This "leak" looks pretty much like the start of the SNP's reassurance campaign targeted at E&W Labour supporters, assuring them that the SNP will work to ensure they get a proper Labour government.
Having spent 6 months in denial the MSM finally seems to be reaching the acceptance phase of the reality of the SNP's position in Scotland. The MSM denial phase I can understand, the bookies who allowed themselves to be slaughtered by many of us on this site have no excuse, all they had to do was send a questionnaire to their hundreds of staff across Scotland and that would have confirmed that the SNP surge was real.
Also, you'd need to make such a survey compulsory for obvious reasons - and that would raise some serious HR issues even if it were anonymous. I recall one survey at my employer where every single person in one department gave the management 0 out of 10 on one key issue. Not much anonymity there ... wonder if it is actually illegal. But it would be particularly sensitive if an employer was of the ilk of those threatening to pull out of Scotland if the Scottish devolution referendum wins/indyref wins/SNP wins etc.
(BTW I ay have pressed the flag button in error for the quote one - if so grovelling apologies.)
It's very reasonable to have a cut-off between zero and the lowest bar so you can see the differences more clearly. What makes no sense is that the gap between 30% and 37% is a lot more than six times 30% and 29%.
No it's not. It's an attempt to deceive. As is the assertion that the contest is a choice between only two parties, it's a three way marginal.
This "leak" looks pretty much like the start of the SNP's reassurance campaign targeted at E&W Labour supporters, assuring them that the SNP will work to ensure they get a proper Labour government.
Having spent 6 months in denial the MSM finally seems to be reaching the acceptance phase of the reality of the SNP's position in Scotland. The MSM denial phase I can understand, the bookies who allowed themselves to be slaughtered by many of us on this site have no excuse, all they had to do was send a questionnaire to their hundreds of staff across Scotland and that would have confirmed that the SNP surge was real.
Also, you'd need to make such a survey compulsory for obvious reasons - and that would raise some serious HR issues even if it were anonymous. I recall one survey at my employer where every single person in one department gave the management 0 out of 10 on one key issue. Not much anonymity there ... wonder if it is actually illegal. But it would be particularly sensitive if an employer was of the ilk of those threatening to pull out of Scotland if the Scottish devolution referendum wins/indyref wins/SNP wins etc.
(BTW I ay have pressed the flag button in error for the quote one - if so grovelling apologies.)
Where's the stuff about that? I assume that the survey results go to the (devolved) government? That sounds horrendously scary.
Did you know Edward III was offered the crown of Holy Roman Emperor?
He declined.
Mr Dancer, in 1437 the throne of Bohemia was offered to my ancestor Sir William Tyndall after the death of the Holy Roman Emperor Sigismund. He declined the offer and instead the throne was offered to the next legitimate claimants - the Hapsburgs.
Talking about ancestry at a less stratospheric level, and one that probably has no bearing whatever on me, a Huguenot ancestor of mine fought as an officer in the Battle of the Boyne, married an Irish lady and produced a son who lived from 1692 to 1798. I suspect the mix of French & Irish blood must have been potent.
Mr. Lilburne, Sky buggered up (to a lesser extent) their F1 page. I think it's because the interweb is moving to a more mobile/tablet-friendly design.
As someone with neither, it's just irritating.
You are probably right, the website used to be appalling on my mobile, the desktop version too clunky and the mobile version not very good. But surely that doesn't matter if you have a free app? The app used to be very good, until the last iteration, you could dig down and easily find all the stuff that was on the website such as historic stats, recent matches etc. Now it is very difficult to find anything other than current matches. You can't even easily scroll through recent articles - and CricInfo has some quite good journalists, I would often spend a few minutes reading what was going on in world cricket.
Mr. G, already linked to [this thread or the last]. The unbreakable spirit and boundless vigour of morris dancers is once again proven beyond all doubt!
Mr. Lilburne, it's a well-known fact that upgrades and updates tend to make things worse. It's like 'modernisation' [often screwing things up for the sake of change].
Did you know Edward III was offered the crown of Holy Roman Emperor?
He declined.
Mr Dancer, in 1437 the throne of Bohemia was offered to my ancestor Sir William Tyndall after the death of the Holy Roman Emperor Sigismund. He declined the offer and instead the throne was offered to the next legitimate claimants - the Hapsburgs.
Talking about ancestry at a less stratospheric level, and one that probably has no bearing whatever on me, a Huguenot ancestor of mine fought as an officer in the Battle of the Boyne, married an Irish lady and produced a son who lived from 1692 to 1798. I suspect the mix of French & Irish blood must have been potent.
Did you know Edward III was offered the crown of Holy Roman Emperor?
He declined.
Mr Dancer, in 1437 the throne of Bohemia was offered to my ancestor Sir William Tyndall after the death of the Holy Roman Emperor Sigismund. He declined the offer and instead the throne was offered to the next legitimate claimants - the Hapsburgs.
Talking about ancestry at a less stratospheric level, and one that probably has no bearing whatever on me, a Huguenot ancestor of mine fought as an officer in the Battle of the Boyne, married an Irish lady and produced a son who lived from 1692 to 1798. I suspect the mix of French & Irish blood must have been potent.
106 years old at that time is extraordinary.
Given the nature of records from that period, it is possible that was two people, father and son, with the same name whose combined lives spanned the 106 years. Not intending to burst any bubbles but just raising a possibility.
We had an ancestor who had 22 children, until my sister unearthed that it was actually two cousins by the same name living in adjacent houses who had 22 children between the two of them.
And 30% is (almost) the same size as 29%. That's one seriously distorted chart...
Why would UKIP design it like that? Surely they'd want UKIP v Lab to be very close with Con quite some distance behind?
They have not got a brain , maybe.
Actually, it doesn't look like a UKIP leaflet/poster at all. I may be a private supporter using Freehand, or the opposition using it to get their troops out fuming.
Most of the stories of ancient kitties are shown to be two cats with the same name.
My father's parents lived into their 90s. They were born in 1895/6. And had 14 living children, and came from families of 12-15 kids. It's so completely unfamiliar to most of us nowadays.
Did you know Edward III was offered the crown of Holy Roman Emperor?
He declined.
Mr Dancer, in 1437 the throne of Bohemia was offered to my ancestor Sir William Tyndall after the death of the Holy Roman Emperor Sigismund. He declined the offer and instead the throne was offered to the next legitimate claimants - the Hapsburgs.
Talking about ancestry at a less stratospheric level, and one that probably has no bearing whatever on me, a Huguenot ancestor of mine fought as an officer in the Battle of the Boyne, married an Irish lady and produced a son who lived from 1692 to 1798. I suspect the mix of French & Irish blood must have been potent.
106 years old at that time is extraordinary.
Given the nature of records from that period, it is possible that was two people, father and son, with the same name whose combined lives spanned the 106 years. Not intending to burst any bubbles but just raising a possibility.
We had an ancestor who had 22 children, until my sister unearthed that it was actually two cousins by the same name living in adjacent houses who had 22 children between the two of them.
Did you know Edward III was offered the crown of Holy Roman Emperor?
He declined.
Mr Dancer, in 1437 the throne of Bohemia was offered to my ancestor Sir William Tyndall after the death of the Holy Roman Emperor Sigismund. He declined the offer and instead the throne was offered to the next legitimate claimants - the Hapsburgs.
Talking about ancestry at a less stratospheric level, and one that probably has no bearing whatever on me, a Huguenot ancestor of mine fought as an officer in the Battle of the Boyne, married an Irish lady and produced a son who lived from 1692 to 1798. I suspect the mix of French & Irish blood must have been potent.
106 years old at that time is extraordinary.
Given the nature of records from that period, it is possible that was two people, father and son, with the same name whose combined lives spanned the 106 years. Not intending to burst any bubbles but just raising a possibility.
We had an ancestor who had 22 children, until my sister unearthed that it was actually two cousins by the same name living in adjacent houses who had 22 children between the two of them.
Point taken. In this case the family were minor French noblemen and later also figured somewhat prominently in the American Revolution under General Washington. This is well documented for generations to the present time, chapter and verse. His son only made 76 years (producing kids right up to the end) but did figure, as a Major, in many of the most famous battles of the Revolutionary war.
The last survivor of the Little Big Horn died in 1950. The last (undisputed) survivor of the American Civil War died in 1956. Amazing the changes they would have experienced.
Mr. Lilburne, Sky buggered up (to a lesser extent) their F1 page. I think it's because the interweb is moving to a more mobile/tablet-friendly design.
As someone with neither, it's just irritating.
You are probably right, the website used to be appalling on my mobile, the desktop version too clunky and the mobile version not very good. But surely that doesn't matter if you have a free app? The app used to be very good, until the last iteration, you could dig down and easily find all the stuff that was on the website such as historic stats, recent matches etc. Now it is very difficult to find anything other than current matches. You can't even easily scroll through recent articles - and CricInfo has some quite good journalists, I would often spend a few minutes reading what was going on in world cricket.
And... this is particularly stupid... the main score summary doesn't give the current score, you have to click on a drop-down for it. Grr
This "leak" looks pretty much like the start of the SNP's reassurance campaign targeted at E&W Labour supporters, assuring them that the SNP will work to ensure they get a proper Labour government.
Having spent 6 months in denial the MSM finally seems to be reaching the acceptance phase of the reality of the SNP's position in Scotland. The MSM denial phase I can understand, the bookies who allowed themselves to be slaughtered by many of us on this site have no excuse, all they had to do was send a questionnaire to their hundreds of staff across Scotland and that would have confirmed that the SNP surge was real.
Also, you'd need to make such a survey compulsory for obvious reasons - and that would raise some serious HR issues even if it were anonymous. I recall one survey at my employer where every single person in one department gave the management 0 out of 10 on one key issue. Not much anonymity there ... wonder if it is actually illegal. But it would be particularly sensitive if an employer was of the ilk of those threatening to pull out of Scotland if the Scottish devolution referendum wins/indyref wins/SNP wins etc.
(BTW I ay have pressed the flag button in error for the quote one - if so grovelling apologies.)
Where's the stuff about that? I assume that the survey results go to the (devolved) government? That sounds horrendously scary.
No, nothing to do with government at all - wrong end of the stick. Look at the previous quotes (blue text). It was a response to Calum asking why the bookies didn't ask their staff how they were going to vote ...
I do recommend John Harris' series of Guardian videos titled Anywhere But Westminster. The general level of disillusionment out there can make for fairly bleak viewing but his take on Sheffield Hallam was surprisingly amusing with them managing to sneak a camera into the only hustings taking place with a mute audience and pre-prepared questions.
He's visited a lot of the poorest parts of the UK and think there's a warning for Miliband in focussing too much on inequality. I'm not convinced inequality plays as well outside the M25 as it does inside. Bluntly in many parts of the UK there really aren't many millionaires about. The issue is whether the economy is actually working at all not inequality. In a way it's surprising how little many of the poorer people he speaks to mention inequality. It's almost always 'The Tories are the party of the rich and Labour used to represent the working man but not so much now.' Plenty of other people think it doesn't make any difference of course.
The last survivor of the Little Big Horn died in 1950. The last (undisputed) survivor of the American Civil War died in 1956. Amazing the changes they would have experienced.
I just want this election to be over now. Not good for me nerves.
If we're going to have a ruinous, quasi-Marxist Labour government propped up, disastrously and mendaciously, by a Nationalist ally bent on destroying the Union for all time, can we just hurry up and get it over with?
When is the DEFINITIVE, as opposed to the hyper-manic, SeanT prediction to be issued? (Although to be fair you have been consistent - and soberly - for some time now in forecasting a narrow Labour plurality).
Most of the stories of ancient kitties are shown to be two cats with the same name.
My father's parents lived into their 90s. They were born in 1895/6. And had 14 living children, and came from families of 12-15 kids. It's so completely unfamiliar to most of us nowadays.
Did you know Edward III was offered the crown of Holy Roman Emperor?
He declined.
Mr Dancer, in 1437 the throne of Bohemia was offered to my ancestor Sir William Tyndall after the death of the Holy Roman Emperor Sigismund. He declined the offer and instead the throne was offered to the next legitimate claimants - the Hapsburgs.
Talking about ancestry at a less stratospheric level, and one that probably has no bearing whatever on me, a Huguenot ancestor of mine fought as an officer in the Battle of the Boyne, married an Irish lady and produced a son who lived from 1692 to 1798. I suspect the mix of French & Irish blood must have been potent.
106 years old at that time is extraordinary.
Given the nature of records from that period, it is possible that was two people, father and son, with the same name whose combined lives spanned the 106 years. Not intending to burst any bubbles but just raising a possibility.
We had an ancestor who had 22 children, until my sister unearthed that it was actually two cousins by the same name living in adjacent houses who had 22 children between the two of them.
A few years ago I shook hands with a man, in Arizona, who once kissed the sister of Butch Cassidy. She spoke warmly of the Sundance Kid.
History is sometimes so much closer than we think.
I just want this election to be over now. Not good for me nerves.
If we're going to have a ruinous, quasi-Marxist Labour government propped up, disastrously and mendaciously, by a Nationalist ally bent on destroying the Union for all time, can we just hurry up and get it over with?
When is the DEFINITIVE, as opposed to the hyper-manic, SeanT prediction to be issued? (Although to be fair you have been consistent - and soberly - for some time now in forecasting a narrow Labour plurality).
The campaign has been much too long, gruelling and tedious in equal measure. What happened to three week campaigns? I'm sure that everyone is campaign fatigued which kind of makes me think that whatever Govt we have next week (in my view now a Tory minority) will last for a few years. The alternative of another campaign is, well too much. Bad news for badgers mind.
I know a man, alive today, who had 11 children by his wife who then expired no doubt worn out by the whole experinec.
He married again and sire 11 more by his second wife who then went the same way.
Tommy was a hill farmer in the tope end of the remote Kentmere valley. Perhaps explains a lot.
Now a resident in a Windermere care home, he has to be watched all the time as he frequently makes off for a walk to Kendal.
Still time to start a third brood.
The thought had obviously occurred to him before he was confined to the care home.
He used to spend three nights a week staying with his lady friend, sharing her bed. One winter he was cold in the middle of the night and she declined to switch on the electric blanket.
So he got up, dressed and walked home 10 miles from Windermere to Burneside.
My gandad was one of 15 kids. When I go to Kentish Town tube station I walk past the house they lived in. It's tiny. How people managed it is beyond me. I guess they had no choice.
King Cole, I've generally avoided it since first subjecting my eyeballs and mind to the horrific idiocy which it has become. Removing so much useful information is just stupid.
If you like, I could check it now.
I’m seeing someone tomorrow who would be very interested in comments.
Another thing that has been really screwed up is the CricInfo app, it is now almost completely useless and I can't make it give me push-updates on England matches. Today I see the website has followed suit. Thing is, I am not sure there is anything out there that will give me the same depth of information which is still there on CricInfo although devilishly hard to find.
Inded; for straight info the Sky cricket app is much more user-friendly.
Dan Hodges@DPJHodges·6 mins6 minutes ago Queensferry, Scotland Some very upbeat Tory candidates out there this evening.
What is there for a Scottish Tory to do but be upbeat.
There is a chance that due to the radical changes in Scotland in the past year the Conservatives are being seen as the Unionist's choice (therefore being significantly higher than 17%), but the stigma against identifying as a Tory meaning that it isn't being picked up. A slim chance mind you. But I've still put a bit on Con winning 3+ seats in Scotland at silly odds just in case.
Very intelligent Lefty mate of mine said t'other day that the country just could not stand another five years of this Coalition government, which, he said, had been a "disaster".
I didn't even bother arguing. How can you argue with a mindset like that? A disaster is an earthquake killing many thousands. A disaster is a war, a plague, a tsunami. If you want an example of a political disaster, the nearest you might get is Tony Blair's decision to invade Iraq. That WAS disastrous, for them and for us.
Yet this government? It's a modestly competent bunch of posho mediocrities struggling with a big deficit. I can see how its policies might irritate, or even anger (at most), but... a disaster?
Idiotic. Yet too many sane people think this crazy way. Tories are a Disaster, almost by definition. Which is why I believe Miliband will scrape to power, enabled by Nats.
And that might be a disaster: for the Labour party.
You describe your mate as 'intelligent'? I take it he's good at chess or something.
I just want this election to be over now. Not good for me nerves.
If we're going to have a ruinous, quasi-Marxist Labour government propped up, disastrously and mendaciously, by a Nationalist ally bent on destroying the Union for all time, can we just hurry up and get it over with?
When is the DEFINITIVE, as opposed to the hyper-manic, SeanT prediction to be issued? (Although to be fair you have been consistent - and soberly - for some time now in forecasting a narrow Labour plurality).
The campaign has been much too long, gruelling and tedious in equal measure. What happened to three week campaigns? I'm sure that everyone is campaign fatigued which kind of makes me think that whatever Govt we have next week (in my view now a Tory minority) will last for a few years. The alternative of another campaign is, well too much.
Has it really been that long? I think it's only seemed long because there's not been enough meaty things to discuss, and that's probably down to most of the leaders being scared to go anywhere but carefully managed events, and other senior figures being invisible.
That said, I do think you are right no-one will be keen to go back and do it all again. While I disagree on what government we will have after next week, I think it could last years a lot easier than we imagine. Only the need for a no holds barred fight for Holyrood would prevent an SNP backed Labour government going along for years I suspect.
King Cole, I've generally avoided it since first subjecting my eyeballs and mind to the horrific idiocy which it has become. Removing so much useful information is just stupid.
If you like, I could check it now.
I’m seeing someone tomorrow who would be very interested in comments.
Another thing that has been really screwed up is the CricInfo app, it is now almost completely useless and I can't make it give me push-updates on England matches. Today I see the website has followed suit. Thing is, I am not sure there is anything out there that will give me the same depth of information which is still there on CricInfo although devilishly hard to find.
Inded; for straight info the Sky cricket app is much more user-friendly.
Cricinfo website is still very good.
Yes, apart from a stupid front-end which is obviously designed for mobiles, all the old information is there and the menu options appear unchanged. I will try the Sky app. Already use the Sky News app for news as it is much better than the BBC one. Whereas on the PC I always default to the BBC.
Very intelligent Lefty mate of mine said t'other day that the country just could not stand another five years of this Coalition government, which, he said, had been a "disaster".
I didn't even bother arguing. How can you argue with a mindset like that? A disaster is an earthquake killing many thousands. A disaster is a war, a plague, a tsunami. If you want an example of a political disaster, the nearest you might get is Tony Blair's decision to invade Iraq. That WAS disastrous, for them and for us.
Yet this government? It's a modestly competent bunch of posho mediocrities struggling with a big deficit. I can see how its policies might irritate, or even anger (at most), but... a disaster?
Idiotic. Yet too many sane people think this crazy way. Tories are a Disaster, almost by definition. Which is why I believe Miliband will scrape to power, enabled by Nats.
And that might be a disaster: for the Labour party.
Biggest disaster of this Gov't was that I didn't realise the Post Office share giveaway was just intentionally done under true market value. And Carmichael not quitting.
Come to think of it - just why were Labour polling in the 40s about 2013 ?
Yet this government? It's a modestly competent bunch of posho mediocrities struggling with a big deficit. I can see how its policies might irritate, or even anger (at most), but... a disaster?
That strikes me as a very decent summary of this government. Reasonable people will quibble over how competent they have been, and some of the things they have done have been controversial in some circles, but it's not been majorly destructive stuff, not really, even if you don't like those things.
What this election campaign has done is confirm election campaigns don't change much. The Tories were always going to win most seats, the SNP was always going to clean up in Scotland. The only real surprises have been Miliband and Farage. The former has done much better as a campaigner than most of us thought possible, the latter has been a lot less visible. All in all it's been a long six weeks or so. Roll on the summer.
Dan Hodges@DPJHodges·6 mins6 minutes ago Queensferry, Scotland Some very upbeat Tory candidates out there this evening.
What is there for a Scottish Tory to do but be upbeat.
There is a chance that due to the radical changes in Scotland in the past year the Conservatives are being seen as the Unionist's choice (therefore being significantly higher than 17%), but the stigma against identifying as a Tory meaning that it isn't being picked up. A slim chance mind you..
I think that if Labour cannot figure out a way to recover from their own sudden collapse, there might be a slim chance of that happening, the Scottish Tories having plodded along much reduced but apparently holding steady. I think anti-Tory feeling in many parts of the country just runs too deep and is too ingrained to be overcome for it to be likely, but as popular as the SNP are now and will remain for who knows how long, not everyone will love them for all time, and those votes have to go somewhere, so it could be the Tories, if the SNP landslide leads to a massive reidentification of scottish politics. Certainly not guaranteed.
Well I'm HOPING for a mainland sweep so there is perhaps a bit of the ol' "Spurs bet" in the projection.
9 seats the SNP may fall short in:
Orkney & Shetland Berwickshire Roxburgh Edi South East Renfrewshire Dumferline West Fife Dumfries Galloway Glasgow NE Rutherglen Hamilton West Coatbridge
I just want this election to be over now. Not good for me nerves.
If we're going to have a ruinous, quasi-Marxist Labour government propped up, disastrously and mendaciously, by a Nationalist ally bent on destroying the Union for all time, can we just hurry up and get it over with?
When is the DEFINITIVE, as opposed to the hyper-manic, SeanT prediction to be issued? (Although to be fair you have been consistent for some time now in forecasting a narrow Labour plurality).
You missed it.
It was solemnly issued, like a Papal bull, about a week ago.
I'm sticking with my narrow Mili plurality, but if I were allowed to change the actual numbers (I'm not, of course) I'd add maybe ten to the SNP score but alter the Tory Labour numbers to reflect a slightly higher amount of LAB gains from CON (judging by the marginals data).
So, still a tiny Miliband plurality, anyway. I wish it otherwise, but no.
SeanT - Of all the right of centre posters on PB.com, you appear to be the most pessimistic about the GE outcome for the Tories, ever more so it would seem as you approach Smithsonian assessment levels in terms of their likely tally. Having gone for them winning 278 seats a week ago, you are now saying that you'd "add maybe ten to the SNP score presumably virtually all from labour but alter the Tory Labour numbers to reflect a slightly higher amount of LAB gains from CON" - I assume you mean something of the order of 5 seats, thereby reducing Labour to around 277 seats and the Tories to around 273 seats In such circumstances, I'm surprised that you're not tempted by the spread betters firms' prices who are offering a SALE of Tory seats at 288 (Sporting) and 289 (Spreadex), that's fully 15 seats more than you expect the Blue Team to achieve. How can you resist?
I just want this election to be over now. Not good for me nerves.
If we're going to have a ruinous, quasi-Marxist Labour government propped up, disastrously and mendaciously, by a Nationalist ally bent on destroying the Union for all time, can we just hurry up and get it over with?
When is the DEFINITIVE, as opposed to the hyper-manic, SeanT prediction to be issued? (Although to be fair you have been consistent - and soberly - for some time now in forecasting a narrow Labour plurality).
PS what is your honest expectation, now, as of this weekend?
I've been pretty consistent too and still expecting a Tory lead on the day of between 4 and 5% which would have them just above 300 seats and Cameron remaining as PM, either as minority or in a second coalition. In short, rubbing shoulders with Jack's ARSE though with Labour a shade higher.
Very intelligent Lefty mate of mine said t'other day that the country just could not stand another five years of this Coalition government, which, he said, had been a "disaster".
I didn't even bother arguing. How can you argue with a mindset like that? A disaster is an earthquake killing many thousands. A disaster is a war, a plague, a tsunami. If you want an example of a political disaster, the nearest you might get is Tony Blair's decision to invade Iraq. That WAS disastrous, for them and for us.
Yet this government? It's a modestly competent bunch of posho mediocrities struggling with a big deficit. I can see how its policies might irritate, or even anger (at most), but... a disaster?
Idiotic. Yet too many sane people think this crazy way. Tories are a Disaster, almost by definition. Which is why I believe Miliband will scrape to power, enabled by Nats.
And that might be a disaster: for the Labour party.
You describe your mate as 'intelligent'? I take it he's good at chess or something.
I know. Seems like an oxymoron. But he is intelligent by any standards. Articulate, sensitive, educated, a rather good journalist, and an excellent cook. Also a nice guy.
Yet when it comes to politics all that goes out the window and he is a raving lefty fruitloop of the first water. It's like some allergic over-reaction, to Tories.
The problem for these people is that they are then continuously and grievously disappointed by Labour governments. Yet they keep the faith.
Sounds more anti-Tory than pro-Labour to me. What choice does he have but Labour if he wants to prevent a Tory government?
The Wisdom Index is the one where people are asked what they think the outcome will be for each party, right? That has to have moved to a Lab lead, even if the polls have edged in the other direction, surely; as we've gotten closer to the GE without Con breaking ahead, more people must have begun to think a Lab win is possible when they didn't beforehand - I've certainly come across more people in that regard, whereas the few people who thought about it previously thought Ed had no chance because he was, well, Ed.
Yet this government? It's a modestly competent bunch of posho mediocrities struggling with a big deficit. I can see how its policies might irritate, or even anger (at most), but... a disaster?
That strikes me as a very decent summary of this government. Reasonable people will quibble over how competent they have been, and some of the things they have done have been controversial in some circles, but it's not been majorly destructive stuff, not really, even if you don't like those things.
My forlorn hope for the country is that he can cobble together a Coalition with the LDs, by some magic, and the Libs will tone down some of his genuinely dangerously Marxist crap, from outlawing Islamophobia to taxing us all to death.
Looks like the LD message is getting through to some at any rate judging by that comment, even if it isn't winning them any votes.
Very intelligent Lefty mate of mine said t'other day that the country just could not stand another five years of this Coalition government, which, he said, had been a "disaster".
I didn't even bother arguing. How can you argue with a mindset like that? A disaster is an earthquake killing many thousands. A disaster is a war, a plague, a tsunami. If you want an example of a political disaster, the nearest you might get is Tony Blair's decision to invade Iraq. That WAS disastrous, for them and for us.
Yet this government? It's a modestly competent bunch of posho mediocrities struggling with a big deficit. I can see how its policies might irritate, or even anger (at most), but... a disaster?
Idiotic. Yet too many sane people think this crazy way. Tories are a Disaster, almost by definition. Which is why I believe Miliband will scrape to power, enabled by Nats.
And that might be a disaster: for the Labour party.
Biggest disaster of this Gov't was that I didn't realise the Post Office share giveaway was just intentionally done under true market value. And Carmichael not quitting.
Come to think of it - just why were Labour polling in the 40s about 2013 ?
Did people get THAT angry over the pasty tax ?
I think the omnishambles budget punctured the myth that the coalition would at least be very competent - and the Tories had held up very well up to then, with the LDs in hindsight enjoying great times for them in comparison to now - but would like all governments either in action or presentation be pretty crappy as well. They lost support as a result and Labour picked it up mostly by default, and they've fallen back since then as their own competency, or lack thereof, is focused on more intently.
I agree Lab win at Croydon Central at 6/4 is a value bet but Lab most seats at 4/1 is a MUCH higher value bet. I simply don't understand it. What am I missing?
The national polls and constituency polls show a Con lead of about 2% and 270/270 seats (assuming Lab lose nearly 40 in Scotland). That is an evens bet.
What are the feasible mechanisms that would drive a different result?
I suggest:
a) An effective Con squeeze on UKIP in Con/Lab seats. A 25% squeeze (i.e. 25% of Tory Kippers vote Con) would increase the Con lead to 3% and Con/Lab seats to 280/260. A 50% squeeze would increase Con lead to 4% and Con/Lab seats to 290/250.
b) Differential turnout beyond what the polls are allowing for. This could break two ways. The new registration process and relative youth of Lab supporters could produce a Lab deficit of say 5% of their potential vote or 1000 votes. This would lose them about 10 seats. On the other hand, the better Lab GOTV this time could gain them 5% of their potential votes. This would gain them about 10 seats.
c) Regional surprises. Con could gain an extra 4 LD seats in SW not shown by Ashcroft. Lab could retain say 10 seats in Scotland from SNP by tactical voting and a late swing.
These potential surprises I think slightly favour the Tories - the UKIP squeeze in particular. But Scotland might surprise the other way as well. I just don't see it as 4/1 against Lab most seats.
Canvassing this marginal London seat this afternoon:
Big houses overwhelming Tory. Multiple occupants likely Labour. Young couples and couples with young children:Labour Older couples and couples with older children:More Tory than Labour Ethnic minorities:Overwhelming Labour. Green Supporters:Evaluating their options.May vote Labour.
Very intelligent Lefty mate of mine said t'other day that the country just could not stand another five years of this Coalition government, which, he said, had been a "disaster".
I didn't even bother arguing. How can you argue with a mindset like that? A disaster is an earthquake killing many thousands. A disaster is a war, a plague, a tsunami. If you want an example of a political disaster, the nearest you might get is Tony Blair's decision to invade Iraq. That WAS disastrous, for them and for us.
Yet this government? It's a modestly competent bunch of posho mediocrities struggling with a big deficit. I can see how its policies might irritate, or even anger (at most), but... a disaster?
Idiotic. Yet too many sane people think this crazy way. Tories are a Disaster, almost by definition. Which is why I believe Miliband will scrape to power, enabled by Nats.
And that might be a disaster: for the Labour party.
You describe your mate as 'intelligent'? I take it he's good at chess or something.
I know. Seems like an oxymoron. But he is intelligent by any standards. Articulate, sensitive, educated, a rather good journalist, and an excellent cook. Also a nice guy.
Yet when it comes to politics all that goes out the window and he is a raving lefty fruitloop of the first water. It's like some allergic over-reaction, to Tories.
The problem for these people is that they are then continuously and grievously disappointed by Labour governments. Yet they keep the faith.
I think this explains the paradigm shifting success of the SNP. Lefties are almost Labour by default, not because of any love or even respect for Labour but because they define themselves as Not Tories.
This makes the support for Labour wide but shallow. Without any deep reason to be pro Labour as opposed to anti Tory, once a certain tipping point was reached wide swathes could be picked up by another Not Tory party. As the SDP almost achieved in the 80s when Labour actually still stood for something.
Surely Nationalist parties must have a range of ideologies among their supporters. One can be a non-socialist but not a Unionist, likewise a socialist and be a Unionist. I supect tha were independence to be obtained the SNP wold split up fairly quikly.
Who has been spotted where on labourdoorstep today so far? Not including those in their constituencies...and those who don't tweet!
Cooper: Pudsey Maria Eagle: Bolton West Reeves: Halifax Balls: Norwich South Burnham: Swindon South, Bristol West, Kingswood, Stroud, Gordon Brown: East Renfrewshire Owen Smith: Glamorgan Flint: Lincoln Trickett: Dewsbury Berger: Wirral West Lammy: Croydon Central Nottingham South MP: Sherwood Kate Green (Stretford & Urmston): Carlisle Sharon Hodgson (Sunderland and Washington somecompasspoint, IIRC, West): Stockton South Neath AM: Carmarthen East and Dinefwr Cardiff South AM: Glamorgan General Secretary: Bedford, Cambridge
Surely Nationalist parties must have a range of ideologies among their supporters. One can be a non-socialist but not a Unionist, likewise a socialist and be a Unionist. I supect tha were independence to be obtained the SNP wold split up fairly quikly.
I agree Lab win at Croydon Central at 6/4 is a value bet but Lab most seats at 4/1 is a MUCH higher value bet. I simply don't understand it. What am I missing?
The national polls and constituency polls show a Con lead of about 2% and 270/270 seats (assuming Lab lose nearly 40 in Scotland). That is an evens bet.
What are the feasible mechanisms that would drive a different result?
I suggest:
a) An effective Con squeeze on UKIP in Con/Lab seats. A 25% squeeze (i.e. 25% of Tory Kippers vote Con) would increase the Con lead to 3% and Con/Lab seats to 280/260. A 50% squeeze would increase Con lead to 4% and Con/Lab seats to 290/250.
b) Differential turnout beyond what the polls are allowing for. This could break two ways. The new registration process and relative youth of Lab supporters could produce a Lab deficit of say 5% of their potential vote or 1000 votes. This would lose them about 10 seats. On the other hand, the better Lab GOTV this time could gain them 5% of their potential votes. This would gain them about 10 seats.
c) Regional surprises. Con could gain an extra 4 LD seats in SW not shown by Ashcroft. Lab could retain say 10 seats in Scotland from SNP by tactical voting and a late swing.
These potential surprises I think slightly favour the Tories - the UKIP squeeze in particular. But Scotland might surprise the other way as well. I just don't see it as 4/1 against Lab most seats.
A sound well-reasoned post, which I feel might tempt SeanT to take the 4/1 which you highlight, particularly as he now has Labour ahead of the Tories in his latest estimation.
Surely Nationalist parties must have a range of ideologies among their supporters. One can be a non-socialist but not a Unionist, likewise a socialist and be a Unionist. I supect tha were independence to be obtained the SNP wold split up fairly quikly.
Maybe, although there are probably examples of dominant 'big tent' parties holding up surprisingly well after a transformational event in their national politics. The ANC perhaps an example?
If this Con lead of 1% or 2% persists, then perhaps I am being pessimistic about Labour numbers. Particularly, seen with the Labour decline in votes in Scotland, the numbers in England must be doing even better.
And if the marginals turn out to be as good as some polls have suggested, it could be a good night for Labour.
Maybe, Ed's change on emphasis re: the SNP at QT onwards is based on something.
Surely Nationalist parties must have a range of ideologies among their supporters. One can be a non-socialist but not a Unionist, likewise a socialist and be a Unionist. I supect tha were independence to be obtained the SNP wold split up fairly quikly.
Tough for Socialist Unionists in NI
The DUP are not all Tory supporters as is assumed. The repeal of the Bedroom tax is one of their red lines, for instance.
Everyone in Merseyside and Coventry will be thrilled at the great advert for Range Rover currently going on. Plus subliminal blue message from George and William.
Who has been spotted where on labourdoorstep today so far? Not including those in their constituencies...and those who don't tweet!
Cooper: Pudsey Maria Eagle: Bolton West Reeves: Halifax Balls: Norwich South Burnham: Swindon South, Bristol West, Kingswood, Stroud, Gordon Brown: East Renfrewshire Owen Smith: Glamorgan Flint: Lincoln Trickett: Dewsbury Berger: Wirral West Lammy: Croydon Central Nottingham South MP: Sherwood Kate Green (Stretford & Urmston): Carlisle Sharon Hodgson (Sunderland and Washington somecompasspoint, IIRC, West): Stockton South Neath AM: Carmarthen East and Dinefwr Cardiff South AM: Glamorgan General Secretary: Bedford, Cambridge
Balls in Norwich in time for the last match of the season!
Surely Nationalist parties must have a range of ideologies among their supporters. One can be a non-socialist but not a Unionist, likewise a socialist and be a Unionist. I supect tha were independence to be obtained the SNP wold split up fairly quikly.
I think the SNP would quickly rebrand itself as a Scandinavian style centrist Social Democratic Party, there would be leakage to the left (as long as SLAB get its act together), with a less marked leakage to the right. The SDP would hope to pick up some centrist support from the other parties which would mitigate the losses to some extent.
Surely Nationalist parties must have a range of ideologies among their supporters. One can be a non-socialist but not a Unionist, likewise a socialist and be a Unionist. I supect tha were independence to be obtained the SNP wold split up fairly quikly.
Tough for Socialist Unionists in NI
The DUP are not all Tory supporters as is assumed. The repeal of the Bedroom tax is one of their red lines, for instance.
Didn't Sylvia Hermon leave the UUP over the tie-up with the Tories?
It will be interesting to see what impact, if any, on the polls. My sense is it will and a few percent in the west coast, which should further mitigate any tactical voting.
The Daily Record/Sunday Mail are in a tricky spot, they may well try to fudge their endorsement by supporting Labour government but advise their readership to vote SNP as SLAB is dead in the water. Particularly as 60-70% of its readership must be intending to vote SNP.
Very intelligent Lefty mate of mine said t'other day that the country just could not stand another five years of this Coalition government, which, he said, had been a "disaster".
I didn't even bother arguing. How can you argue with a mindset like that? A disaster is an earthquake killing many thousands. A disaster is a war, a plague, a tsunami. If you want an example of a political disaster, the nearest you might get is Tony Blair's decision to invade Iraq. That WAS disastrous, for them and for us.
Yet this government? It's a modestly competent bunch of posho mediocrities struggling with a big deficit. I can see how its policies might irritate, or even anger (at most), but... a disaster?
Idiotic. Yet too many sane people think this crazy way. Tories are a Disaster, almost by definition. Which is why I believe Miliband will scrape to power, enabled by Nats.
And that might be a disaster: for the Labour party.
You describe your mate as 'intelligent'? I take it he's good at chess or something.
I know. Seems like an oxymoron. But he is intelligent by any standards. Articulate, sensitive, educated, a rather good journalist, and an excellent cook. Also a nice guy.
Yet when it comes to politics all that goes out the window and he is a raving lefty fruitloop of the first water. It's like some allergic over-reaction, to Tories.
The problem for these people is that they are then continuously and grievously disappointed by Labour governments. Yet they keep the faith.
'journalist' ! hmm...
Labour are the party to have inflicted a massive disaster on our nation. And thats without the Iraq invasion. First they totally misled the country and mishandled the new entrants to the EU. They have set the scene for the nasty opinions we see bandied about now. Second they totally mishandled their spending responsibilities by massively increasing spending which we could not afford; adding to debt when we should have been paying down the debt. This has left the UK in a horrible position and again because we cannot afford this public spending Labour has created the circumstances for division. Thirdly of course Labour created a totally botched devolution settlement which leaves us where we all are now with the future of our country under the spotlight. Labour have created a nation divided, what could be more disastrous than that?
In contrast the Tories have picked up this mess. They promise a referendum and reform on the EU. They have not played the race card. Deficit is down significantly, the tories risked political attack by not pursuing even more cuts to meet an arbitrary timetable. The Nats have lost an independent referendum. Tories want to resolve botched devolution by implementing EVEL.
Far o/t but experienced some genuine old fashioned socialism in Crete yesterday (May Day). Huge march around Chania Old Town. I only speak 3 Greek words (dya birra parakalo) but I can recognise a chanted meter and I swear 500 cretans were chanting "Maggie Maggie maggi, out out out". Made us nostalgic for the 80s, and my partner, a veteran of many a soup kitchen, was keen to make a coal not dole placard and join in.
Makes our modern British politics look a) dull and b) polarised around the centre.
Wonderful place, Chania. If I were a travel writer I would wax lyrical on our £70 return flights vacation.
It will be interesting to see what impact, if any, on the polls. My sense is it will and a few percent in the west coast, which should further mitigate any tactical voting.
The Daily Record/Sunday Mail are in a tricky spot, they may well try to fudge their endorsement by supporting Labour government but advise their readership to vote SNP as SLAB is dead in the water. Particularly as 60-70% of its readership must be intending to vote SNP.
You have to love the image of Jim Murphy they picked.
If this Con lead of 1% or 2% persists, then perhaps I am being pessimistic about Labour numbers. Particularly, seen with the Labour decline in votes in Scotland, the numbers in England must be doing even better.
And if the marginals turn out to be as good as some polls have suggested, it could be a good night for Labour.
Maybe, Ed's change on emphasis re: the SNP at QT onwards is based on something.
If the Tories are only 1 point ahead than Labour must be doing fairly well in England, given the Scotterdammerung (copyright antifrank), so, yeah, Ed will likely have most seats - by a whisker - on this poll.
But are the polls all wrong? Have they been confounded by an unpollable election? That's the big Q, and the last great hope for Tories.
I no longer believe a fear of Ed Miliband will make people waver in the polling booth. He's performed just well enough to avoid that (people still don't like him, at all, especially in Scotland, but he doesn't seem insane). Fear of Miliband = Sturgeon might still be a factor.
Tories need to drill into this deal or no deal bullshit between now and Thursday. Miliband is clearly and brazenly lying. Can they get the public to realise this?
The 1992 polls were wrong. The 2001 polls were as bad averaging a 16% Labour lead, when actually it was about 9%. The 2005 polls overestimated the Labour lead by 3% too. The 2010 polls overestimated the LD's by 3-4%.
Once swingback didn`t happen,it was always going to be good night for Labour.
The election will be decided in the English marginals and Labour are doing better here than nationally according to Ashcroft.With a bit of momentum,several seats which are close now could go Labour`s way.
Comments
(BTW I ay have pressed the flag button in error for the quote one - if so grovelling apologies.)
As someone with neither, it's just irritating.
We had an ancestor who had 22 children, until my sister unearthed that it was actually two cousins by the same name living in adjacent houses who had 22 children between the two of them.
My father's parents lived into their 90s. They were born in 1895/6. And had 14 living children, and came from families of 12-15 kids. It's so completely unfamiliar to most of us nowadays.
I know a man, alive today, who had 11 children by his wife who then expired no doubt worn out by the whole experinec.
He married again and sire 11 more by his second wife who then went the same way.
Tommy was a hill farmer in the tope end of the remote Kentmere valley. Perhaps explains a lot.
Now a resident in a Windermere care home, he has to be watched all the time as he frequently makes off for a walk to Kendal.
He's visited a lot of the poorest parts of the UK and think there's a warning for Miliband in focussing too much on inequality. I'm not convinced inequality plays as well outside the M25 as it does inside. Bluntly in many parts of the UK there really aren't many millionaires about. The issue is whether the economy is actually working at all not inequality. In a way it's surprising how little many of the poorer people he speaks to mention inequality. It's almost always 'The Tories are the party of the rich and Labour used to represent the working man but not so much now.' Plenty of other people think it doesn't make any difference of course.
Dan Hodges@DPJHodges·6 mins6 minutes ago Queensferry, Scotland
Some very upbeat Tory candidates out there this evening.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I_iq5yzJ-Dk
Mystic DH strikes again
(Although to be fair you have been consistent - and soberly - for some time now in forecasting a narrow Labour plurality).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Imich
My uncle survived Aushwitz too and is still merrily kicking on.
I'm sure that everyone is campaign fatigued which kind of makes me think that whatever Govt we have next week (in my view now a Tory minority) will last for a few years. The alternative of another campaign is, well too much.
Bad news for badgers mind.
http://tinyurl.com/c26q3qs
Less than a year later a man was born who also went on to become US President.
That man's grandchildren are still alive...
He used to spend three nights a week staying with his lady friend, sharing her bed. One winter he was cold in the middle of the night and she declined to switch on the electric blanket.
So he got up, dressed and walked home 10 miles from Windermere to Burneside.
Is on nobodies radar but could surprise, particularly as UKIP candidate also well known so could hit Tory vote.
SNP 50
Lab 265
LD 25
Is my finger in the air projection at the moment.
Miliband PM.
Hodges must be up to breath in the air in the spiritual home of Ediscrappism.
Cricinfo website is still very good.
Might stop politicians being first items on TV news...
#tightwads
Wonderful stuff from The Newcastle United Manager.
That said, I do think you are right no-one will be keen to go back and do it all again. While I disagree on what government we will have after next week, I think it could last years a lot easier than we imagine. Only the need for a no holds barred fight for Holyrood would prevent an SNP backed Labour government going along for years I suspect.
Glasgow NE, Edinburgh SW, O & S, Kirkcaldy ?, Renfrewshire East..... Dougie's seat
Come to think of it - just why were Labour polling in the 40s about 2013 ?
Did people get THAT angry over the pasty tax ?
9 seats the SNP may fall short in:
Orkney & Shetland
Berwickshire Roxburgh
Edi South
East Renfrewshire
Dumferline West Fife
Dumfries Galloway
Glasgow NE
Rutherglen Hamilton West
Coatbridge
Having gone for them winning 278 seats a week ago, you are now saying that you'd "add maybe ten to the SNP score presumably virtually all from labour but alter the Tory Labour numbers to reflect a slightly higher amount of LAB gains from CON" - I assume you mean something of the order of 5 seats, thereby reducing Labour to around 277 seats and the Tories to around 273 seats
In such circumstances, I'm surprised that you're not tempted by the spread betters firms' prices who are offering a SALE of Tory seats at 288 (Sporting) and 289 (Spreadex), that's fully 15 seats more than you expect the Blue Team to achieve. How can you resist?
The national polls and constituency polls show a Con lead of about 2% and 270/270 seats (assuming Lab lose nearly 40 in Scotland). That is an evens bet.
What are the feasible mechanisms that would drive a different result?
I suggest:
a) An effective Con squeeze on UKIP in Con/Lab seats. A 25% squeeze (i.e. 25% of Tory Kippers vote Con) would increase the Con lead to 3% and Con/Lab seats to 280/260. A 50% squeeze would increase Con lead to 4% and Con/Lab seats to 290/250.
b) Differential turnout beyond what the polls are allowing for. This could break two ways. The new registration process and relative youth of Lab supporters could produce a Lab deficit of say 5% of their potential vote or 1000 votes. This would lose them about 10 seats. On the other hand, the better Lab GOTV this time could gain them 5% of their potential votes. This would gain them about 10 seats.
c) Regional surprises. Con could gain an extra 4 LD seats in SW not shown by Ashcroft. Lab could retain say 10 seats in Scotland from SNP by tactical voting and a late swing.
These potential surprises I think slightly favour the Tories - the UKIP squeeze in particular. But Scotland might surprise the other way as well. I just don't see it as 4/1 against Lab most seats.
Canvassing this marginal London seat this afternoon:
Big houses overwhelming Tory.
Multiple occupants likely Labour.
Young couples and couples with young children:Labour
Older couples and couples with older children:More Tory than Labour
Ethnic minorities:Overwhelming Labour.
Green Supporters:Evaluating their options.May vote Labour.
Opinium for Observer has another 1% CON lead
If I can get some disclosable facts I will, of course, let you know.
This makes the support for Labour wide but shallow. Without any deep reason to be pro Labour as opposed to anti Tory, once a certain tipping point was reached wide swathes could be picked up by another Not Tory party. As the SDP almost achieved in the 80s when Labour actually still stood for something.
After a CON lead of 1% last week tonight's Opinium/Observer poll has
CON 35
LAB 34
LD 8
UKIP 13
GTN 5
Cooper: Pudsey
Maria Eagle: Bolton West
Reeves: Halifax
Balls: Norwich South
Burnham: Swindon South, Bristol West, Kingswood, Stroud,
Gordon Brown: East Renfrewshire
Owen Smith: Glamorgan
Flint: Lincoln
Trickett: Dewsbury
Berger: Wirral West
Lammy: Croydon Central
Nottingham South MP: Sherwood
Kate Green (Stretford & Urmston): Carlisle
Sharon Hodgson (Sunderland and Washington somecompasspoint, IIRC, West): Stockton South
Neath AM: Carmarthen East and Dinefwr
Cardiff South AM: Glamorgan
General Secretary: Bedford, Cambridge
And if the marginals turn out to be as good as some polls have suggested, it could be a good night for Labour.
Maybe, Ed's change on emphasis re: the SNP at QT onwards is based on something.
Plus subliminal blue message from George and William.
Balls in Norwich in time for the last match of the season!
Like Al Murray in South Thanet.
http://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/scotsol/homepage/news/ge2015/6438053/Theres-been-a-muddler.html
It will be interesting to see what impact, if any, on the polls. My sense is it will and a few percent in the west coast, which should further mitigate any tactical voting.
The Daily Record/Sunday Mail are in a tricky spot, they may well try to fudge their endorsement by supporting Labour government but advise their readership to vote SNP as SLAB is dead in the water. Particularly as 60-70% of its readership must be intending to vote SNP.
Labour are the party to have inflicted a massive disaster on our nation. And thats without the Iraq invasion.
First they totally misled the country and mishandled the new entrants to the EU. They have set the scene for the nasty opinions we see bandied about now.
Second they totally mishandled their spending responsibilities by massively increasing spending which we could not afford; adding to debt when we should have been paying down the debt. This has left the UK in a horrible position and again because we cannot afford this public spending Labour has created the circumstances for division.
Thirdly of course Labour created a totally botched devolution settlement which leaves us where we all are now with the future of our country under the spotlight. Labour have created a nation divided, what could be more disastrous than that?
In contrast the Tories have picked up this mess.
They promise a referendum and reform on the EU. They have not played the race card.
Deficit is down significantly, the tories risked political attack by not pursuing even more cuts to meet an arbitrary timetable.
The Nats have lost an independent referendum. Tories want to resolve botched devolution by implementing EVEL.
He is allergic all right. To common sense.
Makes our modern British politics look a) dull and b) polarised around the centre.
Wonderful place, Chania. If I were a travel writer I would wax lyrical on our £70 return flights vacation.
http://img.thesun.co.uk/aidemitlum/archive/02327/Jim9_2327378a.jpg
The election will be decided in the English marginals and Labour are doing better here than nationally according to Ashcroft.With a bit of momentum,several seats which are close now could go Labour`s way.