Burnham get's it and play's the Michael Howard role in shoring up Labour's position, winning back a few seats from the Tories in 2020 and showing a partial recovery in Scotland...
Blimey, I'd said Chuka was a lay, but I wasn't expecting that!
In the early stages of leadership races, especially when you don't yet know who the candidates will be, laying the favourite is often a good default strategy. Chuka at 2.75 was ludicrously short.
...and SO accuses the PBTories of unbridled hubris...
There is no doubt that were Scotland to become independent Salmond and Sturgeon would very quickly become among the most hated politicians any country has ever known - the lies they have consistently told for years would be exposed for all to see. But they would not give a monkeys. All that matters to them is creating that frontier.
Good old Loyalists, always talking about hate (never their own) and lies (never their own).
Yes, I certainly don't see that hypocrisy displayed by some people on both sides.
Indeed. Cameron could still end up writing his place in history by being remembered as the PM who lost the Union.
Could do. It's certainly not the case that the circumstances which might lead to that are entirely or even principally to do with him, but I fear the challenge is so great that he is not adequate to prevent it. I hope he proves me wrong again.
On Chukka, if it's a simple matter of he couldn't get the votes, does that speak well of Labour or not?
Finally ! Mary Creagh talks about the small business people. Why did Labour not target such people ?
The biggest help to small business would not even cost much money. It is about overwhelming regulation and red tape.
And, before anyone raises the spectre of Europe, let me tell you that the "interpretations" in this country are far more rigorous than say it is in Germany. Not all but many. Even in civilian lives, some of the "understood" health and safety laws are different.
So Surby what are you going to offer ?
The last time was 13 years of wall to wall shit, higher taxes, corrupt banks and well-connected mates getting non-jobs on big salaries which SMEs had to pay for.
There's no point Labour targetting SMEs if all they're going to offer is more of the same.
Indeed Labour still can't accept they hugely over spent, until they do few business owners are going to be taking them seriously.
Labour did not hugely overspend by any historical or international comparison.
If your neighbour buys a Maclaren do you take out a loan and overstretch yourself to buy a Bugatti?
If in your rather tenuous metaphor, success is measured by drag-racing supercars, perhaps.
But you beg the question when you say "overstretched" -- we were not overstretched. Until the global financial crisis hit, we had a smaller deficit and debt than were inherited from the Conservatives, and both were smaller than under the current Conservative government.
That people now believe the opposite shows why Labour's "say nothing" strategy was so incredibly stupid.
There was a surplus in 1997 and a ~5% deficit in 2007 when the crisis hit
Your facts are, in short, incorrect.
But anyway,. you lost ths argument, and the election, so it;s irrelevant, and actually good for the tories that loons like you continue to believe this nonsense, so i should probably not even bother trying to correct you...
Chuka has always looked VERY temperamentally unsuited for a leadership role so doesn't surprise me he's fizzled out before even getting into the starters enclosure...
That's a quick fizzle. I'm inclined to think he's calculated he'll have a better chance in a few years, but temperamentally he does see to possess a permanently irritated attitude when challenged in every interview I've seen him in. I was hoping to see if he had more calm and substance in the campaign. Oh well.
Nigel Farage has told his internal critics swear loyalty to him or leave the UK Independence Party in a bid to draw a line under the worst crisis of his leadership.
Mr Farage told the Telegraph he was prepared to become a more “autocratic” leader to impose his will on the party.
The Ukip leader took the high risk strategy of challenging his critics as he sought to bolster his authority in the party after a week of strife at the party’s highest level.
I don't see why Chuka Umunna leaving the field means that Andy Burnham's price should massively shorten. Andy Burnham should probably have been favourite anyway, but I would have thought that the prices that should be shortening are of other modernisers who may now collect his support.
Agreed. If you were going to vote for Chuka, why would Burnham be your next choice?
The SNP were not responsible for Labour's loss. Labour were.
What the SNP have shown is how it is possible to win big in the modern world as a left of centre party with a top flight organsiation and a first rate leadership.
All Labour need now in England is the organisation and the leadership!
If Nicola and Alec have their way,Scotland will not be part of the union in 2020.
Labour needs to concentrate on England and forget Scotland.
If the SNP become unpopular,Labour voters will return.
This.
It's all about England.
In which case, as Mike said, they'll need that 12% lead. Now, how are they going to do that....
I have to agree with you by the way. Scotland and England are now too divided in what they look for, Labour will recover a bit, and they could get 10-15 seats back in time, but nowhere near the powerbase they had.
Something like 86% of Scots voters vote for high-tax left-wing parties. A point not often made is that this makes Scotland not only utterly unlike the rest of the UK, but utterly unlike any other actual functioning country in the world. In the past, such monolithically leftist countries have been short-lived, their existence usually terminated by the money running out.
Scotland is currently able to vote for high-tax leftism because functionally it's a region not a country. It can therefore subsist on transfer payments from the other, productive regions. Currently it is rational for Scots to vote for high-tax leftism. Scottish individuals are too poor to contribute any tax, in the main, so the high tax they are voting for is high tax on other people. In effect, while they're in a union, the money does not run out.
If you strip leftism of this advantage in Scotland, so that voters feel the actual cost of leftism themselves rather than sending the bill to London and the south-east (as explicitly promised by Murphy during the campaign), then logically, you must get a resurgence of Conservatism. Leftists are incapable of being responsible with other people's money - they didn't go into politics to do that, they went into it expressly to piss away other people's money. So the only party likely to get traction is one that keeps spending and tax under control.
So the question really is whether Scotland gets FFA now, grows up a bit and starts voting Tory, thereby demonstrating that the country can be rehabilitated, made British again, and be fit to stay in the union; or whether it prefers independence, gets it, and just goes bankrupt. Either is a matter of indifference to most English. Personally I'd rather the former because Scotland pre-leftism contributed well above its weight in making Britain successful. But if they really want to be North Korea or Zimbabwe I wouldn't lose a lot of sleep as from a Conservative perspective there appears to be only upside.
It's more prosaic, I think he doesn't want to be Labour's William Hague, he's only 36, same age as Hague was when he became leader.
It .
Erm. I can't see how he can ever run when he's made the statement that the pressure is effectively too much. It will still be too much in five years.
Why would it? He'll be 5 years older, a lot can happen in five years, he can claim easily to have prepared better, and he'll be in his 40s and so, while still youthful and energetic, more of an age with recent leaders.
What could be worse than a politician calling the public trash which was already on the record?
This really is shaping up to be following the Lib Dem '06 elections. Maybe Labour will be able to follow this precedent and elect a man who succeeds in destroying the party?
TSE retweeted John Simpson @thejohnsimpson 8m8 minutes ago Labour source (yes I have one) says Chuka Umunna withdrew from leadership bid because of an article in a Sunday paper, & it's "bad".
Nigel Farage has told his internal critics swear loyalty to him or leave the UK Independence Party in a bid to draw a line under the worst crisis of his leadership.
Mr Farage told the Telegraph he was prepared to become a more “autocratic” leader to impose his will on the party.
The Ukip leader took the high risk strategy of challenging his critics as he sought to bolster his authority in the party after a week of strife at the party’s highest level.
Bold. Not many are inclined to take a run at the king so directly even if they dislike them, and if that's right then he's making any indirect run impossible.
It's more prosaic, I think he doesn't want to be Labour's William Hague, he's only 36, same age as Hague was when he became leader.
It .
Erm. I can't see how he can ever run when he's made the statement that the pressure is effectively too much. It will still be too much in five years.
Why would it? He'll be 5 years older, a lot can happen in five years, he can claim easily to have prepared better, and he'll be in his 40s and so, while still youthful and energetic, more of an age with recent leaders.
From the sounds of it, what 'it' is might scupper his chances full stop.
Re Chuka- as an urbane, clubber in the 90's and naughties, I think the scrutiny is fairly obvious. And Chuka, possibly unlike Cameron and Obama cannot put his habits to the follies of youth.
A shame really because he had star quality and although doubtful if he had won, would have provided us all with some more entertainment in what looks like to be a very turgid Cooper vs Burnham affair.
Hmm, I hope it is something genuinely bad and not just politically bad (from an entertainment pov, I don't actually wish anyone to have done bad things) that is supposedly to be reported, not just that he has 'I hate trash' tatooed on his back or something.
It must be a corker to trump that. And something he didn't think would get out or else he'd never have run. He's no ingénue when it comes to public attention.
I feel a bit sorry for anyone knee-capped by the media, but he did want to be PM.
What could be worse than a politician calling the public trash which was already on the record?
This really is shaping up to be following the Lib Dem '06 elections. Maybe Labour will be able to follow this precedent and elect a man who succeeds in destroying the party?
Just to add to my earlier post on boundaries - just checked and all the remaining Lib Dem seats are at least somewhat undersized so the review could hurt them too.
Last year labour were apparently trying to force Alan Johnson to oust Ed... No chance of him standing?
Think I have some betslips on him - considering them very much dead still !
Me too. But Johnson has categorically ruled himself out. Says he will be too old by next election. Desperate shame. He could have run a decent period of opposition and then handed on a new generation to take things forward.
The SNP were not responsible for Labour's loss. Labour were.
What the SNP have shown is how it is possible to win big in the modern world as a left of centre party with a top flight organsiation and a first rate leadership.
All Labour need now in England is the organisation and the leadership!
Except the SNP can send the bill of this leftism to English taxpayers, which is why they don't want FFA.
Re Chuka- as an urbane, clubber in the 90's and naughties, I think the scrutiny is fairly obvious. And Chuka, possibly unlike Cameron and Obama cannot put his habits to the follies of youth.
Well that would be the 'obvious' thing. But I think that would be shakeable off these days. He could just say 'yes, I took drugs, but I grew out of it, and regret taking them', and i think most people would repsect that.
One problem with younger politicans, their past is rather closer than older politicians.
Well Chuka Umunna has certainly wiped David Cameron/Nicola Sturgeon off the screens.
I see David Davis is already stirring the pot. This man and his king-size ego is so destructive to the Conversative party and particularly when everyone is being pretty disciplined (at the moment).
It's more prosaic, I think he doesn't want to be Labour's William Hague, he's only 36, same age as Hague was when he became leader.
It .
Erm. I can't see how he can ever run when he's made the statement that the pressure is effectively too much. It will still be too much in five years.
Why would it? He'll be 5 years older, a lot can happen in five years, he can claim easily to have prepared better, and he'll be in his 40s and so, while still youthful and energetic, more of an age with recent leaders.
From the sounds of it, what 'it' is might scupper his chances full stop.
That would be very dramatic indeed. Not so bad as to need him to resign, but something so bad he could never recover a leadership contender position in the future? I have no idea what would fit into that small range.
Given the speculation these hints will set off, it probably won't be that bad in the end, if politically scuppering his chances now hence his pulling out, so he reputation may not even be too badly hit, particularly if it is something about a relative.
Re Chuka- as an urbane, clubber in the 90's and naughties, I think the scrutiny is fairly obvious. And Chuka, possibly unlike Cameron and Obama cannot put his habits to the follies of youth.
Well that would be the 'obvious' thing. But I think that would be shakeable off these days. He could just say 'yes, I took drugs, but I grew out of it, and regret taking them', and i think most people would repsect that.
One problem with younger politicans, their past is rather closer than older politicians.
And a lot easier to track down or surface.
Not being on facebook or twitter is probably a good thing for any ambitions I might one day develop re standing for office.
Nigel Farage has told his internal critics swear loyalty to him or leave the UK Independence Party in a bid to draw a line under the worst crisis of his leadership.
Mr Farage told the Telegraph he was prepared to become a more “autocratic” leader to impose his will on the party.
The Ukip leader took the high risk strategy of challenging his critics as he sought to bolster his authority in the party after a week of strife at the party’s highest level.
Bold. Not many are inclined to take a run at the king so directly even if they dislike them, and if that's right then he's making any indirect run impossible.
'We are a leader'' moment?? I thought it was only the SS who had to swear loyalty to their leader - and they had to prove it by taking the pin out of a hand grenade and standing to attention with it on their helmet.
How much more loyal were Farage's two aids who have just had to resign? Lets face it - bonkers is as bonkers does.
Nigel Farage has told his internal critics swear loyalty to him or leave the UK Independence Party in a bid to draw a line under the worst crisis of his leadership.
Mr Farage told the Telegraph he was prepared to become a more “autocratic” leader to impose his will on the party.
The Ukip leader took the high risk strategy of challenging his critics as he sought to bolster his authority in the party after a week of strife at the party’s highest level.
Is it possible for Farage to become "more autocratic"?
apparently something related to his "extended family"....
Source?
Ben Bradshaw on Sky said that was the reason. He sounded like he was in mourning.
Without knowing the details that sounds like a complete cop out. Like asking advice for your "friend" who is in an awkward situation. Or "standing down to spend more time with the family".
Press Assocation are saying sources tell them there's nothing coming in Sunday papers. So if that's right we're back to either he really was taken aback by the amount of pressure he would face, in which case he's an idiot, or he's calculating now is not the right time to run.
Media intrusiveness nowadays means we'll never have another Churchill, Roosevelt or Kennedy (Jack, Bobby or Charlie). Not sure whether that's good or bad.
Unless your background is seriously deranged, I'd rather we judged people on competence and politics.
apparently something related to his "extended family"....
Generally in politics, we appear to be past the affairs, hiding your sexuality (e.g Crispin Blunt), or an extended member of your family doing something bad (e.g. We were talking about Norman Lamb and his son only yesterday) being a killer blow.
This opens up some room for Tristram Hunt to enter the race, surely? (Yes, I know he's useless, but that's not a bar).
I would have though after last night QT's, no Labour MP would seriously want to back him. Every politician has a bad QT, but he was really bad and right after Ed "At least I tried" Miliband and at the moment when he is looking for backers.
Tyson Agree, but it is his decision, I cannot see why anything in the papers would be that damaging, even Obama took cocaine in the past
As it is I think Yvette Cooper should and probably will just edge out Burnham, tough, very bright, Oxbridge but with a fairly normal background she would offer a good contrast with Cameron and Osborne while being reasonable enough to win the middle ground, fortunately for her her husband lost his seat so can stay in the background
Unless your background is seriously deranged, I'd rather we judged people on competence and politics.
It's a shame personal issues cause people to pull out of things, as most of the time I'd agree, such things really don't impact how good a representative they might be.
That's what makes me wonder what on Earth it could be. Even having a shed load of iffy tax issues didn't stop Ken.
I honestly can't imagine what it could be bar lots of ladies or men of the night with credit card receipts. Only Mark Oaten gets close on that one and he was very unlucky to be *recognised* by his rent-a-bloke on the telly.
apparently something related to his "extended family"....
Generally in politics, we appear to be past the affairs, hiding your sexuality (e.g Crispin Blunt), or an extended member of your family doing something bad (e.g. We were talking about Norman Lamb and his son only yesterday) being a killer blow.
All this Curtice talk as the article suggests is not really that accurate, Cameron won a majority on less than the 7% lead he said the Tories would need for even a majority of 1, if the voters want change the swing in the marginals will be more than UNS. The LDs would also win back a few seats from the Tories on tactical voting alone from Labour voters, something more likely to happened if they pick Farron
Meanwhile, Labour's most immediate and serious problem is Holyrood 2016. They look well set for another catastrophic result there. In that context, these words should be chilling for them:
The first minister has dismissed newspaper reports which quote a "senior SNP source at Westminster" as saying the party could push ahead with a second independence referendum without the consent of Westminster.
Her representative said: "These claims are totally wrong - there are no such plans. The position is crystal clear: the general election was not a mandate for another referendum. And there will only be another referendum if and when the people of Scotland back such a proposal at a Scottish Parliament election."
They may have such a mandate in just a year's time.
It looks as if Cameron is prepared to see the Scottish Government in court over the Scottish Parliament's purported legislative competence to call a second referendum. It will be a lucrative time for lawyers. Interestingly, Cameron has yet to appoint an Advocate General for Scotland, which will be a crucial ministerial appointment in this Parliament. The days when a Conservative Prime Minister had talent like James Mackay or Alan Rodger at her disposal have sadly ended.
Nigel Farage has told his internal critics swear loyalty to him or leave the UK Independence Party in a bid to draw a line under the worst crisis of his leadership.
Mr Farage told the Telegraph he was prepared to become a more “autocratic” leader to impose his will on the party.
The Ukip leader took the high risk strategy of challenging his critics as he sought to bolster his authority in the party after a week of strife at the party’s highest level.
Is it possible for Farage to become "more autocratic"?
There is some way to go before he executes his second in command with an anti aircraft gun for falling asleep whilst he is talking as our Great Leader.
I have long thought that Farage suffers from a destructive borderline personality disorder. They just have to be the centre of it all and have lots of dramas with everyone. That is just how it is.
Hmmm seems obvious now that Carswell vs Farage will play out. Farage careful use of the word 'change' when referencing the agitator against him is a clear giveaway. I reckon Dougies on his bike
Tyson Agree, but it is his decision, I cannot see why anything in the papers would be that damaging, even Obama took cocaine in the past
As it is I think Yvette Cooper should and probably will just edge out Burnham, tough, very bright, Oxbridge but with a fairly normal background she would offer a good contrast with Cameron and Osborne while being reasonable enough to win the middle ground, fortunately for her her husband lost his seat so can stay in the background
I can only speculate and a speculate that Cooper will collapse like a pack of cards and Burnham will win by a country mile. Bless her if she proves me wrong. The real hilarity is that if she does lose then Mrs Balls may well end up as Shadow Chancellor. Hootsville Arizona!
BTW may I add that selecting someone who is the opposite of Cameron is a bit pointless since he will not be leader by May 2020.
All this talk of Labour needing massive swings etc, we have no idea what the politician landscape will look like in 5 years..look how BNP went from having MEPs to 1600 total votes across the country in the GE. Who knows what happens to the Greens etc.
On Sunday night I had the figures showing Labour needing a 9.4% swing in England & Wales to win a majority which implies a lead of ((9.4)*2) - 6.6) = 12.2% for Labour.
.. Unless he's got a young family and they will be grown up by then or something along those lines.
I can't see any information about his personal life on either wikipedia or his own website. From his own statement about "impact on those close to me" my assumption is that he has found that the Press were not going to allow him to keep his private life private, and whoever it is who is close to him wasn't happy about it.
FlightpathL She is not an overwhelming favourite, so there would be no collapse even if she lost, but I think she could just edge Burnham. Either would still be an improvement on Ed Miliband, but will still have a lot of work to do, we shall see. Osborne is already favourite to lead the Tories in 2020 now the Tories have won the election so the contrasts applies as much to him as Cameron
Hmmm seems obvious now that Carswell vs Farage will play out. Farage careful use of the word 'change' when referencing the agitator against him is a clear giveaway. I reckon Dougies on his bike
If he does go, it must be record. From 0 to 2, and then back to zero MP's in less than a year? Epic stuff.
Hmmm seems obvious now that Carswell vs Farage will play out. Farage careful use of the word 'change' when referencing the agitator against him is a clear giveaway. I reckon Dougies on his bike
Looks that way:
Asked whether Mr Carswell backed Mr Farage, he said it was "something he would have to explain".
I see that Nigel has fallen back into conspiracy fantasies:
"This is really about a Conservative attempt and a Conservative lobby to try and destabilise UKIP and to use one or two people within who are disaffected".
No, Mr Farage, the people who are destabilising UKIP are UKIP members.
Comments
Burnham get's it and play's the Michael Howard role in shoring up Labour's position, winning back a few seats from the Tories in 2020 and showing a partial recovery in Scotland...
In the early stages of leadership races, especially when you don't yet know who the candidates will be, laying the favourite is often a good default strategy. Chuka at 2.75 was ludicrously short.
On Chukka, if it's a simple matter of he couldn't get the votes, does that speak well of Labour or not?
Your facts are, in short, incorrect.
But anyway,. you lost ths argument, and the election, so it;s irrelevant, and actually good for the tories that loons like you continue to believe this nonsense, so i should probably not even bother trying to correct you...
BREAKING: @ChukaUmunna withdraws from #Labour leadership contest
(edit: in the North
The SNP were not responsible for Labour's loss. Labour were.
What the SNP have shown is how it is possible to win big in the modern world as a left of centre party with a top flight organsiation and a first rate leadership.
All Labour need now in England is the organisation and the leadership!
Scotland is currently able to vote for high-tax leftism because functionally it's a region not a country. It can therefore subsist on transfer payments from the other, productive regions. Currently it is rational for Scots to vote for high-tax leftism. Scottish individuals are too poor to contribute any tax, in the main, so the high tax they are voting for is high tax on other people. In effect, while they're in a union, the money does not run out.
If you strip leftism of this advantage in Scotland, so that voters feel the actual cost of leftism themselves rather than sending the bill to London and the south-east (as explicitly promised by Murphy during the campaign), then logically, you must get a resurgence of Conservatism. Leftists are incapable of being responsible with other people's money - they didn't go into politics to do that, they went into it expressly to piss away other people's money. So the only party likely to get traction is one that keeps spending and tax under control.
So the question really is whether Scotland gets FFA now, grows up a bit and starts voting Tory, thereby demonstrating that the country can be rehabilitated, made British again, and be fit to stay in the union; or whether it prefers independence, gets it, and just goes bankrupt. Either is a matter of indifference to most English. Personally I'd rather the former because Scotland pre-leftism contributed well above its weight in making Britain successful. But if they really want to be North Korea or Zimbabwe I wouldn't lose a lot of sleep as from a Conservative perspective there appears to be only upside.
This really is shaping up to be following the Lib Dem '06 elections. Maybe Labour will be able to follow this precedent and elect a man who succeeds in destroying the party?
John Simpson @thejohnsimpson 8m8 minutes ago
Labour source (yes I have one) says Chuka Umunna withdrew from leadership bid because of an article in a Sunday paper, & it's "bad".
By Election coming up?
A shame really because he had star quality and although doubtful if he had won, would have provided us all with some more entertainment in what looks like to be a very turgid Cooper vs Burnham affair.
I feel a bit sorry for anyone knee-capped by the media, but he did want to be PM.
How judgemental is that?! Lazy stereotyping
Just because they were both lawyers tsk
Who would Labour send the bill to?
Press Assocation are saying sources tell them there's nothing coming in Sunday papers.
One problem with younger politicans, their past is rather closer than older politicians.
I see David Davis is already stirring the pot. This man and his king-size ego is so destructive to the Conversative party and particularly when everyone is being pretty disciplined (at the moment).
Why would someone stand down because of something or other a member of your *extended family* did?
Unless Chuka was directly involved in whatever *it* is - it's nothing to do with him.
IIRC someone fairly close to Mr Cameron was done for a few things before he became PM!
Given the speculation these hints will set off, it probably won't be that bad in the end, if politically scuppering his chances now hence his pulling out, so he reputation may not even be too badly hit, particularly if it is something about a relative.
Not being on facebook or twitter is probably a good thing for any ambitions I might one day develop re standing for office.
'We are a leader'' moment??
I thought it was only the SS who had to swear loyalty to their leader - and they had to prove it by taking the pin out of a hand grenade and standing to attention with it on their helmet.
How much more loyal were Farage's two aids who have just had to resign?
Lets face it - bonkers is as bonkers does.
So if that's right we're back to either he really was taken aback by the amount of pressure he would face, in which case he's an idiot, or he's calculating now is not the right time to run.
Unless your background is seriously deranged, I'd rather we judged people on competence and politics.
As it is I think Yvette Cooper should and probably will just edge out Burnham, tough, very bright, Oxbridge but with a fairly normal background she would offer a good contrast with Cameron and Osborne while being reasonable enough to win the middle ground, fortunately for her her husband lost his seat so can stay in the background
I honestly can't imagine what it could be bar lots of ladies or men of the night with credit card receipts. Only Mark Oaten gets close on that one and he was very unlucky to be *recognised* by his rent-a-bloke on the telly.
If it is so bad, why hasn't he stepped down as an MP?
He's not even a 3 day wonder.
Chuka unhappy about press impact on members of family. Doing rounds that someone doorstepped his mum asking question about personal life.
He's done very well at health.
Labour chucked the stone tablets at him, and he still neutralised their NHS attacks.
There is some way to go before he executes his second in command with an anti aircraft gun for falling asleep whilst he is talking as our Great Leader.
I have long thought that Farage suffers from a destructive borderline personality disorder. They just have to be the centre of it all and have lots of dramas with everyone. That is just how it is.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0At91c3wX1Wu5dGZQUmFIb0xPaURkeGdubVBCRHJkbmc#gid=0
Bless her if she proves me wrong. The real hilarity is that if she does lose then Mrs Balls may well end up as Shadow Chancellor. Hootsville Arizona!
BTW may I add that selecting someone who is the opposite of Cameron is a bit pointless since he will not be leader by May 2020.
there are a few super marginals, but not many around the 2% swing area.
All this talk of Labour needing massive swings etc, we have no idea what the politician landscape will look like in 5 years..look how BNP went from having MEPs to 1600 total votes across the country in the GE. Who knows what happens to the Greens etc.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/11595641/Chuka-Umunna-appears-in-public-with-girlfriend-as-he-sets-out-stall-for-leadership.html
I'm baffled as to why people offer odds like that. They're risking £1,000 for a potential profit of £1.
Some people really do have more money than sense.
NEW THREAD
Asked whether Mr Carswell backed Mr Farage, he said it was "something he would have to explain".
I see that Nigel has fallen back into conspiracy fantasies:
"This is really about a Conservative attempt and a Conservative lobby to try and destabilise UKIP and to use one or two people within who are disaffected".
No, Mr Farage, the people who are destabilising UKIP are UKIP members.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-32749501