Labour HQ praying for the new Princess to named today...
Is there a feminine form of Moses?
Thank you so much for this Labour, I've not had enough chance to laugh at something in this campaign without needing to worry about the politics of it all (a lot of the humour will be partisan of course, but it's silly no matter the side).
Likewise. It's the first time in quite a depressing campaign, where I have genuinely laughed out loud - and laughed a lot. Not just sneered and grinned, or chortled contemptuously, or done a partisan chuckle - but laughed.
The trouble is, I really am laughing AT Ed and the Labour buffoons who devised this. I suspect many others will, too, not just nasty rightwingers.
Labour have spent weeks deconstructing the perceived image of Ed as a gigantic, flailing dork, and with some success. Now this. Will it impact? Probably not, but it ain't good to go into the final week of a tight election with EVERYONE sniggering at you. Even the Guardian.
120 hours and someone else will be laughing at you !
To be fair, SeanT has called the GE for Ed Milliband.
DC gets the numbers to get a C&S but not a majority. The first part of the Queen's Speech reads; "My government in this era when the UK regions are partially devolved, in the spirit of equality and fairness as mentioned in many of the parties' manifestos, will legislate for English Votes for English Laws to complete this devolution picture."
How many English Labour MPs would vote down this QS and so report back to their constituents that they had voted down EVEL?
All of them. It doesn't matter what's in it, it's a Tory Queen's Speech. Not to mention that floating voters are less excited by EVEL than you imagine.
DC gets the numbers to get a C&S but not a majority. The first part of the Queen's Speech reads; "My government in this era when the UK regions are partially devolved, in the spirit of equality and fairness as mentioned in many of the parties' manifestos, will legislate for English Votes for English Laws to complete this devolution picture."
How many English Labour MPs would vote down this QS and so report back to their constituents that they had voted down EVEL?
All of them. It doesn't matter what's in it, it's a Tory Queen's Speech. Not to mention that floating voters are less excited by EVEL than you imagine.
And what evidence do you have for that statement regarding floating voters?
Labour HQ praying for the new Princess to named today...
Is there a feminine form of Moses?
Thank you so much for this Labour, I've not had enough chance to laugh at something in this campaign without needing to worry about the politics of it all (a lot of the humour will be partisan of course, but it's silly no matter the side).
Likewise. It's the first time in quite a depressing campaign, where I have genuinely laughed out loud - and laughed a lot. Not just sneered and grinned, or chortled contemptuously, or done a partisan chuckle - but laughed.
The trouble is, I really am laughing AT Ed and the Labour buffoons who devised this. I suspect many others will, too, not just nasty rightwingers.
Labour have spent weeks deconstructing the perceived image of Ed as a gigantic, flailing dork, and with some success. Now this. Will it impact? Probably not, but it ain't good to go into the final week of a tight election with EVERYONE sniggering at you. Even the Guardian.
120 hours and someone else will be laughing at you !
It's still funny even when Labour do win.
It's a silly thing to do - no doubt. It's just some vague words on a stone - not very clever. And of course it keeps bots like Scott_P very busy.
However, in the grand scheme of things it's unlikely to move any votes. The battle lines have long since been drawn and I have a feeling that the majority on here will be crying into their morning coffee come May 8th.
Many will - but I don't think anyone is getting carried about with this silly event. Even pessimistic Tories are letting off steam, but I doubt those who thought Ed was going to win are changing their minds now, it'll be back to depression tomorrow.
Speaking of Liam Byrne's note, why didn't CCHQ keep hold of that and use it now? Almost perfect campaign material.
Not much doubt the Tory campaign team is a bit asleep at the wheel.
Is this sarcasm. Cameron's using it all the time - and quite rightly too.
One thing I wonder is how come the LD's didn't keep hold of the note. It was addressed to the Chief Secretary, which is Danny Alexander of the LD's. Danny Alexander made fun of Labour at first about it, but now it seems to be Cameron's note during the election.
I should think they all made copies of it a long time ago. As to why the LDs haven't been using it as a prop like Cameron, perhaps that itself is the explanation - Cameron has made it his signature prop (and it is a useful one), so they don't want to appear to be an extension of the Tory campaign.
Speaking of Liam Byrne's note, why didn't CCHQ keep hold of that and use it now? Almost perfect campaign material.
Not much doubt the Tory campaign team is a bit asleep at the wheel.
Cameron has been using it from time to time, but like most of Tory campaign it has been totally unfocused (except the Labour / SNP bashing) and generally piss poor.
All over the shop? It seems to me to have focused on one thing straight from the start and stuck with it relentlessly. It looks more appropriate as each day goes by to me. Fair doos, its a plan which you may not agree with, even though it has reduced Labour to blaming the tories for the wipe out of SLAB. However I have to say my own tory leaning sister wants to throw a brick at the television every time she sees Sturgeon, so the policy seems well aimed, unlike fortunately my sister's brick.
Labour HQ praying for the new Princess to named today...
Is there a feminine form of Moses?
Thank you so much for this Labour, I've not had enough chance to laugh at something in this campaign without needing to worry about the politics of it all (a lot of the humour will be partisan of course, but it's silly no matter the side).
Likewise. It's the first time in quite a depressing campaign, where I have genuinely laughed out loud - and laughed a lot. Not just sneered and grinned, or chortled contemptuously, or done a partisan chuckle - but laughed.
The trouble is, I really am laughing AT Ed and the Labour buffoons who devised this. I suspect many others will, too, not just nasty rightwingers.
Labour have spent weeks deconstructing the perceived image of Ed as a gigantic, flailing dork, and with some success. Now this. Will it impact? Probably not, but it ain't good to go into the final week of a tight election with EVERYONE sniggering at you. Even the Guardian.
120 hours and someone else will be laughing at you !
To be fair, SeanT has called the GE for Ed Milliband.
To be fair, SeanT called the Indy Ref for Yes, then No, then Yes, then No, then Yes, then No, then (at the very end, in a public meltdown on pb) Yes.
When it came in No, Sean could say honestly that he had predicted it.
I think the hilarity of the PB Tories only says one thing. They are resigned to a bad defeat. Their entire assumption was based on the likelihood that Ed would collapse during the campaign because, guess what, he is crap !
For six weeks now, Ed has surprised them. Ed didn't need to support a football team - he probably does even support one. But Cameron does , because he is one of us. Only he forgets which one he supports.
All these tweets referencing an expression containing the word "stone" is the last gasp of a dying corpse.
Guess what ? They is a more than subtle hint in it.
DC gets the numbers to get a C&S but not a majority. The first part of the Queen's Speech reads; "My government in this era when the UK regions are partially devolved, in the spirit of equality and fairness as mentioned in many of the parties' manifestos, will legislate for English Votes for English Laws to complete this devolution picture."
How many English Labour MPs would vote down this QS and so report back to their constituents that they had voted down EVEL?
All of them. It doesn't matter what's in it, it's a Tory Queen's Speech. Not to mention that floating voters are less excited by EVEL than you imagine.
And what evidence do you have for that statement regarding floating voters?
Top issues of concern get polled from time to time, constitutional issues never make a dent.
Sophie Ridge tweets: Just asked Ed Miliband if the #edstone was a bit naff. "No", he said.
Admittedly that question is very difficult to answer in a way that would be positive for Labour, but that doesn't change the fact that the man is a gigantic berk.
He could attempt some humanity and try and spin a negative into a positive. Something along the lines of "yes it may be a bit naff, but the messages are serious and so is our commitment" ... or something along those lines
However even the so-called pledges are naff immeasurable nonsense.
What will be amusing is when the polls don't move. All this excitement and for nada
It's not one to change a million voters' minds, but it's the first genuine laugh out loud moment of the election campaign - and if it persuades a few more voters out for the blues, or a few more reds to stay at home then this morning's hysteria will have done it's job for CCHQ.
Spock smashes scissors and vaporizes rock; he is poisoned by lizard and disproven by paper. Lizard poisons Spock and eats paper; it is crushed by rock and...
I think the hilarity of the PB Tories only says one thing. They are resigned to a bad defeat. Their entire assumption was based on the likelihood that Ed would collapse during the campaign because, guess what, he is crap !
For six weeks now, Ed has surprised them. Ed didn't need to support a football team - he probably does even support one. But Cameron does , because he is one of us. Only he forgets which one he supports.
All these tweets referencing an expression containing the word "stone" is the last gasp of a dying corpse.
Guess what ? They is a more than subtle hint in it.
I think the hilarity of the PB Tories only says one thing. They are resigned to a bad defeat. Their entire assumption was based on the likelihood that Ed would collapse during the campaign because, guess what, he is crap !
For six weeks now, Ed has surprised them. Ed didn't need to support a football team - he probably does even support one. But Cameron does , because he is one of us. Only he forgets which one he supports.
All these tweets referencing an expression containing the word "stone" is the last gasp of a dying corpse.
Guess what ? They is a more than subtle hint in it.
DC gets the numbers to get a C&S but not a majority. The first part of the Queen's Speech reads; "My government in this era when the UK regions are partially devolved, in the spirit of equality and fairness as mentioned in many of the parties' manifestos, will legislate for English Votes for English Laws to complete this devolution picture."
How many English Labour MPs would vote down this QS and so report back to their constituents that they had voted down EVEL?
BTW see in YG today, that Approval at -9 is the lowest since Dec 2010.
If Dav is on 300 seats, then it will only need about 220 of the 250 Labour MPs to vote it down. And they will because Wales.
I think the hilarity of the PB Tories only says one thing. They are resigned to a bad defeat. Their entire assumption was based on the likelihood that Ed would collapse during the campaign because, guess what, he is crap !
For six weeks now, Ed has surprised them. Ed didn't need to support a football team - he probably does even support one. But Cameron does , because he is one of us. Only he forgets which one he supports.
All these tweets referencing an expression containing the word "stone" is the last gasp of a dying corpse.
Guess what ? They is a more than subtle hint in it.
Miliband - Stone - Moses.
Geddit !
In five days' time you will know the answer, and be able to go nyah nyah nyahnyahnyah to your heart's content, so why not restrain yourself till then? I have never seen such impatience in the over-5 year old demographic.
I think the reality is that you have felt it slipping away from you ever since ed's QT car crash. I am not saying you are right, but I can see why you are worried.
Damian McBride tweets: For those who don't know Torsten Bell, the #Edstone architect, he's one of those arrogant oafs with brains to spare but no common sense.
DC gets the numbers to get a C&S but not a majority. The first part of the Queen's Speech reads; "My government in this era when the UK regions are partially devolved, in the spirit of equality and fairness as mentioned in many of the parties' manifestos, will legislate for English Votes for English Laws to complete this devolution picture."
How many English Labour MPs would vote down this QS and so report back to their constituents that they had voted down EVEL?
BTW see in YG today, that Approval at -9 is the lowest since Dec 2010.
If Dav is on 300 seats, then it will only need about 220 of the 250 Labour MPs to vote it down. And they will because Wales.
300+30 is a majority. Even without the possibility of any Lib Dems or others voting it through.
As usual it takes into account the latest constituency, regional and national polls and shows detailed top 3 forecasts for every UK constituency.
Ooh, Con 271, Lab 272. An equal score would be the funnier result, although if it were Con 272, Lab 271, I wonder if Cameron would go ahead with his purported plan to declare victory.
To my mind too many people are discounting the possibility of Lab most seats, even if it is not by much,
I'm not discounting it but I'm not topping up on it - just FEELS like a loser. It may well still be value though.
Tote are offering 6/1 on cons 251-275 - seems great value to me
I think the hilarity of the PB Tories only says one thing. They are resigned to a bad defeat. Their entire assumption was based on the likelihood that Ed would collapse during the campaign because, guess what, he is crap !
Geddit !
Well, actually, Ed has been pretty bad. Just not as bad as I thought.
In Scotland, for the first time, voters are voting not for a party with the best PM to lead the UK, but for a party likely to do its best for Scotland.
This is a huge and significant change with enormous consequences.
They are not voting for the party with the best PM to lead the UK because -- they don’t like the choice on offer. That is of course mainly the fault of Ed.
Most of us can only look enviously on at the Scots.
Cameron has been using it from time to time, but like most of Tory campaign it has been totally unfocused (except the Labour / SNP bashing) and generally piss poor.
I don't mean quoting it, obviously you hear that, I mean the actual physical note itself - haven't seen that myself.
It seems ripe for a PPB: Ed saying "we didn't overspend", followed by EU/IMF warnings in 03-07 of Brown's overspending, and ending with the "what we found when we got into goverment moment": the note itself.
Damian McBride tweets: For those who don't know Torsten Bell, the #Edstone architect, he's one of those arrogant oafs with brains to spare but no common sense.
They go on about the cabal of people around Cameron, few of which have any idea of the real world...when you look at Ed, it isn't much different.
Again, all those who actually are sensible, got some reasonable ideas, are quickly sidelined. Whatever happen to all those policy committee, thinking in the unthinkable, great ideas, new ways of doing things...what we got, bash the rich, baddies vs goodie companies and borrow more i.e what Ed has been banging on about for 5 years.
DC gets the numbers to get a C&S but not a majority. The first part of the Queen's Speech reads; "My government in this era when the UK regions are partially devolved, in the spirit of equality and fairness as mentioned in many of the parties' manifestos, will legislate for English Votes for English Laws to complete this devolution picture."
How many English Labour MPs would vote down this QS and so report back to their constituents that they had voted down EVEL?
All of them. It doesn't matter what's in it, it's a Tory Queen's Speech. Not to mention that floating voters are less excited by EVEL than you imagine.
And what evidence do you have for that statement regarding floating voters?
Top issues of concern get polled from time to time, constitutional issues never make a dent.
Because it is not included in the list by the questioner, and past votes are no indicators of future votes when crises emerge.
Cameron has been using it from time to time, but like most of Tory campaign it has been totally unfocused (except the Labour / SNP bashing) and generally piss poor.
I don't mean quoting it, obviously you hear that, I mean the actual physical note itself - haven't seen that myself.
It seems ripe for a PPB: Ed saying "we didn't overspend", followed by EU/IMF warnings in 03-07 of Brown's overspending, and ending with the note itself.
Andrew, it's in the latest Tory PPB (linked below), Cameron also pulled it out of his pocket on stage during Question Time last Thursday.
Labour HQ praying for the new Princess to named today...
Is there a feminine form of Moses?
Thank you so much for this Labour, I've not had enough chance to laugh at something in this campaign without needing to worry about the politics of it all (a lot of the humour will be partisan of course, but it's silly no matter the side).
Likewise. It's the first time in quite a depressing campaign, where I have genuinely laughed out loud - and laughed a lot. Not just sneered and grinned, or chortled contemptuously, or done a partisan chuckle - but laughed.
The trouble is, I really am laughing AT Ed and the Labour buffoons who devised this. I suspect many others will, too, not just nasty rightwingers.
Labour have spent weeks deconstructing the perceived image of Ed as a gigantic, flailing dork, and with some success. Now this. Will it impact? Probably not, but it ain't good to go into the final week of a tight election with EVERYONE sniggering at you. Even the Guardian.
120 hours and someone else will be laughing at you !
To be fair, SeanT has called the GE for Ed Milliband.
To be fair, SeanT called the Indy Ref for Yes, then No, then Yes, then No, then Yes, then No, then (at the very end, in a public meltdown on pb) Yes.
When it came in No, Sean could say honestly that he had predicted it.
I also predicted, unlike ANYONE, that the SNP would get a huge sympathy vote
Actually...no
Some Scots Tories (I think DavidL was among them) predicted very much this.
And some of us (moi) were rubbished by OGH for pointing out consistently good SNP subsamples in YouGov, post SindyRef....
I think the hilarity of the PB Tories only says one thing. They are resigned to a bad defeat. Their entire assumption was based on the likelihood that Ed would collapse during the campaign because, guess what, he is crap !
Ed's currently forecast to get about 5 seats more than Gordon Brown - and possibly less.
Labour HQ praying for the new Princess to named today...
Is there a feminine form of Moses?
Thank you so much for this Labour, I've not had enough chance to laugh at something in this campaign without needing to worry about the politics of it all (a lot of the humour will be partisan of course, but it's silly no matter the side).
Likewise. It's the first time in quite a depressing campaign, where I have genuinely laughed out loud - and laughed a lot. Not just sneered and grinned, or chortled contemptuously, or done a partisan chuckle - but laughed.
The trouble is, I really am laughing AT Ed and the Labour buffoons who devised this. I suspect many others will, too, not just nasty rightwingers.
Labour have spent weeks deconstructing the perceived image of Ed as a gigantic, flailing dork, and with some success. Now this. Will it impact? Probably not, but it ain't good to go into the final week of a tight election with EVERYONE sniggering at you. Even the Guardian.
120 hours and someone else will be laughing at you !
To be fair, SeanT has called the GE for Ed Milliband.
To be fair, SeanT called the Indy Ref for Yes, then No, then Yes, then No, then Yes, then No, then (at the very end, in a public meltdown on pb) Yes.
When it came in No, Sean could say honestly that he had predicted it.
Nope. I made several thousand mad predictions, then I made my official prediction: narrow NO. As anyone here will attest.
I also predicted, unlike ANYONE, that the SNP would get a huge sympathy vote in the ensuing GE
I made these predictions about four days before the vote.
PS if you wanna check you can look at the Official PB Indyref prediction game, where my prediction is recorded. I called it narrow NO (I was within about 2.5 points of the final score), I also got the turnout within about 2% - see here
One - it looks like the LibDems will agree to a 2017 euro ref as part of a coalition deal with the Tories.
Two - Tories won't rule out a rise in tuition fees, basically saying they plan to put them up.
Three - Scottish leaders debate tonight is last chance for Nicola to mess things up, otherwise 50 plus seats in the bag.
Short of being driven in on a giant gilded throne, complete with a blue sapphire in her gold crown and with her Caesarion Miliband by her side, and pulled by 1000 polished nubian slaves all being whipped by Neil Kinnock screaming 'aaall riiight!' -- I think she has it sewn up. But you can never tell - even I might vote for that.
DC gets the numbers to get a C&S but not a majority. The first part of the Queen's Speech reads; "My government in this era when the UK regions are partially devolved, in the spirit of equality and fairness as mentioned in many of the parties' manifestos, will legislate for English Votes for English Laws to complete this devolution picture."
How many English Labour MPs would vote down this QS and so report back to their constituents that they had voted down EVEL?
BTW see in YG today, that Approval at -9 is the lowest since Dec 2010.
If Dav is on 300 seats, then it will only need about 220 of the 250 Labour MPs to vote it down. And they will because Wales.
300+30 is a majority. Even without the possibility of any Lib Dems or others voting it through.
No because some will abstain, some will back the Tories. Lib Dems will not support EVEL or at best abstain, might make it close but still unlikely. Everyone else in Parliament will oppose.
I think it's in Labour's best interest to let a Conservative minority government essentially fail in time, which ins a space of a few months, it should do. It certainly won't be able to pass its welfare cuts, which the LDs, Labour, SNP, Greens, and Plaid will all vote against. I'm very sure they'll be a second election - I don't think Cameron's plan to 'trap' Miliband will work. It doesn't change the fact that ultimately, minority governments in this country are not secure and it's a matter of time before they fail. I can see that if it comes to that, Miliband probably won't be able to form a government of a majority himself - he knows its political suicide now to do a deal with the SNP - and he'll probably let it go to a second election.
Well I am not convinced it would change 10 votes. But CCHQ need to change votes. So shouldn't they be targeting something else.
I'm sure they will in the coming days - but it's a bank holiday weekend, there's a royal baby occupying the headlines and loads of sport on, serious politics can have a day off before the final run-in.
Last monthly "Super-ELBOW" of the campaign - the "traditional" measure including all polls with fieldwork end-dates 1st to 30th April inclusive. Compare and contrast Lab leads with YG/Non-YG and Phone v. Online posted earlier.
Monthly "Super-ELBOW" for April: Lab 33.9 (+0.3), Con 33.4 (-0.1), UKIP 13.6 (-0.4), LD 8.3 (+0.6), Grn 5.1 (-0.5).
I think the hilarity of the PB Tories only says one thing. They are resigned to a bad defeat. Their entire assumption was based on the likelihood that Ed would collapse during the campaign because, guess what, he is crap !
For six weeks now, Ed has surprised them. Ed didn't need to support a football team - he probably does even support one. But Cameron does , because he is one of us. Only he forgets which one he supports.
All these tweets referencing an expression containing the word "stone" is the last gasp of a dying corpse.
Guess what ? They is a more than subtle hint in it.
Miliband - Stone - Moses.
Geddit !
In five days' time you will know the answer, and be able to go nyah nyah nyahnyahnyah to your heart's content, so why not restrain yourself till then? I have never seen such impatience in the over-5 year old demographic.
I think the reality is that you have felt it slipping away from you ever since ed's QT car crash. I am not saying you are right, but I can see why you are worried.
I am convinced of Labour's victory since the polls yesterday. I am less than happy about jokes with clear anti-semetic undertones.
But then it is there certain English classes - whatever they say.
A good friend of mine, an arch-Tory, works in the NHS as a radiologist.
She has just messaged me "Surprise surprise. I have decided to vote LibDem after all after what Nick Clegg said today about public service workers pay."
I don't think she is joking. She will definitely be deciding based on what is in her own personal best interest. None of this visionary stuff about freedom and fairness. The message has connected with her. I am really surprised. I wonder what impact it will have on public service workers generally?
Sounds good to me!
I just hope that when Ed parts the seas that we do not break his pledge on immigration.
He will not need to part the seas, Nicola walks on water.
I think the hilarity of the PB Tories only says one thing. They are resigned to a bad defeat. Their entire assumption was based on the likelihood that Ed would collapse during the campaign because, guess what, he is crap !
For six weeks now, Ed has surprised them. Ed didn't need to support a football team - he probably does even support one. But Cameron does , because he is one of us. Only he forgets which one he supports.
All these tweets referencing an expression containing the word "stone" is the last gasp of a dying corpse.
Guess what ? They is a more than subtle hint in it.
Miliband - Stone - Moses.
Geddit !
In five days' time you will know the answer, and be able to go nyah nyah nyahnyahnyah to your heart's content, so why not restrain yourself till then? I have never seen such impatience in the over-5 year old demographic.
I think the reality is that you have felt it slipping away from you ever since ed's QT car crash. I am not saying you are right, but I can see why you are worried.
I am convinced of Labour's victory since the polls yesterday. I am less than happy about jokes with clear anti-semetic undertones.
But then it is there certain English classes - whatever they say.
Any chance of the Tories detailing their 12 billion of welfare cuts, rather than making crap stone jokes?
Not whilst Twitter gloriously photoshops the labour tombstone. This really was an own goal.
Mr Rentool is not around but I will point out anyway that in 2001 the Welfare budget was £58 billion. In 2010 it was £110 billion. Pretty poor indictment on Labour's ability to bring people out of poverty - either that or it was a doubling of money wasted. Welfare currently costs ... £110 billion. £112bn in 2016. I think tory critics from the right should think about that for a moment or two. BTW in 2013 it was 114 billion. Everyone is entitled to their views on the costs of welfare. The tories did not slash it on entering office - they were cautious and sensible. Its clear Labour oversaw a massive and pointless increase in welfare. 'Pointless?' Yes - Why in a period of growth did welfare double? Why should it be so terrible to cut it back - over 5 years - to £100 billion again? In 1997 Welfare was £64bn in 1999 it was £55bn. Thats a drop of £9bn in 3 years. However since then Labour spent hugely on benefits to prop up a dependent core. So now we see the result of that - any cuts in benefits are evil - except when labour do it. (ukpublicspending.co.uk) Enjoy your drinks in Broxtowe, boys.
Big news in the last 24 hours: Professor John Curtis predicting Con, LD, DUP and UKIP to win 327 seats.
DUP are far more likely to back Labour than the Tories.
It shows a distinct and fundamental mis-understanding of NI politics and a complete ignorance to believe the DUP are naturally aligned to the Conservatives. It is their differences to the Conservatives that allowed them to completely take over NI politics from the UUP.
Good Friday and Religion helped them. But it was their left-wing Socialism politics which made this stick.
Just wondering when does the legal requirement to be OTT in pursuit of balance going to start? 8th May?
Still Guido does at least point out that Victoria Derbyshire's programme got 'zero' viewers. I do find that a comfort. I think the first mistake they made was calling it 'Victoria Derbyshire'.
Labour HQ praying for the new Princess to named today...
Is there a feminine form of Moses?
Thank you so much for this Labour, I've not had enough chance to laugh at something in this campaign without needing to worry about the politics of it all (a lot of the humour will be partisan of course, but it's silly no matter the side).
Likewise. It's the first time in quite a depressing campaign, where I have genuinely laughed out loud - and laughed a lot. Not just sneered and grinned, or chortled contemptuously, or done a partisan chuckle - but laughed.
The trouble is, I really am laughing AT Ed and the Labour buffoons who devised this. I suspect many others will, too, not just nasty rightwingers.
Labour have spent weeks deconstructing the perceived image of Ed as a gigantic, flailing dork, and with some success. Now this. Will it impact? Probably not, but it ain't good to go into the final week of a tight election with EVERYONE sniggering at you. Even the Guardian.
120 hours and someone else will be laughing at you !
To be fair, SeanT has called the GE for Ed Milliband.
To be fair, SeanT called the Indy Ref for Yes, then No, then Yes, then No, then Yes, then No, then (at the very end, in a public meltdown on pb) Yes.
When it came in No, Sean could say honestly that he had predicted it.
Nope. I made several thousand mad predictions, then I made my official prediction: narrow NO. As anyone here will attest.
I also predicted, unlike ANYONE, that the SNP would get a huge sympathy vote in the ensuing GE
I made these predictions about four days before the vote.
Ehh...I said several times before the referendum that they would increase their support and seats. Not like this admittedly but I did.
Labour HQ praying for the new Princess to named today...
Is there a feminine form of Moses?
Thank you so much for this Labour, I've not had enough chance to laugh at something in this campaign without needing to worry about the politics of it all (a lot of the humour will be partisan of course, but it's silly no matter the side).
Likewise. It's the first time in quite a depressing campaign, where I have genuinely laughed out loud - and laughed a lot. Not just sneered and grinned, or chortled contemptuously, or done a partisan chuckle - but laughed.
The trouble is, I really am laughing AT Ed and the Labour buffoons who devised this. I suspect many others will, too, not just nasty rightwingers.
Labour have spent weeks deconstructing the perceived image of Ed as a gigantic, flailing dork, and with some success. Now this. Will it impact? Probably not, but it ain't good to go into the final week of a tight election with EVERYONE sniggering at you. Even the Guardian.
120 hours and someone else will be laughing at you !
To be fair, SeanT has called the GE for Ed Milliband.
To be fair, SeanT called the Indy Ref for Yes, then No, then Yes, then No, then Yes, then No, then (at the very end, in a public meltdown on pb) Yes.
When it came in No, Sean could say honestly that he had predicted it.
Nope. I made several thousand mad predictions, then I made my official prediction: narrow NO. As anyone here will attest.
I also predicted, unlike ANYONE, that the SNP would get a huge sympathy vote in the ensuing GE
I made these predictions about four days before the vote.
Ehh...I said several times before the referendum that they would increase their support and seats. Not like this admittedly but I did.
Comments
"However, in the grand scheme of things it's unlikely to move any votes."
Who cares, it's been a good laugh. And along the lines of the Ten Commandments, there's an old joke worth repeating.
Moses comes down form the mountain and tells the Israelites that "There's good news and there's bad news."
"'What's the good news?"
"I've got Him down to ten."
"What's the bad news?"
"Adultery is still among them."
It seems to me to have focused on one thing straight from the start and stuck with it relentlessly. It looks more appropriate as each day goes by to me. Fair doos, its a plan which you may not agree with, even though it has reduced Labour to blaming the tories for the wipe out of SLAB. However I have to say my own tory leaning sister wants to throw a brick at the television every time she sees Sturgeon, so the policy seems well aimed, unlike fortunately my sister's brick.
When it came in No, Sean could say honestly that he had predicted it.
For six weeks now, Ed has surprised them. Ed didn't need to support a football team - he probably does even support one. But Cameron does , because he is one of us. Only he forgets which one he supports.
All these tweets referencing an expression containing the word "stone" is the last gasp of a dying corpse.
Guess what ? They is a more than subtle hint in it.
Miliband - Stone - Moses.
Geddit !
However even the so-called pledges are naff immeasurable nonsense.
#EdStoned
I think, when he came up with that idea.
Royal Baby
The boxing
All these are going to be more on peoples minds. The idea that this is a sheffield moment shows how utterly desperate the Tories are.
sums up Ed's Stone.
I am the risible erection?
I think the reality is that you have felt it slipping away from you ever since ed's QT car crash. I am not saying you are right, but I can see why you are worried.
Damian McBride tweets: For those who don't know Torsten Bell, the #Edstone architect, he's one of those arrogant oafs with brains to spare but no common sense.
https://twitter.com/thwphipps/status/594825670812925952
Big one in Sheffield Hallam on Thursday when the DPM is officially no more hopefully
In Scotland, for the first time, voters are voting not for a party with the best PM to lead the UK, but for a party likely to do its best for Scotland.
This is a huge and significant change with enormous consequences.
They are not voting for the party with the best PM to lead the UK because -- they don’t like the choice on offer. That is of course mainly the fault of Ed.
Most of us can only look enviously on at the Scots.
It seems ripe for a PPB: Ed saying "we didn't overspend", followed by EU/IMF warnings in 03-07 of Brown's overspending, and ending with the "what we found when we got into goverment moment": the note itself.
Again, all those who actually are sensible, got some reasonable ideas, are quickly sidelined. Whatever happen to all those policy committee, thinking in the unthinkable, great ideas, new ways of doing things...what we got, bash the rich, baddies vs goodie companies and borrow more i.e what Ed has been banging on about for 5 years.
Well I am not convinced it would change 10 votes. But CCHQ need to change votes. So shouldn't they be targeting something else.
If the result matches Survation or Panelbase. Happiness for Labour.
If the result matches Ashcroft, Ipsos MORI, or ICM. Misery for Labour.
Some Scots Tories (I think DavidL was among them) predicted very much this.
And some of us (moi) were rubbished by OGH for pointing out consistently good SNP subsamples in YouGov, post SindyRef....
Yes, he's crap.
47.12% and 82.83%
http://www.nojam.com/demo/pbindycomp/results.php?s_Name=sean+thomas
But you can never tell - even I might vote for that.
Monthly "Super-ELBOW" for April: Lab 33.9 (+0.3), Con 33.4 (-0.1), UKIP 13.6 (-0.4), LD 8.3 (+0.6), Grn 5.1 (-0.5).
https://twitter.com/Sunil_P2/status/594848871144128512
But then it is there certain English classes - whatever they say.
Sunday Times NO - 1st May end-date - will include in last ever ELBOW on Wednesday
The SNP is a progressive party with good ideas.
'120 hours and someone else will be laughing at you !
Whenever you use an exclamation mark,which seems to be with almost every post, we know your rattled.
'Big news in the last 24 hours: Professor John Curtis predicting Con, LD, DUP and UKIP to win 327 seats.'
It was Ed's tombstone what dunnit.
Hope he's going to dispose of it in an environmentally friendly way or he could stick in it the front garden of his London mansion.
Welfare currently costs ... £110 billion. £112bn in 2016. I think tory critics from the right should think about that for a moment or two.
BTW in 2013 it was 114 billion.
Everyone is entitled to their views on the costs of welfare. The tories did not slash it on entering office - they were cautious and sensible.
Its clear Labour oversaw a massive and pointless increase in welfare. 'Pointless?' Yes - Why in a period of growth did welfare double? Why should it be so terrible to cut it back - over 5 years - to £100 billion again?
In 1997 Welfare was £64bn in 1999 it was £55bn. Thats a drop of £9bn in 3 years. However since then Labour spent hugely on benefits to prop up a dependent core. So now we see the result of that - any cuts in benefits are evil - except when labour do it.
(ukpublicspending.co.uk)
Enjoy your drinks in Broxtowe, boys.
Just wondering when does the legal requirement to be OTT in pursuit of balance going to start? 8th May?
It shows a distinct and fundamental mis-understanding of NI politics and a complete ignorance to believe the DUP are naturally aligned to the Conservatives. It is their differences to the Conservatives that allowed them to completely take over NI politics from the UUP.
Good Friday and Religion helped them. But it was their left-wing Socialism politics which made this stick.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2015-32572988
Not a word will I say!
Tories Broadcasters talking us down
Kippers Everyone talking us down
Hmm