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.
Well lets see, PR with current numbers lets say CON 34, LAB 34, UKIP 13, LD 8, GRN 5, SNP 4: 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.
If it was Universal PR then SNP and PC would joint ticket and get votes in England. They would reach 5% without problem.
Nah, the 5% threshold would not be applied UK-wide but to Wales, Northern Ireland, England and Scotland. So the SNP would be in as well as the Northern Irish parties and PC.
I would compare Nicola Sturgeon to Eamonn De Valera - Salmond is too flamboyant for a comparison with him to be plausible. I expect the SNP result on 7/5/15 to match that of SF in Dec 1918.
No unionist party can or should have any dealings (in terms of forming/running a UK government) with parties like the SNP or its sister party in Ireland (SF both then and now).
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.
Yes. We must also believe that the parties are as tuned in as anybody as to what is happening on the ground and what the likely vote will be. The Ed/Nicola thing is not an 'argument' (as in reasoned discourse) - its what the voters are thinking.
It's hard to foresee Salmond occupying a biscuit factory in Edinburgh to further an armed uprising against London rule before going on to fight a guerilla war against a newly independent Scottish government though.
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.
YouGov. More like the EdLeadsTheNextGov.
I met Mr Hodges a couple of years ago, he was nice chap if a bit taciturn, and he admitted that if Labour actually won "my career will be over".
I'm guessing that he feels differently now, and he's not the first journalist-pundit to make a total tit of himself (D Aaronovitch: "I will retire if they don't find WMD in Iraq") but he will be devalued. And in the end Getting It Totally Wrong can terminally damage a political writer's career, cf the Life and Times of Anatole Kaletsky.
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
I find the whole deference attitude on here to Nick Palmer (sacked ex MP) ridiculous.
So he posts on PB-big deal.
I read his posts expecting some wisdom and in-site-5 years ago you tended to get a little.
Now all he posts is platitudes, and self congratulatory comments about how well he is doing and how grateful and pleased the peasants of Broxtowe are to have his magnificence back on their door step.
Ed Miliband has learnt little in opposition-I have heard nothing that makes me think Nick Palmer has learnt much more.
Sorry Nick-but you epitomise the casual arrogance of Tony Blair's Labour party.
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
Germany mixed system PR&FPTP. Spain D'Hond method PR. Italy had a mixed system of PR&FPTP, ditched for Italicum (a winner take all seats). Finland has PR but look at it's recent elections. Israel has PR but again look at it's messy elections. Japan has mixed PR&FPTP. Russia has PR, but doesn't need it. S.Africa has PR, but parties breakdown on racial grounds.
Dan Hodges @DPJHodges 2m2 minutes ago Queensferry, Scotland One thing I've learnt from this election. He who pays the piper calls Survation.
I do wish he'd STFU.
There have been several high profile commentators try to imply various things about Survation. If that was my business I would be calling in the lawyers.
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".
Why would Con support the SNP amendment?
OK, they might try and cause a bit of trouble but I suspect the result will be that only straightforward stuff goes through.
Remember even if a Bill is lost, the Government won't fall.
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.
YouGov. More like the EdLeadsTheNextGov.
I met Mr Hodges a couple of years ago, he was nice chap if a bit taciturn, and he admitted that if Labour actually won "my career will be over".
I'm guessing that he feels differently now, and he's not the first journalist-pundit to make a total tit of himself (D Aaronovitch: "I will retire if they don't find WMD in Iraq") but he will be devalued. And in the end Getting It Totally Wrong can terminally damage a political writer's career, cf the Life and Times of Anatole Kaletsky.
I expect Dan Hodges to be largely vindicated. OK, UKIP aren't going to poll as low as 6% and the Tories probably aren't going to get a majority, but I think his essential thesis will stand up - a UKIP squeeze, a late break to the Tories (which the phone polls arguably already have) and Cameron in the 300-310s with Labour lower than last time.
If so, he'll deserve all the kudos he will get [and no doubt the fulsome admissions of misjudgment on here!]. Many of his fellow travellers have wavered and fallen away in the last month!
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...
That was a committee stage of the RPA, at the parliamentary stage the proposals for AV and STV were rejected pretty convincingly. You're right though that I was unaware of this till you mentioned it and I had to look it up.
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.
YouGov. More like the EdLeadsTheNextGov.
I met Mr Hodges a couple of years ago, he was nice chap if a bit taciturn, and he admitted that if Labour actually won "my career will be over".
I'm guessing that he feels differently now, and he's not the first journalist-pundit to make a total tit of himself (D Aaronovitch: "I will retire if they don't find WMD in Iraq") but he will be devalued. And in the end Getting It Totally Wrong can terminally damage a political writer's career, cf the Life and Times of Anatole Kaletsky.
I expect Dan Hodges to be largely vindicated. OK, UKIP aren't going to poll as low as 6% and the Tories probably aren't going to get a majority, but I think his essential thesis will stand up - a UKIP squeeze, a late break to the Tories (which the phone polls arguably already have) and Cameron in the 300-310s with Labour lower than last time.
If so, he'll deserve all the kudos he will get [and no doubt the fulsome admissions of misjudgment on here!]. Many of his fellow travellers have wavered and fallen away in the last month!
If Ukip poll single figures, the pollsters will have got it horrendously wrong. Would be horrific for them (and me)
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
Germany mixed system PR&FPTP. Spain D'Hond method PR. Italy had a mixed system of PR&FPTP, ditched for Italicum (a winner take all seats). Finland has PR but look at it's recent elections. Israel has PR but again look at it's messy elections. Japan has mixed PR&FPTP. Russia has PR, but doesn't need it. S.Africa has PR, but parties breakdown on racial grounds.
Two of the largest democracies, India and the USA have FPTP.
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.
YouGov. More like the EdLeadsTheNextGov.
I met Mr Hodges a couple of years ago, he was nice chap if a bit taciturn, and he admitted that if Labour actually won "my career will be over".
I'm guessing that he feels differently now, and he's not the first journalist-pundit to make a total tit of himself (D Aaronovitch: "I will retire if they don't find WMD in Iraq") but he will be devalued. And in the end Getting It Totally Wrong can terminally damage a political writer's career, cf the Life and Times of Anatole Kaletsky.
I expect Dan Hodges to be largely vindicated. OK, UKIP aren't going to poll as low as 6% and the Tories probably aren't going to get a majority, but I think his essential thesis will stand up - a UKIP squeeze, a late break to the Tories (which the phone polls arguably already have) and Cameron in the 300-310s with Labour lower than last time.
If so, he'll deserve all the kudos he will get [and no doubt the fulsome admissions of misjudgment on here!]. Many of his fellow travellers have wavered and fallen away in the last month!
Dan Hodges is a modern standard for contrarians. Along with the Economist of course.
Dan Hodges @DPJHodges 2m2 minutes ago Queensferry, Scotland One thing I've learnt from this election. He who pays the piper calls Survation.
I do wish he'd STFU.
There have been several high profile commentators try to imply various things about Survation. If that was my business I would be calling in the lawyers.
As for the nature of the deal, the Telegraph article which was posted earlier has the details, and they are delicious (if you're a connoisseur of political torture):
Nicola is going to keep ambushing Ed from the left. I don't think our Labour-supporting friends quite understand the full horror of how Ed will be skewered on this Morton's fork. It means that, every day, every vote, will sabotage Labour's narrative that they are 'fair' and 'on the side of ordinary people'. To get any budget or other measure through, Ed will either have to give in to Nicola (she'll not be in the least shy about pointing out that the SNP calls the tune), or get the measure through with Tory support (she'll be even less shy about pointing that out).
Meanwhile Ed will be constrained by reality and the financial markets, so won't be able to give in to everything she demands
The point is that, whilst she won't want to bring down a Labour government, at least for a while, she equally won't care the toss of a caber about being on the losing side of a vote which passes with Tory support or abstention, or about chaos and confusion in Westminster. The entire situation is a win-win from her point of view.
We should just rotate which election system we use for each GE, that'd keep things interesting. FPTP, then STV, AV, PR2, MMP, reinforced PR. It could keep us interested for decades.
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%
AMS seems to be a very productive system. It ensures proportionality (especially the "pure" form in Germany and New Zealand which allows overflow members) but it also allows a party which has genuinely significant support a majority (in most occasions I know the New Zealand exception).
In fact it's pretty hard to see a downside to AMS. The "loser list" snipe does not have much traction in Scotland. The effective outcomes of the vote have been pretty representative in Scotland. It allows genuine Independentl outcomes like Margo MacDonald and smaller parties can get a hearing and if they fail, get booted out.
It's hard to foresee Salmond occupying a biscuit factory in Edinburgh to further an armed uprising against London rule before going on to fight a guerilla war against a newly independent Scottish government though.
Mr Salmond is a little fat foolish fellow so consumed with his only sudden celebrity that he cant quite beleive his luck on his seeing ugly pudgy face on tv every night. So he thinks he is important, the reality is he will be forgotten when the wind changes.
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.
YouGov. More like the EdLeadsTheNextGov.
I met Mr Hodges a couple of years ago, he was nice chap if a bit taciturn, and he admitted that if Labour actually won "my career will be over".
I'm guessing that he feels differently now, and he's not the first journalist-pundit to make a total tit of himself (D Aaronovitch: "I will retire if they don't find WMD in Iraq") but he will be devalued. And in the end Getting It Totally Wrong can terminally damage a political writer's career, cf the Life and Times of Anatole Kaletsky.
Who?
The very same Dan Hodges who lost an eye when he was glassed in a pub for defending a black guy from racist thugs.
Makes him a hero in my eyes, he deserves enormous respect for that selfless act.
We should just rotate which election system we use for each GE, that'd keep things interesting. FPTP, then STV, AV, PR2, MMP, reinforced PR. It could keep us interested for decades.
No more forecasting websites.
And with that, another day has ended without much going on. 5 days until we'll have no functioning government until the next election, whenever that may be in a month or 5 years from now.
For that yes. doesn't mean you can't pick apart his views afterwards. Hodges is a blairite zombie. He can only see things through one prism.
There is a huge huge silver lining for Tory supporters if Ed does beat Cameron. It will liberate them - and everyone else - from the idea there is one set answer to every question. Ed will have found his own way of winning. And if I wanted the challenge the status quo of society from the right, that would make me happy.
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.
But...but...but wasn't it a once in a generation shot?
For that yes. doesn't mean you can't pick apart his views afterwards. Hodges is a blairite zombie. He can only see things through one prism.
There is a huge huge silver lining for Tory supporters if Ed does beat Cameron. It will liberate them - and everyone else - from the idea there is one set answer to every question. Ed will have found his own way of winning. And if I wanted the challenge the status quo of society from the right, that would make me happy.
I hope you appreciate the irony of you criticizing someone for only seeing things through one prism!
I met Mr Hodges a couple of years ago, he was nice chap if a bit taciturn, and he admitted that if Labour actually won "my career will be over".
I'm guessing that he feels differently now, and he's not the first journalist-pundit to make a total tit of himself (D Aaronovitch: "I will retire if they don't find WMD in Iraq") but he will be devalued. And in the end Getting It Totally Wrong can terminally damage a political writer's career, cf the Life and Times of Anatole Kaletsky.
Well perhaps he can go into novel writing. After all he has the family connections that would allow him to keep trying till he gets one right
Faisal Islam @faisalislam 16m16 minutes ago That Milibrand interview at 938,663 views, and 579,726 for the trailer. more than c4n and newsnight combined...
I came out at 68 whilst my wife is 27. It's a bit depressing really. I must look like my wife's father, or even grandfather. I'm only 2 weeks older in real life.
Toby Perkins retweeted mummikins @mummikins 3m3 minutes ago Loved the positive and much deserved support for @nengel4ned today on the doorsteps of NEDerbyshire,so encouraging and exciting for May 7th!
Are we done with polls for today or expecting anything else ?
ELBOW showing phone and internet polls?
Looking forward to it; suspect it'll be a corker
I've done it month by month, as the weekly tally of phone polls is usually very sparse. But here are the monthly plots of Labour % leads - official ELBOW inc. everyone, Phone-only, and online-only:
Just out of interest, what is the shortest possible period between Friday morning and another GE being called? Right now it's looking so dysfunctional (potentially w/ Con+LD = Lab+SNP) that I could envisage an almost immediate new election. (Where hopefully the Blues' money will shine through )
Toby Perkins retweeted mummikins @mummikins 3m3 minutes ago Loved the positive and much deserved support for @nengel4ned today on the doorsteps of NEDerbyshire,so encouraging and exciting for 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.
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".
Why would Con support the SNP amendment?
OK, they might try and cause a bit of trouble but I suspect the result will be that only straightforward stuff goes through.
Remember even if a Bill is lost, the Government won't fall.
One example - Trident.
SNP amendment calls for the new boats to be built on the Clyde and Devonport. Tory and SNP support passes amendment. Labour now have a Trident bill which will kill them in Barrow.
Are we done with polls for today or expecting anything else ?
ELBOW showing phone and internet polls?
Looking forward to it; suspect it'll be a corker
I've done it month by month, as the weekly tally of phone polls is usually very sparse. But here are the monthly plots of Labour & leads - official ELBOW inc. everyone, Phone-only, and online-only:
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.
But...but...but wasn't it a once in a generation shot?
The AV referendum is a good example of why referenda are a bad form of decision making. The question was not well drafted (I would have supported STV or even a Holyrood type system, but not AV). The campaign rapidly evolved into two camps who were attempting to turn it into a stick for short term advantage. The Yes campaign was basically "you will never have another Con government" and the No campaign was "punish the LibDems for their treachery".
There was little of the intelligent discussion that we sometimes get in parliament. A Brexit referendum will be the same. More heat than light and voting would depend more on the midterm popularity of Cameron than the merits or otherwise of the EU.
Those citing his depressing tweets need to be aware that this individual is far more unionist pretendy politician than any sort of journalist these days.
Speedy Germany basically has the Holyrood system, ie constituency vote then list vote, Japan is probably the same, I have no problem with that and maintaining the constituency link, as long as there is a list element that better reflects voteshare in seats
Sunil The US has primaries, India has PR for the upper house
I see things in far more colour than Dan. Not that these really ever get discussed on PB. Its not a great forum for high level debate
Don't take this as a dig, because I'm glad you contribute to this site, but I don't think I've ever seen you attempt to engage in high level debate. (Making an aside about "algorithms" once doesn't cut it.) And since you're a well-informed chap, it'd actually be far more interesting than the snarks you generally treat readers here to. This place benefits from having some people, of various political hues, who have a great ear (or typing hand) for the snide aside, but (a) there's enough of them already, (b) it should probably be left to those who are very very good at it, and (c) some meatier debate would be more than welcome on here.
There's enough politcal apathetics, moderates, eclectics and left-wingers on here you could seriously discuss the stuff that matters to you with. If right-wingers just wind you up so much that you can't meaningfully engage with them, then you're perfectly at liberty to ignore them. I can't recognise the characterisation of PB as a place where no serious debate takes place.
Are we done with polls for today or expecting anything else ?
ELBOW showing phone and internet polls?
Looking forward to it; suspect it'll be a corker
I've done it month by month, as the weekly tally of phone polls is usually very sparse. But here are the monthly plots of Labour & leads - official ELBOW inc. everyone, Phone-only, and online-only:
I see things in far more colour than Dan. Not that these really ever get discussed on PB. Its not a great forum for high level debate
I find the tribal politics both childish and depressing.
I am a Kipper but could find good things to say about all the parties, even Brown who kept us out of the Euro.
There's a lot of tribality about on PB, but at least at the moment it's easy enough to scroll through the posts and filter it out. And I don't think the levels of tribal behaviour here are any worse than they were in 2010, say. There are enough more multifaceted posters around to keep things interesting, and even some of the more one-eyed ones can be worth listening to if they happen to possess deep professional or specialist knowledge about a particular field of discussion. A lot of the arguments that take place here are rather pointless, and the bad-tempered ones are particularly disappointing since nobody's mind is going to be changed by them, but it only takes a little self-discipline to avoid Somebody Is Wrong On The Internet Syndrome.
Speedy Germany basically has the Holyrood system, ie constituency vote then list vote, Japan is probably the same, I have no problem with that and maintaining the constituency link, as long as there is a list element that better reflects voteshare in seats
Sunil The US has primaries, India has PR for the upper house
Germany has the NZ system - it allows overspill 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.
But...but...but wasn't it a once in a generation shot?
The AV referendum is a good example of why referenda are a bad form of decision making. The question was not well drafted (I would have supported STV or even a Holyrood type system, but not AV). The campaign rapidly evolved into two camps who were attempting to turn it into a stick for short term advantage. The Yes campaign was basically "you will never have another Con government" and the No campaign was "punish the LibDems for their treachery".
There was little of the intelligent discussion that we sometimes get in parliament. A Brexit referendum will be the same. More heat than light and voting would depend more on the midterm popularity of Cameron than the merits or otherwise of the EU.
We could have a referendum, without specifying a system, asking the electorate the following questions
A. Do you want a system which produces a majority
i) always, however few votes the leading party has ii) sometimes, if a party has a clear lead and significant support iii) rarely, unless a party managed to get 50% of the votes
B. Do you want a system in which
i) you have a choice of candidate both within and between parties ii) you have to vote for the one candidate your party nominates (or a fixed list of candidates)
maybe a couple more questions.
Then the psephologists could go away and design a system...
We should just rotate which election system we use for each GE, that'd keep things interesting. FPTP, then STV, AV, PR2, MMP, reinforced PR. It could keep us interested for decades.
Comments
2. Yes it would. The correct analogy is with Charles Parnell.
3. No you bloody well can't compare him to Parnell; I already have the thread ready for after the election.
For all his faults Salmond is a better man.
I was doing some thinking, and thinking this could be a 1918 style election, re the Nats.
As an aside, in 1918, the Liberal Leader lost his seat.
I would compare Nicola Sturgeon to Eamonn De Valera - Salmond is too flamboyant for a comparison with him to be plausible. I expect the SNP result on 7/5/15 to match that of SF in Dec 1918.
No unionist party can or should have any dealings (in terms of forming/running a UK government) with parties like the SNP or its sister party in Ireland (SF both then and now).
We must also believe that the parties are as tuned in as anybody as to what is happening on the ground and what the likely vote will be. The Ed/Nicola thing is not an 'argument' (as in reasoned discourse) - its what the voters are thinking.
It's hard to foresee Salmond occupying a biscuit factory in Edinburgh to further an armed uprising against London rule before going on to fight a guerilla war against a newly independent Scottish government though.
(Well the Unionists to the French in the lead up to 1940)
And with that, I bid you all Goodnight.
'He will possibly be the most unpopular Prime Minister we've ever had inside 18 months'
A Labour government without any money to spend & with Ed as Nicola's poodle,a sight to behold.
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. 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
I find the whole deference attitude on here to Nick Palmer (sacked ex MP) ridiculous.
So he posts on PB-big deal.
I read his posts expecting some wisdom and in-site-5 years ago you tended to get a little.
Now all he posts is platitudes, and self congratulatory comments about how well he is doing and how grateful and pleased the peasants of Broxtowe are to have his magnificence back on their door step.
Ed Miliband has learnt little in opposition-I have heard nothing that makes me think Nick Palmer has learnt much more.
Sorry Nick-but you epitomise the casual arrogance of Tony Blair's Labour party.
And for that reason-I hope you remain Fired.
Spain D'Hond method PR.
Italy had a mixed system of PR&FPTP, ditched for Italicum (a winner take all seats).
Finland has PR but look at it's recent elections.
Israel has PR but again look at it's messy elections.
Japan has mixed PR&FPTP.
Russia has PR, but doesn't need it.
S.Africa has PR, but parties breakdown on racial grounds.
So, the question is who will be Hitler, Sturgeon or Salmond and utter
"I could have wept for joy, they had fallen into the trap"
OK, they might try and cause a bit of trouble but I suspect the result will be that only straightforward stuff goes through.
Remember even if a Bill is lost, the Government won't fall.
https://scontent-lhr.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xpt1/v/t1.0-9/11188494_10153155343736708_3210977243360946920_n.jpg?oh=ce337aea0042226c3a3c6851b17e13fd&oe=55D59303
I don't see how PR would break the deadlock. More likely make it permanent.
If so, he'll deserve all the kudos he will get [and no doubt the fulsome admissions of misjudgment on here!]. Many of his fellow travellers have wavered and fallen away in the last month!
Maybe Labour will realise their time is up.
Along with the Economist of course.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/ed-miliband/11578212/nicola-sturgeon-plans-ed-miliband-deal-election.html
Nicola is going to keep ambushing Ed from the left. I don't think our Labour-supporting friends quite understand the full horror of how Ed will be skewered on this Morton's fork. It means that, every day, every vote, will sabotage Labour's narrative that they are 'fair' and 'on the side of ordinary people'. To get any budget or other measure through, Ed will either have to give in to Nicola (she'll not be in the least shy about pointing out that the SNP calls the tune), or get the measure through with Tory support (she'll be even less shy about pointing that out).
Meanwhile Ed will be constrained by reality and the financial markets, so won't be able to give in to everything she demands
The point is that, whilst she won't want to bring down a Labour government, at least for a while, she equally won't care the toss of a caber about being on the losing side of a vote which passes with Tory support or abstention, or about chaos and confusion in Westminster. The entire situation is a win-win from her point of view.
In fact it's pretty hard to see a downside to AMS. The "loser list" snipe does not have much traction in Scotland. The effective outcomes of the vote have been pretty representative in Scotland. It allows genuine Independentl outcomes like Margo MacDonald and smaller parties can get a hearing and if they fail, get booted out.
1) Ed as PM will give him plenty of ammo. PB Tories will love having hip rip it out of Ed daily.
2) The telegraph will love the endless traffic of Labour supporters going on their website to take the piss out of Dan.
Makes him a hero in my eyes, he deserves enormous respect for that selfless act.
And with that, another day has ended without much going on.
5 days until we'll have no functioning government until the next election, whenever that may be in a month or 5 years from now.
Goodnight.
For that yes. doesn't mean you can't pick apart his views afterwards. Hodges is a blairite zombie. He can only see things through one prism.
There is a huge huge silver lining for Tory supporters if Ed does beat Cameron. It will liberate them - and everyone else - from the idea there is one set answer to every question. Ed will have found his own way of winning. And if I wanted the challenge the status quo of society from the right, that would make me happy.
Cons 0.02% ahead including all 14 polls.
YouGov-only 0.7% Labour lead
Non-YouGov-only 0.8% Tory lead
That Milibrand interview at 938,663 views, and 579,726 for the trailer. more than c4n and newsnight combined...
Past 1 million by tomorrow
Try this link
http://how-old.net
I came out at 68 whilst my wife is 27. It's a bit depressing really. I must look like my wife's father, or even grandfather. I'm only 2 weeks older in real life.
mummikins @mummikins 3m3 minutes ago
Loved the positive and much deserved support for @nengel4ned today on the doorsteps of NEDerbyshire,so encouraging and exciting for May 7th!
nengel4ned is definitely not nigel4england
YouGov 28
ComRes 12
ICM 8
Angus Reid 6
Harris 6
Opinium 4
Populus 4
PBIX 3
TNS BMRB 3
Mori 2
Total = 76
I am a Kipper but could find good things to say about all the parties, even Brown who kept us out of the Euro.
https://twitter.com/Sunil_P2/status/594264607885254657
Some blasts from the past there - Angus-Reid, BPIX, Harris!
SNP amendment calls for the new boats to be built on the Clyde and Devonport. Tory and SNP support passes amendment. Labour now have a Trident bill which will kill them in Barrow.
(Also in the future (the autumn election
There was little of the intelligent discussion that we sometimes get in parliament. A Brexit referendum will be the same. More heat than light and voting would depend more on the midterm popularity of Cameron than the merits or otherwise of the EU.
Those citing his depressing tweets need to be aware that this individual is far more unionist pretendy politician than any sort of journalist these days.
Sunil The US has primaries, India has PR for the upper house
I remember trying and uninstalling their shite software almost 10 years ago.
Neutral in S England.
Negative in Midlands.
Very Negative in Scotland.
There's enough politcal apathetics, moderates, eclectics and left-wingers on here you could seriously discuss the stuff that matters to you with. If right-wingers just wind you up so much that you can't meaningfully engage with them, then you're perfectly at liberty to ignore them. I can't recognise the characterisation of PB as a place where no serious debate takes place.
And I thought that Dev more or less kept out of the fighting. Wasn't he regarded as a liability at the Easter Rising?
He is a surprisingly forgotten figure in Ireland today.
Eg. March monthly Phone-ELBOW:
Con 34.31
Lab 32.67
UKIP 12.22
LD 7.81
Grn 6.30
April monthly phone-ELBOW:
Con 34.89
Lab 32.49
UKIP 10.92
LD 8.93
Grn 5.88
I use Malwarebytes now and haven't had a problem, touch wood.
A. Do you want a system which produces a majority
i) always, however few votes the leading party has
ii) sometimes, if a party has a clear lead and significant support
iii) rarely, unless a party managed to get 50% of the votes
B. Do you want a system in which
i) you have a choice of candidate both within and between parties
ii) you have to vote for the one candidate your party nominates (or a fixed list of candidates)
maybe a couple more questions.
Then the psephologists could go away and design a system...
That would be a very very good idea. Maybe - as its not a binding vote - you could try out some online voting.