Mike Smithson @MSmithsonPB 11m11 minutes ago John Curtice says Tories need 3% lead to be certain of winning most seats. Current polling average has 1% lead . http://ind.pn/1dBbpl8
That is SO unequivocal I am starting to wonder (I know, I know) if he is telling the truth, and not just blatantly lying.
Perhaps he means it? Would he forego the chance to be PM if he had to rely on SNP support?
I can't believe he would. And yet he is setting himself up for a terrible fall with these adamantine statements.
He would still be PM even if the SNP refuses to support him, and then he would go to the polls in October or earlier saying that he told the truth about the SNP scare stories.
"A vote for the SNP is a lost vote ect ect."
How do you "go to the polls" within the FTPA?
Genuine question.
Engineering a loss of a vote of confidence.
How do you do that if your opponents want you to stay in office and suffer?
Would the Tories vote to support a Labour government?
No, they abstain it's too tempting for them to watch Labour suffer. Labour either vote themselves down or abstain and let the SNP vote carry them forward. It's so delicious and will make for fantastic entertainment.
I find this thread quite comical. If a PM resigns, then unless another person is prepared to take over within 14 days, a new election has to be called. The FTPA says that.
It says nothing of the sort. If the PM resigns there will be another PM, since the Queen must always have a PM.
Mere resignation doesn't trigger an election, nor has it ever under our Constitution.
Actually, it does implicitly say that. The Act requires the HoC to pass a Vote of Confidence in the government to prevent an early election. If no-one is prepared to form a government (a circumstance I can't imagine but let's run with it), then by definition the Commons can't pass the motion as there'd be no government to have confidence in.
Wondering if a minoriy govt might introduce PR before a second poll.
They'd have to win a referendum first (especially as no such proposal was in anyone's manifesto). We had a referendum on AV, so the principle is established - a change to the voting system requires explicit voter consent (and fair enough).
And I speak as a convert to the idea of PR. We need it. FPTP is now producing quite perverse results. It is bad for the UK.
I'm against PR, PR leads to so severe splintering that rarely can the first party exceed 25%. Also the party lists of PR are anti-democratic.
That is SO unequivocal I am starting to wonder (I know, I know) if he is telling the truth, and not just blatantly lying.
Perhaps he means it? Would he forego the chance to be PM if he had to rely on SNP support?
I can't believe he would. And yet he is setting himself up for a terrible fall with these adamantine statements.
He would still be PM even if the SNP refuses to support him, and then he would go to the polls in October or earlier saying that he told the truth about the SNP scare stories.
"A vote for the SNP is a lost vote ect ect."
How do you "go to the polls" within the FTPA?
Genuine question.
Engineering a loss of a vote of confidence.
How do you do that if your opponents want you to stay in office and suffer?
Would the Tories vote to support a Labour government?
No, they abstain it's too tempting for them to watch Labour suffer. Labour either vote themselves down or abstain and let the SNP vote carry them forward. It's so delicious and will make for fantastic entertainment.
I find this thread quite comical. If a PM resigns, then unless another person is prepared to take over within 14 days, a new election has to be called. The FTPA says that.
It says nothing of the sort. If the PM resigns there will be another PM, since the Queen must always have a PM.
Mere resignation doesn't trigger an election, nor has it ever under our Constitution.
Actually, it does implicitly say that. The Act requires the HoC to pass a Vote of Confidence in the government to prevent an early election. If no-one is prepared to form a government (a circumstance I can't imagine but let's run with it), then by definition the Commons can't pass the motion as there'd be no government to have confidence in.
There would still be a government- the previous one.
That is SO unequivocal I am starting to wonder (I know, I know) if he is telling the truth, and not just blatantly lying.
Perhaps he means it? Would he forego the chance to be PM if he had to rely on SNP support?
I can't believe he would. And yet he is setting himself up for a terrible fall with these adamantine statements.
He would still be PM even if the SNP refuses to support him, and then he would go to the polls in October or earlier saying that he told the truth about the SNP scare stories.
"A vote for the SNP is a lost vote ect ect."
How do you "go to the polls" within the FTPA?
Genuine question.
Engineering a loss of a vote of confidence.
How do you do that if your opponents want you to stay in office and suffer?
Would the Tories vote to support a Labour government?
No, they abstain it's too tempting for them to watch Labour suffer. Labour either vote themselves down or abstain and let the SNP vote carry them forward. It's so delicious and will make for fantastic entertainment.
I find this thread quite comical. If a PM resigns, then unless another person is prepared to take over within 14 days, a new election has to be called. The FTPA says that.
It says nothing of the sort. If the PM resigns there will be another PM, since the Queen must always have a PM.
Mere resignation doesn't trigger an election, nor has it ever under our Constitution.
"the period of 14 days after the day on which that motion is passed ends without the House passing a motion in the form set out in subsection (5)."
Mike Smithson @MSmithsonPB 11m11 minutes ago John Curtice says Tories need 3% lead to be certain of winning most seats. Current polling average has 1% lead . http://ind.pn/1dBbpl8
LAB most seats 4.80
That is absurdly long.
4.90 now
Big John - what is the significance of 4.90 please? I am not a betting man at all!
Douglas Alexander is one of the three most locally popular Labour MP`s according to the Guardian.
Well, that's convinced me.
Local polling apparently suggests that Douglas will just hold on.
You're taking piss now. The only published polls show him losing. What polls are you referring to? Ones reported by the Guardian?
Concentrate on Brighton Pavilion mate!
Local polls show Caroline Lucas losing...lol
Mark Senior predicted this a year back.
But it does not change the arithmetic.
This is why you shouldnt make up polls, SMukesh. Dimmer posters will believe you and may even bet on the basis that they actually exist. Surbiton can probably afford the losses but think of the others.
It could have been a made-up poll in Paisley that I heard about but I certainly didn`t make it up.
Yes, Miliband is lying. Just openly lying. He will accept SNP votes and support. But he won't do a "deal", oh no, he'll just do LOTS of deals with the SNP every day. And he hopes his weaselling words will save him.
Lying. He is a liar. This is the biggest lie of all. A big fat steaming lie.
I've been watching off and on, whilst snoozing after a boozy International Workers Day festivities lunch. Fine for hot, flat, slow pitches in the Caribbean, but Cook cannot prod and poke around for 30 runs in a hundred balls in the summer at home. Somehow England batters need to raise their tempo.
That is SO unequivocal I am starting to wonder (I know, I know) if he is telling the truth, and not just blatantly lying.
Perhaps he means it? Would he forego the chance to be PM if he had to rely on SNP support?
I can't believe he would. And yet he is setting himself up for a terrible fall with these adamantine statements.
He would still be PM even if the SNP refuses to support him, and then he would go to the polls in October or earlier saying that he told the truth about the SNP scare stories.
"A vote for the SNP is a lost vote ect ect."
How do you "go to the polls" within the FTPA?
Genuine question.
Engineering a loss of a vote of confidence.
How do you do that if your opponents want you to stay in office and suffer?
Would the Tories vote to support a Labour government?
No, they abstain it's too tempting for them to watch Labour suffer. Labour either vote themselves down or abstain and let the SNP vote carry them forward. It's so delicious and will make for fantastic entertainment.
I find this thread quite comical. If a PM resigns, then unless another person is prepared to take over within 14 days, a new election has to be called. The FTPA says that.
A second election June 25th or July 2nd if Miliband refuses to form a government on SNP support, if that is accurate.
the thing is the tories have a big enough war chest to fight a second election - do labour?
Perhaps the SNP could sub them? Very reasonable rates of course.
That is SO unequivocal I am starting to wonder (I know, I know) if he is telling the truth, and not just blatantly lying.
Perhaps he means it? Would he forego the chance to be PM if he had to rely on SNP support?
I can't believe he would. And yet he is setting himself up for a terrible fall with these adamantine statements.
He would still be PM even if the SNP refuses to support him, and then he would go to the polls in October or earlier saying that he told the truth about the SNP scare stories.
"A vote for the SNP is a lost vote ect ect."
How do you "go to the polls" within the FTPA?
Genuine question.
Engineering a loss of a vote of confidence.
How do you do that if your opponents want you to stay in office and suffer?
Would the Tories vote to support a Labour government?
No, they abstain it's too tempting for them to watch Labour suffer. Labour either vote themselves down or abstain and let the SNP vote carry them forward. It's so delicious and will make for fantastic entertainment.
I find this thread quite comical. If a PM resigns, then unless another person is prepared to take over within 14 days, a new election has to be called. The FTPA says that.
It says nothing of the sort. If the PM resigns there will be another PM, since the Queen must always have a PM.
Mere resignation doesn't trigger an election, nor has it ever under our Constitution.
Actually, it does implicitly say that. The Act requires the HoC to pass a Vote of Confidence in the government to prevent an early election. If no-one is prepared to form a government (a circumstance I can't imagine but let's run with it), then by definition the Commons can't pass the motion as there'd be no government to have confidence in.
There would still be a government- the previous one.
Wondering if a minoriy govt might introduce PR before a second poll.
They'd have to win a referendum first (especially as no such proposal was in anyone's manifesto). We had a referendum on AV, so the principle is established - a change to the voting system requires explicit voter consent (and fair enough).
And I speak as a convert to the idea of PR. We need it. FPTP is now producing quite perverse results. It is bad for the UK.
I'm against PR, PR leads to so severe splintering that rarely can the first party exceed 25%. Also the party lists of PR are anti-democratic.
Pbc is *not* the site to discuss voting systems!!!!
Yes, Miliband is lying. Just openly lying. He will accept SNP votes and support. But he won't do a "deal", oh no, he'll just do LOTS of deals with the SNP every day. And he hopes his weaselling words will save him.
Lying. He is a liar. This is the biggest lie of all. A big fat steaming lie.
Yes, Miliband is lying. Just openly lying. He will accept SNP votes and support. But he won't do a "deal", oh no, he'll just do LOTS of deals with the SNP every day. And he hopes his weaselling words will save him.
Lying. He is a liar. This is the biggest lie of all. A big fat steaming lie.
So I think, but not sure, what you are saying is that Ed is lying?
I think it was outrageous too, they gave Ed 30 mins of prime time on BBC 1 this evening. Never knew he had been into space ;-)
Yes, Miliband is lying. Just openly lying. He will accept SNP votes and support. But he won't do a "deal", oh no, he'll just do LOTS of deals with the SNP every day. And he hopes his weaselling words will save him.
Lying. He is a liar. This is the biggest lie of all. A big fat steaming lie.
Sean T your posts become more and more desperate by the day
Mike Smithson @MSmithsonPB 11m11 minutes ago John Curtice says Tories need 3% lead to be certain of winning most seats. Current polling average has 1% lead . http://ind.pn/1dBbpl8
LAB most seats 4.80
That is absurdly long.
4.90 now
Big John - what is the significance of 4.90 please? I am not a betting man at all!
Lab most seats now on offer at 3.9/1 ie you get £49 back for a tenner,
John Curtice reckons a 3% Tory lead gives level on seats.
Wondering if a minoriy govt might introduce PR before a second poll.
They'd have to win a referendum first (especially as no such proposal was in anyone's manifesto). We had a referendum on AV, so the principle is established - a change to the voting system requires explicit voter consent (and fair enough).
And I speak as a convert to the idea of PR. We need it. FPTP is now producing quite perverse results. It is bad for the UK.
I'm against PR, PR leads to so severe splintering that rarely can the first party exceed 25%.
There are any number of countries that use PR where parties regularly get well in excess of 25%. Germany is an obvious one.
Not if they're open lists or if you use STV (which isn't technically PR but is close enough to be grouped with it). In any case FPTP is a closed list of one unless combined with primaries.
Would be interesting if the Royal baby appeared over the weekend and then a bank holiday followed so most people happy and feeling patriotic. A "black signet" event even though it's been expected for some time. (Actually black swan cygnets are white at firstI believe)
Not sure who such a situation favours most if at all but it would allow the politicians to be fairly unmolested by media up to polling day. Just another possibility into the confusing mix.
Watching the likely ridiculous coverage on the telly and the OTT celebrations of English nutters at another royal scrounger, it will likely boost the SNP by a couple of points.
They are probably doing all they can do delay the birth till late on May 7th.
I actually don't think Miliband will do deals with the SNP.
Think how closely the media will be looking at him. They'll jump on anytime they even see Lab speaking to the SNP.
If Lab introduces a policy in line with SNP rather than Lab manifesto, media will go beserk. Not just the Murdoch papers - all media, including TV.
So I think Miliband will just play it very, very straight. He'll follow the Lab manifesto precisely and dare the SNP to vote against. Which they won't.
Greetings from Lynmouth on the beautiful North Devon coast. Sea to the front of us, Exmoor behind. Sweeping rain showers; mist. My, but England is a wonder.
Anyway, the fields are full of blue; the odd farmer has rebelled and put up signs for Nick Harvey, the LibDem candidate. Is that the same one who was an MP?
Mike Smithson @MSmithsonPB 11m11 minutes ago John Curtice says Tories need 3% lead to be certain of winning most seats. Current polling average has 1% lead . http://ind.pn/1dBbpl8
Wondering if a minoriy govt might introduce PR before a second poll.
They'd have to win a referendum first (especially as no such proposal was in anyone's manifesto). We had a referendum on AV, so the principle is established - a change to the voting system requires explicit voter consent (and fair enough).
And I speak as a convert to the idea of PR. We need it. FPTP is now producing quite perverse results. It is bad for the UK.
FPTP has been producing perverse results since 1983.
Evening all, Yougov due soon. I sense a shifting of the ground.
I don't. But a non-shifting of the ground is, in itself, good news for Labour. The Tories have six days to conjure another 2 point move in their direction.
It's not happening.
Prediction: YouGov to show another 1 point Lab lead.
Labour have 5 days in fact of pulling heartstrings - especially in Scotland (Miliband says 'don't gamble with the SNP' according to BBC.)
Is anybody listening? I'm not sure anybody can conjure much - although I am sure Labour will be on their bended kneed begging in Scotland. That's why I think anyone who wants to see a tory govt and a defeated Labour opposition would be mad to vote 'tactically' .
Great for Cook, but then he's out and an actually poor day for England. Still, he's had several 50s in last few matches, so it was coming, and England managed to win last time. Not going to be enough to face Australia, but I can handle that, I grew up watching England in the 90s.
Mike Smithson @MSmithsonPB 11m11 minutes ago John Curtice says Tories need 3% lead to be certain of winning most seats. Current polling average has 1% lead . http://ind.pn/1dBbpl8
LAB most seats 4.80
That is absurdly long.
4.90 now
YouGov CON+6 nailed on
Champagne on ice?
As a matter of fact, yes. Although for other reasons!
I actually don't think Miliband will do deals with the SNP.
Think how closely the media will be looking at him. They'll jump on anytime they even see Lab speaking to the SNP.
If Lab introduces a policy in line with SNP rather than Lab manifesto, media will go beserk. Not just the Murdoch papers - all media, including TV.
So I think Miliband will just play it very, very straight. He'll follow the Lab manifesto precisely and dare the SNP to vote against. Which they won't.
Ed Miliband has been forced into a humiliating climbdown over whether Labour will work with the SNP following the election after three of his most senior party allies said they will “of course” talk to nationalist MPs to get laws through the Commons.
Mr Miliband used a BBC Question Time debate on Thursday to insist to voters that his party will do “no deals or coalitions” with Nicola Sturgeon’s party.
However, that commitment appeared to unravel just hours later as Mr Miliband and three of his most senior shadow cabinet ministers conceded that Labour could have to work with SNP MPs in the event of another hung Parliament.
Evening all, Yougov due soon. I sense a shifting of the ground.
I don't. But a non-shifting of the ground is, in itself, good news for Labour. The Tories have six days to conjure another 2 point move in their direction.
It's not happening.
Prediction: YouGov to show another 1 point Lab lead.
Labour have 5 days in fact of pulling heartstrings - especially in Scotland (Miliband says 'don't gamble with the SNP' according to BBC.)
....
Well that's a f*cking stupid argument to a country where 45% just voted to become independent and all of them have seen the SNP in action locally for the last eight years. What, precisely, is supposed to be the gamble?
Mike Smithson @MSmithsonPB 11m11 minutes ago John Curtice says Tories need 3% lead to be certain of winning most seats. Current polling average has 1% lead . http://ind.pn/1dBbpl8
LAB most seats 4.80
That is absurdly long.
4.90 now
YouGov CON+6 nailed on
Champagne on ice?
As a matter of fact, yes. Although for other reasons!
Ed Miliband has been forced into a humiliating climbdown over whether Labour will work with the SNP following the election after three of his most senior party allies said they will “of course” talk to nationalist MPs to get laws through the Commons.
Mr Miliband used a BBC Question Time debate on Thursday to insist to voters that his party will do “no deals or coalitions” with Nicola Sturgeon’s party.
However, that commitment appeared to unravel just hours later as Mr Miliband and three of his most senior shadow cabinet ministers conceded that Labour could have to work with SNP MPs in the event of another hung Parliament.
Mike Smithson @MSmithsonPB 11m11 minutes ago John Curtice says Tories need 3% lead to be certain of winning most seats. Current polling average has 1% lead . http://ind.pn/1dBbpl8
LAB most seats 4.80
That is absurdly long.
4.90 now
YouGov CON+6 nailed on
Champagne on ice?
As a matter of fact, yes. Although for other reasons!
No flights booked for Thursday I hope.
Happy non political event.
Strategically booked for next Tue/Wed so I'd be back in time for the election results!
Mike Smithson @MSmithsonPB 11m11 minutes ago John Curtice says Tories need 3% lead to be certain of winning most seats. Current polling average has 1% lead . http://ind.pn/1dBbpl8
LAB most seats 4.80
That is absurdly long.
4.90 now
Big John - what is the significance of 4.90 please? I am not a betting man at all!
Lab most seats now on offer at 3.9/1 ie you get £49 back for a tenner,
John Curtice reckons a 3% Tory lead gives level on seats.
I know that Ed Miliband is desperate to be PM but the question is 'at any price'. Sure that when he dreamed his dreams of the top job they didn't go anywhere near the nightmare scenario unfolding before us today
There is always a government under our system, with the possible exception of two days under the Earl of Bath in 1746, who accepted the commission, but could find no-one who would serve with him.
"the most wise and honest of all administrations, the minister having ... never transacted one rash thing; and, what is more marvellous, left as much money in the Treasury as he found in it."
I actually don't think Miliband will do deals with the SNP.
Think how closely the media will be looking at him. They'll jump on anytime they even see Lab speaking to the SNP.
If Lab introduces a policy in line with SNP rather than Lab manifesto, media will go beserk. Not just the Murdoch papers - all media, including TV.
So I think Miliband will just play it very, very straight. He'll follow the Lab manifesto precisely and dare the SNP to vote against. Which they won't.
No, the SNP will amend legislation to make it more "progressive" (and more favourable to Scotland) and then when Labour refuse, they'll vote it down.
So Miliband will be forced to reach an accommodation, or, if you like, a "deal".
Would the Tories vote against English votes for English Laws legislation? That would be hilarious
Wondering if a minoriy govt might introduce PR before a second poll.
They'd have to win a referendum first (especially as no such proposal was in anyone's manifesto). We had a referendum on AV, so the principle is established - a change to the voting system requires explicit voter consent (and fair enough).
And I speak as a convert to the idea of PR. We need it. FPTP is now producing quite perverse results. It is bad for the UK.
I'm against PR, PR leads to so severe splintering that rarely can the first party exceed 25%.
There are any number of countries that use PR where parties regularly get well in excess of 25%. Germany is an obvious one.
Not if they're open lists or if you use STV (which isn't technically PR but is close enough to be grouped with it). In any case FPTP is a closed list of one unless combined with primaries.
Germany uses a mixed system not pure PR. And don't make me tell that STV joke again.
No EU referendum or settlement? A notable confidence from self interested Lefties - but no comment on the Euro and Greece. No comment on how the left would walk quietly towards 'ever closer Union'.
Wondering if a minoriy govt might introduce PR before a second poll.
They'd have to win a referendum first (especially as no such proposal was in anyone's manifesto). We had a referendum on AV, so the principle is established - a change to the voting system requires explicit voter consent (and fair enough).
And I speak as a convert to the idea of PR. We need it. FPTP is now producing quite perverse results. It is bad for the UK.
I'm against PR, PR leads to so severe splintering that rarely can the first party exceed 25%.
Are we 100% sure that the EU in/out referendum will actually take place, if the Tories have their way?. I've noticed that Cameron is incredibly precise in his wording when talking about it. The manifesto states "we will negotiate a new settlement for Britain in Europe, and then ask the British people whether they want to stay in the EU on this reformed basis or leave"
The key phrase is "a new settlement" and that is the wording on Question Time last night.
What if he can't negotiate a "new settlement" ? what if the EU leaders don't play ball? In those circumstances, is the referendum off ?
Yes, I've been pointing that out for years. There certainly won't be a new settlement in 2017, or indeed before 2020, as anyone following EU affairs knows. There are 3 possibilities:
1. Cameron says "Here's what I think it will look like, is that OK?" People probably say yes. Some years later, an actual treaty emerges. Cameron says yeah, well, close enough, you're not having ANOTHER referendum, that would be silly. 2. Ditto, but Cameron DOES offer a further referendum in GE 2020, so we spend the next 7 years or so debating Europe, before probably deciding to stay. 3. Cameron says in 2017 oops, this is taking longer than we thought, we'll get back to you when it's ready, and things drift on to 2020.
It seems odd that nobody is seeking clarification of which is envisaged. But it's academic if the Tories don't get an overall majority anyway.
Tom Newton Dunn @tnewtondunn 6m6 minutes ago Only 5 days to go until #GE2015, and no politics on p1s of Times, Daily Mail or The Sun tomorrow. Shows just how bored we think voters are.
Or that tonights YG VI does not show a Tory lead
Nothing wrong with a little constructive boredom, as Ed moves towards No 10.
Whilst you have spent the last few years ensuring cats, dogs and other animals are treated better ( a worthy cause) have you thought about offering the humans who occupy this island the opportunity to vote and have a say on our membership?
I know that Ed Miliband is desperate to be PM but the question is 'at any price'. Sure that when he dreamed his dreams of the top job they didn't go anywhere near the nightmare scenario unfolding before us today
I'm sure they didn't but I am sure he will grab at any scenario which results in him becoming PM, however brief or difficult. He's a smart, cautious man, but like most politicians I would guess he is very ambitious and actually optimistic, at least insofar his own ability to work a situation to his advantage, or at least mitigate any damage. Getting to be PM is essential, if he fails then he probably won't get a second chance, so do anything to get that, and he'll figure something will come up later he can use to handle the coming difficult situation.
Cameron is much the same I imagine, probably with even more confidence of turning things to his advantage in usual circumstances. After all, he quickly managed to arrange for a government with a comfortable majority, a mostly pliant coalition partner and his own party have not collapsed in the polls since. If he can do just a little better than the polls he'd be fine once again, but he's ruined because of things outside his control, namely a lack of potential allies. Miliband knows he doesn't have that problem, even if having those allies causes other ones.
Wondering if a minoriy govt might introduce PR before a second poll.
They'd have to win a referendum first (especially as no such proposal was in anyone's manifesto). We had a referendum on AV, so the principle is established - a change to the voting system requires explicit voter consent (and fair enough).
And I speak as a convert to the idea of PR. We need it. FPTP is now producing quite perverse results. It is bad for the UK.
I'm against PR, PR leads to so severe splintering that rarely can the first party exceed 25%.
Scotland rather disproves that.
Again, Scotland has a mixed system of a list under the D'Hond method and FPTP, it's not pure PR.
Wondering if a minoriy govt might introduce PR before a second poll.
They'd have to win a referendum first (especially as no such proposal was in anyone's manifesto). We had a referendum on AV, so the principle is established - a change to the voting system requires explicit voter consent (and fair enough).
And I speak as a convert to the idea of PR. We need it. FPTP is now producing quite perverse results. It is bad for the UK.
I'm against PR, PR leads to so severe splintering that rarely can the first party exceed 25%.
There are any number of countries that use PR where parties regularly get well in excess of 25%. Germany is an obvious one.
Not if they're open lists or if you use STV (which isn't technically PR but is close enough to be grouped with it). In any case FPTP is a closed list of one unless combined with primaries.
Finland has open lists. Dunno about the most recent election, but at the previous one 25% of incumbents were defeated...
Are the SNP against proportional representation? Labour plus SNP plus PC plus LD = PR?
PR = bye bye SNP
PR will see Labour and the Tories both drop to 200 seats ON CURRENT NUMBERS.
Switching to PR will drop their vote shares to at most 25%. 150 seats each (in a 600 member parliament).
Neither of those parties will allow that.
Until they see that under FPTP they could drop even further. cf Scotland 2015, Liberals 1930s for what can happen.
Yeah but when have parties done this.
There must have been SOME people in the Liberals that realised that only PR could save them and the AV baton would transfer to UKIP benefiting most as the third party? But they still didn't go for PR, they went for a third party biased FPTP.
Parties seem quite intransigent when faced with the future. Even if Labour MPs know they face a Scotland style wipe out, will they actually believe it enough to propose PR and get the support of pretty much everyone except the Tories (SNP will support PR).
I doubt it. Think how late it was before the SLABbers actually realised they were all gone. Not until the short campaign or maybe slightly before it. They wait too long. The same will happen on PR. Labour will avoid it till they don't even benefit from it, till they are a worthless rump.
Dan Hodges @DPJHodges 2m2 minutes ago Queensferry, Scotland One thing I've learnt from this election. He who pays the piper calls Survation.
So Hodges has learned nothing from this election.
I think he has. Every now and then he slips in little pieces of meta-commentary about punditry and what commentators will do when proven wrong, in terms of justifying how they could be so wrong but will continue to make predictions boldly, and that sort of thing, that makes me think he knows he is wrong (or could be wrong at least), but is wedded to his schtick at this point. It's what they pay him for after all.
Is Ed going to allow himself to keep getting bullied by the Tories, or is he going to actually defend the concept of doing deals with the SNP (albeit on the proviso that any deals would not benefit Scotland over the rest of the UK)? No-one is believing him anyway when he says he won't do it, and he's leaving the field clear to people who unquestioningly present it as a bad thing for those evil jock terrorists to help pass legislation.
It's amazing that after 5 years of making the same mistakes again and again, he's still not learnt that giving in when his opponents start demanding him to make concessions doesn't make the problem go away, it just makes him look weak and easy to push around.
Are we 100% sure that the EU in/out referendum will actually take place, if the Tories have their way?. I've noticed that Cameron is incredibly precise in his wording when talking about it. The manifesto states "we will negotiate a new settlement for Britain in Europe, and then ask the British people whether they want to stay in the EU on this reformed basis or leave"
The key phrase is "a new settlement" and that is the wording on Question Time last night.
What if he can't negotiate a "new settlement" ? what if the EU leaders don't play ball? In those circumstances, is the referendum off ?
Yes, I've been pointing that out for years. There certainly won't be a new settlement in 2017, or indeed before 2020, as anyone following EU affairs knows. There are 3 possibilities:
1. Cameron says "Here's what I think it will look like, is that OK?" People probably say yes. Some years later, an actual treaty emerges. Cameron says yeah, well, close enough, you're not having ANOTHER referendum, that would be silly. 2. Ditto, but Cameron DOES offer a further referendum in GE 2020, so we spend the next 7 years or so debating Europe, before probably deciding to stay. 3. Cameron says in 2017 oops, this is taking longer than we thought, we'll get back to you when it's ready, and things drift on to 2020.
It seems odd that nobody is seeking clarification of which is envisaged. But it's academic if the Tories don't get an overall majority anyway.
Tom Newton Dunn @tnewtondunn 6m6 minutes ago Only 5 days to go until #GE2015, and no politics on p1s of Times, Daily Mail or The Sun tomorrow. Shows just how bored we think voters are.
Or that tonights YG VI does not show a Tory lead
Nothing wrong with a little constructive boredom, as Ed moves towards No 10.
Whilst you have spent the last few years ensuring cats, dogs and other animals are treated better ( a worthy cause) have you thought about offering the humans who occupy this island the opportunity to vote and have a say on our membership?
No. And that's why people should vote Tory in Broxtowe
Dan Hodges @DPJHodges 2m2 minutes ago Queensferry, Scotland One thing I've learnt from this election. He who pays the piper calls Survation.
So Hodges has learned nothing from this election.
I think he has. Every now and then he slips in little pieces of meta-commentary about punditry and what commentators will do when proven wrong, in terms of justifying how they could be so wrong but will continue to make predictions boldly, and that sort of thing, that makes me think he knows he is wrong (or could be wrong at least), but is wedded to his schtick at this point. It's what they pay him for after all.
You seem to be reading far too much of Hodges' output than is sensible. I only ever read his stuff when it is posted here and even then I do try to skim over most of it.
Are the SNP against proportional representation? Labour plus SNP plus PC plus LD = PR?
PR = bye bye SNP
PR will see Labour and the Tories both drop to 200 seats ON CURRENT NUMBERS.
Switching to PR will drop their vote shares to at most 25%. 150 seats each (in a 600 member parliament).
Neither of those parties will allow that.
Until they see that under FPTP they could drop even further. cf Scotland 2015, Liberals 1930s for what can happen.
Yeah but when have parties done this.
The ruling elites of almost all countries recognised it in the period 1910-1920. Even the Liberals here recognised it, and tried to introduce STV, missing out by 1 vote...
Wondering if a minoriy govt might introduce PR before a second poll.
They'd have to win a referendum first (especially as no such proposal was in anyone's manifesto). We had a referendum on AV, so the principle is established - a change to the voting system requires explicit voter consent (and fair enough).
And I speak as a convert to the idea of PR. We need it. FPTP is now producing quite perverse results. It is bad for the UK.
I'm against PR, PR leads to so severe splintering that rarely can the first party exceed 25%.
There are any number of countries that use PR where parties regularly get well in excess of 25%. Germany is an obvious one.
Not if they're open lists or if you use STV (which isn't technically PR but is close enough to be grouped with it). In any case FPTP is a closed list of one unless combined with primaries.
Germany uses a mixed system not pure PR. And don't make me tell that STV joke again.
No-one with any interest in democracy would advocate 'pure PR', as you put it but there are plenty of systems which are near enough and are a lot less bad than FPTP or pure PR.
Dan Hodges @DPJHodges 2m2 minutes ago Queensferry, Scotland One thing I've learnt from this election. He who pays the piper calls Survation.
So Hodges has learned nothing from this election.
I think he has. Every now and then he slips in little pieces of meta-commentary about punditry and what commentators will do when proven wrong, in terms of justifying how they could be so wrong but will continue to make predictions boldly, and that sort of thing, that makes me think he knows he is wrong (or could be wrong at least), but is wedded to his schtick at this point. It's what they pay him for after all.
You seem to be reading far too much of Hodges' output than is sensible. I only ever read his stuff when it is posted here and even then I do try to skim over most of it.
I actually enjoy him to be honest - when he gets away from just harping on the Ed is Crap stuff, he can make some good points and I think he's a decent writer. It's just his prolific output on the same goddamn points about Ed and Labour over and over again that demand skimming of the rest of his stuff.
Polls remain clear as mud. Probably a slight move to the Tories over the past week, but not as big as it looked a few days ago. The election remains a question of which polling company's methodology you put most faith in.
Are the SNP against proportional representation? Labour plus SNP plus PC plus LD = PR?
PR = bye bye SNP
PR will see Labour and the Tories both drop to 200 seats ON CURRENT NUMBERS.
Switching to PR will drop their vote shares to at most 25%. 150 seats each (in a 600 member parliament).
Neither of those parties will allow that.
Until they see that under FPTP they could drop even further. cf Scotland 2015, Liberals 1930s for what can happen.
Yeah but when have parties done this.
There must have been SOME people in the Liberals that realised that only PR could save them and the AV baton would transfer to UKIP benefiting most as the third party? But they still didn't go for PR, they went for a third party biased FPTP.
Parties seem quite intransigent when faced with the future. Even if Labour MPs know they face a Scotland style wipe out, will they actually believe it enough to propose PR and get the support of pretty much everyone except the Tories (SNP will support PR).
I doubt it. Think how late it was before the SLABbers actually realised they were all gone. Not until the short campaign or maybe slightly before it. They wait too long. The same will happen on PR. Labour will avoid it till they don't even benefit from it, till they are a worthless rump.
Britain very very nearly introduced PR in the 1918 reforms. In fact, it did albeit on a tiny scale. The 3-member Scottish University seat was elected by STV.
Wondering if a minoriy govt might introduce PR before a second poll.
They'd have to win a referendum first (especially as no such proposal was in anyone's manifesto). We had a referendum on AV, so the principle is established - a change to the voting system requires explicit voter consent (and fair enough).
And I speak as a convert to the idea of PR. We need it. FPTP is now producing quite perverse results. It is bad for the UK.
I'm against PR, PR leads to so severe splintering that rarely can the first party exceed 25%.
Scotland rather disproves that.
In NZ last year under a MMP system, the winning party scored 49%
Wondering if a minoriy govt might introduce PR before a second poll.
They'd have to win a referendum first (especially as no such proposal was in anyone's manifesto). We had a referendum on AV, so the principle is established - a change to the voting system requires explicit voter consent (and fair enough).
And I speak as a convert to the idea of PR. We need it. FPTP is now producing quite perverse results. It is bad for the UK.
I'm against PR, PR leads to so severe splintering that rarely can the first party exceed 25%.
There are any number of countries that use PR where parties regularly get well in excess of 25%. Germany is an obvious one.
Not if they're open lists or if you use STV (which isn't technically PR but is close enough to be grouped with it). In any case FPTP is a closed list of one unless combined with primaries.
Germany uses a mixed system not pure PR. And don't make me tell that STV joke again.
No-one with any interest in democracy would advocate 'pure PR', as you put it but there are plenty of systems which are near enough and are a lot less bad than FPTP or pure PR.
We could use the Greek system of PR with a threshold +bonus seats for the first party enough for a majority above 38% of the votes, with Finnish open lists.
Dan Hodges @DPJHodges 2m2 minutes ago Queensferry, Scotland One thing I've learnt from this election. He who pays the piper calls Survation.
So Hodges has learned nothing from this election.
I think he has. Every now and then he slips in little pieces of meta-commentary about punditry and what commentators will do when proven wrong, in terms of justifying how they could be so wrong but will continue to make predictions boldly, and that sort of thing, that makes me think he knows he is wrong (or could be wrong at least), but is wedded to his schtick at this point. It's what they pay him for after all.
You seem to be reading far too much of Hodges' output than is sensible. I only ever read his stuff when it is posted here and even then I do try to skim over most of it.
Wondering if a minoriy govt might introduce PR before a second poll.
They'd have to win a referendum first (especially as no such proposal was in anyone's manifesto). We had a referendum on AV, so the principle is established - a change to the voting system requires explicit voter consent (and fair enough).
And I speak as a convert to the idea of PR. We need it. FPTP is now producing quite perverse results. It is bad for the UK.
I'm against PR, PR leads to so severe splintering that rarely can the first party exceed 25%.
Scotland rather disproves that.
In NZ last year under a MMP system, the winning party scored 49%
Malta has just two parties under STV, and one usually wins over 50% of the vote...
The two Labour stooges on Newsnight - Keunssberg and Wark stitching up the argument with Editorial based on a Jack McConnell statement (look him up) is desperate and ridiculous BBC bias.
Yes. Did you notice the "tell"? In the poker playing sense?
When he was directly asked about SNP support, and quietly slipped in that little phrase "of course how people vote in the Commons is up to them", his eyes evaded the gaze of the interviewer, just for a nanosecond.
Quite compelling, in a depressing way. He knows he is lying, he knows it is a big lie (to win English votes) he knows that some deal will be sought and found with the SNP, day by day.
What a c*nt. OK I hate him now.
Yes. I saw the footage twice. First time I thought he seemed unusually shifty. Second time I caught that in particular.
PR would leave to Tory and UKIP coalitions and Labour and Green and nationalist coalitions with the LDs going either way, it would also stop the SNP getting 90% of Scottish seats on 50% or less of the vote. Germany has PR, New Zealand has PR, Spain has PR, Italy has PR, the Nordic countries have PR, Israel has PR, Japan has PR, Russia has PR, South Africa has PR, Brazil and Mexico have PR. FPTP is actually the exception
Dan Hodges @DPJHodges 2m2 minutes ago Queensferry, Scotland One thing I've learnt from this election. He who pays the piper calls Survation.
I'm kinda feeling sorry for the guy, he's staked his entire credibility on a UKIP collapse and a tory majority. Fair play to him for being bold enough to do it, but as it's looking he's going to be unemployable in 5 days. Barring a miracle, his punditry lies in ruins and he's burned every semblance of a bridge with the labour movement.
I'm sure he's got bills to pay just like anyone else, it's all pretty sad. Wouldn't surprise me to see a Hodges as Hitler "downfall" video up on Friday morning.
BBC usual straight bat (NOT) reporting. Ed says no deal, no mention of his own party saying, well yeah, but no, but yeah...while also repeating his claims about Tories child benefit cut as if fact rather reporting it as Ed Miliband made up Tory Secret Plan.
That is SO unequivocal I am starting to wonder (I know, I know) if he is telling the truth, and not just blatantly lying.
Perhaps he means it? Would he forego the chance to be PM if he had to rely on SNP support?
I can't believe he would. And yet he is setting himself up for a terrible fall with these adamantine statements.
The most obvious explanation is that Labour believe that they are being very badly hit by the 'weak Miliband in thrall to Nicola' argument.
And why not? As electoral arguments go, it's one of the most persuasive and one of the most grounded in reality we've seen for yonks.
Wonder who Dave will be in thrall to if he has a whiff of power. It's a career defining election after all.
You wilfully miss the point. The SNP are a narrow regionally based party which wants to destroy the UK. Furthermore the devolution settlement makes them unsuitable to be voting on English only Laws. They do not contest seats in England or Wales. Its not the Conservatives fault that this party is a far left party and would push labour to the left as a price for its support - and thats before you count up all the pork scrapped from the barrel heading to Scotland paid for by the English.
Comments
Also the party lists of PR are anti-democratic.
Switching to PR will drop their vote shares to at most 25%. 150 seats each (in a 600 member parliament).
Neither of those parties will allow that.
It`s not only the Tories` prerogative to lie.
I think it was outrageous too, they gave Ed 30 mins of prime time on BBC 1 this evening. Never knew he had been into space ;-)
John Curtice reckons a 3% Tory lead gives level on seats.
Is a bigger than a 3% tory win really a 1/4 shot?
Labour: We WILL talk to the SNP
#tomorrowspaperstoday #bbcpapers #scotpapers http://t.co/Qz9qd9taAY
They are probably doing all they can do delay the birth till late on May 7th.
Think how closely the media will be looking at him. They'll jump on anytime they even see Lab speaking to the SNP.
If Lab introduces a policy in line with SNP rather than Lab manifesto, media will go beserk. Not just the Murdoch papers - all media, including TV.
So I think Miliband will just play it very, very straight. He'll follow the Lab manifesto precisely and dare the SNP to vote against. Which they won't.
Anyway, the fields are full of blue; the odd farmer has rebelled and put up signs for Nick Harvey, the LibDem candidate. Is that the same one who was an MP?
Is anybody listening? I'm not sure anybody can conjure much - although I am sure Labour will be on their bended kneed begging in Scotland. That's why I think anyone who wants to see a tory govt and a defeated Labour opposition would be mad to vote 'tactically' .
Happy non political event.
He actually said that he wouldn't negotiate with any other party...not just the SNP
CON 221
LAB 221
UKIP 85
LD 52
GRN 32
SNP 26
OTH 13
Result: No government.
If there is a 5% threshold:
CON 235
LAB 235
UKIP 90
LD 55
GRN 35
Result: Each block 325 seats, could go either way, oh and no SNP or PC.
Dan Hodges @DPJHodges 2m2 minutes ago Queensferry, Scotland
One thing I've learnt from this election. He who pays the piper calls Survation.
And thanks!
There is always a government under our system, with the possible exception of two days under the Earl of Bath in 1746, who accepted the commission, but could find no-one who would serve with him.
"the most wise and honest of all administrations, the minister having ... never transacted one rash thing; and, what is more marvellous, left as much money in the Treasury as he found in it."
And don't make me tell that STV joke again.
A notable confidence from self interested Lefties - but no comment on the Euro and Greece. No comment on how the left would walk quietly towards 'ever closer Union'.
Cameron is much the same I imagine, probably with even more confidence of turning things to his advantage in usual circumstances. After all, he quickly managed to arrange for a government with a comfortable majority, a mostly pliant coalition partner and his own party have not collapsed in the polls since. If he can do just a little better than the polls he'd be fine once again, but he's ruined because of things outside his control, namely a lack of potential allies. Miliband knows he doesn't have that problem, even if having those allies causes other ones.
There must have been SOME people in the Liberals that realised that only PR could save them and the AV baton would transfer to UKIP benefiting most as the third party? But they still didn't go for PR, they went for a third party biased FPTP.
Parties seem quite intransigent when faced with the future. Even if Labour MPs know they face a Scotland style wipe out, will they actually believe it enough to propose PR and get the support of pretty much everyone except the Tories (SNP will support PR).
I doubt it. Think how late it was before the SLABbers actually realised they were all gone. Not until the short campaign or maybe slightly before it. They wait too long. The same will happen on PR. Labour will avoid it till they don't even benefit from it, till they are a worthless rump.
It's amazing that after 5 years of making the same mistakes again and again, he's still not learnt that giving in when his opponents start demanding him to make concessions doesn't make the problem go away, it just makes him look weak and easy to push around.
And why not? As electoral arguments go, it's one of the most persuasive and one of the most grounded in reality we've seen for yonks.
YouGov. More like the EdLeadsTheNextGov.
But how do you deal with by-elections?
Where is Douglas Carswell when you need him.
Ed saying no deal is about as convincing as Ed saying "We didn't borrow too much"
But would I be wrong to write in a thread to
1) Call Éamon de Valera a terrorist?
2) Compare Alex Salmond to Éamon de Valera?
CON 33%, LAB 34%, LD 8%, UKIP 14%, GRN 5%
Good polling day for Labour today but it hasn't really moved the betting markets.
I'm sure he's got bills to pay just like anyone else, it's all pretty sad. Wouldn't surprise me to see a Hodges as Hitler "downfall" video up on Friday morning.
BBC usual straight bat (NOT) reporting. Ed says no deal, no mention of his own party saying, well yeah, but no, but yeah...while also repeating his claims about Tories child benefit cut as if fact rather reporting it as Ed Miliband made up Tory Secret Plan.
Labour are accusing the business woman on QT this week of being a plant..
Playing the lady not the ball.
The SNP are a narrow regionally based party which wants to destroy the UK. Furthermore the devolution settlement makes them unsuitable to be voting on English only Laws. They do not contest seats in England or Wales. Its not the Conservatives fault that this party is a far left party and would push labour to the left as a price for its support - and thats before you count up all the pork scrapped from the barrel heading to Scotland paid for by the English.
He will possibly be the most unpopular Prime Minister we've ever had inside 18 months.