I think Mr Herdson neglects the polling on the views of England on an SNP-propped up government.....and whatever the merits of the Sturgeon story, surely the damage is that its perfectly credible that she doesn't believe Miliband is 'Prime Ministerial material'?
I also don't follow the logic that the greatest threat to Miliband's seats - Sturgeon - winning the debate, isn't a threat to Miliband?
How many of Miliband's seats are at threat from:
Sturgeon- Farage- Bennet ?
Meanwhile the Mail explores Labour Hobbit Hypocrisy:
In Spain they always have a day of reflection without news, polls etc the day before polling. I'd like a week of reflection after these silly debates. The polls and endless pointless analysis is a total turnoff and invariably covers the faces of pundits and politicians alike with a huge amount of egg.
In Spain they always have a day of reflection without news, polls etc the day before polling. I'd like a week of reflection after these silly debates. The polls and endless pointless analysis is a total turnoff and invariably covers the faces of pundits and politicians alike with a huge amount of egg.
Nicola Sturgeon has "categorically" denied telling a foreign ambassador she would rather see David Cameron than Ed Miliband as PM after the election.
The SNP leader faced calls to explain a diplomatic memo, which recorded her saying privately that the Labour leader was not "prime minister material".
The claims appeared on the front page of the Daily Telegraph, and were followed swiftly by an angry denial from Ms Sturgeon.
In a direct tweet to the journalists who wrote the story she said: "Your story is categorically, 100%, untrue ... which I'd have told you if you'd asked me at any point today."
A spokeswoman for the First Minister added: "It must be a belated April Fool.
Surely the Foreign Office note is a fake? No educated senior civil servant would use "met with" in that context. You meet with triumph and disaster, but you meet people.
Surely the Foreign Office note is a fake? No educated senior civil servant would use "met with" in that context. You meet with triumph and disaster, but you meet people.
Surely the Foreign Office note is a fake? No educated senior civil servant would use "met with" in that context. You meet with triumph and disaster, but you meet people.
Alas, Americanisms entering into the FCO vocabulary. Next they'll be saying envision.
Nicola Sturgeon has "categorically" denied telling a foreign ambassador she would rather see David Cameron than Ed Miliband as PM after the election.
The SNP leader faced calls to explain a diplomatic memo, which recorded her saying privately that the Labour leader was not "prime minister material".
The claims appeared on the front page of the Daily Telegraph, and were followed swiftly by an angry denial from Ms Sturgeon.
In a direct tweet to the journalists who wrote the story she said: "Your story is categorically, 100%, untrue ... which I'd have told you if you'd asked me at any point today."
A spokeswoman for the First Minister added: "It must be a belated April Fool.
Nicola Sturgeon has "categorically" denied telling a foreign ambassador she would rather see David Cameron than Ed Miliband as PM after the election.
The SNP leader faced calls to explain a diplomatic memo, which recorded her saying privately that the Labour leader was not "prime minister material".
The claims appeared on the front page of the Daily Telegraph, and were followed swiftly by an angry denial from Ms Sturgeon.
In a direct tweet to the journalists who wrote the story she said: "Your story is categorically, 100%, untrue ... which I'd have told you if you'd asked me at any point today."
A spokeswoman for the First Minister added: "It must be a belated April Fool.
Nicola Sturgeon has "categorically" denied telling a foreign ambassador she would rather see David Cameron than Ed Miliband as PM after the election.
The SNP leader faced calls to explain a diplomatic memo, which recorded her saying privately that the Labour leader was not "prime minister material".
The claims appeared on the front page of the Daily Telegraph, and were followed swiftly by an angry denial from Ms Sturgeon.
In a direct tweet to the journalists who wrote the story she said: "Your story is categorically, 100%, untrue ... which I'd have told you if you'd asked me at any point today."
A spokeswoman for the First Minister added: "It must be a belated April Fool.
Never believe anything until it has been officially 100 % denied by the SNP.
Sure....
But then Nicola plays a very dangerous, if not terminal game. That's the point here.
And while not to underestimate the SNP's own work - they have been very fortunate in their enemy - one of the few vestiges of pre-Thatcher Britain - Scottish Labour
I think Mr Herdson neglects the polling on the views of England on an SNP-propped up government...
What does the polling say specifically that David Herdson is missing? Is there some polling the validates some argument like, "Don't vote Labour, because they'll have to rely on the SNP if not enough people vote for them"?
Is the thread header really the poster the Tories released and you haven't picked up a parody by accident?
I thought they had Ed sitting up straight with his hands in front of him, a little like a begging dog. I'd be surprised that they would have used the bacon sandwich shot like that as it would be childish and distract from what is a pretty important message
It will be interesting to see whether Leanne Wood’s good performance, and lack of any comment by EM about Wales (at least AFAIR), affects PC prospects.
Off topic, but has anyone else noticed just how much Norman Lamb is getting his face on TV at the moment? A few weeks ago I didn't know what the guy looked like. Now, I can't turn on the TV without him appearing to talk about something. By contrast, I haven't seen Tim Farron on TV for months.
What happened at the debate on Thursday was that nothing happened (which is what the tories wanted); analysing what precise flavour of nothing it was adds very little to anything.
Extraordinary story by the Mail. They have just repeated their story of last week but made the headlines more lurid adding that Freeman is a tax avoider which the article doesn't back up. I really can't imagine why he isn't suing them. There is something ugly about Tory cheerleaders.
On topic, in common with most of the public I missed the debates and have only seen news highlights. I've seen Ed Miliband get a good line against both David Cameron and Nick Clegg, seen Nick Clegg launch a fierce and effective attack on Ed Miliband which extracted a reply that would satisfy only the labour loyalists and I've heard that Nigel Farage was obnoxious and Nicola Sturgeon did well. On that basis, it looks to me like it hasn't made much difference.
On topic, in common with most of the public I missed the debates and have only seen news highlights. I've seen Ed Miliband get a good line against both David Cameron and Nick Clegg, seen Nick Clegg launch a fierce and effective attack on Ed Miliband which extracted a reply that would satisfy only the labour loyalists and I've heard that Nigel Farage was obnoxious and Nicola Sturgeon did well. On that basis, it looks to me like it hasn't made much difference.
ditto
I've deliberately avoided watching the debates and for the non-anoraks it's everyone is claiming they've won so no-one has. Can't see them changing much so far.
On reflection I think a sensible decision on my part to ignore politics for the past 36 hours ;-)
Telegraph story on Sturgeon somehow seems a little fishy, I don't believe she didn't know the protocol and the CS would surely have run the memo or a draft past her before sending it to London? The DT have gone with it on the front page though, so obviously they think they can stand it up. The story hits a nerve because the strategy it exposes is so plausible, that she can play better to her home electorate as dealing with "Evil Tories" more so than the propping up of Ed and making herself unpopular with the Scottish and the English in the process.
I see that the Mail are doing a hatchet job on the Labour letter of 100 from the other day. They have identified a convicted benefit fraudster, "Toff" students pictured in black tie with cigars, union organisers self-describing as being on ZHCs, employers of ZHC staff and interns, a smattering of councillors, an ex-MP and even a man who died three months ago! Looks like it was put together in 24 hours in response to the Tories' letter, by an intern on a ZHC without access to the internet! http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3023927/A-28k-dole-cheat-cigar-puffing-students-Harrods-shopper-ordinary-workers-backed-Red-Ed.html
Bennett didn't do poorly at all. Neither did Clegg.
There was something about Clegg that I (personally) found irritating: his pitch was no original thought, just splitting the difference between the others. I didn't find it particularly distinctive & doubt it will help. There again, I'm probably not his target audience (although I should be)
Presentationally, though, he did well if a little earnest. Won't help him though. People aren't willing to listen to him.
I think Mr Herdson neglects the polling on the views of England on an SNP-propped up government.....and whatever the merits of the Sturgeon story, surely the damage is that its perfectly credible that she doesn't believe Miliband is 'Prime Ministerial material'?
I also don't follow the logic that the greatest threat to Miliband's seats - Sturgeon - winning the debate, isn't a threat to Miliband?
How many of Miliband's seats are at threat from:
Sturgeon- Farage- Bennet ?
Meanwhile the Mail explores Labour Hobbit Hypocrisy:
I really can't imagine why he isn't suing them. There is something ugly about Tory cheerleaders.
He isn't suing them because he can't. Nothing in the story is untrue. He does minimize his tax, quite rightly, his partner of 15 years and mother of his children, that he sends to private schools, also quite rightly minimizes her tax. Nobody has an issue with these things. They do, however, have an issue over the hypocrisy from both of them pontificating about what other people should be doing and how other people should be leading their lives. And if you didn't move in the same circles as they do, you would be in a position to understand this. People on PAYE,tend not to like being talked down to by people who are doing all they can to avoid paying taxes.
Bennett didn't do poorly at all. Neither did Clegg.
Agreed. Bennett spoke well and with more confidence than is sometimes the case. She also benefited from Ed Miliband being uninterested in drawing attention to her and debating her (for obvious reasons) and from Cameron being more than happy to let her get her message out (also for obvious reasons).
I'm just irritated that the locals Greens here in Lincoln have decided not to stand a General Election candidate. They claim to be focusing on the city council elections instead. Big deal.
Surely the Foreign Office note is a fake? No educated senior civil servant would use "met with" in that context. You meet with triumph and disaster, but you meet people.
Maybe "met with" = have a formal meeting, "met"= less specific, could mean just bumped into.
If nothing else, we can surmise that Mr Javid is entertaining the idea of a leadership bid at some point.
Javid is one of very few people that could get away with saying that so bluntly, just as Trevor Philips did a couple of weeks ago.
Certainly looks like he is positioning for a run if there is a vacancy in the summer - and good luck to him, he's probably in with a reasonable shout too. Javid v May for the leadership, no-one can say there's a lack of diversity in the Tories there!
Extraordinary story by the Mail. They have just repeated their story of last week but made the headlines more lurid adding that Freeman is a tax avoider which the article doesn't back up. I really can't imagine why he isn't suing them. There is something ugly about Tory cheerleaders.
But he and his wife (partner?) are tax avoiders - not paying HMRC until the press shamed them into it and using a limited company to AVOID paying his full share of tax. I don't have a problem with it myself, but hypocrisy stinks.
I think Mr Herdson neglects the polling on the views of England on an SNP-propped up government.....and whatever the merits of the Sturgeon story, surely the damage is that its perfectly credible that she doesn't believe Miliband is 'Prime Ministerial material'?
I also don't follow the logic that the greatest threat to Miliband's seats - Sturgeon - winning the debate, isn't a threat to Miliband?
How many of Miliband's seats are at threat from:
Sturgeon- Farage- Bennet ?
Meanwhile the Mail explores Labour Hobbit Hypocrisy:
I wonder whether it's true, though. People can differentiate between the strong performance of Sturgeon, and the essential insanity of having a party committed to the UK's break-up effectively in government (albeit as a junior partner).
And even if that's not realised now by the electorate, it'll be something Labour MPs will be acutely aware of, and which the electorate will recognise very soon if Labour get fewer votes/MPs in England, yet end up in government due to the SNP.
I saw snippets of This Week [repeated last night] and this point was put by Andrew Neil to David Lammy, though I didn't see the response. It's a strategic trap for Labour.
Bennett didn't do poorly at all. Neither did Clegg.
There was something about Clegg that I (personally) found irritating: his pitch was no original thought, just splitting the difference between the others. I didn't find it particularly distinctive & doubt it will help. There again, I'm probably not his target audience (although I should be)
Most of Clegg´s "original thought", Charles, was Lib Dem policy at the last election.
It then became implemented as Coalition Government policy.
And now it is being presented by Mr Cameron as Tory policy for the next Tory government.
Whereas the real Tory policy for their next government consists of all the Tory policies that the Lib Dems would not let them implement this time round.
Nick Clegg was the only party leader to mention this.
And then this was presented by Tory spinners as a savage and disloyal attack on the Coalition.
Yesterday I posted that after the debates that I had serious reservations about Ed's potential as a PM. Since then two things have changed.
I tuned into the film programme on BBC which was posponed and in it's place was a long piece on the 7 way debate. Watching it distilled into half an hour and without the prejudices I took to the live show I thought I'd got it wrong with Ed.
He looked as good as any of the men and certainly the only one genuinely interested in public service. I found him convincing.
The second thing is the full on onlaught from the Tory press and others which reminds me of a much uglier time when the same forces were in action. The dreaded 80's and a period 25 years on from which the Tory brand still hasn't recovered
No one can help their friends but there's something so unpleasant about the Tory camp followers that for the sake of fair play and decency it's important that they lose
Bennett didn't do poorly at all. Neither did Clegg.
Agreed. Bennett spoke well and with more confidence than is sometimes the case. She also benefited from Ed Miliband being uninterested in drawing attention to her and debating her (for obvious reasons) and from Cameron being more than happy to let her get her message out (also for obvious reasons).
I'm just irritated that the locals Greens here in Lincoln have decided not to stand a General Election candidate. They claim to be focusing on the city council elections instead. Big deal.
Why don't you stand? Even just as a paper candidate.
I think Mr Herdson neglects the polling on the views of England on an SNP-propped up government.....and whatever the merits of the Sturgeon story, surely the damage is that its perfectly credible that she doesn't believe Miliband is 'Prime Ministerial material'?
I also don't follow the logic that the greatest threat to Miliband's seats - Sturgeon - winning the debate, isn't a threat to Miliband?
How many of Miliband's seats are at threat from:
Sturgeon- Farage- Bennet ?
Meanwhile the Mail explores Labour Hobbit Hypocrisy:
This is all tremendous fun but how many votes will it shift? The paradox is the right is attacking Hobbit for doing things they approve of anyway.
Nope - he is being attacked for being another luvvie hypocrite, trying to tell us how to behave yet doing things very differently for himself.
And how many votes will it shift? How many voters will switch from Labour because Hobbit does these things, and vote instead for a party which approves of those things being done? It's the politics of the playground. What next? Vote Plaid because William Hague learnt Welsh?
Most of Clegg´s "original thought", Charles, was Lib Dem policy at the last election.
It then became implemented as Coalition Government policy.
Then he's done and there's no reason to vote for him.
There are parts of Coalition policy where I think the LibDems have made a valuable contribution. And there are parts where they have wasted money on pointless gimmicks. There are also parts where they have been depressingly inactive (I'm looking at you, Vince) and some where they have been actively destructive.
So pretty much like any government.
But they now need to say "this is where we are, this is what we will do". Saying "a bit of them and a bit of the other" isn't interesting or original.
I think Mr Herdson neglects the polling on the views of England on an SNP-propped up government...
What does the polling say specifically that David Herdson is missing? Is there some polling the validates some argument like, "Don't vote Labour, because they'll have to rely on the SNP if not enough people vote for them"?
Yes, David is making the point that Ashcroft found in polls - potential Labour supporters don't see that not voting Labour is going to reduce the risk, if it's a risk.
The Sturgeon story with its heated denials is going to be obscure to most people, and I doubt if it will have much effect in England, but it feeds the sense of unease that Labour in Scotland is trying to encourage about the effect of replacing lots of Labour MPs with lots of Nationalists. Sturgeon will clearly see it as unhelpful, and tactically it's a mistake for the Tory press to go big on it if their primary motive is to prevent a Labour Government.
There is some talk doing the rounds that a certain Lord Rennard is back aiding the LibDem strategy. Is it too far fetched to believe the LiBDems were behind the supposed "FCO" memo from yesterday?
The best thing that can be said for the debates is that we can now have 2 weeks of proper campaigning until the next "debate" sucks the life out of it all for a further 3 or 4 days
I think Mr Herdson neglects the polling on the views of England on an SNP-propped up government...
What does the polling say specifically that David Herdson is missing? Is there some polling the validates some argument like, "Don't vote Labour, because they'll have to rely on the SNP if not enough people vote for them"?
Yes, David is making the point that Ashcroft found in polls - potential Labour supporters don't see that not voting Labour is going to reduce the risk, if it's a risk.
The Sturgeon story with its heated denials is going to be obscure to most people, and I doubt if it will have much effect in England, but it feeds the sense of unease that Labour in Scotland is trying to encourage about the effect of replacing lots of Labour MPs with lots of Nationalists. Sturgeon will clearly see it as unhelpful, and tactically it's a mistake for the Tory press to go big on it if their primary motive is to prevent a Labour Government.
I think Mr Herdson neglects the polling on the views of England on an SNP-propped up government.....and whatever the merits of the Sturgeon story, surely the damage is that its perfectly credible that she doesn't believe Miliband is 'Prime Ministerial material'?
I also don't follow the logic that the greatest threat to Miliband's seats - Sturgeon - winning the debate, isn't a threat to Miliband?
How many of Miliband's seats are at threat from:
Sturgeon- Farage- Bennet ?
Meanwhile the Mail explores Labour Hobbit Hypocrisy:
This is all tremendous fun but how many votes will it shift? The paradox is the right is attacking Hobbit for doing things they approve of anyway.
Nope - he is being attacked for being another luvvie hypocrite, trying to tell us how to behave yet doing things very differently for himself.
And how many votes will it shift? How many voters will switch from Labour because Hobbit does these things, and vote instead for a party which approves of those things being done? It's the politics of the playground. What next? Vote Plaid because William Hague learnt Welsh?
It's the same as Miliband saying that he knows how the ordinary man is feeling, from his two-kitchened house in North London. Look at Scotland to see the damage that is doing to Labour.
The party of the working class have stopped looking and sounding like the voice of the working man, instead being the same PPE clones as the Tories they claim to despise, caring themselves more about attracting the support of tax-avoiding luvvies that the white van man - who is fed up with being sneered at and moving his support to Con or more likely UKIP.
It also plays into the more general narrative that Labour have gone into the campaign with no planning at all, their election strategy seems to be shouting over and over again that Tories eat babies and hoping that this is enough to see them just over the line.
Their researchers seemed to have switched off their internet connections while assembling their letter the other day. Any researcher not star-struck would have spotted that Freeman was perhaps not the best guy to lead their opening day campaign. Who next, Jimmy Carr?
I think Mr Herdson neglects the polling on the views of England on an SNP-propped up government...
What does the polling say specifically that David Herdson is missing? Is there some polling the validates some argument like, "Don't vote Labour, because they'll have to rely on the SNP if not enough people vote for them"?
Yes, David is making the point that Ashcroft found in polls - potential Labour supporters don't see that not voting Labour is going to reduce the risk, if it's a risk.
The Sturgeon story with its heated denials is going to be obscure to most people, and I doubt if it will have much effect in England, but it feeds the sense of unease that Labour in Scotland is trying to encourage about the effect of replacing lots of Labour MPs with lots of Nationalists. Sturgeon will clearly see it as unhelpful, and tactically it's a mistake for the Tory press to go big on it if their primary motive is to prevent a Labour Government.
It's not aimed at potential Labour voters. It's aimed at potential UKIP voters. And so far it's been far more effective than I expected.
Extraordinary story by the Mail. They have just repeated their story of last week but made the headlines more lurid adding that Freeman is a tax avoider which the article doesn't back up. I really can't imagine why he isn't suing them. There is something ugly about Tory cheerleaders.
Dacre needs to take a long hard look at himself. The Mail is rapidly drowning in a torrent of its own bile.
For those interested, the question on This Week begins at 32:30. I went back to check on the iPlayer, but Lammy had no answer whatsoever. That might be because there is no right answer, but it also may indicate that Labour will be screwed if that's how the numbers stacks up (say, 270 Labour MPs and 45 SNP).
If Labour holds together, the English will not like it. If Labour splinters, then there's no point allying with the SNP as they'd lose backbench support (some of whom might even defect). But that would let the Conservatives in.
I'm looking for good constituency bets on the Tories to partially hedge my massive position on Labour most seats. I just keep laying and laying the Tories and its getting a bit big!
Any ideas where Tories odds look good value?
Also anyone checked the implied seats totals from bookies odds recently?
I'm assuming backing the Tories in individual seats with Labour most seats is the best approach- hopefully this disparity still exists!
Extraordinary story by the Mail. They have just repeated their story of last week but made the headlines more lurid adding that Freeman is a tax avoider which the article doesn't back up. I really can't imagine why he isn't suing them. There is something ugly about Tory cheerleaders.
Dacre needs to take a long hard look at himself. The Mail is rapidly drowning in a torrent of its own bile.
You can't imagine why he isn't suing them? Really?
I think Mr Herdson neglects the polling on the views of England on an SNP-propped up government...
What does the polling say specifically that David Herdson is missing? Is there some polling the validates some argument like, "Don't vote Labour, because they'll have to rely on the SNP if not enough people vote for them"?
Yes, David is making the point that Ashcroft found in polls - potential Labour supporters don't see that not voting Labour is going to reduce the risk, if it's a risk.
The Sturgeon story with its heated denials is going to be obscure to most people, and I doubt if it will have much effect in England, but it feeds the sense of unease that Labour in Scotland is trying to encourage about the effect of replacing lots of Labour MPs with lots of Nationalists. Sturgeon will clearly see it as unhelpful, and tactically it's a mistake for the Tory press to go big on it if their primary motive is to prevent a Labour Government.
It's not aimed at potential Labour voters. It's aimed at potential UKIP voters. And so far it's been far more effective than I expected.
Bennett didn't do poorly at all. Neither did Clegg.
Agreed. Bennett spoke well and with more confidence than is sometimes the case. She also benefited from Ed Miliband being uninterested in drawing attention to her and debating her (for obvious reasons) and from Cameron being more than happy to let her get her message out (also for obvious reasons).
I'm just irritated that the locals Greens here in Lincoln have decided not to stand a General Election candidate. They claim to be focusing on the city council elections instead. Big deal.
I'm looking for good constituency bets on the Tories to partially hedge my massive position on Labour most seats. I just keep laying and laying the Tories and its getting a bit big!
Any ideas where Tories odds look good value?
Also anyone checked the implied seats totals from bookies odds recently?
I'm assuming backing the Tories in individual seats with Labour most seats is the best approach- hopefully this disparity still exists!
Kingston and Surbiton vs Ed Davey.. LibDems lost the council last year and their ground operation is half what it used to be. The LDs in that part of SW london are going to be stretched pretty thin fighting 4 adjoining constituencies. DYOR
Sorry David really don't follow the logic of this at all. What Ed needed to do was to show the leadership and vision to unite the left, win back those who have drifted Green and squeeze the Lib Dems till the pips squeaked. He failed which is why the probability of a Labour majority is now nil according to the models.
Dave needed to keep together his more liberal coalition and try to win back some of the Kippers at the same time. Difficult. His chosen method is to make Kippers worry about the alternative. A strong SNP performance was good for that. It also greatly improves his chance of having the most seats although it moves him no nearer a majority. What Sturgeon did was show what thin gruel an Ed Labour Party offers. So English nationalists are more likely to want a strong tory presence and Labour are demoralised. I think it worked out rather well for Dave.
I think Mr Herdson neglects the polling on the views of England on an SNP-propped up government...
What does the polling say specifically that David Herdson is missing? Is there some polling the validates some argument like, "Don't vote Labour, because they'll have to rely on the SNP if not enough people vote for them"?
Yes, David is making the point that Ashcroft found in polls - potential Labour supporters don't see that not voting Labour is going to reduce the risk, if it's a risk.
The Sturgeon story with its heated denials is going to be obscure to most people, and I doubt if it will have much effect in England, but it feeds the sense of unease that Labour in Scotland is trying to encourage about the effect of replacing lots of Labour MPs with lots of Nationalists. Sturgeon will clearly see it as unhelpful, and tactically it's a mistake for the Tory press to go big on it if their primary motive is to prevent a Labour Government.
It's not aimed at potential Labour voters. It's aimed at potential UKIP voters. And so far it's been far more effective than I expected.
Don't understand that at all, and what on earth is your metric for effectiveness on potential kippers?
"And if you didn't move in the same circles as they do, you would be in a position to understand this. People on PAYE,tend not to like being talked down to by people who are doing all they can to avoid paying taxes."
I was advised by my accountant when I first started to become a limited company. It was not to avoid tax but because self employed earnings fluctuate and that was a good way of evening out the good times and the bad. For actors this would be much more important than it was for me.
(incidentally I never did become limited because of the added paperwork which I didn't fancy)
Milliband did not come across as prime ministerial and overtly did not answer questions like why was Labour not offering a referendum on EU.Feel sensitive folks will feel he also bullied Leanne Wood when they were both simultaneously trying to make points so that he got his point across and she backed down.Feel the poll results on debate suggesting Wood came bottom are misleading and that her clear honesty vis-à-vis on immigration and HIV will have helped her with progressive left voters in Wales. The overalls press`s attacks on Milliband are less significant than the TV media`s relentless progressive left bias.How often do you see anyone focus on what has happened in France under Hollande? Newsnight has now joined CH4 news as just a tv version of the Guardian newspaper while Sky News is increasing the Daily Mirror on air
Extraordinary story by the Mail. They have just repeated their story of last week but made the headlines more lurid adding that Freeman is a tax avoider which the article doesn't back up. I really can't imagine why he isn't suing them. There is something ugly about Tory cheerleaders.
Dacre needs to take a long hard look at himself. The Mail is rapidly drowning in a torrent of its own bile.
The paper that has supported fascism for over 80 years , Dacre is just following that tradition .
I'm looking for good constituency bets on the Tories to partially hedge my massive position on Labour most seats. I just keep laying and laying the Tories and its getting a bit big!
Any ideas where Tories odds look good value?
Also anyone checked the implied seats totals from bookies odds recently?
I'm assuming backing the Tories in individual seats with Labour most seats is the best approach- hopefully this disparity still exists!
Extraordinary story by the Mail. They have just repeated their story of last week but made the headlines more lurid adding that Freeman is a tax avoider which the article doesn't back up. I really can't imagine why he isn't suing them. There is something ugly about Tory cheerleaders.
Dacre needs to take a long hard look at himself. The Mail is rapidly drowning in a torrent of its own bile.
The paper that has supported fascism for over 80 years , Dacre is just following that tradition .
I thought your beef about them was that they pointed out (correctly) that Cyril Smith was an active paedophile. Is that a fascist position?
"And if you didn't move in the same circles as they do, you would be in a position to understand this. People on PAYE,tend not to like being talked down to by people who are doing all they can to avoid paying taxes."
I was advised by my accountant when I first started to become a limited company. It was not to avoid tax but because self employed earnings fluctuate and that was a good way of evening out the good times and the bad. For actors this would be much more important than it was for me.
(incidentally I never did become limited because of the added paperwork which I didn't fancy)
Shame the hobbits didn't do the same, he wouldn't be as open to accurate charges of hypocrisy.
I'm looking for good constituency bets on the Tories to partially hedge my massive position on Labour most seats. I just keep laying and laying the Tories and its getting a bit big!
Any ideas where Tories odds look good value?
Also anyone checked the implied seats totals from bookies odds recently?
I'm assuming backing the Tories in individual seats with Labour most seats is the best approach- hopefully this disparity still exists!
Whitney.
1-500 is not value!
I did suggest the other day that some of the long odds-on might be value at say 1-50 or 1-20 (Tories in Woking or Salisbury, Labour in Liverpool etc) With 5 weeks to go 1-50 is a 20% APR, assuming no scandals (so stay away from Boris!).
"And if you didn't move in the same circles as they do, you would be in a position to understand this. People on PAYE,tend not to like being talked down to by people who are doing all they can to avoid paying taxes."
I was advised by my accountant when I first started to become a limited company. It was not to avoid tax but because self employed earnings fluctuate and that was a good way of evening out the good times and the bad. For actors this would be much more important than it was for me.
(incidentally I never did become limited because of the added paperwork which I didn't fancy)
I agree totally, his income will be derived from many different projects, films, TV, voiceovers etc
However it doesn't alter the fact that it was a bad move by Labour, they left themselves open to these attacks, and of course once it is picked up by the media then the WWC will resent being spoken down to.
I really can't imagine why he isn't suing them. There is something ugly about Tory cheerleaders.
He isn't suing them because he can't. Nothing in the story is untrue. He does minimize his tax, quite rightly, his partner of 15 years and mother of his children, that he sends to private schools, also quite rightly minimizes her tax. Nobody has an issue with these things. They do, however, have an issue over the hypocrisy from both of them pontificating about what other people should be doing and how other people should be leading their lives. And if you didn't move in the same circles as they do, you would be in a position to understand this. People on PAYE,tend not to like being talked down to by people who are doing all they can to avoid paying taxes.
Bullsh1t. He talked about values and said that Labour represented his values better. Don't recall any of that amounting to pontification about what others should and shouldn't do. The right hated it because Freeman is popular and has an everyman persona that will appeal to ordinary people.
Extraordinary story by the Mail. They have just repeated their story of last week but made the headlines more lurid adding that Freeman is a tax avoider which the article doesn't back up. I really can't imagine why he isn't suing them. There is something ugly about Tory cheerleaders.
Dacre needs to take a long hard look at himself. The Mail is rapidly drowning in a torrent of its own bile.
The paper that has supported fascism for over 80 years , Dacre is just following that tradition .
Extraordinary story by the Mail. They have just repeated their story of last week but made the headlines more lurid adding that Freeman is a tax avoider which the article doesn't back up. I really can't imagine why he isn't suing them. There is something ugly about Tory cheerleaders.
Dacre needs to take a long hard look at himself. The Mail is rapidly drowning in a torrent of its own bile.
The paper that has supported fascism for over 80 years , Dacre is just following that tradition .
Interesting that the LibDem leader of Sutton council Ruth Dombey praised the Daily Mail yesterday for running a positive story about the borough... When the cap fits and all that.
"And if you didn't move in the same circles as they do, you would be in a position to understand this. People on PAYE,tend not to like being talked down to by people who are doing all they can to avoid paying taxes."
I was advised by my accountant when I first started to become a limited company. It was not to avoid tax but because self employed earnings fluctuate and that was a good way of evening out the good times and the bad. For actors this would be much more important than it was for me.
In other words, it was to avoid tax on the money earned in "the good times".
Did this bloke revert to PAYE employment, or contracting as an individual, when it became clear that the bad times were a thing of the past?
Extraordinary story by the Mail. They have just repeated their story of last week but made the headlines more lurid adding that Freeman is a tax avoider which the article doesn't back up. I really can't imagine why he isn't suing them. There is something ugly about Tory cheerleaders.
Dacre needs to take a long hard look at himself. The Mail is rapidly drowning in a torrent of its own bile.
The paper that has supported fascism for over 80 years , Dacre is just following that tradition .
I thought your beef about them was that they pointed out (correctly) that Cyril Smith was an active paedophile. Is that a fascist position?
Clearly Cyril Smith is dead and cannot sue you otherwise a coward like you would not have dared to post that .
I really can't imagine why he isn't suing them. There is something ugly about Tory cheerleaders.
He isn't suing them because he can't. Nothing in the story is untrue. He does minimize his tax, quite rightly, his partner of 15 years and mother of his children, that he sends to private schools, also quite rightly minimizes her tax. Nobody has an issue with these things. They do, however, have an issue over the hypocrisy from both of them pontificating about what other people should be doing and how other people should be leading their lives. And if you didn't move in the same circles as they do, you would be in a position to understand this. People on PAYE,tend not to like being talked down to by people who are doing all they can to avoid paying taxes.
Bullsh1t. He talked about values and said that Labour represented his values better. Don't recall any of that amounting to pontification about what others should and shouldn't do. The right hated it because Freeman is popular and has an everyman persona that will appeal to ordinary people.
Yesterday I posted that after the debates that I had serious reservations about Ed's potential as a PM. Since then two things have changed.
I tuned into the film programme on BBC which was posponed and in it's place was a long piece on the 7 way debate. Watching it distilled into half an hour and without the prejudices I took to the live show I thought I'd got it wrong with Ed.
He looked as good as any of the men and certainly the only one genuinely interested in public service. I found him convincing.
This is the perfect illustration of why the debates will change nothing.
People will find a way back to what they prefer in spite of what they saw.
"As an aside, to have recorded 37% despite having lost so much support to UKIP is quite a remarkable achievement"
You assume, David Herdson, that the YouGov figure of 37% for the Tories, is not an outrageous outlier, similar that spectacular outlier of YouGov of the Scottish Referendum where suddenly the SNP and YES were 2% ahead of the pack; not supported by any other source, and shown to outrageously wrong in every detail in the actual results only a few days later.
Extraordinary story by the Mail. They have just repeated their story of last week but made the headlines more lurid adding that Freeman is a tax avoider which the article doesn't back up. I really can't imagine why he isn't suing them. There is something ugly about Tory cheerleaders.
Dacre needs to take a long hard look at himself. The Mail is rapidly drowning in a torrent of its own bile.
Dacre is a deeply unpleasant man. I'd go so far as to say he's a complete c***
But he is probably the most commercially effective newspaper editor in a generation
Extraordinary story by the Mail. They have just repeated their story of last week but made the headlines more lurid adding that Freeman is a tax avoider which the article doesn't back up. I really can't imagine why he isn't suing them. There is something ugly about Tory cheerleaders.
Dacre needs to take a long hard look at himself. The Mail is rapidly drowning in a torrent of its own bile.
The paper that has supported fascism for over 80 years , Dacre is just following that tradition .
I thought your beef about them was that they pointed out (correctly) that Cyril Smith was an active paedophile. Is that a fascist position?
Clearly Cyril Smith is dead and cannot sue you otherwise a coward like you would not have dared to post that .
David Icke posted things like that for years and he didn't get sued, he out Saville as a necrophiliac a long time before he died, and outed Smith on several occasions.
To be honest I find your post absolutely disgusting.
I think Mr Herdson neglects the polling on the views of England on an SNP-propped up government.....and whatever the merits of the Sturgeon story, surely the damage is that its perfectly credible that she doesn't believe Miliband is 'Prime Ministerial material'?
I also don't follow the logic that the greatest threat to Miliband's seats - Sturgeon - winning the debate, isn't a threat to Miliband?
How many of Miliband's seats are at threat from:
Sturgeon- Farage- Bennet ?
Meanwhile the Mail explores Labour Hobbit Hypocrisy:
This is all tremendous fun but how many votes will it shift? The paradox is the right is attacking Hobbit for doing things they approve of anyway.
Nope - he is being attacked for being another luvvie hypocrite, trying to tell us how to behave yet doing things very differently for himself.
And how many votes will it shift? How many voters will switch from Labour because Hobbit does these things, and vote instead for a party which approves of those things being done? It's the politics of the playground. What next? Vote Plaid because William Hague learnt Welsh?
It's the same as Miliband saying that he knows how the ordinary man is feeling, from his two-kitchened house in North London. Look at Scotland to see the damage that is doing to Labour.
The party of the working class have stopped looking and sounding like the voice of the working man, instead being the same PPE clones as the Tories they claim to despise, caring themselves more about attracting the support of tax-avoiding luvvies that the white van man - who is fed up with being sneered at and moving his support to Con or more likely UKIP.
It also plays into the more general narrative that Labour have gone into the campaign with no planning at all, their election strategy seems to be shouting over and over again that Tories eat babies and hoping that this is enough to see them just over the line.
Their researchers seemed to have switched off their internet connections while assembling their letter the other day. Any researcher not star-struck would have spotted that Freeman was perhaps not the best guy to lead their opening day campaign. Who next, Jimmy Carr?
And are you sure Jimmy Carr supports Labour? I'm not. But leave that to one side.
All those criticisms of Labour, and its campaign may well be true, and have been made here previously. The question remains, how do the Conservatives gain from this, given they support it?
Extraordinary story by the Mail. They have just repeated their story of last week but made the headlines more lurid adding that Freeman is a tax avoider which the article doesn't back up. I really can't imagine why he isn't suing them. There is something ugly about Tory cheerleaders.
Dacre needs to take a long hard look at himself. The Mail is rapidly drowning in a torrent of its own bile.
The paper that has supported fascism for over 80 years , Dacre is just following that tradition .
I thought your beef about them was that they pointed out (correctly) that Cyril Smith was an active paedophile. Is that a fascist position?
Clearly Cyril Smith is dead and cannot sue you otherwise a coward like you would not have dared to post that .
I would not have known it, and Mike would not have let me post it. But he was a paedophile as well as a lard mountain.
I think Mr Herdson neglects the polling on the views of England on an SNP-propped up government...
What does the polling say specifically that David Herdson is missing? Is there some polling the validates some argument like, "Don't vote Labour, because they'll have to rely on the SNP if not enough people vote for them"?
Yes, David is making the point that Ashcroft found in polls - potential Labour supporters don't see that not voting Labour is going to reduce the risk, if it's a risk.
The Sturgeon story with its heated denials is going to be obscure to most people, and I doubt if it will have much effect in England, but it feeds the sense of unease that Labour in Scotland is trying to encourage about the effect of replacing lots of Labour MPs with lots of Nationalists. Sturgeon will clearly see it as unhelpful, and tactically it's a mistake for the Tory press to go big on it if their primary motive is to prevent a Labour Government.
It's not aimed at potential Labour voters. It's aimed at potential UKIP voters. And so far it's been far more effective than I expected.
Don't understand that at all, and what on earth is your metric for effectiveness on potential kippers?
There is a cohort of voters who aren't warm on the current Conservative leadership who have been thinking about voting for UKIP. This group responds particularly virulently to the idea of Scotland being given more money. The idea of a Labour/SNP alliance fills them with loathing.
Anecdotally I have had several such voters raise this spontaneously with me. And in the polls UKIP recently have been drifting down a bit while the Conservatives have been climbing a bit. Correlation does not equal causation, I accept.
"As an aside, to have recorded 37% despite having lost so much support to UKIP is quite a remarkable achievement"
You assume, David Herdson, that the YouGov figure of 37% for the Tories, is not an outrageous outlier, similar that spectacular outlier of YouGov of the Scottish Referendum where suddenly the SNP and YES were 2% ahead of the pack; not supported by any other source, and shown to outrageously wrong in every detail in the actual results only a few days later.
Hardly the same, Tories have been posting 35/36% regularly with YouGov. It wasn't as if Yes went from 1 to 2%.
The breaking news is that WIND is reporting to the JNN the contents of the latest ARSE with added APLOMB 2015 General Election and "JackW Dozen" Projections. (Changes From 31st March Projection) :
Con 313 (-3) .. Lab 244 (+2) .. LibDem 30 (NC) .. SNP 36 (NC) .. PC 2 .. NI 18 .. UKIP 4 (+1) .. Respect 1 .. Green 1 .. Ind 0 .. Speaker 1
Conservatives 13 seats short of a majority ......................................................................................
"JackW Dozen" - 13 seats that will shape the General Election result :
Bury North - Con Hold Pudsey - Likely Con Hold Broxtowe - TCTC from Likely Con Hold Warwickshire North - Likely Con Hold Cambridge - LibDem Hold Ipswich - Con Hold Watford - TCTC Croydon Central - Con Hold Enfield North - TCTC Cornwall North - TCTC Great Yarmouth - Con Hold Vale of Glamorgan - Con Hold Ochil and South Perthshire - SNP Gain
Changes From 31 Mar - Broxtowe moves from Likely Con Hold to TCTC
TCTC - Too Close To Call - Less than 500 votes Likely Hold/Gain - 500 - 2500 votes Gain/Hold - Over 2500 .......................................................................................
ARSE is sponsored by Auchentennach Fine Pies (Est 1745)
WIND - Whimsical Independent News Division JNN - Jacobite News Network ARSE - Anonymous Random Selection of Electors APLOMB - Auchentennach Pies Leading Outsales Mainland Britain
Extraordinary story by the Mail. They have just repeated their story of last week but made the headlines more lurid adding that Freeman is a tax avoider which the article doesn't back up. I really can't imagine why he isn't suing them. There is something ugly about Tory cheerleaders.
Dacre needs to take a long hard look at himself. The Mail is rapidly drowning in a torrent of its own bile.
The paper that has supported fascism for over 80 years , Dacre is just following that tradition .
I thought your beef about them was that they pointed out (correctly) that Cyril Smith was an active paedophile. Is that a fascist position?
Clearly Cyril Smith is dead and cannot sue you otherwise a coward like you would not have dared to post that .
I think Mr Herdson neglects the polling on the views of England on an SNP-propped up government...
What does the polling say specifically that David Herdson is missing? Is there some polling the validates some argument like, "Don't vote Labour, because they'll have to rely on the SNP if not enough people vote for them"?
Yes, David is making the point that Ashcroft found in polls - potential Labour supporters don't see that not voting Labour is going to reduce the risk, if it's a risk.
The Sturgeon story with its heated denials is going to be obscure to most people, and I doubt if it will have much effect in England, but it feeds the sense of unease that Labour in Scotland is trying to encourage about the effect of replacing lots of Labour MPs with lots of Nationalists. Sturgeon will clearly see it as unhelpful, and tactically it's a mistake for the Tory press to go big on it if their primary motive is to prevent a Labour Government.
It's not aimed at potential Labour voters. It's aimed at potential UKIP voters. And so far it's been far more effective than I expected.
Don't understand that at all, and what on earth is your metric for effectiveness on potential kippers?
The argument is that Kippers will be more concerned about a Lab-SNP pact than Labour voters and that it might be sufficient to tip them back into the Tory camp.
I think I've seen some polling suggesting that Kippers were most worried about the SNP having significant influence over the next government than anyone else?
It also plays into the more general narrative that Labour have gone into the campaign with no planning at all, their election strategy seems to be shouting over and over again that Tories eat babies and hoping that this is enough to see them just over the line.
Swap Labour and tories around in that sentence and you get a good indication of why an increasing number of people hate them both.
I think Mr Herdson neglects the polling on the views of England on an SNP-propped up government...
What does the polling say specifically that David Herdson is missing? Is there some polling the validates some argument like, "Don't vote Labour, because they'll have to rely on the SNP if not enough people vote for them"?
Yes, David is making the point that Ashcroft found in polls - potential Labour supporters don't see that not voting Labour is going to reduce the risk, if it's a risk.
The Sturgeon story with its heated denials is going to be obscure to most people, and I doubt if it will have much effect in England, but it feeds the sense of unease that Labour in Scotland is trying to encourage about the effect of replacing lots of Labour MPs with lots of Nationalists. Sturgeon will clearly see it as unhelpful, and tactically it's a mistake for the Tory press to go big on it if their primary motive is to prevent a Labour Government.
It's not aimed at potential Labour voters. It's aimed at potential UKIP voters. And so far it's been far more effective than I expected.
Don't understand that at all, and what on earth is your metric for effectiveness on potential kippers?
There is a cohort of voters who aren't warm on the current Conservative leadership who have been thinking about voting for UKIP. This group responds particularly virulently to the idea of Scotland being given more money. The idea of a Labour/SNP alliance fills them with loathing.
Anecdotally I have had several such voters raise this spontaneously with me. And in the polls UKIP recently have been drifting down a bit while the Conservatives have been climbing a bit. Correlation does not equal causation, I accept.
Tories moving up, UKIP drifting but Labour not moving.
I said some time ago the WWC will not be going back to Labour.
Comments
I also don't follow the logic that the greatest threat to Miliband's seats - Sturgeon - winning the debate, isn't a threat to Miliband?
How many of Miliband's seats are at threat from:
Sturgeon-
Farage-
Bennet ?
Meanwhile the Mail explores Labour Hobbit Hypocrisy:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3025156/Red-Ed-s-hypocrite-Hobbit-tax-avoider-know-double-standards-champagne-socialists-investigation-shows-Labour-s-new-celebrity-poster-boy-really-takes-biscuit.html
"Soaps politics"
3 hours 3 minutes 3 seconds
Nicola Sturgeon has "categorically" denied telling a foreign ambassador she would rather see David Cameron than Ed Miliband as PM after the election.
The SNP leader faced calls to explain a diplomatic memo, which recorded her saying privately that the Labour leader was not "prime minister material".
The claims appeared on the front page of the Daily Telegraph, and were followed swiftly by an angry denial from Ms Sturgeon.
In a direct tweet to the journalists who wrote the story she said: "Your story is categorically, 100%, untrue ... which I'd have told you if you'd asked me at any point today."
A spokeswoman for the First Minister added: "It must be a belated April Fool.
http://news.sky.com/story/1458465/sturgeon-denies-secretly-backing-cameron-for-pm
http://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/wider-political-news/background-how-the-snp-and-tories-hit-the-mark-with-different-pitches-.122409449
Today, Nicola Sturgeon is the most dangerous woman in British politics
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3024983/SNP-s-Nicola-Sturgeon-tells-Ed-Miliband-ll-call-shots-now.html#ixzz3WJbdieRd
But then Nicola plays a very very dangerous, if not terminal game. That's the point here.
She will not do that.
I thought they had Ed sitting up straight with his hands in front of him, a little like a begging dog. I'd be surprised that they would have used the bacon sandwich shot like that as it would be childish and distract from what is a pretty important message
edit: this is the one I remember
https://twitter.com/grantshapps/status/574841509972963328/photo/1
p.s. apologies for polluting the thread with grant shapps twitter feed. I linked to it from this article, I promise
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/mar/09/tory-election-poster-ed-miliband-pocket-snp-alex-salmond
That includes the posts on here about it. Sometimes PB seems more like a comedy club than a sane discussion forum.
Especially when I'm on. Although my posts may have more in common with tragedy than comedy...
What happened at the debate on Thursday was that nothing happened (which is what the tories wanted); analysing what precise flavour of nothing it was adds very little to anything.
"Meanwhile the Mail explores Labour Hobbit Hypocrisy:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3025156/Red-Ed-s-hypocrite-Hobbit-tax-avoider-know-double-standards-champagne-socialists-investigation-shows-Labour-s-new-celebrity-poster-boy-really-takes-biscuit.html"
Extraordinary story by the Mail. They have just repeated their story of last week but made the headlines more lurid adding that Freeman is a tax avoider which the article doesn't back up. I really can't imagine why he isn't suing them. There is something ugly about Tory cheerleaders.
= only briefly, but promising more later.
I've deliberately avoided watching the debates and for the non-anoraks it's everyone is claiming they've won so no-one has. Can't see them changing much so far.
On reflection I think a sensible decision on my part to ignore politics for the past 36 hours ;-)
Telegraph story on Sturgeon somehow seems a little fishy, I don't believe she didn't know the protocol and the CS would surely have run the memo or a draft past her before sending it to London? The DT have gone with it on the front page though, so obviously they think they can stand it up. The story hits a nerve because the strategy it exposes is so plausible, that she can play better to her home electorate as dealing with "Evil Tories" more so than the propping up of Ed and making herself unpopular with the Scottish and the English in the process.
I see that the Mail are doing a hatchet job on the Labour letter of 100 from the other day. They have identified a convicted benefit fraudster, "Toff" students pictured in black tie with cigars, union organisers self-describing as being on ZHCs, employers of ZHC staff and interns, a smattering of councillors, an ex-MP and even a man who died three months ago!
Looks like it was put together in 24 hours in response to the Tories' letter, by an intern on a ZHC without access to the internet!
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3023927/A-28k-dole-cheat-cigar-puffing-students-Harrods-shopper-ordinary-workers-backed-Red-Ed.html
Presentationally, though, he did well if a little earnest. Won't help him though. People aren't willing to listen to him.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/conservative/11515205/Sajid-Javid-The-cultural-problem-among-Asian-Muslim-men.html
If nothing else, we can surmise that Mr Javid is entertaining the idea of a leadership bid at some point.
People on PAYE,tend not to like being talked down to by people who are doing all they can to avoid paying taxes.
I'm just irritated that the locals Greens here in Lincoln have decided not to stand a General Election candidate. They claim to be focusing on the city council elections instead. Big deal.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/conservative/11515205/Sajid-Javid-The-cultural-problem-among-Asian-Muslim-men.html
Certainly looks like he is positioning for a run if there is a vacancy in the summer - and good luck to him, he's probably in with a reasonable shout too. Javid v May for the leadership, no-one can say there's a lack of diversity in the Tories there!
An interesting angle for the post.
I wonder whether it's true, though. People can differentiate between the strong performance of Sturgeon, and the essential insanity of having a party committed to the UK's break-up effectively in government (albeit as a junior partner).
And even if that's not realised now by the electorate, it'll be something Labour MPs will be acutely aware of, and which the electorate will recognise very soon if Labour get fewer votes/MPs in England, yet end up in government due to the SNP.
I saw snippets of This Week [repeated last night] and this point was put by Andrew Neil to David Lammy, though I didn't see the response. It's a strategic trap for Labour.
It then became implemented as Coalition Government policy.
And now it is being presented by Mr Cameron as Tory policy for the next Tory government.
Whereas the real Tory policy for their next government consists of all the Tory policies that the Lib Dems would not let them implement this time round.
Nick Clegg was the only party leader to mention this.
And then this was presented by Tory spinners as a savage and disloyal attack on the Coalition.
The right are not attacking the actions.
They are attacking the hypocrisy and sanctimoniousness
I tuned into the film programme on BBC which was posponed and in it's place was a long piece on the 7 way debate. Watching it distilled into half an hour and without the prejudices I took to the live show I thought I'd got it wrong with Ed.
He looked as good as any of the men and certainly the only one genuinely interested in public service. I found him convincing.
The second thing is the full on onlaught from the Tory press and others which reminds me of a much uglier time when the same forces were in action. The dreaded 80's and a period 25 years on from which the Tory brand still hasn't recovered
No one can help their friends but there's something so unpleasant about the Tory camp followers that for the sake of fair play and decency it's important that they lose
Leveson.
There are parts of Coalition policy where I think the LibDems have made a valuable contribution. And there are parts where they have wasted money on pointless gimmicks. There are also parts where they have been depressingly inactive (I'm looking at you, Vince) and some where they have been actively destructive.
So pretty much like any government.
But they now need to say "this is where we are, this is what we will do". Saying "a bit of them and a bit of the other" isn't interesting or original.
The Sturgeon story with its heated denials is going to be obscure to most people, and I doubt if it will have much effect in England, but it feeds the sense of unease that Labour in Scotland is trying to encourage about the effect of replacing lots of Labour MPs with lots of Nationalists. Sturgeon will clearly see it as unhelpful, and tactically it's a mistake for the Tory press to go big on it if their primary motive is to prevent a Labour Government.
Is it too far fetched to believe the LiBDems were behind the supposed "FCO" memo from yesterday?
The party of the working class have stopped looking and sounding like the voice of the working man, instead being the same PPE clones as the Tories they claim to despise, caring themselves more about attracting the support of tax-avoiding luvvies that the white van man - who is fed up with being sneered at and moving his support to Con or more likely UKIP.
It also plays into the more general narrative that Labour have gone into the campaign with no planning at all, their election strategy seems to be shouting over and over again that Tories eat babies and hoping that this is enough to see them just over the line.
Their researchers seemed to have switched off their internet connections while assembling their letter the other day. Any researcher not star-struck would have spotted that Freeman was perhaps not the best guy to lead their opening day campaign. Who next, Jimmy Carr?
33 minutes 33 seconds
If Labour holds together, the English will not like it. If Labour splinters, then there's no point allying with the SNP as they'd lose backbench support (some of whom might even defect). But that would let the Conservatives in.
Any ideas where Tories odds look good value?
Also anyone checked the implied seats totals from bookies odds recently?
I'm assuming backing the Tories in individual seats with Labour most seats is the best approach- hopefully this disparity still exists!
Ed didn't win yesterday's debate but he made progress.He's getting a lot of coverage these days.
Coz for or against,most of the headlines were about him.
Effect on polls:Probably slight Labour uptick and rise in Ed's personal numbers.
LibDems lost the council last year and their ground operation is half what it used to be. The LDs in that part of SW london are going to be stretched pretty thin fighting 4 adjoining constituencies.
DYOR
Warrington S- 3/1 Tories with Will Hill.
Dave needed to keep together his more liberal coalition and try to win back some of the Kippers at the same time. Difficult. His chosen method is to make Kippers worry about the alternative. A strong SNP performance was good for that. It also greatly improves his chance of having the most seats although it moves him no nearer a majority. What Sturgeon did was show what thin gruel an Ed Labour Party offers. So English nationalists are more likely to want a strong tory presence and Labour are demoralised. I think it worked out rather well for Dave.
"And if you didn't move in the same circles as they do, you would be in a position to understand this.
People on PAYE,tend not to like being talked down to by people who are doing all they can to avoid paying taxes."
I was advised by my accountant when I first started to become a limited company. It was not to avoid tax but because self employed earnings fluctuate and that was a good way of evening out the good times and the bad. For actors this would be much more important than it was for me.
(incidentally I never did become limited because of the added paperwork which I didn't fancy)
The overalls press`s attacks on Milliband are less significant than the TV media`s relentless progressive left bias.How often do you see anyone focus on what has happened in France under Hollande? Newsnight has now joined CH4 news as just a tv version of the Guardian newspaper while Sky News is increasing the Daily Mirror on air
I wonder if Clegg's brilliant attack on Ed will shift a few yellow>red switchers back into the fold.
2/1 with Lad's
I did suggest the other day that some of the long odds-on might be value at say 1-50 or 1-20 (Tories in Woking or Salisbury, Labour in Liverpool etc) With 5 weeks to go 1-50 is a 20% APR, assuming no scandals (so stay away from Boris!).
However it doesn't alter the fact that it was a bad move by Labour, they left themselves open to these attacks, and of course once it is picked up by the media then the WWC will resent being spoken down to.
Did this bloke revert to PAYE employment, or contracting as an individual, when it became clear that the bad times were a thing of the past?
People will find a way back to what they prefer in spite of what they saw.
The press's primary objective is to sell papers. Any editorial slant is entirely driven by that (appealing to core readership, etc).
The press simply doesn't make decisions about whether to "go big" on a scoop based on the political impact.
Believing anything else is the realm of conspiracy theorists
You assume, David Herdson, that the YouGov figure of 37% for the Tories, is not an outrageous outlier, similar that spectacular outlier of YouGov of the Scottish Referendum where suddenly the SNP and YES were 2% ahead of the pack; not supported by any other source, and shown to outrageously wrong in every detail in the actual results only a few days later.
But he is probably the most commercially effective newspaper editor in a generation
To be honest I find your post absolutely disgusting.
All those criticisms of Labour, and its campaign may well be true, and have been made here previously. The question remains, how do the Conservatives gain from this, given they support it?
Could someone explain Ed's new wheeze to use the first time buyers ISA money to increase house building, please?
Loads of £40k houses from free money? A magic house tree?
Is this a sort of nationalisation of the societies?
Anecdotally I have had several such voters raise this spontaneously with me. And in the polls UKIP recently have been drifting down a bit while the Conservatives have been climbing a bit. Correlation does not equal causation, I accept.
The breaking news is that WIND is reporting to the JNN the contents of the latest ARSE with added APLOMB 2015 General Election and "JackW Dozen" Projections. (Changes From 31st March Projection) :
Con 313 (-3) .. Lab 244 (+2) .. LibDem 30 (NC) .. SNP 36 (NC) .. PC 2 .. NI 18 .. UKIP 4 (+1) .. Respect 1 .. Green 1 .. Ind 0 .. Speaker 1
Conservatives 13 seats short of a majority
......................................................................................
"JackW Dozen" - 13 seats that will shape the General Election result :
Bury North - Con Hold
Pudsey - Likely Con Hold
Broxtowe - TCTC from Likely Con Hold
Warwickshire North - Likely Con Hold
Cambridge - LibDem Hold
Ipswich - Con Hold
Watford - TCTC
Croydon Central - Con Hold
Enfield North - TCTC
Cornwall North - TCTC
Great Yarmouth - Con Hold
Vale of Glamorgan - Con Hold
Ochil and South Perthshire - SNP Gain
Changes From 31 Mar - Broxtowe moves from Likely Con Hold to TCTC
TCTC - Too Close To Call - Less than 500 votes
Likely Hold/Gain - 500 - 2500 votes
Gain/Hold - Over 2500
.......................................................................................
ARSE is sponsored by Auchentennach Fine Pies (Est 1745)
WIND - Whimsical Independent News Division
JNN - Jacobite News Network
ARSE - Anonymous Random Selection of Electors
APLOMB - Auchentennach Pies Leading Outsales Mainland Britain
A Cyril Smith defender exists?
Wonders never cease.
I think I've seen some polling suggesting that Kippers were most worried about the SNP having significant influence over the next government than anyone else?
I said some time ago the WWC will not be going back to Labour.