politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The UKIP implosion Part 2: Farage accused of being “snarling, thin-skinned and aggressive”
Last Friday Nigel Farage stepped down as UKIP leader following his failure to become an MP. After the weekend that was all rescinded when the party executive refused to accept it.
"Polling organisations will improve their fudge factors and they won’t make the same mistakes next time. They’ll just make different ones instead.
Whereas we, the electorate, will make exactly the same error we always do: we will believe that for once, the polls have got it right – and we will be cross when we discover they haven’t."
It has been a bad week for UKIP. Interesting to see if O'Flynn's comments mirror Desmond's disappointment about a million quid pissed up a wall. It was a poor investment, just to get Carswell re-elected... At a minimum he must have expected Farage in the House. As it is, whenever a vote is called, it will be Carswell who presents to the world the UKIP view on this or that policy.
And short of expelling him from the party, what can Farage do? As with Short Money, Farage is powerless. Ooooh, that's gonna get under Nigel's (thin) skin.
Truth is though Nigel, seven times you have asked the voters for a key to the House. And seven times they have said "Bugger off!" Are you getting the message yet?
Mike certainly seems to be enjoying the UKIP implosion. We have a thread like this most days, probably correctly as the potential collapse of UKIP could reshape the whole political landscape. I think Liz Kendalls interview last night was mostly a reaching out to kipper territory. Smart woman.
I don't see how UKIP can exist with such tension at the top. Surely someone has to go. Farage should have stuck to his original scheme. There should have been an open discussion on direction and leadership rather than a North Korean conception of the Dear Leader.
Incidentally North Korea does look worryingly unstable, surely due for a collapse:
I see that they agree with the point that I made. The polls were right on all parties except the big two.
Why should Tories be shy or Labour reluctant? It is far more likely to be leadership than some nuance of weighting.
No amount of weighting makes up for a bad sample, as the exit poll shows. We had far too many polls last parliament. It would be far more useful to have better random sampling with a reasonable size sample than to try to fix with another weighting factor. You cannot polish a turd. Incidentally constituency level polling seems even more innacurate.
"Polling organisations will improve their fudge factors and they won’t make the same mistakes next time. They’ll just make different ones instead.
Whereas we, the electorate, will make exactly the same error we always do: we will believe that for once, the polls have got it right – and we will be cross when we discover they haven’t."
Didn't the electorate get it right?
I thought they consistently said they expected a Tory government?
"The team around Nigel himself need to reflect why it was that Thanet voted in a Ukip council but didn’t vote in Nigel as the MP for Thanet South, Mr O’Flynn said."
I'd have thought that was quite obvious. The Tory campaign of fear about Scotland paid off and the voters couldn't bare the thought of the Ed and Nicola show and I can understand that.
Personally, though, I don't trust Dave to be tough on Scotland and tough on the causes of Scotland so I voted Ukip in the parliamentary vote anyway (albeit the safe Tory seat of Woking). We all know Dave is scared of the Union breaking up on his watch so I expect plenty of pork to be given to the Scots to keep them happy.
Ultimately, Ukip have helped to reshape politics without winning power in Westminster. Without Ukip, Dave wouldn't have promised the referendum and, as we now know, they took votes off Labour to help secure a majority for the Tories.
Where Ukip go from here is uncertain. In a way I hope they don't become any more popular because that would probably mean the economy was tanking again or the Tories weren't keeping their promises on the EU referendum.
"Polling organisations will improve their fudge factors and they won’t make the same mistakes next time. They’ll just make different ones instead.
Whereas we, the electorate, will make exactly the same error we always do: we will believe that for once, the polls have got it right – and we will be cross when we discover they haven’t."
Didn't the electorate get it right?
I thought they consistently said they expected a Tory government?
Plato: slightly disappointing results for UKIP in the Norfolk and Suffolk area where Labour seems to have retained second place. I'd have guessed UKIP would come second in most seats in that area.
I don't think anyone had the idea of doing a second-place map in 2010. You don't often come across original ideas but I think this is one of them. (I may just have missed it of course). It seems obvious now that a second place map would be an interesting thing to do, but then new ideas always do once they've happened.
Mike certainly seems to be enjoying the UKIP implosion. We have a thread like this most days, probably correctly as the potential collapse of UKIP could reshape the whole political landscape. I think Liz Kendalls interview last night was mostly a reaching out to kipper territory. Smart woman.
I don't see how UKIP can exist with such tension at the top. Surely someone has to go. Farage should have stuck to his original scheme. There should have been an open discussion on direction and leadership rather than a North Korean conception of the Dear Leader.
Incidentally North Korea does look worryingly unstable, surely due for a collapse:
Plato: slightly disappointing results for UKIP in the Norfolk and Suffolk area where Labour seems to have retained second place. I'd have guessed UKIP would come second in most seats in that area.
I don't think anyone had the idea of doing a second-place map in 2010. You don't often come across original ideas but I think this is one of them. (I may just have missed it of course). It seems obvious now that a second place map would be an interesting thing to do, but then new ideas always do once they've happened.
WRT Mr Farage's staffers - I can see how Mr Carswell wouldn't approve of troughing, especially on the UK taxpayers dime.
Kippers have made a virtue of extracting as much money as possible from the expenses system of the EU. It's understandable post-expenses scandal that Mr Carswell is very concerned such a mindset could be replicated in Parliament by his own Party.
"Mike certainly seems to be enjoying the UKIP implosion."
Although you seem unfazed, Mike's beloved LDs have hit a considerable bump in the road, so he can be a bit of a mardy arse at times. But the point of the thread is correct. Farage comes over as thin-skinned and irritable. His 'resignation' speech was less than gracious and throughout the campaign he looked unwell.
"Mike certainly seems to be enjoying the UKIP implosion."
Although you seem unfazed, Mike's beloved LDs have hit a considerable bump in the road, so he can be a bit of a mardy arse at times. But the point of the thread is correct. Farage comes over as thin-skinned and irritable. His 'resignation' speech was less than gracious and throughout the campaign he looked unwell.
On the Thanet council thing has anyone compared the South Thanet wards to make sure we're comparing like with like? North would potentially be better for UKIP than south, but for the fact that it's got Roger Gale who is more UKIP than UKIP.
"Mike certainly seems to be enjoying the UKIP implosion."
Although you seem unfazed, Mike's beloved LDs have hit a considerable bump in the road, so he can be a bit of a mardy arse at times. But the point of the thread is correct. Farage comes over as thin-skinned and irritable. His 'resignation' speech was less than gracious and throughout the campaign he looked unwell.
Time to take a long rest.
OGH (or dad, as I sometimes call him) is a journalist. He writes what is newsworthy. The LDs are not doing anything worthy right now: has Farron accused Clegg of being a buffoon, for example?
Truth be told: there is nothing particularly interesting, from a betting or a political story perspective, about the LibDems right now.
That will change. There will be a leadership contest - probably Farron vs Lamb. And there will be next year's locals (and 2017 too). But what story is there to write? This site survives - like a newspaper - by having content people wish to read. I don't think there's anything that anyone care to read about the LibDems right now, at least compared to UKIP.
It seems trite to say that the 3.8m people who lent their votes to UKIP are not being well served by these shenanigans. The interesting question is how many will do so again and, if they won't, where they go next.
The Tories (and Labour) may find themselves in the happy position of the team in second place collapsing for the second election in a row making a large number of seats safer and the Tory/Labour marginals even more critical.
Farage does not look well and did not for much of the campaign.
The step up from interested observer status to actual contender is really hard and in some ways is what destroyed the Lib Dems. All those nice observational chats pointing out the faults of others by Uncle Vince and the like suddenly became a Minister defending an actual policy in the real world. In an ideal world Farage would ask his NEC to reconsider their refusal to accept his resignation. He really needs a break and UKIP need new leadership. Not that a collapse in UKIP support is necessarily a bad thing.
Mike's beloved LDs have hit a considerable bump in the road, so he can be a bit of a mardy arse at times.
The CIA have been surprised by satellite images showing the recent appearance of a battery of anti-aircraft guns in a domestic garden in Bedford, England....
DavidL - I don't understand why UKIP didn't let Farage just apply again in the Autumn. It'd give him plenty of time for R&R to recoup, and wouldn't have led to the farcical unresignation.
Mike's beloved LDs have hit a considerable bump in the road, so he can be a bit of a mardy arse at times.
The CIA have been surprised by satellite images showing the recent appearance of a battery of anti-aircraft guns in a domestic garden in Bedford, England....
Re: Barrow-in-Furness FPT. I can see Cameron/Osborne making a big, open and comprehensive offer to the SNP.
I think part of that will include a deal to link the renewal of Trident to a re-basing outside of Scotland over the next 10-15 years. Like to Barrow-in-Furness.
Jobs in the north-west and shoots one of the SNP's foxes. If managed appropriately, it might even secure the Tories the seat next time. Win-win.
DavidL - I don't understand why UKIP didn't let Farage just apply again in the Autumn. It'd give him plenty of time for R&R to recoup, and wouldn't have led to the farcical unresignation.
Except....that would give Carswell plenty of time to start moulding the party in a direction which causes apoplexy amongst UKIP's senior troughers....
"Mike certainly seems to be enjoying the UKIP implosion."
Although you seem unfazed, Mike's beloved LDs have hit a considerable bump in the road, so he can be a bit of a mardy arse at times. But the point of the thread is correct. Farage comes over as thin-skinned and irritable. His 'resignation' speech was less than gracious and throughout the campaign he looked unwell.
Time to take a long rest.
OGH (or dad, as I sometimes call him) is a journalist. He writes what is newsworthy. The LDs are not doing anything worthy right now: has Farron accused Clegg of being a buffoon, for example?
Truth be told: there is nothing particularly interesting, from a betting or a political story perspective, about the LibDems right now.
That will change. There will be a leadership contest - probably Farron vs Lamb. And there will be next year's locals (and 2017 too). But what story is there to write? This site survives - like a newspaper - by having content people wish to read. I don't think there's anything that anyone care to read about the LibDems right now, at least compared to UKIP.
For me the really interesting story of the last 24 hours is that article by Hodges in the Staggers about the Labour campaign. I am still astonished that one of our two major parties could be so dysfunctional and delusional. Who was the shadow cabinet member who resigned in case they had won? Such a commendable attitude should really be reflected in the leadership campaign.
For nearly 20 years from 1994 to 2010 Labour had a formidable fighting machine. Even when they got hammered in 2010 they kept a remarkable number of seats and a platform from which they could recover (unlike the tories in 97, 01 and 05) and regain power.
How on earth did it come to this? A leader that people were frightened to give bad news to. A shadow chancellor not even warned that his seat was at risk. A campaign who seemed to believe that they were winning when they were getting thrashed. A functioning democracy needs a choice. When are Labour going to give us one?
The collapse of the LD vote is still perplexing me somewhat - it's been huge and across the board - did well known names do any better? It doesn't look like it bar Clegg - and he appears to have been saved by Tories.
It makes me wonder just how many LD voters were actually LDs at all - and their prospects for future council elections. It's looking very grim for a long time to come.
I expect UKIP's wrangling to carry on for a while to come - if Farage goes off for a bit, he'll either try to grab the wheel again or be firmly driving from the backseat. He seems to see UKIP as his Party - and he's not sharing the toys.
It seems trite to say that the 3.8m people who lent their votes to UKIP are not being well served by these shenanigans. The interesting question is how many will do so again and, if they won't, where they go next.
The Tories (and Labour) may find themselves in the happy position of the team in second place collapsing for the second election in a row making a large number of seats safer and the Tory/Labour marginals even more critical.
Farage does not look well and did not for much of the campaign.
The step up from interested observer status to actual contender is really hard and in some ways is what destroyed the Lib Dems. All those nice observational chats pointing out the faults of others by Uncle Vince and the like suddenly became a Minister defending an actual policy in the real world. In an ideal world Farage would ask his NEC to reconsider their refusal to accept his resignation. He really needs a break and UKIP need new leadership. Not that a collapse in UKIP support is necessarily a bad thing.
The people who voted for UKIP will barely have noticed the current punch-up. They certainly won't have heard of Patrick O'Flynn.
The row is funny for those of us that enjoy the detail of politics, but until something happens involving either Nigel Farage or Douglas Carswell being dumped on his backside, there will be no real world consequences.
Things started going downhill for Ukip when Farage got Breitbart's Raheem Kassam involved as his chief of staff. Towards the wacky end of the political spectrum
There is I suspect a fundamental problem with how UKIP recruits which is why they keep getting splits. If you take the crankiest people who've got upset with the way politics was being done then put them all together, the chances are they're going to start rubbing each other the wrong way.
Remember Robert Kilroy Silk and Veritas? There've been a number of other splits in the past.
Completely O/T - does anyone think that the Govt's intentions on introducing thresholds for strike ballots could backfire on them in a very unexpected way? At the moment strike activity is incredibly low and the unions power is (contrary to what they might claim) likewise. With exceptions in a few unions, even when strikes do occur, they often cause far less disruption than is predicted. Part of this must be related to the low participation rates.
The Govt's assumption seems to be that introducing thresholds will only be beneficial, because low turnout will continue and therefore legal strike activity will reduce. But consider the opposite scenario. That low ballot participation is not necessarily always a function of lack of interest. And that increasing the threshold may have the effect of increasing participation rates. And increasing participation rates would mean greater legitimacy for strike action. And if the Unions were as a result genuinely demonstrating that they were taking their members with them then their power as a result would increase and it would be harder to ignore their demands.
DavidL - I don't understand why UKIP didn't let Farage just apply again in the Autumn. It'd give him plenty of time for R&R to recoup, and wouldn't have led to the farcical unresignation.
"Mike certainly seems to be enjoying the UKIP implosion."
Although you seem unfazed, Mike's beloved LDs have hit a considerable bump in the road, so he can be a bit of a mardy arse at times. But the point of the thread is correct. Farage comes over as thin-skinned and irritable. His 'resignation' speech was less than gracious and throughout the campaign he looked unwell.
Time to take a long rest.
OGH (or dad, as I sometimes call him) is a journalist. He writes what is newsworthy. The LDs are not doing anything worthy right now: has Farron accused Clegg of being a buffoon, for example?
Truth be told: there is nothing particularly interesting, from a betting or a political story perspective, about the LibDems right now.
That will change. There will be a leadership contest - probably Farron vs Lamb. And there will be next year's locals (and 2017 too). But what story is there to write? This site survives - like a newspaper - by having content people wish to read. I don't think there's anything that anyone care to read about the LibDems right now, at least compared to UKIP.
On the day that Tim Farron has announced he's running on the leadership election, for which many people are placing bets, if the LibDems aren't doing anything newsworthy that's a tad concerning!
It makes me wonder just how many LD voters were actually LDs at all
I have long believed that whilst their party members are largely akin to 'knit your own muesli', their voters were more aligned to 'none of the above'.
The collapse of the LD vote is still perplexing me somewhat - it's been huge and across the board - did well known names do any better? It doesn't look like it bar Clegg - and he appears to have been saved by Tories.
It makes me wonder just how many LD voters were actually LDs at all - and their prospects for future council elections. It's looking very grim for a long time to come.
I expect UKIP's wrangling to carry on for a while to come - if Farage goes off for a bit, he'll either try to grab the wheel again or be firmly driving from the backseat. He seems to see UKIP as his Party - and he's not sharing the toys.
It seems trite to say that the 3.8m people who lent their votes to UKIP are not being well served by these shenanigans. The interesting question is how many will do so again and, if they won't, where they go next.
The Tories (and Labour) may find themselves in the happy position of the team in second place collapsing for the second election in a row making a large number of seats safer and the Tory/Labour marginals even more critical.
Farage does not look well and did not for much of the campaign.
The step up from interested observer status to actual contender is really hard and in some ways is what destroyed the Lib Dems. All those nice observational chats pointing out the faults of others by Uncle Vince and the like suddenly became a Minister defending an actual policy in the real world. In an ideal world Farage would ask his NEC to reconsider their refusal to accept his resignation. He really needs a break and UKIP need new leadership. Not that a collapse in UKIP support is necessarily a bad thing.
The Lib Dems were the NOTA party and they have been replaced by UKIP. Someone, maybe Pulpstar, had a brilliant post the other day of footage of the Tories campaigning in the SW linked to pictures of a pack of wolves bringing down a deer.
But it reiterate my previous point the Lib Dems were a relatively small party with a relatively small operation. How on earth did the multi million pound operation of Labour get it so wrong?
"Mike certainly seems to be enjoying the UKIP implosion."
Although you seem unfazed, Mike's beloved LDs have hit a considerable bump in the road, so he can be a bit of a mardy arse at times. But the point of the thread is correct. Farage comes over as thin-skinned and irritable. His 'resignation' speech was less than gracious and throughout the campaign he looked unwell.
Time to take a long rest.
OGH (or dad, as I sometimes call him) is a journalist. He writes what is newsworthy. The LDs are not doing anything worthy right now: has Farron accused Clegg of being a buffoon, for example?
Truth be told: there is nothing particularly interesting, from a betting or a political story perspective, about the LibDems right now.
That will change. There will be a leadership contest - probably Farron vs Lamb. And there will be next year's locals (and 2017 too). But what story is there to write? This site survives - like a newspaper - by having content people wish to read. I don't think there's anything that anyone care to read about the LibDems right now, at least compared to UKIP.
On the day that Tim Farron has announced he's running on the leadership election, for which many people are placing bets, if the LibDems aren't doing anything newsworthy that's a tad concerning!
It looks as though Farron will announce his leadership bid today. It's no great surprise. Maybe then there'll be a thread.
DavidL - I don't understand why UKIP didn't let Farage just apply again in the Autumn. It'd give him plenty of time for R&R to recoup, and wouldn't have led to the farcical unresignation.
Or accept that the Leadership is not for him and focus on being the spokesman for Out in the forthcoming referendum. He is at risk of being destroyed before the most important point of his career even arrives.
"Mike certainly seems to be enjoying the UKIP implosion."
Although you seem unfazed, Mike's beloved LDs have hit a considerable bump in the road, so he can be a bit of a mardy arse at times. But the point of the thread is correct. Farage comes over as thin-skinned and irritable. His 'resignation' speech was less than gracious and throughout the campaign he looked unwell.
Time to take a long rest.
OGH (or dad, as I sometimes call him) is a journalist. He writes what is newsworthy. The LDs are not doing anything worthy right now: has Farron accused Clegg of being a buffoon, for example?
Truth be told: there is nothing particularly interesting, from a betting or a political story perspective, about the LibDems right now.
That will change. There will be a leadership contest - probably Farron vs Lamb. And there will be next year's locals (and 2017 too). But what story is there to write? This site survives - like a newspaper - by having content people wish to read. I don't think there's anything that anyone care to read about the LibDems right now, at least compared to UKIP.
On the day that Tim Farron has announced he's running on the leadership election, for which many people are placing bets, if the LibDems aren't doing anything newsworthy that's a tad concerning!
You think it newsworthy that Tim Farron - skin stretched taut over ambition - is making a bid for power?
Re greater powers for cities, IIRC every seat on Manchester City council is Labour, all 32 of them.
Anyone know the Mayor's geography - is it the same?
Much bigger IIRC, Manchester City council actually covers a relatively small area of the city centre and many areas you would regard as being in Manchester are actually in one of the surrounding boroughs.
"Polling organisations will improve their fudge factors and they won’t make the same mistakes next time. They’ll just make different ones instead.
Whereas we, the electorate, will make exactly the same error we always do: we will believe that for once, the polls have got it right – and we will be cross when we discover they haven’t."
Didn't the electorate get it right?
I thought they consistently said they expected a Tory government?
DavidL - I don't understand why UKIP didn't let Farage just apply again in the Autumn. It'd give him plenty of time for R&R to recoup, and wouldn't have led to the farcical unresignation.
Except....that would give Carswell plenty of time to start moulding the party in a direction which causes apoplexy amongst UKIP's senior troughers....
Quite. Carswell is the one accountable for the Short money and wants to see it spent responsibly. Fair play to him for standing his ground and sticking up for the taxpayer.
Friends, we all knew this would happen. Just as Farage resigned and three days later rose again, so he is being denied three times (by Carswell, O'Flynn and another to come forward soon, I expect).
On a more serious note, they need to sort this nonsense out. If it drags then it'll affect the In/Out referendum, and Out could easily be associated with 'those in-fighting oafs at UKIP'.
"Mike certainly seems to be enjoying the UKIP implosion."
Although you seem unfazed, Mike's beloved LDs have hit a considerable bump in the road, so he can be a bit of a mardy arse at times. But the point of the thread is correct. Farage comes over as thin-skinned and irritable. His 'resignation' speech was less than gracious and throughout the campaign he looked unwell.
Time to take a long rest.
OGH (or dad, as I sometimes call him) is a journalist. He writes what is newsworthy. The LDs are not doing anything worthy right now: has Farron accused Clegg of being a buffoon, for example?
Truth be told: there is nothing particularly interesting, from a betting or a political story perspective, about the LibDems right now.
That will change. There will be a leadership contest - probably Farron vs Lamb. And there will be next year's locals (and 2017 too). But what story is there to write? This site survives - like a newspaper - by having content people wish to read. I don't think there's anything that anyone care to read about the LibDems right now, at least compared to UKIP.
On the day that Tim Farron has announced he's running on the leadership election, for which many people are placing bets, if the LibDems aren't doing anything newsworthy that's a tad concerning!
You think it newsworthy that Tim Farron - skin stretched taut over ambition - is making a bid for power?
No I'm saying that if the Lib Dem leadership race is not newsworthy then that is terrible news for the Lib Dem party. If we can't even care about their leadership race, then what can they do that will be newsworthy? We're having posts on the Labour leadership.
Re greater powers for cities, IIRC every seat on Manchester City council is Labour, all 32 of them.
Anyone know the Mayor's geography - is it the same?
Much bigger IIRC, Manchester City council actually covers a relatively small area of the city centre and many areas you would regard as being in Manchester are actually in one of the surrounding boroughs.
Yes - somewhat like Greater London in that respect - so not a complete one party state but very likely on present form to be a safe Labour authority I'd have thought. Guess it depends on how effectively they use the powers Osborne wants to give them.
I did not realise that other EU countries had put in place legal defence mechanisms against this happening.
"England and Wales stand alone in Europe in their readiness to take away children without their parents’ consent.
A damning Council of Europe report on child protection, published last month, warned: ‘England and Wales are unique in placing so many children for adoption, in particular in the young age group which is “popular” in its adoption market.’
It said 80 per cent of babies and under-fives ‘forcibly taken’ from their families by social workers are never returned, but are adopted by ‘strangers’..........
The numbers have provoked protests to the Government and to Sir James Munby, the head of the family courts, from ambassadors and government representatives of 34 countries, including Russia, Nigeria, Latvia, India and the Czech Republic.
In France, the Senate (the upper house of parliament) has approved a change in the Republic’s law to stop French children here being removed for adoption.
The legislation says: ‘Children of French families living abroad must be returned to France... in particular to avoid forced adoption without permission of the biological parents. This type of situation exists in particular in the UK.’
Slovakia’s Ministry of Justice is threatening to take the UK to the European Court of Human Rights after at least 30 of its young citizens — including babies — were taken from their mothers.
And the Latvian government has written in protest to the leader of the House of Commons because in the past three years, 136 Latvian children living here have been ‘illegally or forcibly’ adopted by British families."
The LDs will need to do their own navel gazing, leadership contest and debate about future direction, but I am glad of the pause first. UKIP and Labour are prime examples of how not to deal with the aftermath.
It is a very fluid situation politically, with UKIP having one of its periodic splits and Labour not sure whether to stay in its comfort zone or to move to a new generation. The Tories are cheering now but have a wafer thin majority and no one knows what will happen next in Scotland. If the cards fall right then there is potential for a strong bounceback for the LDs. I suspect that if Liz Kendall is chosen for Labour and Tim Farron for the LDs that we will see a tacit pact similar to Blair and Ashdown. When one of Labour and LDs does well the other tends to do so as well.
DavidL - I don't understand why UKIP didn't let Farage just apply again in the Autumn. It'd give him plenty of time for R&R to recoup, and wouldn't have led to the farcical unresignation.
Yes indeed. They also gave now some decent stand ins.
UKIP need to get a grip - they got lots of votes but only 1 seat and people will try to hit them hard and fast so they are not as much of a factor in this parliament as the last. Stay the course and cut the internal squabbling and the are still well set.
So while some of us on here were saying that the Labour problem was that they were only talking to each other, it now transpires that they weren't even doing that!
Quality read, I always wonder what it is like behind the scenes.
Who is the shadow cabinet minister who resigned (how did I miss that??)
Also:
"Another Labour insider told of the scene in the press office when Miliband posed with the notorious Ed stone, the 8ft 6in slab of limestone upon which his six key election pledges were inscribed. When it appeared on TV, a press officer ‘started screaming. He stood in the office, just screaming over and over again at the screen. It was so bad they thought he was having a breakdown.’"
a la Thick of It. Titter...
I do feel a bit for Balls. Looks like he was hung out to dry, despite how sweet his defeat was for us blues.
This paragraph in The Spectator article summed up Labour's campaign:
‘When the campaign started we were told we had to clear all leaflet design past the leader’s office,’ said one party worker. ‘We thought that would be a nightmare, but for the first part of the campaign it worked really well. We’d email the art, and about an hour or so later we’d get the response, “Great. Go with this.” Then one day someone got the message, “Excellent. All good.” But when they went to respond they realised they’d failed to insert the original attachment. All the time, Ed’s team had been signing off the leaflets without bothering to look at them.’
The spirit behind the payment of 'short money' is the key. It is intended to go a little way towards helping opposition parties to hold the govt to account, where one side has the entire civil service on their side, and the opposion has merely their MPs. It is a gesture towards rebalancing a very unequal relationship.
It is admirable that Carswell wants to be frugal, and wants to be seen to be frugal. If the party were wealthy, and this money were immaterial, it would be fine statement. But UKIP is not in that position.
Carswell is our only MP, representing 4 million of us. Why he thinks that would be easier to accomplish with 5 support staff, rather 15 remains unclear.
Completely O/T - does anyone think that the Govt's intentions on introducing thresholds for strike ballots could backfire on them in a very unexpected way? At the moment strike activity is incredibly low and the unions power is (contrary to what they might claim) likewise. With exceptions in a few unions, even when strikes do occur, they often cause far less disruption than is predicted. Part of this must be related to the low participation rates.
The Govt's assumption seems to be that introducing thresholds will only be beneficial, because low turnout will continue and therefore legal strike activity will reduce. But consider the opposite scenario. That low ballot participation is not necessarily always a function of lack of interest. And that increasing the threshold may have the effect of increasing participation rates. And increasing participation rates would mean greater legitimacy for strike action. And if the Unions were as a result genuinely demonstrating that they were taking their members with them then their power as a result would increase and it would be harder to ignore their demands.
Int resting idea. If the Tories drop the idea at some point we will see that their analysis says the same thing
Mr. Financier, read a comment in another place [by someone trustworthy] that he and his wife had to take their daughter, who was feigning illness, back from school otherwise the school would've called social services.
Friends, we all knew this would happen. Just as Farage resigned and three days later rose again, so he is being denied three times (by Carswell, O'Flynn and another to come forward soon, I expect).
On a more serious note, they need to sort this nonsense out. If it drags then it'll affect the In/Out referendum, and Out could easily be associated with 'those in-fighting oafs at UKIP'.
The referendum is the only reason I don't think Carswell will quit UKIP. I think he'd rather fight that battle from UKIP than the Tory benches.
The spirit behind the payment of 'short money' is the key. It is intended to go a little way towards helping opposition parties to hold the govt to account, where one side has the entire civil service on their side, and the opposion has merely their MPs. It is a gesture towards rebalancing a very unequal relationship.
It is admirable that Carswell wants to be frugal, and wants to be seen to be frugal. If the party were wealthy, and this money were immaterial, it would be fine statement. But UKIP is not in that position.
Carswell is our only MP, representing 4 million of us. Why he thinks that would be easier to accomplish with 5 support staff, rather 15 remains unclear.
Strictly speaking, he only represents the people of Clacton. Is it common for MPs to have non-constituents at their surgeries, because they didn't vote for their own MP?
Quality read, I always wonder what it is like behind the scenes.
Who is the shadow cabinet minister who resigned (how did I miss that??)
Also:
"Another Labour insider told of the scene in the press office when Miliband posed with the notorious Ed stone, the 8ft 6in slab of limestone upon which his six key election pledges were inscribed. When it appeared on TV, a press officer ‘started screaming. He stood in the office, just screaming over and over again at the screen. It was so bad they thought he was having a breakdown.’"
a la Thick of It. Titter...
I do feel a bit for Balls. Looks like he was hung out to dry, despite how sweet his defeat was for us blues.
Will Yvette be out for revenge? Or will the Milifans want to consign her to history as well?
Smart Labour would want to move on from the Blair/Brown feuding. That should be as buried as history while a new generation takes over. Picking at wounds is no way to heal them.
Mr. Kendrick, I agree. Carswell's like a medieval soldier who thinks a cross blessed by the local abbot will prove greater protection than plate armour.
I did not realise that other EU countries had put in place legal defence mechanisms against this happening.
"England and Wales stand alone in Europe in their readiness to take away children without their parents’ consent.
A damning Council of Europe report on child protection, published last month, warned: ‘England and Wales are unique in placing so many children for adoption, in particular in the young age group which is “popular” in its adoption market.’
It said 80 per cent of babies and under-fives ‘forcibly taken’ from their families by social workers are never returned, but are adopted by ‘strangers’..........
The numbers have provoked protests to the Government and to Sir James Munby, the head of the family courts, from ambassadors and government representatives of 34 countries, including Russia, Nigeria, Latvia, India and the Czech Republic.
In France, the Senate (the upper house of parliament) has approved a change in the Republic’s law to stop French children here being removed for adoption.
The legislation says: ‘Children of French families living abroad must be returned to France... in particular to avoid forced adoption without permission of the biological parents. This type of situation exists in particular in the UK.’
Slovakia’s Ministry of Justice is threatening to take the UK to the European Court of Human Rights after at least 30 of its young citizens — including babies — were taken from their mothers.
And the Latvian government has written in protest to the leader of the House of Commons because in the past three years, 136 Latvian children living here have been ‘illegally or forcibly’ adopted by British families."
Having had professional dealings with child protection issues on a number of occasions, I would be very sceptical about that being the whole story. Social services cannot tell their side because of client confidentiality.
Mr. Financier, read a comment in another place [by someone trustworthy] that he and his wife had to take their daughter, who was feigning illness, back from school otherwise the school would've called social services.
English Parliament is the answer not this city devolution. And what about rural areas?
Being cynical, I cannot help but think people propose devolution they think helps their party not just that is a good idea, and rural areas are already in the bag for the Tories.
But it's probably just that rural areas are always ignored.
Regarding Boris - while he waits to finish his term as MoL, does he get to attend Cabinet or anything?
I'm rather confused about his various hats right now.
He gets to attend the 'political cabinet' apparently, although in a single party gov I'd have thought it was the same. He gets to attend pretend cabinet I guess, after the real thing finished.
"So what did you guys talk about?" "Not you, boris, of course"
I did not realise that other EU countries had put in place legal defence mechanisms against this happening. [SNIP]
Yes, it's something that a few journalists, most notably Christopher Booker, have been going on quite heavily over the past couple of years. Former MP John Hemming also raised individual cases in the Commons under Privilege. It does seem that at least the secrecy in some of these cases is being lifted, but Social Services certainly seem to have far too much power to act unrestrained, with parents often having no way to be represented within the system.
Mr. Kendrick, I agree. Carswell's like a medieval soldier who thinks a cross blessed by the local abbot will prove greater protection than plate armour.
To be fair to Carswell he does seem like he ideologically believes in what he believes in.
The problem is that he's learning that what Farage believes in and what he believes in isn't the same thing. That's how party politics is supposed to work, there's a broad tent - but having left the tent once he seems to have less tolerance for divergence from The Plan.
Some thoughts on the Labour leadership, offered only because I know they will be ignored.
Someone pointed out that although the US Presidential election is next year, the candidates have yet to be picked, but Labour are choosing a leader they expect to fight in 2020.
They will pick Burnham, and he will lose badly.
What they should do is learn the one lesson from Ed's 5 wasted years, which is ditch a loser.
If Burnham is selected, he should spend 2-3 years testing to destruction the notions that
- Labour were not left wing enough - The unions can pick the right leader - Anyone from Gordo's cabinet can win
Then, when his rating are at rock bottom, and it might be clear who will follow Cameron for the Tories, defenestrate him and pick someone who might have a chance
Comments
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/05/11/why_the_election_pollsters_got_it_wrong/
"Polling organisations will improve their fudge factors and they won’t make the same mistakes next time. They’ll just make different ones instead.
Whereas we, the electorate, will make exactly the same error we always do: we will believe that for once, the polls have got it right – and we will be cross when we discover they haven’t."
And short of expelling him from the party, what can Farage do? As with Short Money, Farage is powerless. Ooooh, that's gonna get under Nigel's (thin) skin.
Truth is though Nigel, seven times you have asked the voters for a key to the House. And seven times they have said "Bugger off!" Are you getting the message yet?
I don't see how UKIP can exist with such tension at the top. Surely someone has to go. Farage should have stuck to his original scheme. There should have been an open discussion on direction and leadership rather than a North Korean conception of the Dear Leader.
Incidentally North Korea does look worryingly unstable, surely due for a collapse:
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/may/13/north-korean-defence-minister-executed-by-anti-aircaft-gun-report
Makes the LDs seem a sensible party :-)
Why should Tories be shy or Labour reluctant? It is far more likely to be leadership than some nuance of weighting.
No amount of weighting makes up for a bad sample, as the exit poll shows. We had far too many polls last parliament. It would be far more useful to have better random sampling with a reasonable size sample than to try to fix with another weighting factor. You cannot polish a turd. Incidentally constituency level polling seems even more innacurate.
I thought they consistently said they expected a Tory government?
Perhaps there was a clue in there?
http://www.economist.com/news/science-and-technology/21651169-strength-your-handshake-predicts-length-your-life-getting-grip?fsrc=scn/tw/te/pe/ed/gettingagrip
I'd have thought that was quite obvious. The Tory campaign of fear about Scotland paid off and the voters couldn't bare the thought of the Ed and Nicola show and I can understand that.
Personally, though, I don't trust Dave to be tough on Scotland and tough on the causes of Scotland so I voted Ukip in the parliamentary vote anyway (albeit the safe Tory seat of Woking). We all know Dave is scared of the Union breaking up on his watch so I expect plenty of pork to be given to the Scots to keep them happy.
Ultimately, Ukip have helped to reshape politics without winning power in Westminster. Without Ukip, Dave wouldn't have promised the referendum and, as we now know, they took votes off Labour to help secure a majority for the Tories.
Where Ukip go from here is uncertain. In a way I hope they don't become any more popular because that would probably mean the economy was tanking again or the Tories weren't keeping their promises on the EU referendum.
Kippers have made a virtue of extracting as much money as possible from the expenses system of the EU. It's understandable post-expenses scandal that Mr Carswell is very concerned such a mindset could be replicated in Parliament by his own Party.
"Mike certainly seems to be enjoying the UKIP implosion."
Although you seem unfazed, Mike's beloved LDs have hit a considerable bump in the road, so he can be a bit of a mardy arse at times. But the point of the thread is correct. Farage comes over as thin-skinned and irritable. His 'resignation' speech was less than gracious and throughout the campaign he looked unwell.
Time to take a long rest.
UKIP 3,881,129
LibDems 2,415,888
Truth be told: there is nothing particularly interesting, from a betting or a political story perspective, about the LibDems right now.
That will change. There will be a leadership contest - probably Farron vs Lamb. And there will be next year's locals (and 2017 too). But what story is there to write? This site survives - like a newspaper - by having content people wish to read. I don't think there's anything that anyone care to read about the LibDems right now, at least compared to UKIP.
The Tories (and Labour) may find themselves in the happy position of the team in second place collapsing for the second election in a row making a large number of seats safer and the Tory/Labour marginals even more critical.
Farage does not look well and did not for much of the campaign.
The step up from interested observer status to actual contender is really hard and in some ways is what destroyed the Lib Dems. All those nice observational chats pointing out the faults of others by Uncle Vince and the like suddenly became a Minister defending an actual policy in the real world. In an ideal world Farage would ask his NEC to reconsider their refusal to accept his resignation. He really needs a break and UKIP need new leadership. Not that a collapse in UKIP support is necessarily a bad thing.
I think part of that will include a deal to link the renewal of Trident to a re-basing outside of Scotland over the next 10-15 years. Like to Barrow-in-Furness.
Jobs in the north-west and shoots one of the SNP's foxes. If managed appropriately, it might even secure the Tories the seat next time. Win-win.
Edit - I realise now you're talking about a North England seat.. my apologies.
For nearly 20 years from 1994 to 2010 Labour had a formidable fighting machine. Even when they got hammered in 2010 they kept a remarkable number of seats and a platform from which they could recover (unlike the tories in 97, 01 and 05) and regain power.
How on earth did it come to this? A leader that people were frightened to give bad news to. A shadow chancellor not even warned that his seat was at risk. A campaign who seemed to believe that they were winning when they were getting thrashed. A functioning democracy needs a choice. When are Labour going to give us one?
It makes me wonder just how many LD voters were actually LDs at all - and their prospects for future council elections. It's looking very grim for a long time to come.
I expect UKIP's wrangling to carry on for a while to come - if Farage goes off for a bit, he'll either try to grab the wheel again or be firmly driving from the backseat. He seems to see UKIP as his Party - and he's not sharing the toys.
The row is funny for those of us that enjoy the detail of politics, but until something happens involving either Nigel Farage or Douglas Carswell being dumped on his backside, there will be no real world consequences.
Labour navel gaze for the next four months, UKIP imploding over troughing and the Lib Dems reduced to 8 MPs.
Great time to be a Tory.
"OGH (or dad, as I sometimes call him) is a journalist. He writes what is newsworthy."
Of course, but the venerable Mr Smithson Snr does it with some glee. Anyway, Being of a similar age, I'm allowed to tease him.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-32726171
That it may also cause dissent within Labour between its local authority power base and the shadow Cabinet is no doubt coincidental.
Talking to a Labour guest about the exit poll, as the night rolled on "you'll be wishing the exit poll was right before long"
Ouch.
Remember Robert Kilroy Silk and Veritas? There've been a number of other splits in the past.
And Lord knows, the north needs some help.
The Govt's assumption seems to be that introducing thresholds will only be beneficial, because low turnout will continue and therefore legal strike activity will reduce. But consider the opposite scenario. That low ballot participation is not necessarily always a function of lack of interest. And that increasing the threshold may have the effect of increasing participation rates. And increasing participation rates would mean greater legitimacy for strike action. And if the Unions were as a result genuinely demonstrating that they were taking their members with them then their power as a result would increase and it would be harder to ignore their demands.
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2015/05/12/farage-forced-through-leadership-confirmation/
But it reiterate my previous point the Lib Dems were a relatively small party with a relatively small operation. How on earth did the multi million pound operation of Labour get it so wrong?
Labour's brilliant ground game would destroy us in a second election.
Anyone know the Mayor's geography - is it the same?
Not sure if this is the whole thing or a taster of what is to come.
http://us6.campaign-archive2.com/?u=b7034b6517cfdcc8d4d4e60e9&id=780a0402bb&e=34b267752a
It's so unusual to find pieces where every paragraph asks to be quoted.
http://i.imgur.com/KBzp7jP.jpg
http://www.spectator.co.uk/features/9528312/inside-the-milibunker-the-last-days-of-ed-did-ed-miliband-sacrifice-ed-balls/
Friends, we all knew this would happen. Just as Farage resigned and three days later rose again, so he is being denied three times (by Carswell, O'Flynn and another to come forward soon, I expect).
On a more serious note, they need to sort this nonsense out. If it drags then it'll affect the In/Out referendum, and Out could easily be associated with 'those in-fighting oafs at UKIP'.
The immediate power of SociaL Services is worrying as evidenced by this story.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-3080527/The-schoolgirls-snatched-parents-social-services-moaned-teachers-banned-watching-TV.html
I did not realise that other EU countries had put in place legal defence mechanisms against this happening.
"England and Wales stand alone in Europe in their readiness to take away children without their parents’ consent.
A damning Council of Europe report on child protection, published last month, warned: ‘England and Wales are unique in placing so many children for adoption, in particular in the young age group which is “popular” in its adoption market.’
It said 80 per cent of babies and under-fives ‘forcibly taken’ from their families by social workers are never returned, but are adopted by ‘strangers’..........
The numbers have provoked protests to the Government and to Sir James Munby, the head of the family courts, from ambassadors and government representatives of 34 countries, including Russia, Nigeria, Latvia, India and the Czech Republic.
In France, the Senate (the upper house of parliament) has approved a change in the Republic’s law to stop French children here being removed for adoption.
The legislation says: ‘Children of French families living abroad must be returned to France... in particular to avoid forced adoption without permission of the biological parents. This type of situation exists in particular in the UK.’
Slovakia’s Ministry of Justice is threatening to take the UK to the European Court of Human Rights after at least 30 of its young citizens — including babies — were taken from their mothers.
And the Latvian government has written in protest to the leader of the House of Commons because in the past three years, 136 Latvian children living here have been ‘illegally or forcibly’ adopted by British families."
The LDs will need to do their own navel gazing, leadership contest and debate about future direction, but I am glad of the pause first. UKIP and Labour are prime examples of how not to deal with the aftermath.
It is a very fluid situation politically, with UKIP having one of its periodic splits and Labour not sure whether to stay in its comfort zone or to move to a new generation. The Tories are cheering now but have a wafer thin majority and no one knows what will happen next in Scotland. If the cards fall right then there is potential for a strong bounceback for the LDs. I suspect that if Liz Kendall is chosen for Labour and Tim Farron for the LDs that we will see a tacit pact similar to Blair and Ashdown. When one of Labour and LDs does well the other tends to do so as well.
Interesting times indeed.
UKIP need to get a grip - they got lots of votes but only 1 seat and people will try to hit them hard and fast so they are not as much of a factor in this parliament as the last. Stay the course and cut the internal squabbling and the are still well set.
I went back to check the author, which raised another smile.
Who is the shadow cabinet minister who resigned (how did I miss that??)
Also:
"Another Labour insider told of the scene in the press office when Miliband posed with the notorious Ed stone, the 8ft 6in slab of limestone upon which his six key election pledges were inscribed. When it appeared on TV, a press officer ‘started screaming. He stood in the office, just screaming over and over again at the screen. It was so bad they thought he was having a breakdown.’"
a la Thick of It. Titter...
I do feel a bit for Balls. Looks like he was hung out to dry, despite how sweet his defeat was for us blues.
‘When the campaign started we were told we had to clear all leaflet design past the leader’s office,’ said one party worker. ‘We thought that would be a nightmare, but for the first part of the campaign it worked really well. We’d email the art, and about an hour or so later we’d get the response, “Great. Go with this.” Then one day someone got the message, “Excellent. All good.” But when they went to respond they realised they’d failed to insert the original attachment. All the time, Ed’s team had been signing off the leaflets without bothering to look at them.’
It is admirable that Carswell wants to be frugal, and wants to be seen to be frugal. If the party were wealthy, and this money were immaterial, it would be fine statement. But UKIP is not in that position.
Carswell is our only MP, representing 4 million of us. Why he thinks that would be easier to accomplish with 5 support staff, rather 15 remains unclear.
In other news, Osborne's devolution is daft: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-32726171
English Parliament is the answer not this city devolution. And what about rural areas?
I'm rather confused about his various hats right now.
Smart Labour would want to move on from the Blair/Brown feuding. That should be as buried as history while a new generation takes over. Picking at wounds is no way to heal them.
Basically, his 'job' is just a nod to the fact that he's around but can't have anything proper to do until he stops being mayor.
Mr. Monksfield, I'm not sure whether he'd be welcomed back.
Carswell represents the people of Clacton, those who voted for him and those who didn't.
People who voted UKIP in other constituencies are represented by other MPs from other parties.
But it's probably just that rural areas are always ignored. He gets to attend the 'political cabinet' apparently, although in a single party gov I'd have thought it was the same. He gets to attend pretend cabinet I guess, after the real thing finished.
"So what did you guys talk about?"
"Not you, boris, of course"
The problem is that he's learning that what Farage believes in and what he believes in isn't the same thing. That's how party politics is supposed to work, there's a broad tent - but having left the tent once he seems to have less tolerance for divergence from The Plan.
Someone pointed out that although the US Presidential election is next year, the candidates have yet to be picked, but Labour are choosing a leader they expect to fight in 2020.
They will pick Burnham, and he will lose badly.
What they should do is learn the one lesson from Ed's 5 wasted years, which is ditch a loser.
If Burnham is selected, he should spend 2-3 years testing to destruction the notions that
- Labour were not left wing enough
- The unions can pick the right leader
- Anyone from Gordo's cabinet can win
Then, when his rating are at rock bottom, and it might be clear who will follow Cameron for the Tories, defenestrate him and pick someone who might have a chance
The Sun sort of agrees with me
@tnewtondunn: The Sun Says today: What Labour needs and why it matters http://t.co/XnzXkfBv7u