That...seems like a very silly thing to say. People will not believe the next government might not need to raise taxes at some point. So presumably its a promise that he would not have to follow in a coalition, something he can say he wanted to do but his partners won't allow him to do.
Such an extreme promise does I think show Cameron clearly sees things as being more difficult for his position than the optimists out there, if he is offering this.
Well it looks like it's 3 specific taxes. Big ones, mind.
Ah, I couldn't see the smaller text. That's a more reasonable pledge. Probably still unlikely should things start to slow down properly, but more realistic than the headline.
Sorry, the "read my lips: no new taxes" was entirely my own. Though this does seem very nearly as silly to me.
Russell Brand (@rustyrockets) 28/04/2015 14:29 Don't be jealous Dave - I'll run into you at West Ham - when you're not busy with "ordinary people" pic.twitter.com/wB1Paq9xHV
Nick Sutton @suttonnick 1 min1 minute ago Wednesday's Daily Express front page: Freeze on VAT and income tax #tomorrowspaperstoday #bbcpapers /twitter.com/suttonnick/status/593150741361070081/photo/1
Russell Brand (@rustyrockets) 28/04/2015 14:29 Don't be jealous Dave - I'll run into you at West Ham - when you're not busy with "ordinary people" pic.twitter.com/wB1Paq9xHV
Good Twitter today was Ed meets Russell about poverty and then Russell goes back to his 3 million mansion and Ed goes back to his 199,999.99p mansion
Russell Brand (@rustyrockets) 28/04/2015 14:29 Don't be jealous Dave - I'll run into you at West Ham - when you're not busy with "ordinary people" pic.twitter.com/wB1Paq9xHV
Good Twitter today was Ed meets Russell about poverty and then Russell goes back to his 3 million mansion and Ed goes back to his 199,999.99p mansion
Harsh but fair....
:-)
I don't like Russell Brand, and I don't want Ed Miliband to be our Prime Minister, but...
Opposition leader meets the most popular person who talks about politics in the country with people under 30, and said personality endorses his party/tweets negatively to 9.5m about the PM
Russell Brand (@rustyrockets) 28/04/2015 14:29 Don't be jealous Dave - I'll run into you at West Ham - when you're not busy with "ordinary people" pic.twitter.com/wB1Paq9xHV
Good Twitter today was Ed meets Russell about poverty and then Russell goes back to his 3 million mansion and Ed goes back to his 199,999.99p mansion
Harsh but fair....
:-)
I don't like Russell Brand, and I don't want Ed Miliband to be our Prime Minister, but...
Opposition leader meets the most popular person who talks about politics in the country with people under 30, and said personality endorses his party/tweets negatively to 9.5m about the PM
I don't think it can hurt Labours chances
I agree. He is a fool, but a fool with a following.
Russell Brand (@rustyrockets) 28/04/2015 14:29 Don't be jealous Dave - I'll run into you at West Ham - when you're not busy with "ordinary people" pic.twitter.com/wB1Paq9xHV
Good Twitter today was Ed meets Russell about poverty and then Russell goes back to his 3 million mansion and Ed goes back to his 199,999.99p mansion
Harsh but fair....
:-)
I don't like Russell Brand, and I don't want Ed Miliband to be our Prime Minister, but...
Opposition leader meets the most popular person who talks about politics in the country with people under 30, and said personality endorses his party/tweets negatively to 9.5m about the PM
I don't think it can hurt Labours chances
I mostly agree with you. The slight danger for Labour is that some socially conservative oldies who hate Russell Brand get wind of this. But I'd have thought that it was a chance worth taking for Labour right now.
Russell Brand (@rustyrockets) 28/04/2015 14:29 Don't be jealous Dave - I'll run into you at West Ham - when you're not busy with "ordinary people" pic.twitter.com/wB1Paq9xHV
Good Twitter today was Ed meets Russell about poverty and then Russell goes back to his 3 million mansion and Ed goes back to his 199,999.99p mansion
Harsh but fair....
:-)
I don't like Russell Brand, and I don't want Ed Miliband to be our Prime Minister, but...
Opposition leader meets the most popular person who talks about politics in the country with people under 30, and said personality endorses his party/tweets negatively to 9.5m about the PM
I don't think it can hurt Labours chances
Indeed. Hopefully it won't help, I really don't like Brand, but no-one is going to not vote Labour because Ed met with the guy if they were considering it before.
Russell Brand (@rustyrockets) 28/04/2015 14:29 Don't be jealous Dave - I'll run into you at West Ham - when you're not busy with "ordinary people" pic.twitter.com/wB1Paq9xHV
Good Twitter today was Ed meets Russell about poverty and then Russell goes back to his 3 million mansion and Ed goes back to his 199,999.99p mansion
Harsh but fair....
:-)
I don't like Russell Brand, and I don't want Ed Miliband to be our Prime Minister, but...
Opposition leader meets the most popular person who talks about politics in the country with people under 30, and said personality endorses his party/tweets negatively to 9.5m about the PM
I don't think it can hurt Labours chances
I mostly agree with you. The slight danger for Labour is that some socially conservative oldies who hate Russell Brand get wind of this. But I'd have thought that it was a chance worth taking for Labour right now.
Has Dave pledged not to extend VAT into new areas?
What's pretty clear is that someone's taxes are going to have to go up and/or the cuts are going to have to be punitive. There is no magic money tree, Tories!
2005(England only) Con 35.7 Lab 35.4 Result:Lab 92 seats ahead of Con
2010(England only) Con39.4 Lab 28.1 Result:Con 106 ahead of Lab
Given results are likely to be significantly less than 11.3%,there is a significant chance Lab are going to do rather well.
In 2005 Labour won 7 seats in Kent. It's difficult to see them winning any this time. The same is true for a lot of places in the south of England.
AND THEY'VE LOST SCOTLAND
I know Smukesh is deliberately ignoring this, but it is hard to overstate what a calamity this is, for Labour. It makes a mere general election look trivial.
Labour took the piss out of the Tories for their losses but they were never really strong there in Scotland as Labour have been in the past.
The latest situation though is quite simply a "McMeteorite" scenario for SLAB
It just is.....and for the entire Labour movement as a whole.
Russell Brand (@rustyrockets) 28/04/2015 14:29 Don't be jealous Dave - I'll run into you at West Ham - when you're not busy with "ordinary people" pic.twitter.com/wB1Paq9xHV
Good Twitter today was Ed meets Russell about poverty and then Russell goes back to his 3 million mansion and Ed goes back to his 199,999.99p mansion
Harsh but fair....
:-)
I don't like Russell Brand, and I don't want Ed Miliband to be our Prime Minister, but...
Opposition leader meets the most popular person who talks about politics in the country with people under 30, and said personality endorses his party/tweets negatively to 9.5m about the PM
I don't think it can hurt Labours chances
I mostly agree with you. The slight danger for Labour is that some socially conservative oldies who hate Russell Brand get wind of this. But I'd have thought that it was a chance worth taking for Labour right now.
A Brand endorsement may win over some young non voters/green voters but I fancy for a lot of the older floaters in the middle it may reaffirm their beliefs that Miliband isn't a serious leader. 2 of the former are of course worth 1 of the latter if they move behind Dave.
For Brand surely it would represent a huge risk backing Ed. He would lose a lot of his left wing credibility and be seen as a bit of a flip flopper changing his mind and principles at this late stage.
If the polls prove correct, Labour are going to be wiped out, and henceforth unelectable, in south east England, south west England, central south England, East Anglia, and Scotland. And of course they do not exist in northern Ireland.
They are being reduced to the party of London, Wales, and scattered parts of the north and Midlands. And that's it.
If Plaid and UKIP up their game, in Wales and WWC England, it is possible to see Labour disappearing forever as a significant party of government.
There's much more chance of that happening if they win (i.e. end up in office) than if they lose. It's one reason why the SNP are so keen on putting Miliband into No 10.
If the polls prove correct, Labour are going to be wiped out, and henceforth unelectable, in south east England, south west England, central south England, East Anglia, and Scotland. And of course they do not exist in northern Ireland.
They are being reduced to the party of London, Wales, and scattered parts of the north and Midlands. And that's it.
If Plaid and UKIP up their game, in Wales and WWC England, it is possible to see Labour disappearing forever as a significant party of government.
There is a large block of centre left voters in England and millions more in the centre. As a consequence, a sensible, credible Labour party will always have a chance. Labour was wiped out in all the places in England you mention 30 years ago, but came back. Scotland is another matter.
'If Plaid and UKIP up their game, in Wales and WWC England, it is possible to see Labour disappearing forever as a significant party of government.'
Quite possible, PASOK in Greece went from government to 13 MP's in 5 years.
Surely it can't take much longer for voters in Wales to realize that Labour has given them the worst health, education & transport in the UK and Plaid can't possibly be worse.
If the polls prove correct, Labour are going to be wiped out, and henceforth unelectable, in south east England, south west England, central south England, East Anglia, and Scotland. And of course they do not exist in northern Ireland.
They are being reduced to the party of London, Wales, and scattered parts of the north and Midlands. And that's it.
If Plaid and UKIP up their game, in Wales and WWC England, it is possible to see Labour disappearing forever as a significant party of government.
There is a large block of centre left voters in England and millions more in the centre. As a consequence, a sensible, credible Labour party will always have a chance. Labour was wiped out in all the places in England you mention 30 years ago, but came back. Scotland is another matter.
And If, as the polls suggest Labour is wiped out north of the border, will it take another 30 years to rebuild there IYO?
If Ed were really a strong leader he would expel from the party a man who defends someone who has been expelled from the Labour party and found guilty of many and varied and serious breaches of electoral law. People like him bring Labour - and the London Labour party - into disrepute.
If Ed were strong enough and had any sort of moral compass and wanted a Labour party which did not patronise its voters and seek power on the back of community/identity politics of the most base kind, he would do this.
2005(England only) Con 35.7 Lab 35.4 Result:Lab 92 seats ahead of Con
2010(England only) Con39.4 Lab 28.1 Result:Con 106 ahead of Lab
Given results are likely to be significantly less than 11.3%,there is a significant chance Lab are going to do rather well.
This GE will mark the death of UNS. In a multi-party, FPTP system voting percentages are only a vague guide as to how seats will be allocated in the Commons. And Red LDs complicate things even more. Labour's slight rise in English support is almost entirely down to them. If they are mostly based in Labour held seats it does not help Labour one bit, even as its vote share increases.
Russell Brand (@rustyrockets) 28/04/2015 14:29 Don't be jealous Dave - I'll run into you at West Ham - when you're not busy with "ordinary people" pic.twitter.com/wB1Paq9xHV
If the polls prove correct, Labour are going to be wiped out, and henceforth unelectable, in south east England, south west England, central south England, East Anglia, and Scotland. And of course they do not exist in northern Ireland.
They are being reduced to the party of London, Wales, and scattered parts of the north and Midlands. And that's it.
If Plaid and UKIP up their game, in Wales and WWC England, it is possible to see Labour disappearing forever as a significant party of government.
There is a large block of centre left voters in England and millions more in the centre. As a consequence, a sensible, credible Labour party will always have a chance. Labour was wiped out in all the places in England you mention 30 years ago, but came back. Scotland is another matter.
A sensible, credible Labour party. If only........
If the polls prove correct, Labour are going to be wiped out, and henceforth unelectable, in south east England, south west England, central south England, East Anglia, and Scotland. And of course they do not exist in northern Ireland.
They are being reduced to the party of London, Wales, and scattered parts of the north and Midlands. And that's it.
If Plaid and UKIP up their game, in Wales and WWC England, it is possible to see Labour disappearing forever as a significant party of government.
There is a large block of centre left voters in England and millions more in the centre. As a consequence, a sensible, credible Labour party will always have a chance. Labour was wiped out in all the places in England you mention 30 years ago, but came back. Scotland is another matter.
There were nowhere near as many alternative parties then as now and of those that there were, they weren't as well organised.
In 1906, the Liberals won a landslide; eighteen years later, they were reduced to forty MPs. Was that inevitable? Certainly not. Was it preventable? Absolutely. Parties of government of long standing have no God-given right to remain as such.
Russell Brand (@rustyrockets) 28/04/2015 14:29 Don't be jealous Dave - I'll run into you at West Ham - when you're not busy with "ordinary people" pic.twitter.com/wB1Paq9xHV
As I predicted.
Brand interviewing Ed and endorsing Labour in a show seen exclusively on Trews TV while slagging Cameron on twitter is the young undecideds equivalent of Bruce Forsyth interviewing Cameron on Old Peoples Home TV, then writing an article doing down Miliband in the SAGA catalogue
If Ed were really a strong leader he would expel from the party a man who defends someone who has been expelled from the Labour party and found guilty of many and varied and serious breaches of electoral law. People like him bring Labour - and the London Labour party - into disrepute.
If Ed were strong enough and had any sort of moral compass and wanted a Labour party which did not patronise its voters and seek power on the back of community/identity politics of the most base kind, he would do this.
Disgraceful stuff. This 'defend democracy' crap is so bizarre given how blatantly the guy was found to be in many of his undemocratic actions. And all the organisations those people are part of will have to comment, you cannot just declare they are speaking in a personal capacity and leave it at that. People do face consequences for things they say 'off the clock' as well, and this would certainly qualify.
If the polls prove correct, Labour are going to be wiped out, and henceforth unelectable, in south east England, south west England, central south England, East Anglia, and Scotland. And of course they do not exist in northern Ireland.
They are being reduced to the party of London, Wales, and scattered parts of the north and Midlands. And that's it.
If Plaid and UKIP up their game, in Wales and WWC England, it is possible to see Labour disappearing forever as a significant party of government.
There is a large block of centre left voters in England and millions more in the centre. As a consequence, a sensible, credible Labour party will always have a chance. Labour was wiped out in all the places in England you mention 30 years ago, but came back. Scotland is another matter.
And If, as the polls suggest Labour is wiped out north of the border, will it take another 30 years to rebuild there IYO?
I doubt it. A new leader, a recession and things could change quickly. Why wouldn't they?
It's worth remembering that even with Scotland gone, Ed in charge and the economy improving, we are talking about a very fragile Tory majority on a 37% vote share, at best. There are millions of English voters who just don't like the Tories.
The seat mathematics for Labour are clear. With an absolute tanking due in Scotland, their starting position is way worse than they could have imagined a few years ago. And, if the Tories stay at 34-35% (which is plausible) then I just cant see where they going to surpass the Conservatives on actual seat numbers, even though I don't think they'll be reduced the most dire predictions of 0-2 seats. I can see them hanging on to 10.
'If Plaid and UKIP up their game, in Wales and WWC England, it is possible to see Labour disappearing forever as a significant party of government.'
Quite possible, PASOK in Greece went from government to 13 MP's in 5 years.
Surely it can't take much longer for voters in Wales to realize that Labour has given them the worst health, education & transport in the UK and Plaid can't possibly be worse.
An extraordinary turnaround in fortunes. Over most of the last 10 years there has been conversation of the demise and destruction of the Tory party.
Now they appear to have the better future (just) of the two.
Russell Brand (@rustyrockets) 28/04/2015 14:29 Don't be jealous Dave - I'll run into you at West Ham - when you're not busy with "ordinary people" pic.twitter.com/wB1Paq9xHV
As I predicted.
Brand interviewing Ed and endorsing Labour in a show seen exclusively on Trews TV while slagging Cameron on twitter is the young undecideds equivalent of Bruce Forsyth interviewing Cameron on Old Peoples Home TV, then writing an article doing down Miliband in the SAGA catalogue
Yes, it's quite a coup for Labour whichever way you slice it, and it's silly to try and say otherwise. Apart from anything else, anything too fruity that Brand comes up with, Milliband can just talk about 'the realities of Government, do what we can' and appear shrewd and moderate.
If the polls prove correct, Labour are going to be wiped out, and henceforth unelectable, in south east England, south west England, central south England, East Anglia, and Scotland. And of course they do not exist in northern Ireland.
They are being reduced to the party of London, Wales, and scattered parts of the north and Midlands. And that's it.
If Plaid and UKIP up their game, in Wales and WWC England, it is possible to see Labour disappearing forever as a significant party of government.
There is a large block of centre left voters in England and millions more in the centre. As a consequence, a sensible, credible Labour party will always have a chance. Labour was wiped out in all the places in England you mention 30 years ago, but came back. Scotland is another matter.
But the centre and centre left is fragmenting even more than the right, we can see this on our TV screens in the Debates - SNP, PC, Greens, LDs, and Labour are all competing for those votes (even as UKIP eat away at the CDEs). And Labour are now being outcompeted by some of these parties.
Labour's core vote could go down to 15-20%.
By contrast the Tories dominate the centre right. Their core vote is still 30%. Tory England remains solid.
Both parties are in long term decline, but the loss of Scotland underlines how Labour could fall further, faster.
It could. But equally the left could coalesce once more. It's a cyclical thing. People aren't going to stop being centre left or left.
2005(England only) Con 35.7 Lab 35.4 Result:Lab 92 seats ahead of Con
2010(England only) Con39.4 Lab 28.1 Result:Con 106 ahead of Lab
Given results are likely to be significantly less than 11.3%,there is a significant chance Lab are going to do rather well.
In 2005 Labour won 7 seats in Kent. It's difficult to see them winning any this time. The same is true for a lot of places in the south of England.
AND THEY'VE LOST SCOTLAND
I know Smukesh is deliberately ignoring this, but it is hard to overstate what a calamity this is, for Labour. It makes a mere general election look trivial.
Labour took the piss out of the Tories for their losses but they were never really strong there in Scotland as Labour have been in the past.
The latest situation though is quite simply a "McMeteorite" scenario for SLAB
It just is.....and for the entire Labour movement as a whole.
Yes. I don't think anyone has really grasped how momentous this is. Because it is TOO big. Off the radar. Extinction level event. Comet in Moominland. Etc.
For a start it means Labour are crippled, electorally, for the rest of time (especially if they go into some bizarre alliance with the Nats, cementing their defeat in Scotland), it also sets a terrible precedent for the rest of their heartlands (or what remains of them)
Stolid Labour voters will be looking at all the goodies given to Nat-voting Scotland. They will see how Not Voting Labour can be to your benefit. The Welsh in particular will be taking note.
= end of Labour.
ELE in this circumstance is probably not far off the truth. The only thing now is for sitting Labour MP's to start boarding the circulating military busses on May 6th and then heading south. Perhaps the local Panda could find the keys in the garage to the bike and mono saddle the last Tory out at the same time......
I worked up in Scotland for many many years starting in 1974 and although a southerner I know what it was like then...... I know what it is like now? This situation is quite simply ELE for SLAB.
There are millions of English voters who just don't like the Tories.
Indeed so, but that dislike is irrational (you are a prime example of the phenomenon!). Therefore, the alternative is always going to be disappointing, because there is no better alternative. Either you overcome the dislike, or you'll be for ever searching around for a non-existent alternative which somehow manages to combine being 'nicer' or 'fairer' with actually doing what needs to be done.
That alternative doesn't exist. You end up with Labour, all spin and no substance. It's not that Miliband and Darling and Blair and even Brown are stupid, it's the fundamental clash with reality which will repeatedly disappoint you.
People are really commenting on an estimated, provisional, 2 parts in a 1000 GDP figure?
Blimey.
That's what happens when you create a 'cult of growth' and make GDP an economic virility symbol.
Of course we could talk about other economic data - government borrowing, off balance sheet debts, industrial production, productivity, the current account balance etc.
But perhaps its best for the government if we talk about GDP.
I see that Ed' sucking up to democracy-denier Russell Brand was splashed all over the front of the Evening Standard tonight. Who the hell persuaded Ed that was a good idea? The only explanation can be that this Milifandom thing has gone to his head. Perhaps he actually believes he's the rock-star/voice-of-youth figure he always fantasied about becoming as a pubescent.
If the polls prove correct, Labour are going to be wiped out, and henceforth unelectable, in south east England, south west England, central south England, East Anglia, and Scotland. And of course they do not exist in northern Ireland.
They are being reduced to the party of London, Wales, and scattered parts of the north and Midlands. And that's it.
If Plaid and UKIP up their game, in Wales and WWC England, it is possible to see Labour disappearing forever as a significant party of government.
There is a large block of centre left voters in England and millions more in the centre. As a consequence, a sensible, credible Labour party will always have a chance. Labour was wiped out in all the places in England you mention 30 years ago, but came back. Scotland is another matter.
But the centre and centre left is fragmenting even more than the right, we can see this on our TV screens in the Debates - SNP, PC, Greens, LDs, and Labour are all competing for those votes (even as UKIP eat away at the CDEs). And Labour are now being outcompeted by some of these parties.
Labour's core vote could go down to 15-20%.
By contrast the Tories dominate the centre right. Their core vote is still 30%. Tory England remains solid.
Both parties are in long term decline, but the loss of Scotland underlines how Labour could fall further, faster.
It could. But equally the left could coalesce once more. It's a cyclical thing. People aren't going to stop being centre left or left.
No it isn't. Things diverge, they don't come together. Two branches don't grow back into one. Divergence is nature. And what is 'centre' is an entirely arbitrary triangulation of two imaginary poles. There will always be people who seek comfort in the 'centre', but I have every hope that the 'left' as we know it will be extinguished. The sheer weight of human misery it has caused must become clear at some point.
If the polls prove correct, Labour are going to be wiped out, and henceforth unelectable, in south east England, south west England, central south England, East Anglia, and Scotland. And of course they do not exist in northern Ireland.
They are being reduced to the party of London, Wales, and scattered parts of the north and Midlands. And that's it.
If Plaid and UKIP up their game, in Wales and WWC England, it is possible to see Labour disappearing forever as a significant party of government.
There is a large block of centre left voters in England and millions more in the centre. As a consequence, a sensible, credible Labour party will always have a chance. Labour was wiped out in all the places in England you mention 30 years ago, but came back. Scotland is another matter.
There were nowhere near as many alternative parties then as now and of those that there were, they weren't as well organised.
In 1906, the Liberals won a landslide; eighteen years later, they were reduced to forty MPs. Was that inevitable? Certainly not. Was it preventable? Absolutely. Parties of government of long standing have no God-given right to remain as such.
Of course. The Liberals were replaced by Labour. Maybe a new centre left party will replace Labour. The name doesn't really matter. It's not football. But the centre left is not going to disappear.
Remember, the Tories have not secured a majority for 23 years. That could easily turn into 28. There are no big, popular English parties these days. Only relatively few voters are enthusiastically pro the party they choose to put a cross by.
If the polls prove correct, Labour are going to be wiped out, and henceforth unelectable, in south east England, south west England, central south England, East Anglia, and Scotland. And of course they do not exist in northern Ireland.
They are being reduced to the party of London, Wales, and scattered parts of the north and Midlands. And that's it.
If Plaid and UKIP up their game, in Wales and WWC England, it is possible to see Labour disappearing forever as a significant party of government.
There is a large block of centre left voters in England and millions more in the centre. As a consequence, a sensible, credible Labour party will always have a chance. Labour was wiped out in all the places in England you mention 30 years ago, but came back. Scotland is another matter.
But the centre and centre left is fragmenting even more than the right, we can see this on our TV screens in the Debates - SNP, PC, Greens, LDs, and Labour are all competing for those votes (even as UKIP eat away at the CDEs). And Labour are now being outcompeted by some of these parties.
Labour's core vote could go down to 15-20%.
By contrast the Tories dominate the centre right. Their core vote is still 30%. Tory England remains solid.
Both parties are in long term decline, but the loss of Scotland underlines how Labour could fall further, faster.
It could. But equally the left could coalesce once more. It's a cyclical thing. People aren't going to stop being centre left or left.
And what would prompt that. All the direction of travel has been in the opposite direction for 60 years, prompted by the public continually reacting against the status quo. The left (or the right for that matter) will only unify either if one party drives the rest out of business or if the external threat becomes so great that the various parties voluntarily come together. I see no evidence for either being likely any time soon.
Daily Mail has a pic of Ed pulling a funny face w Brand and call him a clown on one half of front page, & accuse the current govt of killing us via salt usage on the other
The seat mathematics for Labour are clear. With an absolute tanking due in Scotland, their starting position is way worse than they could have imagined a few years ago. And, if the Tories stay at 34-35% (which is plausible) then I just cant see where they going to surpass the Conservatives on actual seat numbers, even though I don't think they'll be reduced the most dire predictions of 0-2 seats. I can see them hanging on to 10.
No one is saying that Labour will surpass the Tories on actual seat numbers. Where did you hear that ?
There are millions of English voters who just don't like the Tories.
Indeed so, but that dislike is irrational (you are a prime example of the phenomenon!). Therefore, the alternative is always going to be disappointing, because there is no better alternative. Either you overcome the dislike, or you'll be for ever searching around for a non-existent alternative which somehow manages to combine being 'nicer' or 'fairer' with actually doing what needs to be done.
That alternative doesn't exist. You end up with Labour, all spin and no substance. It's not that Miliband and Darling and Blair and even Brown are stupid, it's the fundamental clash with reality which will repeatedly disappoint you.
Robert Peston @Peston 4m4 minutes ago Tory press release: "living standards 2.2% up from Lab's Recession. Q4 2014 disposable income £4,187, Q2 2010 £4,178". Actually 0.22% rise
It's up by a lot more than that for the 2 million extra people in work.
Is it?
Does that include those on Zero hours contracts?
You cant just say 'zero hours contract', and then somehow you cancel out the fact that 2 million more people are in work.
Its the equivalent of pointing at someone who has just won a spelling bee, and saying, yeah but you smell.
A figure that is truly shocking. A figure that no politician, predicting it in 2010 would have been taken seriously. Laughed from the rafters.
Some of those jobs will be zero hours, some will be part time. But a great many are full time and permanent. Also, a hint, many full time permanent staff start off part time and temporary.
People are really commenting on an estimated, provisional, 2 parts in a 1000 GDP figure?
Blimey.
That's what happens when you create a 'cult of growth' and make GDP an economic virility symbol.
Of course we could talk about other economic data - government borrowing, off balance sheet debts, industrial production, productivity, the current account balance etc.
But perhaps its best for the government if we talk about GDP.
GDP is important, but the difference between 0.3% and 0.5% in the first estimate of a quarter's figure is not important.
But yes, you are right, lots of other figures are also important, most notably unemployment, the deficit, and public vs private sector employment. Household deleveraging continues to be going gently in the right direction. House prices are in the Goldilocks zone - not too hot, not too cold.
The deficit remains too high, but is coming down, probably as fast as could reasonably be expected without causing other major disruptions and increasing unemployment.
The current account balance in foreign trade remains dire.
Productivity will I think correct itself - I'm less worried about that.
Robert Peston @Peston 4m4 minutes ago Tory press release: "living standards 2.2% up from Lab's Recession. Q4 2014 disposable income £4,187, Q2 2010 £4,178". Actually 0.22% rise
It's up by a lot more than that for the 2 million extra people in work.
Is it?
Does that include those on Zero hours contracts?
Ask Labour councils and MP's - they seem to think they are ok?
Well the manifesto is pretty cleverly phrased as banning 'exploitative zero hours contracts', which could mean all, but could also leave them some wiggle room of course.
There are millions of English voters who just don't like the Tories.
Indeed so, but that dislike is irrational (you are a prime example of the phenomenon!). Therefore, the alternative is always going to be disappointing, because there is no better alternative. Either you overcome the dislike, or you'll be for ever searching around for a non-existent alternative which somehow manages to combine being 'nicer' or 'fairer' with actually doing what needs to be done.
That alternative doesn't exist. You end up with Labour, all spin and no substance. It's not that Miliband and Darling and Blair and even Brown are stupid, it's the fundamental clash with reality which will repeatedly disappoint you.
Of course, Richard!! It's only irrational if you don't understand it. And you don't understand it. Because you are a Tory.
If the polls prove correct, Labour are going to be wiped out, and henceforth unelectable, in south east England, south west England, central south England, East Anglia, and Scotland. And of course they do not exist in northern Ireland.
They are being reduced to the party of London, Wales, and scattered parts of the north and Midlands. And that's it.
If Plaid and UKIP up their game, in Wales and WWC England, it is possible to see Labour disappearing forever as a significant party of government.
There is a large block of centre left voters in England and millions more in the centre. As a consequence, a sensible, credible Labour party will always have a chance. Labour was wiped out in all the places in England you mention 30 years ago, but came back. Scotland is another matter.
And If, as the polls suggest Labour is wiped out north of the border, will it take another 30 years to rebuild there IYO?
I doubt it. A new leader, a recession and things could change quickly. Why wouldn't they?
It's worth remembering that even with Scotland gone, Ed in charge and the economy improving, we are talking about a very fragile Tory majority on a 37% vote share, at best. There are millions of English voters who just don't like the Tories.
Labour's total vote in 1997: 13,518,167 Labour's total vote in 2010: 8,606,517
5 million votes gone missing. A fall of 40%.
FPTP has hitherto disguised this catastrophic collapse in the Labour vote.
But now FPTP is making it weirdly clear, in Scotland. Where Labour have just lost another 500,000 votes.
What do you think this means for your Peak SNP theory? In 2016, Labour will surely be in abject chaos, with ex-MP's squabbling for Holyrood seats and potentially, an unpopular Labour government dancing to the SNP's tune.
Labour took the piss out of the Tories for their losses but they were never really strong there in Scotland as Labour have been in the past.
The Conservatives (Unionist, National Liberal & Conservatives) had 50.1% of the vote in Scotland in the 1955 GE, the highest percentage any party has had here.
Nothing lasts forever, including any current SNP hegemony.
If the polls prove correct, Labour are going to be wiped out, and henceforth unelectable, in south east England, south west England, central south England, East Anglia, and Scotland. And of course they do not exist in northern Ireland.
They are being reduced to the party of London, Wales, and scattered parts of the north and Midlands. And that's it.
If Plaid and UKIP up their game, in Wales and WWC England, it is possible to see Labour disappearing forever as a significant party of government.
There is a large block of centre left voters in England and millions more in the centre. As a consequence, a sensible, credible Labour party will always have a chance. Labour was wiped out in all the places in England you mention 30 years ago, but came back. Scotland is another matter.
There were nowhere near as many alternative parties then as now and of those that there were, they weren't as well organised.
In 1906, the Liberals won a landslide; eighteen years later, they were reduced to forty MPs. Was that inevitable? Certainly not. Was it preventable? Absolutely. Parties of government of long standing have no God-given right to remain as such.
Of course. The Liberals were replaced by Labour. Maybe a new centre left party will replace Labour. The name doesn't really matter. It's not football. But the centre left is not going to disappear.
Remember, the Tories have not secured a majority for 23 years. That could easily turn into 28. There are no big, popular English parties these days. Only relatively few voters are enthusiastically pro the party they choose to put a cross by.
Robert Peston @Peston 4m4 minutes ago Tory press release: "living standards 2.2% up from Lab's Recession. Q4 2014 disposable income £4,187, Q2 2010 £4,178". Actually 0.22% rise
It's up by a lot more than that for the 2 million extra people in work.
Is it?
Does that include those on Zero hours contracts?
Could you refer that post to the numerous Labour councils that use them. Also to the Labour MPs that use them and by the way in case you forgot......Labour invented them
Quite a lot of people actually like them as well as it suits their lifestyle.
There are millions of English voters who just don't like the Tories.
Indeed so, but that dislike is irrational (you are a prime example of the phenomenon!). Therefore, the alternative is always going to be disappointing, because there is no better alternative. Either you overcome the dislike, or you'll be for ever searching around for a non-existent alternative which somehow manages to combine being 'nicer' or 'fairer' with actually doing what needs to be done.
That alternative doesn't exist. You end up with Labour, all spin and no substance. It's not that Miliband and Darling and Blair and even Brown are stupid, it's the fundamental clash with reality which will repeatedly disappoint you.
It quite a conceit to consider dislike the the Conservatives as irrational. The idea that the Tories have any special grasp on reality is absurd. As if we should all aspire to the gritty realism of the Jacob Rees-Mogg.
Russell Brand (@rustyrockets) 28/04/2015 14:29 Don't be jealous Dave - I'll run into you at West Ham - when you're not busy with "ordinary people" pic.twitter.com/wB1Paq9xHV
Good Twitter today was Ed meets Russell about poverty and then Russell goes back to his 3 million mansion and Ed goes back to his 199,999.99p mansion
Harsh but fair....
:-)
I don't like Russell Brand, and I don't want Ed Miliband to be our Prime Minister, but...
Opposition leader meets the most popular person who talks about politics in the country with people under 30, and said personality endorses his party/tweets negatively to 9.5m about the PM
I don't think it can hurt Labours chances
I agree. He is a fool, but a fool with a following.
I've seen Brand a few times at the Edinburgh fringe. The first time was literally with one man and a goat- and he went off his routine to chat up a girl in the audience.
Brand is not a fool. He is very observant, and intelligent. His comedy is full of compassion and pathos. Even when he veers into his anti capitalist line, he still shows humanity.
There are millions of English voters who just don't like the Tories.
Indeed so, but that dislike is irrational (you are a prime example of the phenomenon!). Therefore, the alternative is always going to be disappointing, because there is no better alternative. Either you overcome the dislike, or you'll be for ever searching around for a non-existent alternative which somehow manages to combine being 'nicer' or 'fairer' with actually doing what needs to be done.
That alternative doesn't exist. You end up with Labour, all spin and no substance. It's not that Miliband and Darling and Blair and even Brown are stupid, it's the fundamental clash with reality which will repeatedly disappoint you.
As we say, the facts of life are conservative.
Yep conservatives certainly believe that the facts of life are conservative. Nobody else does though and it's 23 years and waiting since an election victory.
The seat mathematics for Labour are clear. With an absolute tanking due in Scotland, their starting position is way worse than they could have imagined a few years ago. And, if the Tories stay at 34-35% (which is plausible) then I just cant see where they going to surpass the Conservatives on actual seat numbers, even though I don't think they'll be reduced the most dire predictions of 0-2 seats. I can see them hanging on to 10.
No one is saying that Labour will surpass the Tories on actual seat numbers. Where did you hear that ?
Not from you because I'd sure as hell not listen.
The point is, Labour could really do with being the largest party, by one if necessary, to help get a run at forming a coalition, because they certainly won't be the largest party on vote share either at the current rate of going.
Russell Brand (@rustyrockets) 28/04/2015 14:29 Don't be jealous Dave - I'll run into you at West Ham - when you're not busy with "ordinary people" pic.twitter.com/wB1Paq9xHV
Good Twitter today was Ed meets Russell about poverty and then Russell goes back to his 3 million mansion and Ed goes back to his 199,999.99p mansion
Harsh but fair....
:-)
I don't like Russell Brand, and I don't want Ed Miliband to be our Prime Minister, but...
Opposition leader meets the most popular person who talks about politics in the country with people under 30, and said personality endorses his party/tweets negatively to 9.5m about the PM
I don't think it can hurt Labours chances
I mostly agree with you. The slight danger for Labour is that some socially conservative oldies who hate Russell Brand get wind of this. But I'd have thought that it was a chance worth taking for Labour right now.
Clearly, Brand is gearing up to wink-nod endorse Miliband.
The socially conservative oldies who hate Russell Brand would vote Labour even if Ed Miliband personally torched their house, called them a See You Next Tuesday to their faces, and urinated on their lawns.
The young who follow Brand will mostly not vote. It might make some difference in Nottingham, Bristol, London, Leeds and Manchester, where political young voters are concentrated, but they are solidly Labour areas anyway.
If the polls prove correct, Labour are going to be wiped out, and henceforth unelectable, in south east England, south west England, central south England, East Anglia, and Scotland. And of course they do not exist in northern Ireland.
They are being reduced to the party of London, Wales, and scattered parts of the north and Midlands. And that's it.
If Plaid and UKIP up their game, in Wales and WWC England, it is possible to see Labour disappearing forever as a significant party of government.
There is a large block of centre left voters in England and millions more in the centre. As a consequence, a sensible, credible Labour party will always have a chance. Labour was wiped out in all the places in England you mention 30 years ago, but came back. Scotland is another matter.
And If, as the polls suggest Labour is wiped out north of the border, will it take another 30 years to rebuild there IYO?
I doubt it. A new leader, a recession and things could change quickly. Why wouldn't they?
It's worth remembering that even with Scotland gone, Ed in charge and the economy improving, we are talking about a very fragile Tory majority on a 37% vote share, at best. There are millions of English voters who just don't like the Tories.
Labour's total vote in 1997: 13,518,167 Labour's total vote in 2010: 8,606,517
5 million votes gone missing. A fall of 40%.
FPTP has hitherto disguised this catastrophic collapse in the Labour vote.
But now FPTP is making it weirdly clear, in Scotland. Where Labour have just lost another 500,000 votes.
And how many votes have the Conservatives lost between 1992 and 2010 , almost as many as Labour from 1997 to 2010
Has Dave pledged not to extend VAT into new areas?
What's pretty clear is that someone's taxes are going to have to go up and/or the cuts are going to have to be punitive. There is no magic money tree, Tories!
Lol! The Conservatives need take no lectures from the Labour Party on fiscal responsibility.
If the polls prove correct, Labour are going to be wiped out, and henceforth unelectable, in south east England, south west England, central south England, East Anglia, and Scotland. And of course they do not exist in northern Ireland.
They are being reduced to the party of London, Wales, and scattered parts of the north and Midlands. And that's it.
If Plaid and UKIP up their game, in Wales and WWC England, it is possible to see Labour disappearing forever as a significant party of government.
There is a large block of centre left voters in England and millions more in the centre. As a consequence, a sensible, credible Labour party will always have a chance. Labour was wiped out in all the places in England you mention 30 years ago, but came back. Scotland is another matter.
There were nowhere near as many alternative parties then as now and of those that there were, they weren't as well organised.
In 1906, the Liberals won a landslide; eighteen years later, they were reduced to forty MPs. Was that inevitable? Certainly not. Was it preventable? Absolutely. Parties of government of long standing have no God-given right to remain as such.
Of course. The Liberals were replaced by Labour. Maybe a new centre left party will replace Labour. The name doesn't really matter. It's not football. But the centre left is not going to disappear.
Remember, the Tories have not secured a majority for 23 years. That could easily turn into 28. There are no big, popular English parties these days. Only relatively few voters are enthusiastically pro the party they choose to put a cross by.
Robert Peston @Peston 4m4 minutes ago Tory press release: "living standards 2.2% up from Lab's Recession. Q4 2014 disposable income £4,187, Q2 2010 £4,178". Actually 0.22% rise
It's up by a lot more than that for the 2 million extra people in work.
Is it?
Does that include those on Zero hours contracts?
Could you refer that post to the numerous Labour councils that use them. Also to the Labour MPs that use them and by the way in case you forgot......Labour invented them
When & how did Labour invent the zero hours contract?
There are millions of English voters who just don't like the Tories.
Indeed so, but that dislike is irrational (you are a prime example of the phenomenon!). Therefore, the alternative is always going to be disappointing, because there is no better alternative. Either you overcome the dislike, or you'll be for ever searching around for a non-existent alternative which somehow manages to combine being 'nicer' or 'fairer' with actually doing what needs to be done.
That alternative doesn't exist. You end up with Labour, all spin and no substance. It's not that Miliband and Darling and Blair and even Brown are stupid, it's the fundamental clash with reality which will repeatedly disappoint you.
As we say, the facts of life are conservative.
Yep conservatives certainly believe that the facts of life are conservative. Nobody else does though and it's 23 years and waiting since an election victory.
There are millions of English voters who just don't like the Tories.
Indeed so, but that dislike is irrational (you are a prime example of the phenomenon!). Therefore, the alternative is always going to be disappointing, because there is no better alternative. Either you overcome the dislike, or you'll be for ever searching around for a non-existent alternative which somehow manages to combine being 'nicer' or 'fairer' with actually doing what needs to be done.
That alternative doesn't exist. You end up with Labour, all spin and no substance. It's not that Miliband and Darling and Blair and even Brown are stupid, it's the fundamental clash with reality which will repeatedly disappoint you.
It quite a conceit to consider dislike the the Conservatives as irrational. The idea that the Tories have any special grasp on reality is absurd. As if we should all aspire to the gritty realism of the Jacob Rees-Mogg.
The intensity of hatred of the Tory party is irrational, particular in instances where their policies might appeal to people until they find out they are Tory policies. That is not to say there is not irrational dislike of Labour out there - there is - but it is not as prevalent.
Basil distraught. Those goalpost are moving again.
Well, it was a nice trend while it lasted. Maybe tomorrow will respark it, or at least show some results wildly out of step in some direction at least.
Robert Peston @Peston 4m4 minutes ago Tory press release: "living standards 2.2% up from Lab's Recession. Q4 2014 disposable income £4,187, Q2 2010 £4,178". Actually 0.22% rise
It's up by a lot more than that for the 2 million extra people in work.
Is it?
Does that include those on Zero hours contracts?
You cant just say 'zero hours contract'
I think I can.
I think you can also believe there has been a job miracle if you wish
Can you seriously claim there hasnt? Is there any other way to describe 2 million more jobs? It isnt a mild improvement, it isnt even a stunning improvement in jobs, it as an absolutely shock my bollocks with an electric cattle prod amazing number of jobs.
If two million jobs in a five year period, with half a million public sector jobs lost, economic austerity imposed on the public sector and a eurocrises which nearly did for the Eurozone what the banking system did to Lehmans.
If that isnt a miracle, what would you consider a miracle?
Of course, Richard!! It's only irrational if you don't understand it. And you don't understand it. Because you are a Tory.
A genuine question for you, Southam. You posted earlier today that you hoped a better centre-left alternative to Labour might emerge (it's a point you've made before). As I was walking out to get my sandwich, I was thinking about that point, and I was really struggling to think what in policy terms you might want different from what Labour offers. Presumably no difference on the EU, or slower deficit reduction, or the bedroom tax, or anti-discrimination legislation, or higher taxation, or reduced use of private providers in the NHS, or getting rid of so-called 'unqualified' teachers in schools, or cancelling free schools, etc etc etc.
I appreciate that I might be wrong about what you'd like to see, but can you elaborate on what you would like to be different?
Labour took the piss out of the Tories for their losses but they were never really strong there in Scotland as Labour have been in the past.
The Conservatives (Unionist, National Liberal & Conservatives) had 50.1% of the vote in Scotland in the 1955 GE, the highest percentage any party has had here.
Nothing lasts forever, including any current SNP hegemony.
The 1931 GE made the political map of Scotland look almost entirely blue.
If the polls prove correct, Labour are going to be wiped out, and henceforth unelectable, in south east England, south west England, central south England, East Anglia, and Scotland. And of course they do not exist in northern Ireland.
They are being reduced to the party of London, Wales, and scattered parts of the north and Midlands. And that's it.
If Plaid and UKIP up their game, in Wales and WWC England, it is possible to see Labour disappearing forever as a significant party of government.
There is a large block of centre left voters in England and millions more in the centre. As a consequence, a sensible, credible Labour party will always have a chance. Labour was wiped out in all the places in England you mention 30 years ago, but came back. Scotland is another matter.
And If, as the polls suggest Labour is wiped out north of the border, will it take another 30 years to rebuild there IYO?
I doubt it. A new leader, a recession and things could change quickly. Why wouldn't they?
It's worth remembering that even with Scotland gone, Ed in charge and the economy improving, we are talking about a very fragile Tory majority on a 37% vote share, at best. There are millions of English voters who just don't like the Tories.
Labour's total vote in 1997: 13,518,167 Labour's total vote in 2010: 8,606,517
5 million votes gone missing. A fall of 40%.
FPTP has hitherto disguised this catastrophic collapse in the Labour vote.
But now FPTP is making it weirdly clear, in Scotland. Where Labour have just lost another 500,000 votes.
What do you think this means for your Peak SNP theory? In 2016, Labour will surely be in abject chaos, with ex-MP's squabbling for Holyrood seats and potentially, an unpopular Labour government dancing to the SNP's tune.
How close to Major's 14 million votes did Dave get last time? What about Hague in 2001. Both parties have lost huge numbers of supporters. Many to None of the Above.
Robert Peston @Peston 4m4 minutes ago Tory press release: "living standards 2.2% up from Lab's Recession. Q4 2014 disposable income £4,187, Q2 2010 £4,178". Actually 0.22% rise
It's up by a lot more than that for the 2 million extra people in work.
Is it?
Does that include those on Zero hours contracts?
You cant just say 'zero hours contract', and then somehow you cancel out the fact that 2 million more people are in work.
Its the equivalent of pointing at someone who has just won a spelling bee, and saying, yeah but you smell.
A figure that is truly shocking. A figure that no politician, predicting it in 2010 would have been taken seriously. Laughed from the rafters.
Some of those jobs will be zero hours, some will be part time. But a great many are full time and permanent. Also, a hint, many full time permanent staff start off part time and temporary.
It is a jobs miracle.
Ok will stand corrected on this but the job gains under this coalition were 80% approx full time. This was announced on the main news channels. Of the 20% will be part time and of course zeros.
Like I said I will be more than happily corrected by someone who perhaps is knowledgable about the distribution.
There are millions of English voters who just don't like the Tories.
Indeed so, but that dislike is irrational (you are a prime example of the phenomenon!). Therefore, the alternative is always going to be disappointing, because there is no better alternative. Either you overcome the dislike, or you'll be for ever searching around for a non-existent alternative which somehow manages to combine being 'nicer' or 'fairer' with actually doing what needs to be done.
That alternative doesn't exist. You end up with Labour, all spin and no substance. It's not that Miliband and Darling and Blair and even Brown are stupid, it's the fundamental clash with reality which will repeatedly disappoint you.
As we say, the facts of life are conservative.
Yep conservatives certainly believe that the facts of life are conservative. Nobody else does though and it's 23 years and waiting since an election victory.
Many people can't face reality.
I'd say blaming the electorate for not seeing the truth and making the right decision was a poor strategy - not least because the parties' job is in part to make us see the 'truth' - but if we were to have a second election this year (I don't think we will, I think Lab-SNP will be shockingly stable enough to get through at the very least this year) that would in fact be the main parties going back to the electorate and telling us we'd gotten it wrong and to do it again right this time, so it's not far off.
Robert Peston @Peston 4m4 minutes ago Tory press release: "living standards 2.2% up from Lab's Recession. Q4 2014 disposable income £4,187, Q2 2010 £4,178". Actually 0.22% rise
It's up by a lot more than that for the 2 million extra people in work.
Is it?
Does that include those on Zero hours contracts?
You cant just say 'zero hours contract'
I think I can.
I think you can also believe there has been a job miracle if you wish
Can you seriously claim there hasnt? Is there any other way to describe 2 million more jobs? It isnt a mild improvement, it isnt even a stunning improvement in jobs, it as an absolutely shock my bollocks with an electric cattle prod amazing number of jobs.
If two million jobs in a five year period, with half a million public sector jobs lost, economic austerity imposed on the public sector and a eurocrises which nearly did for the Eurozone what the banking system did to Lehmans.
If that isnt a miracle, what would you consider a miracle?
Comments
Russell Brand (@rustyrockets)
28/04/2015 14:29
Don't be jealous Dave - I'll run into you at West Ham - when you're not busy with "ordinary people" pic.twitter.com/wB1Paq9xHV
Express turning blue at the end.
2005(England only)
Con 35.7 Lab 35.4 Result:Lab 92 seats ahead of Con
2010(England only)
Con39.4 Lab 28.1 Result:Con 106 ahead of Lab
Given results are likely to be significantly less than 11.3%,there is a significant chance Lab are going to do rather well.
Harsh but fair....
:-)
Opposition leader meets the most popular person who talks about politics in the country with people under 30, and said personality endorses his party/tweets negatively to 9.5m about the PM
I don't think it can hurt Labours chances
What's pretty clear is that someone's taxes are going to have to go up and/or the cuts are going to have to be punitive. There is no magic money tree, Tories!
I will not support Labour until the purge of those who took us to war on a lie is complete.
"The Good life"
"No income Tax, no guarantee..."
The latest situation though is quite simply a "McMeteorite" scenario for SLAB
It just is.....and for the entire Labour movement as a whole.
For Brand surely it would represent a huge risk backing Ed. He would lose a lot of his left wing credibility and be seen as a bit of a flip flopper changing his mind and principles at this late stage.
'If Plaid and UKIP up their game, in Wales and WWC England, it is possible to see Labour disappearing forever as a significant party of government.'
Quite possible, PASOK in Greece went from government to 13 MP's in 5 years.
Surely it can't take much longer for voters in Wales to realize that Labour has given them the worst health, education & transport in the UK and Plaid can't possibly be worse.
If Ed were really a strong leader he would expel from the party a man who defends someone who has been expelled from the Labour party and found guilty of many and varied and serious breaches of electoral law. People like him bring Labour - and the London Labour party - into disrepute.
If Ed were strong enough and had any sort of moral compass and wanted a Labour party which did not patronise its voters and seek power on the back of community/identity politics of the most base kind, he would do this.
Blimey.
A sensible, credible Labour party. If only........
In 1906, the Liberals won a landslide; eighteen years later, they were reduced to forty MPs. Was that inevitable? Certainly not. Was it preventable? Absolutely. Parties of government of long standing have no God-given right to remain as such.
Tory press release: "living standards 2.2% up from Lab's Recession. Q4 2014 disposable income £4,187, Q2 2010 £4,178". Actually 0.22% rise
It's worth remembering that even with Scotland gone, Ed in charge and the economy improving, we are talking about a very fragile Tory majority on a 37% vote share, at best. There are millions of English voters who just don't like the Tories.
Does that include those on Zero hours contracts?
Now they appear to have the better future (just) of the two.
He really is loathsome. But there we go.
I worked up in Scotland for many many years starting in 1974 and although a southerner I know what it was like then...... I know what it is like now? This situation is quite simply ELE for SLAB.
Who would have thought even in 2010?
That alternative doesn't exist. You end up with Labour, all spin and no substance. It's not that Miliband and Darling and Blair and even Brown are stupid, it's the fundamental clash with reality which will repeatedly disappoint you.
Of course we could talk about other economic data - government borrowing, off balance sheet debts, industrial production, productivity, the current account balance etc.
But perhaps its best for the government if we talk about GDP.
Remember, the Tories have not secured a majority for 23 years. That could easily turn into 28. There are no big, popular English parties these days. Only relatively few voters are enthusiastically pro the party they choose to put a cross by.
Its the equivalent of pointing at someone who has just won a spelling bee, and saying, yeah but you smell.
A figure that is truly shocking. A figure that no politician, predicting it in 2010 would have been taken seriously. Laughed from the rafters.
Some of those jobs will be zero hours, some will be part time. But a great many are full time and permanent. Also, a hint, many full time permanent staff start off part time and temporary.
It is a jobs miracle.
But yes, you are right, lots of other figures are also important, most notably unemployment, the deficit, and public vs private sector employment. Household deleveraging continues to be going gently in the right direction. House prices are in the Goldilocks zone - not too hot, not too cold.
The deficit remains too high, but is coming down, probably as fast as could reasonably be expected without causing other major disruptions and increasing unemployment.
The current account balance in foreign trade remains dire.
Productivity will I think correct itself - I'm less worried about that.
You seem to be operating on the principle that every silver lining has a cloud. Lighten up - I though you thought that your lad was going to win?
'It could. But equally the left could coalesce once more. It's a cyclical thing. People aren't going to stop being centre left or left.'
If it's a cyclical thing it's an incredibly long cycle,
Nothing lasts forever, including any current SNP hegemony.
Could you refer that post to the numerous Labour councils that use them. Also to the Labour MPs that use them and by the way in case you forgot......Labour invented them
Quite a lot of people actually like them as well as it suits their lifestyle.
Next question?
I think you can also believe there has been a job miracle if you wish
Brand is not a fool. He is very observant, and intelligent. His comedy is full of compassion and pathos. Even when he veers into his anti capitalist line, he still shows humanity.
Basil distraught. Those goalpost are moving again.
The point is, Labour could really do with being the largest party, by one if necessary, to help get a run at forming a coalition, because they certainly won't be the largest party on vote share either at the current rate of going.
Tonights YG EICIPM
The socially conservative oldies who hate Russell Brand would vote Labour even if Ed Miliband personally torched their house, called them a See You Next Tuesday to their faces, and urinated on their lawns.
The young who follow Brand will mostly not vote. It might make some difference in Nottingham, Bristol, London, Leeds and Manchester, where political young voters are concentrated, but they are solidly Labour areas anyway.
If two million jobs in a five year period, with half a million public sector jobs lost, economic austerity imposed on the public sector and a eurocrises which nearly did for the Eurozone what the banking system did to Lehmans.
If that isnt a miracle, what would you consider a miracle?
Betting on the basis of a poll taken many months ago seems rather risky.
The MOE of constituency polls is almost certainly greater than those of national polls.
I appreciate that I might be wrong about what you'd like to see, but can you elaborate on what you would like to be different?
Like I said I will be more than happily corrected by someone who perhaps is knowledgable about the distribution.