Miliband has reached a new low today..he should be ashamed of himself...as should the Party he leads because they no doubt approve of what he is saying
Total and utter disgrace, morons like Southam will still vote for him but anyone with a brain cell can see him for what he really is.
35% have no brain cells?
Only right wing PBers have brains and can call posters who argue that foreign policy is a legitimate subject for discussion during a general election campaign Morons!
FairyNuff
This Government has learnt nothing about Libya from Blairs Iraq failings.
Its all about post war as Ed pointed out in Parliament 8 WEEKS AGO
Of course, Southam is right. It's only the Tory press who are misrepresenting Ed's position:
Miliband will cite this week's Mediterranean refugee deaths, the sidelining of Britain during the Ukraine crisis and the endagering of the UK's EU membership as examples of Cameron's failures.
On 5 live this morning, they were reporting that the original speech had been rewritten as Ed and his aides have had to back down in the face of a backlash.
We were all led to believe that the Tories were rolling in cash to throw at this GE. Have we seen any real evidence of this, and it is too late now as their caps on spending.
As I noted yesterday, over the past week I have visited two ultra marginals and there is virtually no signs a GE is only 2 weeks away.
Former Foreign Secretary William Hague who is bowing out of politics after this election but is travelling with, and campaigning with, the prime minister today says:"Foreign policy is not something you can just discover 13 days before polling day. This is the first time in five years that Ed Miliband has troubled himself to give a full length speech on foreign policy."
Sure is. Some bigger Tory leads gives them continued hope of some late swings, but the overall picture, including a bunch of Lab 35%s, is still that Ed is on course. Although a very unambitious strategy, can the 35% one be criticised too heavily if it ends up working I wonder?
I bet Liam Bryne has taken a lot of stick in Labour circles for his attempt at being funny 5 years ago. I don't know that it has actually cost them anything, but it's always provided an easy counter for the coalition to fall back on.
Oh, was Liam Byrne's note a joke?
A lot of good jokes are true.
Alex Salmond did one about writing Labour's budget...
Whooshed Cameron who Tweeted and subsequently got thousands of replies explaining what a joke was.
Todays Populus EICIPM (LAB most seats 3.70 Betfair)
I can't believe how big the Ed PM / Lab seats gap is now - it's ridiculously huge ! I think people must have decided it is going to be EICIPM but with less seats than the Tories.
Whilst this is perhaps the midpoint, it may not be probability wise the correct play from a betting PoV.
But, yes, if it turns out that he says the opposite of what is being reported, I shall retract what I said.
"The BBC's assistant political editor Norman Smith said Labour were making clear that they were not blaming the prime minister for the recent deaths in the Mediterranean."
How generous of them.
Clearly, they see they've made a major and extremely distasteful blunder, and are trying to row back from it. It's hard to reconcile that rowing back with what Douglas Alexander said on the Today programme, though.
But, yes, if it turns out that he says the opposite of what is being reported, I shall retract what I said.
"The BBC's assistant political editor Norman Smith said Labour were making clear that they were not blaming the prime minister for the recent deaths in the Mediterranean."
How generous of them.
Clearly, they see they've made a major and extremely distasteful blunder, and are trying to row back from it. It's hard to reconcile that rowing back with what Douglas Alexander said on the Today programme, though.
At no point did Alexander blame Cameron for the deaths.
But, yes, if it turns out that he says the opposite of what is being reported, I shall retract what I said.
"The BBC's assistant political editor Norman Smith said Labour were making clear that they were not blaming the prime minister for the recent deaths in the Mediterranean."
I for one am holding back judgement until later as I haven't read the whole story yet, but I would also point out that a quote like that can be pretty meaningless. One of the oldest political tricks is to indicate your opponent is to blame for something or has a terrible position on something, while including a comment to the effect that you are not blaming them for that. Will his speech give the impression he is blaming the PM for the deaths (to people who are not Tory partisans in any case), even if he slips in a comment about not blaming him, that is the key for me? Speechwriters should be good enough to toe that line, so we shall see.
I bet Liam Bryne has taken a lot of stick in Labour circles for his attempt at being funny 5 years ago. I don't know that it has actually cost them anything, but it's always provided an easy counter for the coalition to fall back on.
Oh, was Liam Byrne's note a joke?
A lot of good jokes are true.
Alex Salmond did one about writing Labour's budget...
Yes indeed. As I said at the time, it would not have been as funny if he had said he was writing the Tory budget, as that would just be silly, but the potential influence of the SNP on a Labour minority government is undeniable in the event of Lab not getting a majority, making what was clearly a joke much funnier.
Con 280 Lab 260 SNP 52 LD 20 UKIP 5 NI 18 Others 5
Dave, realising that he can't form a government resigns and leaves it to Ed.
Ed, manages to cobble a barely workable agreement, but in a moment of foresight, realises that such a government could lead to the long term destruction of the Labour party, also resigns.
Does Salmond try to form a government (with LAB S&C) and become PM or is that just too ridiculous and we would have to have another election.
The SNP cannot provide support for the Tories.
But an SNP government in Westminster could hardly stop the Tories voting for their policies. ASIPM.
So who to believe? Panelbase, YouGov and Populus or Survation and ComRes?
I'm sticking with Thresher and Rawlings 33 % each,even money the 2.The real action is in the marginals.Although I am really too old to be excited by an Ashcroft poll and the significance of his polling is an unknown.he is where the action is and the contact rate is a good guide to the various ground games which,in close contests,could be crucial.
Well disappointing Populus for tories. On t'other hand you've got to go back 8 months for a tory lead with that pollster so maybe not surprising if the two mains are close.
Do the two Alexanders, Danny and Douglas, not understand that they are heading towards HoC exit in their own constituency? Is spending time in the UK media going to help them connect with their voters?
Dry in the north, period of rain possible in the south.
Normal temps, cooler on east coast and under any rain in the south.
Verification chance @ +312 hours (2% to 4%)
I can assure you that the verification probability for the forecast you have provided is considerably higher than 4%.
Depends on what criteria you base your verification on.
Given the detail I have given, the chances of it going wrong are pretty considerable at this range.
If you were basing model verification purely of sea level pressure anomaly (which is how the forecast models, generally judge themselves), then the chance of verification would be a lot higher - probably 30-45%
I bet Liam Bryne has taken a lot of stick in Labour circles for his attempt at being funny 5 years ago. I don't know that it has actually cost them anything, but it's always provided an easy counter for the coalition to fall back on.
Oh, was Liam Byrne's note a joke?
A lot of good jokes are true.
Alex Salmond did one about writing Labour's budget...
Whooshed Cameron who Tweeted and subsequently got thousands of replies explaining what a joke was.
Yeah got to agree with you. Thought the tory froth about it was very silly. it was a joke by Salmond & quite funny really.
On 5 live this morning, they were reporting that the original speech had been rewritten as Ed and his aides have had to back down in the face of a backlash.
Pretty typical stuff I imagine. As I say, one reason parties so heavily trail these things in the first place.
It also gives the handy opportunity to attack their opposing media for misrepresenting them. It'll be fun if Cameron tries this sort of trick in the coming weeks as well (if reports of Ed M rewriting his speech are true of course).
Todays Populus EICIPM (LAB most seats 3.70 Betfair)
I can't believe how big the Ed PM / Lab seats gap is now - it's ridiculously huge ! I think people must have decided it is going to be EICIPM but with less seats than the Tories.
Whilst this is perhaps the midpoint, it may not be probability wise the correct play from a betting PoV.
All very confusing, hopefully profitable - mind.
Agrred I haveprofitably laid EICIPM at 1.6 and backed most seats at 3.7 with some of the profit.
I am hoping to be out of both markets with a Wad before 7th May but who knows how high Lab most seats will drift need it to be in to 3.5 before selling
We were all led to believe that the Tories were rolling in cash to throw at this GE. Have we seen any real evidence of this, and it is too late now as their caps on spending.
As I noted yesterday, over the past week I have visited two ultra marginals and there is virtually no signs a GE is only 2 weeks away.
We don't know.
This is 2015, not 2010, 2005, etc. The money is spent on methods that the party think will be most effective, and that is no longer billboards and posters. Political campaigning has moved into the digital age far more than the average voters realises, I suspect.
On topic, and in the light of Populus, if you do what a wise man once said and look at the shares not the leads, pretty much everyone is within MoE of Con 34 Lab 34, with the single rogue (not surprising to have one in this many polls) being the Survation Lab score.
Of course, Southam is right. It's only the Tory press who are misrepresenting Ed's position:
Miliband will cite this week's Mediterranean refugee deaths, the sidelining of Britain during the Ukraine crisis and the endagering of the UK's EU membership as examples of Cameron's failures.
It's very easy Richard. Listen to the speech and then read it if you have missed some of what was said. If Ed blames Dave I will join you in condemning it. But as far as I can see he does no such thing. What he does do is question British foreign policy over the last few years. That is a perfectly legitimate thing to do, is not wicked and does not indicate degeneracy.
I do not know how many times Ed Miliband has asked the prime minister at PMQs about the rebuilding of Libya, but I’m willing to bet it was a lot less than he’s asked him about whether he will take part in TV debates. He’s probably asked more questions about Andy Coulson’s security pass than North African migrants.
And when the Labour leader has dipped his toe into foreign policy waters? Well, there was the Syria vote where he gave every impression of shifting positions for political reasons and then got terribly upset when he was accused of giving “succour” to Assad.
Miliband has reached a new low today..he should be ashamed of himself...as should the Party he leads because they no doubt approve of what he is saying
Total and utter disgrace, morons like Southam will still vote for him but anyone with a brain cell can see him for what he really is.
35% have no brain cells?
If Labour get 35% I will eat my 10 gallon Stetson.
I thought it was an effective strategy that was achievable but incredibly depressing. It doesn't even look like they will achieve that low level.
Drinking heavily from the sub-sample cup that poll shows a huge age divide. Tories consistently ahead with the over 45s. Labour with whopping leads on the under 45s.
Mike Smithson retweeted Ladbrokes Politics@LadPolitics·3 mins3 minutes ago @MSmithsonPB Mainly because someone had £10,000 on the Tories to win Watford last week
I bet Liam Bryne has taken a lot of stick in Labour circles for his attempt at being funny 5 years ago. I don't know that it has actually cost them anything, but it's always provided an easy counter for the coalition to fall back on.
Oh, was Liam Byrne's note a joke?
A lot of good jokes are true.
Alex Salmond did one about writing Labour's budget...
Whooshed Cameron who Tweeted and subsequently got thousands of replies explaining what a joke was.
Yeah got to agree with you. Thought the tory froth about it was very silly. it was a joke by Salmond & quite funny really.
People may have found it funnier should there not be a big chance the picture he painted will spring to life soon enough. Terrifying yes, funny not really.
The problem with Stuart Campbell is that, from everything I can decypher, he is a pretty obnoxious and nasty human being.
However, he is also a very, very good journalist. He is a rarity in any media these days in that he fact checks and provides supporting evidence. His pieces are generally reliable.
Which is why the Unionists attack the man. The trouble with Scotland supporters is they try to defend the man who is often indefensible instead of just accepting the man is an arse and pointing out that the journalism still stands.
He uses the quote 'A necessary wanker' in his own twitter bio, which indicates a refreshing amount of self knowledge. If only we could get the unecessary wankers in the media to show similar insight.
Mike Smithson retweeted Ladbrokes Politics@LadPolitics·3 mins3 minutes ago @MSmithsonPB Mainly because someone had £10,000 on the Tories to win Watford last week
I know someone that had 50k on a political market last week and the bookie didn't publicise... Bit weird?
Of course, Southam is right. It's only the Tory press who are misrepresenting Ed's position:
Miliband will cite this week's Mediterranean refugee deaths, the sidelining of Britain during the Ukraine crisis and the endagering of the UK's EU membership as examples of Cameron's failures.
It's very easy Richard. Listen to the speech and then read it if you have missed some of what was said. If Ed blames Dave I will join you in condemning it. But as far as I can see he does no such thing. What he does do is question British foreign policy over the last few years. That is a perfectly legitimate thing to do, is not wicked and does not indicate degeneracy.
Sorry, you can't get away with that. It was Labour's own briefing note which started this. The New Statesman, the BBC, Sky, all agree that Labour were blaming Cameron for the deaths.
Of course the speech itself will tone down that disgusting allegation, but that's not the point.
I'd change my mind if Ed had made a convincing and unconditional apology for the suggestion, i.e. if it really was incompetence on Labour's part in briefing journalists. But he hasn't, as far as I know.
Drinking heavily from the sub-sample cup that poll shows a huge age divide. Tories consistently ahead with the over 45s. Labour with whopping leads on the under 45s.
I bet Liam Bryne has taken a lot of stick in Labour circles for his attempt at being funny 5 years ago. I don't know that it has actually cost them anything, but it's always provided an easy counter for the coalition to fall back on.
Oh, was Liam Byrne's note a joke?
A lot of good jokes are true.
Alex Salmond did one about writing Labour's budget...
Whooshed Cameron who Tweeted and subsequently got thousands of replies explaining what a joke was.
Yeah got to agree with you. Thought the tory froth about it was very silly. it was a joke by Salmond & quite funny really.
Yes...but the point was it was only funny* because it had an element of truth
Mike Smithson retweeted Ladbrokes Politics@LadPolitics·3 mins3 minutes ago @MSmithsonPB Mainly because someone had £10,000 on the Tories to win Watford last week
The Lib Dem selection probably cost Labour a decent chance of a gain.
Dry in the north, period of rain possible in the south.
Normal temps, cooler on east coast and under any rain in the south.
Verification chance @ +312 hours (2% to 4%)
I can assure you that the verification probability for the forecast you have provided is considerably higher than 4%.
Depends on what criteria you base your verification on.
Given the detail I have given, the chances of it going wrong are pretty considerable at this range.
If you were basing model verification purely of sea level pressure anomaly (which is how the forecast models, generally judge themselves), then the chance of verification would be a lot higher - probably 30-45%
Actually, the opposite is the case. Model verification of 500hPa geopotential height (more commonly used as the standard than sea-level pressure), shows a clear decline at increased forecast range, but at a lead time of two weeks you can get the forecast right about one-third of the time using purely climatology with the sort of vague forecast you gave.
I bet Liam Bryne has taken a lot of stick in Labour circles for his attempt at being funny 5 years ago. I don't know that it has actually cost them anything, but it's always provided an easy counter for the coalition to fall back on.
Oh, was Liam Byrne's note a joke?
A lot of good jokes are true.
Alex Salmond did one about writing Labour's budget...
Whooshed Cameron who Tweeted and subsequently got thousands of replies explaining what a joke was.
So what? Although of course it was not literally true and Cameron would surely know that (making those thousands of replies missing the point), he made the gag because of the narrative that the SNP would have a large influence on Lab policy.
If Farage made a joke about immigrants, you can bet everyone would kick up a fuss about it because UKIP are so heavily focused on immigration, and you can also bet that a lot of people would suggest that even if it was a complete joke, that he made a joke about that issue, that very political issue, was significant and symbolic of his positions somehow.
I thought Salmond's joke was pretty funny. I did not take it literally. But it was funny because of the context of the SNP genuinely having some influence over Labour, if the circumstances are right. That Cameron and the Tories used that to further their narrative does not show they don't know what a joke is, and it was bloody idiotic of people to suggest it did.
So who to believe? Panelbase, YouGov and Populus or Survation and ComRes?
I dunno, but the betting markets move to the tories on a good poll and never seem to move back. PtP talked about a ratchet effect, and i can see exactly what he means.
The bet I really want to make is that the midpoint of the Sporting Index Con/Lab seat supremecy market (at the last price before the exit poll) overstates the tories and understates labour.
Does any reputable punter want to lay me at evens?
Miliband has reached a new low today..he should be ashamed of himself...as should the Party he leads because they no doubt approve of what he is saying
Total and utter disgrace, morons like Southam will still vote for him but anyone with a brain cell can see him for what he really is.
35% have no brain cells?
Only right wing PBers have brains and can call posters who argue that foreign policy is a legitimate subject for discussion during a general election campaign Morons!
FairyNuff
This Government has learnt nothing about Libya from Blairs Iraq failings.
Its all about post war as Ed pointed out in Parliament 8 WEEKS AGO
Political point scoring over a human tragedy?
Proud of that are you?
I guess you were pro war * 3 Iraq, Afgh. Libya?
How many do you think have made us safer.
I was against all 3 and believe the answer to my question is Nil
Whatever Ed will say, or planned to say, I think it probably is fair to say one reason for the reaction is the concern that Libya has turned into such a mess after an initial Mission Accomplished moment. I am suspicious of Miliband in particular trying to criticise foreign policy, since as I said his Syria stance is one of the few areas where I will outright criticise him, or any politician, for being intentionally misleading, but our foreign policy has typically been pretty bad. I'm at a loss what could have been done in Libya though. If Miliband is able to articulate something we could have, he will rise in my estimation on this issue immensely (on domestic issues he seems to pretty decent at times, at the least in picking his topics - people will disagree on his solutions of course).
Will any of the forthcoming polls monitor the level of voters who have already voted ( using postal votes) Clearly a good proportion of postal voters have already voted. My Mum who lives in a Conservative Marginal had sent her postal vote back on Wednesday.
Dry in the north, period of rain possible in the south.
Normal temps, cooler on east coast and under any rain in the south.
Verification chance @ +312 hours (2% to 4%)
I can assure you that the verification probability for the forecast you have provided is considerably higher than 4%.
Depends on what criteria you base your verification on.
Given the detail I have given, the chances of it going wrong are pretty considerable at this range.
If you were basing model verification purely of sea level pressure anomaly (which is how the forecast models, generally judge themselves), then the chance of verification would be a lot higher - probably 30-45%
Actually, the opposite is the case. Model verification of 500hPa geopotential height (more commonly used as the standard than sea-level pressure), shows a clear decline at increased forecast range, but at a lead time of two weeks you can get the forecast right about one-third of the time using purely climatology with the sort of vague forecast you gave.
I was just looking at the specifics as shown by the GFS at + 312 (for a bit of fun)
The amount of times that an actual forecast has been right at that range is rarer than hen's teeth in my experience and when they do come to fruition, it's usually by pure luck (i.e via a different synoptic route)
In actual fact, the period we are talking about is showing a blocking pattern to the north east. It is my understanding that blocking patterns are a lot more reliable to predict at this sort of range than zonal ones, however when it comes to specifics a shift of a 100 miles of so, could dramatically alter the conditions on the day.
Best to look at +144 before making any serious predictions in my experience.
So who to believe? Panelbase, YouGov and Populus or Survation and ComRes?
I dunno, but the betting markets move to the tories on a good poll and never seem to move back. PtP talked about a ratchet effect, and i can see exactly what he means.
The bet I really want to make is that the midpoint of the Sporting Index Con/Lab seat supremecy market (at the last price before the exit poll) overstates the tories and understates labour.
Does any reputable punter want to lay me at evens?
The Most Seats market is ridiculous. It has only a tangential relationship with the polls and it is barely linked to the individual constituency markets.
Has there ever been such divergence between pollsters this close to election day?
The odd thing is the pollsters whose methodology seems to favour the Tories (Comres & Survation) over the last 24 hours show an increasing Tory lead and those who seem to favour Labour (Panelbase & Populus) an increasing Labour lead. YouGove plies its lonely furrow marginally to the left of middle. Bizarro.
Drinking heavily from the sub-sample cup that poll shows a huge age divide. Tories consistently ahead with the over 45s. Labour with whopping leads on the under 45s.
The Tories are the party of Entitlement and the Boomers are the generation of Entitlement, truly the most destructive population group in history.
It is going to be amusing watching the likes of SO and TUD making excuses for Miligeeks feck ups over the next five years..
I don't think Miliband will be PM, but if I am wrong and he does make it I doubt he will be very impressive. I am not much of a fan.
As professional, experienced and cautious as he is, I'm expecting him to be like most governments - a little crappy, but not egregiously so. I'd put Cameron in the same category.
Will any of the forthcoming polls monitor the level of voters who have already voted ( using postal votes) Clearly a good proportion of postal voters have already voted. My Mum who lives in a Conservative Marginal had sent her postal vote back on Wednesday.
I'm not sure they can.
They can ask someone's opinion, but if they ask if they have voted then it becomes an exit poll which cannot be published prior to the end of voting.
We were all led to believe that the Tories were rolling in cash to throw at this GE. Have we seen any real evidence of this, and it is too late now as their caps on spending.
As I noted yesterday, over the past week I have visited two ultra marginals and there is virtually no signs a GE is only 2 weeks away.
We don't know.
This is 2015, not 2010, 2005, etc. The money is spent on methods that the party think will be most effective, and that is no longer billboards and posters. Political campaigning has moved into the digital age far more than the average voters realises, I suspect.
Phone banks were a big thing at the 2010 GE - haven't heard so much about them this time. I expect people who can be identified through Facebook as living in the right place and being of the target demographic will have had lots of party advertising in their news feed.
Why is it unacceptable for a politician to criticise another politician for political decisions which the criticising politician believes contributed to the death of a boatload of people?
It doesn't transcend the political realm and become an uncaused tragedy by virtue of being a tragedy. It's not playing politics. It is politics. That's what we elect them to undertake.
I'm not with SO here - of course Labour are drawing attention to Cameron's essay-crisis approach to foreign affairs and the possibility that it's contributed to a tragedy that's in the public eye. But that could be because they believe that Cameron's failings *are* responsible.
Prima facie, it seems no more immoral or scurrilous than criticising Blair for (a large number of boatloads of) Iraqi deaths; it seems that I'm in a minority here and I guess everyone else would criticise anyone who made that connection in an electoral context as "playing politics on the back of victims of war" or some such.
Totally legitimate to criticise Miliband as incoherent, self-contradictory, opportunistic to talk about it now with the benefit of hindsight and so on. But again, that's politics. The key advantage of opposition is the ability to speak hypocritically about the post-facto assessment of your opponent having used their power to do exactly what you'd have done in their place.
... I'm at a loss what could have been done in Libya though. If Miliband is able to articulate something we could have, he will rise in my estimation on this issue immensely (on domestic issues he seems to pretty decent at times, at the least in picking his topics - people will disagree on his solutions of course).
Yeah, I'd agree with that.
You replied to me last night and I don't want to appear rude by not replying but it feels too late to really reply to it. The tl;dr answer is "Well, they'll probably not win then. And the reasons why aren't ever going to shift in 1, 2 or possibly even 5 years ... "
Mr. kle4, there's a potential danger (which I don't think will be realised) for Miliband on Libya. He might be asked 'what would you have done differently?' which will mean he has to refute he'd've put boots on the ground and will be left wibbling, or he might be asked whether he thinks we should take more migrants. And if he refutes both, then what's the difference with Cameron? If he agrees to either he'll be attacked as both positions will be unpopular.
Drinking heavily from the sub-sample cup that poll shows a huge age divide. Tories consistently ahead with the over 45s. Labour with whopping leads on the under 45s.
The Tories are the party of Entitlement and the Boomers are the generation of Entitlement, truly the most destructive population group in history.
Utter rubbish, but you are a lost cause and it's not worth my time explaining why to you.
Why is it unacceptable for a politician to criticise another politician for political decisions which the criticising politician believes contributed to the death of a boatload of people?
The main criticism seems to be that Ed was supportive of the other politician at the time.
Drinking heavily from the sub-sample cup that poll shows a huge age divide. Tories consistently ahead with the over 45s. Labour with whopping leads on the under 45s.
The Tories are the party of Entitlement and the Boomers are the generation of Entitlement, truly the most destructive population group in history.
Did you see the Green manifesto? It included a bit on that generation, listing the nasty things people say about them, then sort of weakly countered that not all of them are well off, so that's alright then. I was a little confused why they would list all the nasty things people say about that generation if they weren't really going to rebut those claims.
Has there ever been such divergence between pollsters this close to election day?
The odd thing is the pollsters whose methodology seems to favour the Tories (Comres & Survation) over the last 24 hours show an increasing Tory lead and those who seem to favour Labour (Panelbase & Populus) an increasing Labour lead. YouGove plies its lonely furrow marginally to the left of middle. Bizarro.
The Most Seats market is ridiculous. It has only a tangential relationship with the polls and it is barely linked to the individual constituency markets.
Of course, we don't know whether it is the constituency markets or the seat total markets which are wrong. We have to be careful about relying on a circular argument which starts from the premise that the betting markets are right (in the constituency markets) in order to demonstrate that the betting markets are wrong on the seat totals.
Personally I'm not taking a view - just ensuring I'm in profit over a reasonably wide range.
I bet Liam Bryne has taken a lot of stick in Labour circles for his attempt at being funny 5 years ago. I don't know that it has actually cost them anything, but it's always provided an easy counter for the coalition to fall back on.
Oh, was Liam Byrne's note a joke?
A lot of good jokes are true.
Alex Salmond did one about writing Labour's budget...
Whooshed Cameron who Tweeted and subsequently got thousands of replies explaining what a joke was.
Yeah got to agree with you. Thought the tory froth about it was very silly. it was a joke by Salmond & quite funny really.
TBH I think the froth was only intended to highlight what is a good joke that highlights SNP strengths and Labour weakness. Why not emphasize it when the downside seat losses in Scotland are low.
Of course, Southam is right. It's only the Tory press who are misrepresenting Ed's position:
Miliband will cite this week's Mediterranean refugee deaths, the sidelining of Britain during the Ukraine crisis and the endagering of the UK's EU membership as examples of Cameron's failures.
It's very easy Richard. Listen to the speech and then read it if you have missed some of what was said. If Ed blames Dave I will join you in condemning it. But as far as I can see he does no such thing. What he does do is question British foreign policy over the last few years. That is a perfectly legitimate thing to do, is not wicked and does not indicate degeneracy.
Sorry, you can't get away with that. It was Labour's own briefing note which started this. The New Statesman, the BBC, Sky, all agree that Labour were blaming Cameron for the deaths.
Of course the speech itself will tone down that disgusting allegation, but that's not the point.
I'd change my mind if Ed had made a convincing and unconditional apology for the suggestion, i.e. if it really was incompetence on Labour's part in briefing journalists. But he hasn't, as far as I know.
No, Richard. I am afraid that as usual you want to believe that the Labour party is immoral, degenerate and wicked. This is your basic position and it has not changed for many years. The fact is that Ed has not said that Cameron is to blame for the deaths.
Drinking heavily from the sub-sample cup that poll shows a huge age divide. Tories consistently ahead with the over 45s. Labour with whopping leads on the under 45s.
The Tories are the party of Entitlement and the Boomers are the generation of Entitlement, truly the most destructive population group in history.
As a late boomer (those born between 1956 and 1965) that statement is ridiculous.
We were all led to believe that the Tories were rolling in cash to throw at this GE. Have we seen any real evidence of this, and it is too late now as their caps on spending.
As I noted yesterday, over the past week I have visited two ultra marginals and there is virtually no signs a GE is only 2 weeks away.
We don't know.
This is 2015, not 2010, 2005, etc. The money is spent on methods that the party think will be most effective, and that is no longer billboards and posters. Political campaigning has moved into the digital age far more than the average voters realises, I suspect.
I agree that you really don't see as many as you used to. So far out and about on my travels I have seen the following:
1 Tory billboard in Reading West 2 Tory and 1 LD billboard in Thornbury and Yate 2 Green window posters in Bristol South Absolutely nothing in my own constituency (Wantage)
Why is it unacceptable for a politician to criticise another politician for political decisions which the criticising politician believes contributed to the death of a boatload of people?
It doesn't transcend the political realm and become an uncaused tragedy by virtue of being a tragedy. It's not playing politics. It is politics. That's what we elect them to undertake.
I'm not with SO here - of course Labour are drawing attention to Cameron's essay-crisis approach to foreign affairs and the possibility that it's contributed to a tragedy that's in the public eye. But that could be because they believe that Cameron's failings *are* responsible.
Prima facie, it seems no more immoral or scurrilous than criticising Blair for (a large number of boatloads of) Iraqi deaths; it seems that I'm in a minority here and I guess everyone else would criticise anyone who made that connection in an electoral context as "playing politics on the back of victims of war" or some such.
Totally legitimate to criticise Miliband as incoherent, self-contradictory, opportunistic to talk about it now with the benefit of hindsight and so on. But again, that's politics. The key advantage of opposition is the ability to speak hypocritically about the post-facto assessment of your opponent having used their power to do exactly what you'd have done in their place.
Drinking heavily from the sub-sample cup that poll shows a huge age divide. Tories consistently ahead with the over 45s. Labour with whopping leads on the under 45s.
The Tories are the party of Entitlement and the Boomers are the generation of Entitlement, truly the most destructive population group in history.
Utter rubbish, but you are a lost cause and it's not worth my time explaining why to you.
The Tories have always been the Entitlement party. They exist to give away public funds to specific groups to guarantee votes and always have. From the hideous disgrace of Right To Buy where expensive social housing was given away for pennies to todays focus on the Boomers "me, me, me" attitudes to ever inflating pensioner give aways.
Has there ever been such divergence between pollsters this close to election day?
The odd thing is the pollsters whose methodology seems to favour the Tories (Comres & Survation) over the last 24 hours show an increasing Tory lead and those who seem to favour Labour (Panelbase & Populus) an increasing Labour lead. YouGove plies its lonely furrow marginally to the left of middle. Bizarro.
IMHO If the polls are biased - one leaning one party, the other to the other, then you would expect increased polarisation as more people make up their minds.
Drinking heavily from the sub-sample cup that poll shows a huge age divide. Tories consistently ahead with the over 45s. Labour with whopping leads on the under 45s.
The Tories are the party of Entitlement and the Boomers are the generation of Entitlement, truly the most destructive population group in history.
We were all led to believe that the Tories were rolling in cash to throw at this GE. Have we seen any real evidence of this, and it is too late now as their caps on spending.
As I noted yesterday, over the past week I have visited two ultra marginals and there is virtually no signs a GE is only 2 weeks away.
We don't know.
This is 2015, not 2010, 2005, etc. The money is spent on methods that the party think will be most effective, and that is no longer billboards and posters. Political campaigning has moved into the digital age far more than the average voters realises, I suspect.
Phone banks were a big thing at the 2010 GE - haven't heard so much about them this time. I expect people who can be identified through Facebook as living in the right place and being of the target demographic will have had lots of party advertising in their news feed.
Guido linked to an article that mentions this sort of thing:
"Conservative strategists also point to the sophisticated micro-targeting as a secret weapon. The Westminster bubble and the London commentariat are blissfully unaware of the work that’s been underway for months.
Highly-personalised direct mailing and social media communication to swing voters in the most important seats is more likely, they say, to count than the traditional door-knocking.
There is no shortage of funding. Candidates up and down the land find they’ve had strong support when they’ve needed it. Many still have the funds for more mailshots, more “moments”, to ram home their message.
Precision-targeting makes national share of vote much less significant, and that’s why a number of people at the heart of Team Cameron are confident they will do better in the marginal battleground than the polls imply."
Why is it unacceptable for a politician to criticise another politician for political decisions which the criticising politician believes contributed to the death of a boatload of people?
The main criticism seems to be that Ed was supportive of the other politician at the time.
And has just said "something must be done" cannot be the basis for Foreign Policy.
It can, however, be the basis for criticising it......
Miliband has reached a new low today..he should be ashamed of himself...as should the Party he leads because they no doubt approve of what he is saying
Total and utter disgrace, morons like Southam will still vote for him but anyone with a brain cell can see him for what he really is.
35% have no brain cells?
Only right wing PBers have brains and can call posters who argue that foreign policy is a legitimate subject for discussion during a general election campaign Morons!
FairyNuff
This Government has learnt nothing about Libya from Blairs Iraq failings.
Its all about post war as Ed pointed out in Parliament 8 WEEKS AGO
Political point scoring over a human tragedy?
Proud of that are you?
I guess you were pro war * 3 Iraq, Afgh. Libya?
How many do you think have made us safer.
I was against all 3 and believe the answer to my question is Nil
I was against all three also, and agree the answer to your question is nil, probably less so if you take my point.
What has that got to do with political point scoring over human tragedy?
Drinking heavily from the sub-sample cup that poll shows a huge age divide. Tories consistently ahead with the over 45s. Labour with whopping leads on the under 45s.
The Tories are the party of Entitlement and the Boomers are the generation of Entitlement, truly the most destructive population group in history.
Disagree. They are the party of the landed gentry, but on the flipside they are the party of social mobility and aspiration.
Labour detest social mobility because they fear that their votes then become a flight risk.
Lib Dems (and UKIP to an extent) try to paint themselves as the party of meritocracy.
It's well known that younger members of the electorate tend to have a more left wing ideology when setting out in life and that many convert to a more centre right outlook as they come into contact with, what we on planet earth call, reality.
Drinking heavily from the sub-sample cup that poll shows a huge age divide. Tories consistently ahead with the over 45s. Labour with whopping leads on the under 45s.
The Tories are the party of Entitlement and the Boomers are the generation of Entitlement, truly the most destructive population group in history.
Did you see the Green manifesto? It included a bit on that generation, listing the nasty things people say about them, then sort of weakly countered that not all of them are well off, so that's alright then. I was a little confused why they would list all the nasty things people say about that generation if they weren't really going to rebut those claims.
The problem with the Greens is that they refuse to be consistent. There is a very viable Hard Green model which would not only work in a country like the UK but may be one of the better options available.
However, it is politically, a complete non-starter as there would be no acceptance of population controls and consumption limits.
That doesn't mean Green politicians can't add anything to the national debate and certainly doesn't mean they aren't viable junior coalition partners. Just don't take their complete position too seriously.
... I'm at a loss what could have been done in Libya though. If Miliband is able to articulate something we could have, he will rise in my estimation on this issue immensely (on domestic issues he seems to pretty decent at times, at the least in picking his topics - people will disagree on his solutions of course).
Yeah, I'd agree with that.
You replied to me last night and I don't want to appear rude by not replying but it feels too late to really reply to it. The tl;dr answer is "Well, they'll probably not win then. And the reasons why aren't ever going to shift in 1, 2 or possibly even 5 years ... "
Now I'm just trying to recall what my question/comment could have been based on your response. Like doing a crossword in reverse
No need to worry about appearing rude, I assure you.
It is going to be amusing watching the likes of SO and TUD making excuses for Miligeeks feck ups over the next five years..
I don't think Miliband will be PM, but if I am wrong and he does make it I doubt he will be very impressive. I am not much of a fan.
You seriously don't understand my posts, do you? I always thought it was just that you were trolling. But it is a genuine lack of understanding. Blimey.
I don't think anyone is whingeing, Tory or otherwise.
A few people find the combination of selective amnesia and the use of people killed in a tragic manner, by a person with aspirations to be PM, distasteful and unpleasant.
O/T Just received from a Scottish pal and voter. He is not of the SNP persuasion:
Nicola Sturgeon is touring Perthshire in the First Minister’s chauffeur driven car. Suddenly a cow jumps out into the road. They hit it full on and the car comes to a stop. Nicola in her usual jaunty manner, says to the chauffeur : " You get out and check - you were driving."
The chauffeur gets out, checks and reports that the animal is dead. " You were driving, go and tell the farmer," says Nicola, ”I can’t afford to be blamed for anything.”
The chauffeur walks up the drive to the farmhouse and returns five hours later totally plastered, his hair ruffled and with a big grin on his face.
" My God, what happened to you ?" asks Nicola.
The chauffeur replies : " When I got there, the farmer opened his best bottle of malt whisky, the wife gave me a slap up meal and the daughter made love to me."
" What on earth did you say?" asks Nicola.
" I knocked on the door and when it was answered, I said to them, I'm Nicola Sturgeon’s chauffeur and I've justrun the cow over and killed her
We were all led to believe that the Tories were rolling in cash to throw at this GE. Have we seen any real evidence of this, and it is too late now as their caps on spending.
As I noted yesterday, over the past week I have visited two ultra marginals and there is virtually no signs a GE is only 2 weeks away.
We don't know.
This is 2015, not 2010, 2005, etc. The money is spent on methods that the party think will be most effective, and that is no longer billboards and posters. Political campaigning has moved into the digital age far more than the average voters realises, I suspect.
Phone banks were a big thing at the 2010 GE - haven't heard so much about them this time. I expect people who can be identified through Facebook as living in the right place and being of the target demographic will have had lots of party advertising in their news feed.
Guido linked to an article that mentions this sort of thing:
"Conservative strategists also point to the sophisticated micro-targeting as a secret weapon. The Westminster bubble and the London commentariat are blissfully unaware of the work that’s been underway for months.
Highly-personalised direct mailing and social media communication to swing voters in the most important seats is more likely, they say, to count than the traditional door-knocking.
There is no shortage of funding. Candidates up and down the land find they’ve had strong support when they’ve needed it. Many still have the funds for more mailshots, more “moments”, to ram home their message.
Precision-targeting makes national share of vote much less significant, and that’s why a number of people at the heart of Team Cameron are confident they will do better in the marginal battleground than the polls imply."
Although I'd like to I'm not sure I believe this. Facebook, leaflets and emails are going to swing it?
It's partly a substitute for the fact they don't have many people available to do the door knocking.
If this had a significant effect you've expect the Ashcroft marginals polls to start picking it up. There are tentative signs in one or two areas but nothing to justify the optimism of CCHQ above.
And that is even more transparent. I do you the courtesy of accepting your brains and profession, please do the same. I don't troll - I find it tedious.
It is going to be amusing watching the likes of SO and TUD making excuses for Miligeeks feck ups over the next five years..
I don't think Miliband will be PM, but if I am wrong and he does make it I doubt he will be very impressive. I am not much of a fan.
You seriously don't understand my posts, do you? I always thought it was just that you were trolling. But it is a genuine lack of understanding. Blimey.
Comments
Proud of that are you?
Miliband will cite this week's Mediterranean refugee deaths, the sidelining of Britain during the Ukraine crisis and the endagering of the UK's EU membership as examples of Cameron's failures.
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2015/04/miliband-promises-hard-headed-multilateralism-first-major-foreign-policy-speech
As I noted yesterday, over the past week I have visited two ultra marginals and there is virtually no signs a GE is only 2 weeks away.
Whilst this is perhaps the midpoint, it may not be probability wise the correct play from a betting PoV.
All very confusing, hopefully profitable - mind.
But an SNP government in Westminster could hardly stop the Tories voting for their policies. ASIPM.
Miliband on how a Labour govt will deal with conflicts overseas: "we will reconsider the place of military intervention"
Utter meaningless statement... does it mean aye or nay?
Given the detail I have given, the chances of it going wrong are pretty considerable at this range.
If you were basing model verification purely of sea level pressure anomaly (which is how the forecast models, generally judge themselves), then the chance of verification would be a lot higher - probably 30-45%
The antidote to spinning of polls and best method of telling the way the political wind is blowing
12 polls this week, 8 different pollsters
Con -8
Lab -7
Ukip +5
LD NC
Green -1
It also gives the handy opportunity to attack their opposing media for misrepresenting them. It'll be fun if Cameron tries this sort of trick in the coming weeks as well (if reports of Ed M rewriting his speech are true of course).
I am hoping to be out of both markets with a Wad before 7th May but who knows how high Lab most seats will drift need it to be in to 3.5 before selling
This is 2015, not 2010, 2005, etc. The money is spent on methods that the party think will be most effective, and that is no longer billboards and posters. Political campaigning has moved into the digital age far more than the average voters realises, I suspect.
Mike Smithson retweeted
Ladbrokes Politics@LadPolitics·3 mins3 minutes ago
@MSmithsonPB Mainly because someone had £10,000 on the Tories to win Watford last week
It could be if it goes viral. Or he might try to wriggle out it and blame one of his aides.
.............................I'll get my coat
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fb-f8CTafHs
Of course the speech itself will tone down that disgusting allegation, but that's not the point.
I'd change my mind if Ed had made a convincing and unconditional apology for the suggestion, i.e. if it really was incompetence on Labour's part in briefing journalists. But he hasn't, as far as I know.
That's. how. Comedy. Works.
* also terrifying...
If Farage made a joke about immigrants, you can bet everyone would kick up a fuss about it because UKIP are so heavily focused on immigration, and you can also bet that a lot of people would suggest that even if it was a complete joke, that he made a joke about that issue, that very political issue, was significant and symbolic of his positions somehow.
I thought Salmond's joke was pretty funny. I did not take it literally. But it was funny because of the context of the SNP genuinely having some influence over Labour, if the circumstances are right. That Cameron and the Tories used that to further their narrative does not show they don't know what a joke is, and it was bloody idiotic of people to suggest it did.
The bet I really want to make is that the midpoint of the Sporting Index Con/Lab seat supremecy market (at the last price before the exit poll) overstates the tories and understates labour.
Does any reputable punter want to lay me at evens?
How many do you think have made us safer.
I was against all 3 and believe the answer to my question is Nil
Seems odd, or they are the only one that's right, or their sampling is wrong, or their weighting is wrong.
The amount of times that an actual forecast has been right at that range is rarer than hen's teeth in my experience and when they do come to fruition, it's usually by pure luck (i.e via a different synoptic route)
In actual fact, the period we are talking about is showing a blocking pattern to the north east. It is my understanding that blocking patterns are a lot more reliable to predict at this sort of range than zonal ones, however when it comes to specifics a shift of a 100 miles of so, could dramatically alter the conditions on the day.
Best to look at +144 before making any serious predictions in my experience.
favour Labour (Panelbase & Populus) an increasing Labour lead. YouGove plies its lonely furrow marginally to the left of middle. Bizarro.
I'm not sure they can.
They can ask someone's opinion, but if they ask if they have voted then it becomes an exit poll which cannot be published prior to the end of voting.
I'm confused.
Why is it unacceptable for a politician to criticise another politician for political decisions which the criticising politician believes contributed to the death of a boatload of people?
It doesn't transcend the political realm and become an uncaused tragedy by virtue of being a tragedy. It's not playing politics. It is politics. That's what we elect them to undertake.
I'm not with SO here - of course Labour are drawing attention to Cameron's essay-crisis approach to foreign affairs and the possibility that it's contributed to a tragedy that's in the public eye. But that could be because they believe that Cameron's failings *are* responsible.
Prima facie, it seems no more immoral or scurrilous than criticising Blair for (a large number of boatloads of) Iraqi deaths; it seems that I'm in a minority here and I guess everyone else would criticise anyone who made that connection in an electoral context as "playing politics on the back of victims of war" or some such.
Totally legitimate to criticise Miliband as incoherent, self-contradictory, opportunistic to talk about it now with the benefit of hindsight and so on. But again, that's politics. The key advantage of opposition is the ability to speak hypocritically about the post-facto assessment of your opponent having used their power to do exactly what you'd have done in their place.
You replied to me last night and I don't want to appear rude by not replying but it feels too late to really reply to it. The tl;dr answer is "Well, they'll probably not win then. And the reasons why aren't ever going to shift in 1, 2 or possibly even 5 years ... "
HSBC reveals that it's looking at moving HQ.
So that's Cameron's fault.......
I suspect the real reason is the increased regulatory burden......
*really, really hilarious by the way.
Personally I'm not taking a view - just ensuring I'm in profit over a reasonably wide range.
After everything you've said up to now?
Really, I forgive your pin head dancing as its part of your patent law nitpicking - but this is hilarious.
1 Tory billboard in Reading West
2 Tory and 1 LD billboard in Thornbury and Yate
2 Green window posters in Bristol South
Absolutely nothing in my own constituency (Wantage)
It's how the Tory party works.
Most peculiar logic.
Stop whingeing Tories.
"Conservative strategists also point to the sophisticated micro-targeting as a secret weapon. The Westminster bubble and the London commentariat are blissfully unaware of the work that’s been underway for months.
Highly-personalised direct mailing and social media communication to swing voters in the most important seats is more likely, they say, to count than the traditional door-knocking.
There is no shortage of funding. Candidates up and down the land find they’ve had strong support when they’ve needed it. Many still have the funds for more mailshots, more “moments”, to ram home their message.
Precision-targeting makes national share of vote much less significant, and that’s why a number of people at the heart of Team Cameron are confident they will do better in the marginal battleground than the polls imply."
http://www.totalpolitics.com/opinion/448871/all-shots-in-the-tory-locker-have-been-fired-and-cameron-is-praying-for-a-late-swing.thtml
Fighting the last war is a common thing. I imagine 2020 will all be organised around countering UKIP/Greens/SNP.
It can, however, be the basis for criticising it......
What has that got to do with political point scoring over human tragedy?
Labour detest social mobility because they fear that their votes then become a flight risk.
Lib Dems (and UKIP to an extent) try to paint themselves as the party of meritocracy.
It's well known that younger members of the electorate tend to have a more left wing ideology when setting out in life and that many convert to a more centre right outlook as they come into contact with, what we on planet earth call, reality.
However, it is politically, a complete non-starter as there would be no acceptance of population controls and consumption limits.
That doesn't mean Green politicians can't add anything to the national debate and certainly doesn't mean they aren't viable junior coalition partners. Just don't take their complete position too seriously.
No need to worry about appearing rude, I assure you.
I think you'll find most tory voters exist independently of public money, they depend on their own money which they earn in the private sector.
Its the Scottish nationalist vote that depends on public money.
A few people find the combination of selective amnesia and the use of people killed in a tragic manner, by a person with aspirations to be PM, distasteful and unpleasant.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-32447603
Nicola Sturgeon is touring Perthshire in the First Minister’s chauffeur driven car.
Suddenly a cow jumps out into the road. They hit it full on and the car comes to a stop.
Nicola in her usual jaunty manner, says to the chauffeur : " You get out and check - you were driving."
The chauffeur gets out, checks and reports that the animal is dead.
" You were driving, go and tell the farmer," says Nicola, ”I can’t afford to be blamed for anything.”
The chauffeur walks up the drive to the farmhouse and returns five hours later totally plastered, his hair ruffled and with a big grin on his face.
" My God, what happened to you ?" asks Nicola.
The chauffeur replies : " When I got there, the farmer opened his best bottle of malt whisky, the wife gave me a slap up meal and the daughter made love to me."
" What on earth did you say?" asks Nicola.
" I knocked on the door and when it was answered, I said to them, I'm Nicola Sturgeon’s chauffeur and I've justrun the cow over and killed her
It seems extraordinary that Populus never, ever show's any deviation at all from it's previous polls.
Even YouGov throws out a curveball now and again....
It's partly a substitute for the fact they don't have many people available to do the door knocking.
If this had a significant effect you've expect the Ashcroft marginals polls to start picking it up. There are tentative signs in one or two areas but nothing to justify the optimism of CCHQ above.
Oh, wait...