I was in Cheshire Oaks yesterday and was amazed at the large number of children out shopping with their parents. I checked why with a shop assistant who said that they were still on holiday. This somewhat surprised me as all the schools in Wales are back after the Easter holiday. The polls may see an effect from next week when everyone's back to normal
Still out in most of the Marcher counties, and in Staffordshire and Leicestershire. Gloucestershire went back on Monday, I am told.
But Mr Balls insisted the note admitting that Labour had blown the nation's finances should not be taken seriously. He told BBC West Midlands: 'Liam Byrne's note was a jokey note… of the course the money hadn't run out.'
That must be the archetype of "when you're explaining, you're losing".
According to someone on Twitter it was intended for Hammond, who is a friend of Byrne's.
John Rentoul is saying that Laws was discourteous. Maybe he was, but I think I would be too if someone offered me an opportunity like that.
A combined share of 43% for the Conservatives and UKIP is very low; a combined vote share of 43% for Labour and the Greens is very high.
I believe Mori weight to match population demographics.
If the FT story is correct that disproportionately more young voters have fallen off the electoral roll, that should skew the electorate vs the population.
Pointing out the record of a party in govt isn't negative personal campaigning
The tag line of the advert is "David Cameron is too scared to debate his record"
That is negative personal campaigning
Do you understand the difference?
On that basis any comment about anyone is a personal comment.
Rubbish.
The comment is negative, and is personally directed at Cameron.
Still, I wouldn't expect someone who supports the party of McBride to understand the difference. Especially someone who was so shocked by it that he said he would not vote Labour that contained Ed Balls ...
The comment is a comment. It pertains to Cameron. Thus, it is a personal comment. As any comment about Cameron would be.
I did enjoy your fulsome condemnation of Fallon's highly personal attack on Ed Miliband by the way.
But Mr Balls insisted the note admitting that Labour had blown the nation's finances should not be taken seriously. He told BBC West Midlands: 'Liam Byrne's note was a jokey note… of the course the money hadn't run out.'
That must be the archetype of "when you're explaining, you're losing".
According to someone on Twitter it was intended for Hammond, who is a friend of Byrne's.
John Rentoul is saying that Laws was discourteous. Maybe he was, but I think I would be too if someone offered me an opportunity like that.
The letter added nothing to the sum of human understanding and no confidence was broken. It wasn't addressed to anyone in particular and so it was entirely proper to make it public.
But Mr Balls insisted the note admitting that Labour had blown the nation's finances should not be taken seriously. He told BBC West Midlands: 'Liam Byrne's note was a jokey note… of the course the money hadn't run out.'
That must be the archetype of "when you're explaining, you're losing".
According to someone on Twitter it was intended for Hammond, who is a friend of Byrne's.
John Rentoul is saying that Laws was discourteous. Maybe he was, but I think I would be too if someone offered me an opportunity like that.
It was an act of irresponsibility, politically speaking, when Byrne did not know who would get the job. It was a fair joke to a friend - most of us might have made it - but it left his opponents an open goal.
What's rather sadder is that it's been used to seriously damage his career. He's been written off as a silly lightweight when actually he would be doing a much better job than Balls (admittedly not hard). What's saddest of all is that he's the only Labour politician to have made this admission - and everyone else seems determined to ignore the truth in case they suffer his fate.
He told the Sun: “I’m a researcher as well as a candidate, I know what people are thinking.”
Really? I'm a researcher, or I have been, but it's difficult to know what people think just on the basis of raw data. Surely somebody who knows what people are thinking is a psychic, not a researcher?
But Mr Balls insisted the note admitting that Labour had blown the nation's finances should not be taken seriously. He told BBC West Midlands: 'Liam Byrne's note was a jokey note… of the course the money hadn't run out.'
That must be the archetype of "when you're explaining, you're losing".
According to someone on Twitter it was intended for Hammond, who is a friend of Byrne's.
John Rentoul is saying that Laws was discourteous. Maybe he was, but I think I would be too if someone offered me an opportunity like that.
The letter added nothing to the sum of human understanding and no confidence was broken. It wasn't addressed to anyone in particular and so it was entirely proper to make it public.
In any case, it's politics not a parlour game.
It was very cheap of Laws. Whatever happened to him?
But Mr Balls insisted the note admitting that Labour had blown the nation's finances should not be taken seriously. He told BBC West Midlands: 'Liam Byrne's note was a jokey note… of the course the money hadn't run out.'
That must be the archetype of "when you're explaining, you're losing".
According to someone on Twitter it was intended for Hammond, who is a friend of Byrne's.
John Rentoul is saying that Laws was discourteous. Maybe he was, but I think I would be too if someone offered me an opportunity like that.
The letter added nothing to the sum of human understanding and no confidence was broken. It wasn't addressed to anyone in particular and so it was entirely proper to make it public.
In any case, it's politics not a parlour game.
It was very cheap of Laws. Whatever happened to him?
"Cheap". Good grief, you sound like Lady Bracknell. You might instead consider the mindset of someone who thought it was hilariously amusing to leave a note like that behind for his successor.
Pointing out the record of a party in govt isn't negative personal campaigning
The tag line of the advert is "David Cameron is too scared to debate his record"
That is negative personal campaigning
Do you understand the difference?
On that basis any comment about anyone is a personal comment.
Rubbish.
The comment is negative, and is personally directed at Cameron.
Still, I wouldn't expect someone who supports the party of McBride to understand the difference. Especially someone who was so shocked by it that he said he would not vote Labour that contained Ed Balls ...
The comment is a comment. It pertains to Cameron. Thus, it is a personal comment. As any comment about Cameron would be.
I did enjoy your fulsome condemnation of Fallon's highly personal attack on Ed Miliband by the way.
Hypocrite.
1) You are being ridiculous. You do seem to have a rather significant problem with comprehension of English. Just the other week you said a report into the BBC's bias on religion, immigration and Europe was into BBC bias on politics.
2) I can''t say I was aware of Fallon's comment, and thus I'm pretty sure I've not commented on it. Sorry, I can't follow politics 24/7.
3) ISTR Miliband saying Labour would run a positive campaign.
4) This was being talked about today. As far as I'm aware, Fallon's comments have not been.
So as far as I can tell, I'm not being a hypocrite. At least on this. And given your comments after the publication of McBride's book, I'm not sure that you should be calling anyone a hypocrite.
A combined share of 43% for the Conservatives and UKIP is very low; a combined vote share of 43% for Labour and the Greens is very high.
8% for the Greens feels very high on it's own tbh.
The Greens had two 8's with Ashcroft in March (and another from YouGov). Definitely an outlier on the high side, but it does look like the Green decline from their surge has stabilised in the polls for now.
@stodge The SNP and Conservatives won't do any sort of deal. And the reason is deeply political - the SNP wants a majority in Holyrood in 2016. That will allow them to push for IndyRef 2...
If they do a deal with the Conservatives, their fox is shot. If you think the swing to the SNP looks big at this election, wait for the swing to Labour in Holyrood 2016.
The chance of an SNP-Conservative zero is one of the biggest zero chances we have at this election.
If I'm right you will allow me to remind you of this ad nauseam in the next few months and years.
I'm sure Labour will recover but only because nature abhors a vacuum. If she has any nous (and I'm sure she has), Sturgeon will go for Indyref2 only if and when she is certain of winning. That may not be for some while and in the interim DevoMax provides the financial underpinning for the putative Scottish State while she works out how a truly independent Scotland will operate in the EU, NATO and can answer the currency question.
A couple of polls unfortunately opened the elephant trap into which Messrs Cameron, Miliband and Clegg duly fell and have provided Salmond and Sturgeon with a big card to play in any post-election negotiations.
The most recent poll from each company over the past week shows:-
ICM 6% Con Lead Opinium 2% Con Lead TNS 2% Con Lead Com Res 1% Con Lead Ashcroft Tied Populus Tied Yougov 1% Lab Lead MORI 2% Lab Lead Survation 4% Lab Lead Panelbase 6% Lab Lead
But Mr Balls insisted the note admitting that Labour had blown the nation's finances should not be taken seriously. He told BBC West Midlands: 'Liam Byrne's note was a jokey note… of the course the money hadn't run out.'
That must be the archetype of "when you're explaining, you're losing".
According to someone on Twitter it was intended for Hammond, who is a friend of Byrne's.
John Rentoul is saying that Laws was discourteous. Maybe he was, but I think I would be too if someone offered me an opportunity like that.
The letter added nothing to the sum of human understanding and no confidence was broken. It wasn't addressed to anyone in particular and so it was entirely proper to make it public.
In any case, it's politics not a parlour game.
It was very cheap of Laws. Whatever happened to him?
"Cheap". Good grief, you sound like Lady Bracknell. You might instead consider the mindset of someone who thought it was hilariously amusing to leave a note like that behind for his successor.
Laws was excitedly trying to curry favour with the Tories. It was not a classy move.
As for Byrne, he'd just lost his job. It was gallows humour. Foolish for sure, but nothing more to it than that.
Perhaps ICM is the outlier and there is a groundswell of support for Ed that will see him returned as PM ?
It's possible but the evidence is so mixed.
Con leads in the last few days with ICM, Comres, Opinium and TNS.
Ties with Populus and Ashcroft.
Labour leads with Ipsos and Yougov, probably soon to be joined by Panelbase.
The SW Comres is great for the Tories, the Scottish TNS is awful for Labour but this week's Ashcroft marginals seem good for Labour and disconcerting for the Tories.
Out and about yesterday in North London and West Essex there was zero sense of an election taking place. I wonder how many people are actively tuning it out.
But Mr Balls insisted the note admitting that Labour had blown the nation's finances should not be taken seriously. He told BBC West Midlands: 'Liam Byrne's note was a jokey note… of the course the money hadn't run out.'
That must be the archetype of "when you're explaining, you're losing".
According to someone on Twitter it was intended for Hammond, who is a friend of Byrne's.
John Rentoul is saying that Laws was discourteous. Maybe he was, but I think I would be too if someone offered me an opportunity like that.
The letter added nothing to the sum of human understanding and no confidence was broken. It wasn't addressed to anyone in particular and so it was entirely proper to make it public.
In any case, it's politics not a parlour game.
It was very cheap of Laws. Whatever happened to him?
"Cheap". Good grief, you sound like Lady Bracknell. You might instead consider the mindset of someone who thought it was hilariously amusing to leave a note like that behind for his successor.
Laws was excitedly trying to curry favour with the Tories. It was not a classy move.
As for Byrne, he'd just lost his job. It was gallows humour. Foolish for sure, but nothing more to it than that.
We'll have to differ. It seems perfectly reasonable behaviour to me. There was nothing confidential in it, and it was an illuminating insight into the mind of an opponent.
Sadly for you, for much of the population it encapsulated the profligacy of the last government in a single sentence. That's what you really object to and what stings you so much.
@stodge The SNP and Conservatives won't do any sort of deal. And the reason is deeply political - the SNP wants a majority in Holyrood in 2016. That will allow them to push for IndyRef 2...
If they do a deal with the Conservatives, their fox is shot. If you think the swing to the SNP looks big at this election, wait for the swing to Labour in Holyrood 2016.
The chance of an SNP-Conservative zero is one of the biggest zero chances we have at this election.
If I'm right you will allow me to remind you of this ad nauseam in the next few months and years.
I'm sure Labour will recover but only because nature abhors a vacuum. If she has any nous (and I'm sure she has), Sturgeon will go for Indyref2 only if and when she is certain of winning. That may not be for some while and in the interim DevoMax provides the financial underpinning for the putative Scottish State while she works out how a truly independent Scotland will operate in the EU, NATO and can answer the currency question.
A couple of polls unfortunately opened the elephant trap into which Messrs Cameron, Miliband and Clegg duly fell and have provided Salmond and Sturgeon with a big card to play in any post-election negotiations.
If you're right (SNP abstaining on a Conservative minority Queen's speech will mean you are) I'll be quite prepared to eat the humble pie.
The most recent poll from each company over the past week shows:-
ICM 6% Con Lead Opinium 2% Con Lead TNS 2% Con Lead Com Res 1% Con Lead Ashcroft Tied Populus Tied Yougov 1% Lab Lead MORI 2% Lab Lead Survation 4% Lab Lead Panelbase 6% Lab Lead
Recent opinion polls are suggesting a result heading towards Lab 300 Con 250 SNP 50 LD 25. Although I'd be pleased with that, I'm highly sceptical. It's a lot easier holding seats than winning them, 1997 notwithstanding. The damage that Ukip will do to the Tories' chances seems to be lessening every day. And you can never be confident that Labour will GOTV.
Not sure what that has to do with the likely relocation of many financial jobs south of the border had the Nats won the referendum ? Bizarre.
I don't know AVIVA (The old Norwich Union (+ General Accident, Fire and Life Assurance Corporation + Commercial Union) is based, surprise, surprise, in Norwich - but presumably still has offices in Perth.
Mind you - this is potentially ruinous for Aviva - it makes the stupidity of fixed returns for Equitable life customers look like the essence of prudence.
I read the FT article on this, that French insurance company was still selling the products in 1997! They managed to get most holders to switch to a non-apocalypse contract with a payment of 100 Francs.
Pointing out the record of a party in govt isn't negative personal campaigning
The tag line of the advert is "David Cameron is too scared to debate his record"
That is negative personal campaigning
Do you understand the difference?
On that basis any comment about anyone is a personal comment.
Rubbish.
The comment is negative, and is personally directed at Cameron.
Still, I wouldn't expect someone who supports the party of McBride to understand the difference. Especially someone who was so shocked by it that he said he would not vote Labour that contained Ed Balls ...
The comment is a comment. It pertains to Cameron. Thus, it is a personal comment. As any comment about Cameron would be.
I did enjoy your fulsome condemnation of Fallon's highly personal attack on Ed Miliband by the way.
Hypocrite.
1) You are being ridiculous. You do seem to have a rather significant problem with comprehension of English. Just the other week you said a report into the BBC's bias on religion, immigration and Europe was into BBC bias on politics.
2) I can''t say I was aware of Fallon's comment, and thus I'm pretty sure I've not commented on it. Sorry, I can't follow politics 24/7.
3) ISTR Miliband saying Labour would run a positive campaign.
4) This was being talked about today. As far as I'm aware, Fallon's comments have not been.
So as far as I can tell, I'm not being a hypocrite. At least on this. And given your comments after the publication of McBride's book, I'm not sure that you should be calling anyone a hypocrite.
No, I did not say the BBC report was about politics, I said I did not understand your claim that religion, immigration and Europe were not political. Sadly, it is you that has the basic problem with the English language. You also have a distinct problem with self-awareness. Your willingness to consistently call out every terrible thing you believe Labour does is only matched by your total inability to do the same for the Tories. The Fallon story was all over the press and the TV for several days. I am afraid I just do not believe you missed it. As you consistently - and somewhat obsessively observe - I am a vile, venal, hypocrite. I admit it; which, at least, makes me honest.
@stodge The SNP and Conservatives won't do any sort of deal. And the reason is deeply political - the SNP wants a majority in Holyrood in 2016. That will allow them to push for IndyRef 2...
If they do a deal with the Conservatives, their fox is shot. If you think the swing to the SNP looks big at this election, wait for the swing to Labour in Holyrood 2016.
The chance of an SNP-Conservative zero is one of the biggest zero chances we have at this election.
If I'm right you will allow me to remind you of this ad nauseam in the next few months and years.
I'm sure Labour will recover but only because nature abhors a vacuum. If she has any nous (and I'm sure she has), Sturgeon will go for Indyref2 only if and when she is certain of winning. That may not be for some while and in the interim DevoMax provides the financial underpinning for the putative Scottish State while she works out how a truly independent Scotland will operate in the EU, NATO and can answer the currency question.
A couple of polls unfortunately opened the elephant trap into which Messrs Cameron, Miliband and Clegg duly fell and have provided Salmond and Sturgeon with a big card to play in any post-election negotiations.
I have to admit that I have to agree with Pulpstar. People south of the border have no conception of the Scottish National distate for the Tories. For the SNP to have talks about C&S let alone coalition would destroy them in Scotland a year before the Holyrood elections and cause major defections amongst the new MP's.
Sturgeon and Murrell are certainly not daft enough to get caught in that trap, although Salmond may try to bait a trap for others to fall into.
No, I did not say the BBC report was about politics, I said I did not understand your claim that religion, immigration and Europe were not political. Sadly, it is you that has the basic problem with the English language. You also have a distinct problem with self-awareness. Your willingness to consistently call out every terrible thing you believe Labour does is only matched by your total inability to do the same for the Tories. The Fallon story was all over the press and the TV for several days. I am afraid I just do not believe you missed it. As you consistently - and somewhat obsessively observe - I am a vile, venal, hypocrite. I admit it; which, at least, makes me honest.
Where did I claim that they were 'not political'? AFAICR I said directly the opposite. But that is not what you were trying to prove.
To recap: you provided a link to that report as a sign that the BBC did studies into their political bias, in the context of political parties. Which it does not. Agree? If you read the report that is fairly easy to see, from the terms of reference, yet alone the contents.
Feel free not to believe me re. Fallon. It happens to be the truth. I do have other rather pleasant things to occupy my time. ;-)
As for not criticising the Tories: are you serious? Just last night I bashed them (and to be fair, Labour) for having splash screens on their website - but note my first post was just about the Conservatives, as they were the first party's site I looked at (and that was because conservatives.com is easier to remember than labour.org.uk). I also congratulated the Lib Dems and Greens for having various disabled-access versions of their manifestos.
As for your final sentence: that's just a rather silly attempt at putting words into my mouth that I do not believe.
Comments
John Rentoul is saying that Laws was discourteous. Maybe he was, but I think I would be too if someone offered me an opportunity like that.
If the FT story is correct that disproportionately more young voters have fallen off the electoral roll, that should skew the electorate vs the population.
He told the Sun: “I’m a researcher as well as a candidate, I know what people are thinking.”
I did enjoy your fulsome condemnation of Fallon's highly personal attack on Ed Miliband by the way.
Hypocrite.
In any case, it's politics not a parlour game.
What's rather sadder is that it's been used to seriously damage his career. He's been written off as a silly lightweight when actually he would be doing a much better job than Balls (admittedly not hard). What's saddest of all is that he's the only Labour politician to have made this admission - and everyone else seems determined to ignore the truth in case they suffer his fate.
A: We’re only 20 seats from a majority, Cameron claims. There is only one way "
Essex?
http://tinyurl.com/ThatBeardIsAFireHazard
Unders Evens.
2.5+ 8-11
2) I can''t say I was aware of Fallon's comment, and thus I'm pretty sure I've not commented on it. Sorry, I can't follow politics 24/7.
3) ISTR Miliband saying Labour would run a positive campaign.
4) This was being talked about today. As far as I'm aware, Fallon's comments have not been.
So as far as I can tell, I'm not being a hypocrite. At least on this. And given your comments after the publication of McBride's book, I'm not sure that you should be calling anyone a hypocrite.
Must be worth a flutter surely?
A fair price may be 9-2 or some such ? (They are related)
Con 29%, Lab 29%, LD 5% and UKIP 32.8% gets you the following seat distribution
Con 184, Lab 254, Lib Dems 2, UKIP 182
I'm sure Labour will recover but only because nature abhors a vacuum. If she has any nous (and I'm sure she has), Sturgeon will go for Indyref2 only if and when she is certain of winning. That may not be for some while and in the interim DevoMax provides the financial underpinning for the putative Scottish State while she works out how a truly independent Scotland will operate in the EU, NATO and can answer the currency question.
A couple of polls unfortunately opened the elephant trap into which Messrs Cameron, Miliband and Clegg duly fell and have provided Salmond and Sturgeon with a big card to play in any post-election negotiations.
The most recent poll from each company over the past week shows:-
ICM 6% Con Lead
Opinium 2% Con Lead
TNS 2% Con Lead
Com Res 1% Con Lead
Ashcroft Tied
Populus Tied
Yougov 1% Lab Lead
MORI 2% Lab Lead
Survation 4% Lab Lead
Panelbase 6% Lab Lead
A dead heat.
As for Byrne, he'd just lost his job. It was gallows humour. Foolish for sure, but nothing more to it than that.
http://tinyurl.com/IHopeHeDoesntSpreadBet
There will probably only be two more Mori polls before polling day?
Con leads in the last few days with ICM, Comres, Opinium and TNS.
Ties with Populus and Ashcroft.
Labour leads with Ipsos and Yougov, probably soon to be joined by Panelbase.
The SW Comres is great for the Tories, the Scottish TNS is awful for Labour but this week's Ashcroft marginals seem good for Labour and disconcerting for the Tories.
Out and about yesterday in North London and West Essex there was zero sense of an election taking place. I wonder how many people are actively tuning it out.
Sadly for you, for much of the population it encapsulated the profligacy of the last government in a single sentence. That's what you really object to and what stings you so much.
new thread
A debate between two politicians is being held on the roof of the Empire State Building
One of the politicians has a well known fear of heights and refuses to debate
The other says he is scared of coming up here and debating me
Personal attack.
Situation B
A debate between two politicians is being held in a TV studio
One politician refuses to debate
The other lists his policy failures and says he is scared to debate
Not a personal attack
But I'll offer you 3.25-to-1.
http://ftalphaville.ft.com/2015/02/27/2120422/meet-the-man-who-could-own-aviva-france/
Sturgeon and Murrell are certainly not daft enough to get caught in that trap, although Salmond may try to bait a trap for others to fall into.
Edited to correct a Spulchucker error.
To recap: you provided a link to that report as a sign that the BBC did studies into their political bias, in the context of political parties. Which it does not. Agree? If you read the report that is fairly easy to see, from the terms of reference, yet alone the contents.
Feel free not to believe me re. Fallon. It happens to be the truth. I do have other rather pleasant things to occupy my time. ;-)
As for not criticising the Tories: are you serious? Just last night I bashed them (and to be fair, Labour) for having splash screens on their website - but note my first post was just about the Conservatives, as they were the first party's site I looked at (and that was because conservatives.com is easier to remember than labour.org.uk). I also congratulated the Lib Dems and Greens for having various disabled-access versions of their manifestos.
As for your final sentence: that's just a rather silly attempt at putting words into my mouth that I do not believe.