politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » ICM test finds that stay has an 18% lead when the proposed

System

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » ICM test finds that stay has an 18% lead when the proposed EU referendum question is asked

Split sample Q2: Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?
1. Remain a member of the European Union
2. Leave the European Union
3. DK

Read the full story here

TheScreamingEagles

Turnout is going to be key

JonCisBack

I can never see these charts when posted in from twitter :-( Just a little blue-green icon top left of a massive empty white box. I can read the words in Mike's tweet but not see the image

All a bit academic though at the moment. If there's Grexit it might be interesting.

foxinsoxuk

The differences in the questions all look to be within margin of error to me.

FrancisUrquhart

Are we still taking any notice of polls?

Disraeli

*Tongue-in-cheek mode on*
I'm not so bothered about the actual question, but we do need to be aware that if Scotland votes differently to the rest of the UK, then Scotland may well feel that they have no alternative but to call another referendum on independence (which I am pretty sure the YES-side will win this time)

Therefore, I think that Scotland should vote separately first, Then the rest of the UK can vote taking the Scotland vote into account.
*Tongue-in-cheek mode off*

SquareRoot

FrancisUrquhart said:

Are we still taking any notice of polls?

Only the ones that make the left wince

Scott_P

FrancisUrquhart said:

Are we still taking any notice of polls?

Andy Burnham at health questions just claimed polling in aid of his arguments...

blackburn63

TheScreamingEagles said:

Turnout is going to be key

I'm curious why you say that, what do you think it will be?

In 2011 the AV referendum was 41%, I anticipate a similar figure for the EU referendum which means approx 10m wins. Assuming the 4m UKIP voters will enthusiastically vote they need to persuade another 6m.

Eastwinger

Perhaps we need a referendum to ask what the question should be.

OblitusSumMe

What would the ideal question be in UKIP-type thinking?

Should the United Kingdom become an Independent country by leaving the European Union?
Should the United Kingdom leave the European Union before falling under the yoke of Franco-German domination?
Should the United Kingdom leave the European Union to avoid the threat of Eurocrats forcing honest hard-working English men from drinking half-litres instead of pints?

I do think that ICM could have been a bit more inventive with their alternative question formats.

Edit: I think there's a grammatical mistake in my second suggestion which makes it amusingly unclear.

Life_ina_market_town

The first draft of the Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Act 2011 contained the following circuitous question:

Do you want the United Kingdom to adopt the "alternative vote" system instead of the current "first past the post" system for electing Members of Parliament to the House of Commons?

The question (as enacted) was:

At present, the UK uses the “first past the post” system to elect MPs to the House of Commons. Should the “alternative vote” system be used instead?

A question can be changed during its passage through Parliament!

The European Union Referendum Bill is a Bill providing for a referendum, and which declares that Part VII of the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000 applies to it. Accordingly, the Electoral Commission are under a statutory duty to consider the intelligibility of the question, and to publish their views as soon as is reasonably practicable (see section 104(2) of the 2000 Act). The question certainly seems intelligible, but if the Commission recommend any change, the government will almost certainly accept their recommendation.

If the current proposed question produces a slight bias towards "In", it seems unlikely that there will be a majority in either House to amend it. Preferable questions would have been: "Should the Treaty on European Union and Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union have primacy over Acts of Parliament", or "Should the United Kingdom be a free, sovereign and independent state?"...

TheScreamingEagles

https://twitter.com/tom_ComRes/status/605728257087041537

Sandpit

Interesting that the results are all within MoE, although the 'best' result (for In) is for the actually proposed question. Will the Electoral Commission be pronouncing their opinion on the question before the Bill passes, or will they wait until Parliament formally calls the referendum? Could they turn it around, so that like the AV referendum (and that in Scotland) the Yes vote is for the change?

Sandpit

blackburn63 said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Turnout is going to be key

I'm curious why you say that, what do you think it will be?

In 2011 the AV referendum was 41%, I anticipate a similar figure for the EU referendum which means approx 10m wins. Assuming the 4m UKIP voters will enthusiastically vote they need to persuade another 6m.

The higher the turnout, the more difficult it would be to effect the change. The thinking behind this would be that the generally ambivalent among the population are more likely to either not care or be in support of things remaining how they are.

If I were a leader in the Out campaign I would want to make it very clear indeed that there's no Status Quo option here, it's the Superstate or out.

manfrom

I wonder why the question has to have a yes/no answer when up to now, all the discussion has been of a different choice - that of in/out. Perhaps it is an issue of clarity.

On the radio the other day a reporter had been sent off somewhere, I don't recall where, to gauge public opinion on membership of the EU. More than half the people he talked to weren't even sure if the UK was in the EU, or not...

Ishmael_X

blackburn63 said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Turnout is going to be key

I'm curious why you say that, what do you think it will be?

In 2011 the AV referendum was 41%, I anticipate a similar figure for the EU referendum which means approx 10m wins. Assuming the 4m UKIP voters will enthusiastically vote they need to persuade another 6m.

65% turnout in 1975. It will be north of 60%.

blackburn63

Sandpit said:

blackburn63 said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Turnout is going to be key

I'm curious why you say that, what do you think it will be?

In 2011 the AV referendum was 41%, I anticipate a similar figure for the EU referendum which means approx 10m wins. Assuming the 4m UKIP voters will enthusiastically vote they need to persuade another 6m.

The higher the turnout, the more difficult it would be to effect the change. The thinking behind this would be that the generally ambivalent among the population are more likely to either not care or be in support of things remaining how they are.

If I were a leader in the Out campaign I would want to make it very clear indeed that there's no Status Quo option here, it's the Superstate or out.

Yes I agree, but I believe those wanting OUT are more likely to vote. The key to the OUT vote is who's leading the campaign, Farage needs to be low key, those 4m are in the bag. Interesting on Daily Politics yesterday a Labour MP was arguing against the EU and Laura Sandys, who stood down as the tory in South Thanet, was enthusiastically IN.

Tissue_Price

Life_ina_market_town said:

Preferable questions would have been: "Should the Treaty on European Union and Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union have primacy over Acts of Parliament"

That is a frankly terrible question that wouldn't be understood by a large proportion of the electorate. You view things too legalistically.

CarlottaVance

I thought the conclusion from SindyRef (Curtice?) was that by the time the question is put to the electorate the issues will have been aired sufficiently that any minor bias inherent in how the question is posed would have negligible effect......

TheScreamingEagles

blackburn63 said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Turnout is going to be key

I'm curious why you say that, what do you think it will be?

In 2011 the AV referendum was 41%, I anticipate a similar figure for the EU referendum which means approx 10m wins. Assuming the 4m UKIP voters will enthusiastically vote they need to persuade another 6m.

Depends when it is held, if it held concurrently with local or devolved elections then I'd expect turnout to be higher, if it the referendum is held on its own, for example in November, like the police commissioner elections, then turnout will be lower.

My own assumption is that a low turnout favours OUT

Life_ina_market_town

manfrom said:

I wonder why the question has to have a yes/no answer when up to now, all the discussion has been of a different choice - that of in/out. Perhaps it is an issue of clarity.

The Commission's previous report on the European Union Referendum Bill in the last Parliament recommended that:

If Parliament wants to retain 'Yes' and 'No' as the response options, we recommended the question should be amended to:

a) "Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union?"

If Parliament decides not to retain a 'Yes' and 'No' question, we recommended:

b) "Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?"

So there is nothing in principle to stop an "In"/"Out" question, rather than a "Yes"/"No" question.

MikeK

I'm going against the grain here, and I expect the usual odium will be drenched on me.
However here goes.

I never liked Charles Kennedy when he was alive and I refuse too heap eulogies of saintly-hood on him now he's dead. Alive, he was a so, so, moderate leader, a lefty who would have done better in the Labour Party. He had an engaging smile? Well many people have and they are bastards underneath.

As they say in Braavos "valar morghulis - all men must die". That he died young for these days is a shame, but thats life.

MarkHopkins

MikeK said:

I'm going against the grain here, and I expect the usual odium will be drenched on me.
However here goes.

I never liked Charles Kennedy when he was alive and I refuse too heap eulogies of saintly-hood on him now he's dead. Alive, he was a so, so, moderate leader, a lefty who would have done better in the Labour Party. He had an engaging smile? Well many people have and they are bastards underneath.

As they say in Braavos "valar morghulis - all men must die". That he died young for these days is a shame, but thats life.

"De mortuis nil nisi bonum" as they say in the civilised world.

Ishmael_X

TheScreamingEagles said:

blackburn63 said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Turnout is going to be key

I'm curious why you say that, what do you think it will be?

In 2011 the AV referendum was 41%, I anticipate a similar figure for the EU referendum which means approx 10m wins. Assuming the 4m UKIP voters will enthusiastically vote they need to persuade another 6m.

Depends when it is held, if it held concurrently with local or devolved elections then I'd expect turnout to be higher, if it the referendum is held on its own, for example in November, like the police commissioner elections, then turnout will be lower.

My own assumption is that a low turnout favours OUT

1975 wasn't concurrent with any other elections as far as I know.

The 1975 question: "Do you think that the United Kingdom should remain part of the European Community (the Common Market)?"

CD13

How about "Should we have control of our own borders?" or "Should we continue on the road to union with assorted nationalities in Europe?"

It will obviously be more measured, and after a lot of heat and not much light, we will vote to stay in ... unless the EU throws a massive wobbly.

TheScreamingEagles

Ishmael_X said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

blackburn63 said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Turnout is going to be key

I'm curious why you say that, what do you think it will be?

In 2011 the AV referendum was 41%, I anticipate a similar figure for the EU referendum which means approx 10m wins. Assuming the 4m UKIP voters will enthusiastically vote they need to persuade another 6m.

Depends when it is held, if it held concurrently with local or devolved elections then I'd expect turnout to be higher, if it the referendum is held on its own, for example in November, like the police commissioner elections, then turnout will be lower.

My own assumption is that a low turnout favours OUT

1975 wasn't concurrent with any other elections as far as I know.

The 1975 question: "Do you think that the United Kingdom should remain part of the European Community (the Common Market)?"

I know, but turnouts have been falling since then, in October 74's general election the turnout was 72% this year saw it being 66%

I don't think we'll be seeing Indyref levels of turnout.

Sandpit

blackburn63 said:

Sandpit said:

blackburn63 said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Turnout is going to be key

I'm curious why you say that, what do you think it will be?

In 2011 the AV referendum was 41%, I anticipate a similar figure for the EU referendum which means approx 10m wins. Assuming the 4m UKIP voters will enthusiastically vote they need to persuade another 6m.

The higher the turnout, the more difficult it would be to effect the change. The thinking behind this would be that the generally ambivalent among the population are more likely to either not care or be in support of things remaining how they are.

If I were a leader in the Out campaign I would want to make it very clear indeed that there's no Status Quo option here, it's the Superstate or out.

Yes I agree, but I believe those wanting OUT are more likely to vote. The key to the OUT vote is who's leading the campaign, Farage needs to be low key, those 4m are in the bag. Interesting on Daily Politics yesterday a Labour MP was arguing against the EU and Laura Sandys, who stood down as the tory in South Thanet, was enthusiastically IN.

Yes, the faces of the campaigns will be interesting, especially from the Out side.

What needs to happen now is for Out campaigners from all parties to be talking to their own supporters, then select a couple of representatives to lead the Out campaign once the negotiations have happened (or otherwise!) and we know who will be on each side from the senior politicians of all parties.

The leaders need to be centrists politically to appeal to all sides and floating voters, and not be seen as 'Marmite' politicians by the general public - Think Mr Darling in the Scotland referendum, rather than say Mr Farage or Mr Gove.

Sandpit

I'm calling it Game Over in the cricket. 48 overs to bowl and 3 wickets remaining.

Ishmael_X

MikeK said:

I'm going against the grain here, and I expect the usual odium will be drenched on me.
However here goes.

I never liked Charles Kennedy when he was alive and I refuse too heap eulogies of saintly-hood on him now he's dead. Alive, he was a so, so, moderate leader, a lefty who would have done better in the Labour Party. He had an engaging smile? Well many people have and they are bastards underneath.

As they say in Braavos "valar morghulis - all men must die". That he died young for these days is a shame, but thats life.

Conventions quite often exist for a reason. I assume that you would not be happy with the thought that if your demise were announced on here, it would be greeted with a chorus of "monomaniacal old bore, site better without him" etc. Try extending a bit of consideration to others.

Chameleon

Although 18% looks promising for Yes, it's not hard to foresee a series of events that would make ~10% of the public flip and us to subsequently leave:
1. No substantial powers gained in re-negotiation,
2. Some sort of stupid EU move (e.g. Migrant quotas),
3. Cammo recommending out,
4. The debate being framed as much more integration v freedom to stand up tall on the world stage.

Personally I'm pretty sure that I'll vote out as I don't want to be tied to more integration like we were after the EEC vote.

TheScreamingEagles

Douglas Carswell has retweeted this

https://twitter.com/WinstonMcK/status/605473610610929666

Pulpstar

TheScreamingEagles said:

blackburn63 said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Turnout is going to be key

I'm curious why you say that, what do you think it will be?

In 2011 the AV referendum was 41%, I anticipate a similar figure for the EU referendum which means approx 10m wins. Assuming the 4m UKIP voters will enthusiastically vote they need to persuade another 6m.

Depends when it is held, if it held concurrently with local or devolved elections then I'd expect turnout to be higher, if it the referendum is held on its own, for example in November, like the police commissioner elections, then turnout will be lower.

My own assumption is that a low turnout favours OUT

A Nov election would be very tricky for in

Scrapheap_as_was

england can't even lose right.

JosiasJessop

There's been a collision on the Smiler ride at Alton Towers. A carriage with people in has been hit by an empty carriage. Air ambulance on scene.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-32980354

TheScreamingEagles

You know youv'e hit rock bottom are being accused of an infiltator by the serial defector Winston McKenzie

TheWhiteRabbit

TheScreamingEagles said:

You know youv'e hit rock bottom are being accused of an infiltator by the serial defector Winston McKenzie

Who is "Youv'e" and when did they hit rock bottom?

SimonStClare

I always thought Winston McKenzie was dumped, long before he had a chance to defect. - one loses track however, as there's been so many.

TheScreamingEagles

TheWhiteRabbit said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

You know youv'e hit rock bottom are being accused of an infiltator by the serial defector Winston McKenzie

Who is "Youv'e" and when did they hit rock bottom?

I'm blaming lardy fingers for that.

Misuse of apostrophes' make me so angry

Pulpstar

Someone needs to splice the DNA of Bradman and Gayle ...

TheScreamingEagles

This is turning into Westminster's most entertaining fight

http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/steerpike/2015/06/lynton-crosby-vs-lord-ashcroft-round-two-hes-not-a-pollster/

TheWhiteRabbit

David Boothroyd ‏@220_d_92_20 16h16 hours ago
"London CLP nominations state of play: @TessaJowell 34, @SadiqKhan 26, @DavidLammy 8 @DianeforLondon 4, @christianwolmar 2 @GarethThomasMP 1"

I'm missing one, never mind.

Just past the halfway stage and no more nominations for outsiders.

It will be a real plus for me if Abbott fails to make the ballot (there are only two candidates for the woman nomination of each CLP) but rather unlikely still.

Omnium

The mixed bag that the EU offers us won't get a landslide vote in my view. I'm pretty certain that we'll stay in. but I think the margin will be small.

Also as my first post after the sad death of Charles Kennedy I'd like to add a RIP too.

Sandpit

Dan Hannan writes a very eloquent prophecy of how the UK can quickly prosper outside the EU. Will be interesting to come back to it 5 years down the line, if we were to leave.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/11644904/A-vision-of-Britain-outside-the-EU-confident-successful-and-free.html

It’s 2020, and the UK is flourishing outside of the EU. The rump Union, now a united bloc, continues its genteel decline, but Britain has become the most successful and competitive knowledge-based economy in the region. Our universities attract the world’s brightest students. We lead the way in software, biotech, law, finance and the audio-visual sector. We have forged a distinctive foreign policy, allied to Europe, but giving due weight to the US, India and other common-law, Anglophone democracies.

More intangibly but no less significantly, we have recovered our self-belief. As Nicolas Sarkozy, President of the European Federation, crossly put it: “Britain has become Hong Kong to Europe’s China.”

JosiasJessop

JosiasJessop said:

There's been a collision on the Smiler ride at Alton Towers. A carriage with people in has been hit by an empty carriage. Air ambulance on scene.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-32980354

At least four people seriously injured; triage has been set up.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/alton-towers-crash-live-two-carriages-collide-into-each-other-10292176.html

AndreaParma_82

When is Islington North nominating? It could be her best shot for 5th nom.

I suppose Thomas will get Harrow West and possibly Harrow East. But he needs other 2 somewhere...where?

Where could Wolmar get 3 further noms?

TheWhiteRabbit said:

David Boothroyd ‏@220_d_92_20 16h16 hours ago
"London CLP nominations state of play: @TessaJowell 34, @SadiqKhan 26, @DavidLammy 8 @DianeforLondon 4, @christianwolmar 2 @GarethThomasMP 1"

I'm missing one, never mind.

Just past the halfway stage and no more nominations for outsiders.

It will be a real plus for me if Abbott fails to make the ballot (there are only two candidates for the woman nomination of each CLP) but rather unlikely still.

logical_song

Disraeli said:

*Tongue-in-cheek mode on*
I'm not so bothered about the actual question, but we do need to be aware that if Scotland votes differently to the rest of the UK, then Scotland may well feel that they have no alternative but to call another referendum on independence (which I am pretty sure the YES-side will win this time)

Therefore, I think that Scotland should vote separately first, Then the rest of the UK can vote taking the Scotland vote into account.
*Tongue-in-cheek mode off*

Let's hope that it becomes clear during the campaign, especially to those outside Scotland, that a vote for OUT of the EU is also, in all likelihood, a vote for Scotland to secede.

Disraeli

Sandpit said:

If I were a leader in the Out campaign I would want to make it very clear indeed that there's no Status Quo option here, it's the Superstate or out.

Actually, I think that BOTH sides need to emphasise this point. One of the things that you hear people say is something along the lines of "We voted for the EEC in 1975, not the EU".
If the Superstate idea is made clear by the INNERS then this forestalls some potential challenges in the future along the line of "we were not told about this" or "we thought that we were voting on something else".

AndreaParma_82

EdM was back in the chamber yesterday for the FIFA debate.
He was sitting between Karen Buck and Susan Jones from Clwyd South, on the 4th bench
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3106060/Look-s-Miliband-returns-Commons-lowly-MP.html

JosiasJessop

AndreaParma_82 said:

When is Islington North nominating? It could be her best shot for 5th nom.

I suppose Thomas will get Harrow West and possibly Harrow East. But he needs other 2 somewhere...where?

Where could Wolmar get 3 further noms?

TheWhiteRabbit said:

David Boothroyd ‏@220_d_92_20 16h16 hours ago
"London CLP nominations state of play: @TessaJowell 34, @SadiqKhan 26, @DavidLammy 8 @DianeforLondon 4, @christianwolmar 2 @GarethThomasMP 1"

I'm missing one, never mind.

Just past the halfway stage and no more nominations for outsiders.

It will be a real plus for me if Abbott fails to make the ballot (there are only two candidates for the woman nomination of each CLP) but rather unlikely still.

It'd be great if Wolmar got a nomination. I don't agree with everything he says about London's transport, but he's knowledgeable and obviously cares a great deal about the capital.

If I had a vote in London, and he was standing, I'd vote for him.

TheWhiteRabbit

AndreaParma_82 said:

When is Islington North nominating? It could be her best shot for 5th nom.

I suppose Thomas will get Harrow West and possibly Harrow East. But he needs other 2 somewhere...where?

Where could Wolmar get 3 further noms?

TheWhiteRabbit said:

David Boothroyd ‏@220_d_92_20 16h16 hours ago
"London CLP nominations state of play: @TessaJowell 34, @SadiqKhan 26, @DavidLammy 8 @DianeforLondon 4, @christianwolmar 2 @GarethThomasMP 1"

I'm missing one, never mind.

Just past the halfway stage and no more nominations for outsiders.

It will be a real plus for me if Abbott fails to make the ballot (there are only two candidates for the woman nomination of each CLP) but rather unlikely still.

I think our very own NPXXMP said Wednesday for Islington North.

Having said that it doesn't seem to be an area thing. Abbott and Wolmar (maybe Thomas) are more like the "let's have more diversity on the ballot" option from those selecting them so far.

(Technically there's a shortlisting panel after, but I doubt it will do anything.)

Edit: I should add that Wolmar does not strike me as the sort of guy who could shoot to the front overnight from the back. Abbott more so, but she seems to be half-wheeling this, which I don't understand; unlike Khan or Jowell she has no real other way of getting back to frontline politics.

JohnLilburne

AndreaParma_82 said:

EdM was back in the chamber yesterday for the FIFA debate.
He was sitting between Karen Buck and Susan Jones from Clwyd South, on the 4th bench
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3106060/Look-s-Miliband-returns-Commons-lowly-MP.html

Why is it that when Labour leaders step down they do so immediately and the deputy leader takes over (Brown, Milliband) but leaders of other parties stay on as caretakers until the election of a successor (Clegg, various Tory leaders)?

tlg86

Disraeli said:

Sandpit said:

If I were a leader in the Out campaign I would want to make it very clear indeed that there's no Status Quo option here, it's the Superstate or out.

Actually, I think that BOTH sides need to emphasise this point. One of the things that you hear people say is something along the lines of "We voted for the EEC in 1975, not the EU".
If the Superstate idea is made clear by the INNERS then this forestalls some potential challenges in the future along the line of "we were not told about this" or "we thought that we were voting on something else".

That would very much play into the No campaign's hands. Right now it's hard to see how the debate will take shape, lots of known unknowns, and probably lots of unknown unknowns!

Disraeli

JosiasJessop said:

AndreaParma_82 said:

When is Islington North nominating? It could be her best shot for 5th nom.

I suppose Thomas will get Harrow West and possibly Harrow East. But he needs other 2 somewhere...where?

Where could Wolmar get 3 further noms?

TheWhiteRabbit said:

David Boothroyd ‏@220_d_92_20 16h16 hours ago
"London CLP nominations state of play: @TessaJowell 34, @SadiqKhan 26, @DavidLammy 8 @DianeforLondon 4, @christianwolmar 2 @GarethThomasMP 1"

I'm missing one, never mind.

Just past the halfway stage and no more nominations for outsiders.

It will be a real plus for me if Abbott fails to make the ballot (there are only two candidates for the woman nomination of each CLP) but rather unlikely still.

It'd be great if Wolmar got a nomination. I don't agree with everything he says about London's transport, but he's knowledgeable and obviously cares a great deal about the capital.

If I had a vote in London, and he was standing, I'd vote for him.

What are his spending plans like?

As a London ratepayer, it would be nice to get someone whose spending plans were a happy medium between Boris (too little) and Ken (too much).

JosiasJessop

TheWhiteRabbit said:

AndreaParma_82 said:

When is Islington North nominating? It could be her best shot for 5th nom.

I suppose Thomas will get Harrow West and possibly Harrow East. But he needs other 2 somewhere...where?

Where could Wolmar get 3 further noms?

TheWhiteRabbit said:

David Boothroyd ‏@220_d_92_20 16h16 hours ago
"London CLP nominations state of play: @TessaJowell 34, @SadiqKhan 26, @DavidLammy 8 @DianeforLondon 4, @christianwolmar 2 @GarethThomasMP 1"

I'm missing one, never mind.

Just past the halfway stage and no more nominations for outsiders.

It will be a real plus for me if Abbott fails to make the ballot (there are only two candidates for the woman nomination of each CLP) but rather unlikely still.

I think our very own NPXXMP said Wednesday for Islington North.
(snip)

Surely it should be NPXMPMPMPXX ?

TheWhiteRabbit

JohnLilburne said:

AndreaParma_82 said:

EdM was back in the chamber yesterday for the FIFA debate.
He was sitting between Karen Buck and Susan Jones from Clwyd South, on the 4th bench
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3106060/Look-s-Miliband-returns-Commons-lowly-MP.html

Why is it that when Labour leaders step down they do so immediately and the deputy leader takes over (Brown, Milliband) but leaders of other parties stay on as caretakers until the election of a successor (Clegg, various Tory leaders)?

Callaghan was LoTO for over a year, I think under the assumption he was keeping the seat warm, but someone can correct me on that.

Scrapheap_as_was

Scrapheap_as_was said:

england can't even lose right.

If one more wicket goes down before tea then it's delayed and I assume my bet is looking good.... so it won't.

malcolmg

I have seen some lowlife posting on here in my time, but the lunatic fringe posting about Salmond on last thread really takes the biscuit. You really do have to wonder how low some people can stoop, certainly lower than rattlesnakes for sure. Desperate.

AndreaParma_82

I was thinking about Islington North for Abbott because she can add the core left around Jeremy Corbyn to the "let's nominate somebody else as Jowell has already 1113 nominations".

Harrow CLPs for Thomas on the "we know him, he's nice (is he? I don't have a clue). Let's nominate him even if I won't vote for him in the end" ground.

TheWhiteRabbit said:

AndreaParma_82 said:

When is Islington North nominating? It could be her best shot for 5th nom.

I suppose Thomas will get Harrow West and possibly Harrow East. But he needs other 2 somewhere...where?

Where could Wolmar get 3 further noms?

TheWhiteRabbit said:

David Boothroyd ‏@220_d_92_20 16h16 hours ago
"London CLP nominations state of play: @TessaJowell 34, @SadiqKhan 26, @DavidLammy 8 @DianeforLondon 4, @christianwolmar 2 @GarethThomasMP 1"

I'm missing one, never mind.

Just past the halfway stage and no more nominations for outsiders.

It will be a real plus for me if Abbott fails to make the ballot (there are only two candidates for the woman nomination of each CLP) but rather unlikely still.

I think our very own NPXXMP said Wednesday for Islington North.

Having said that it doesn't seem to be an area thing. Abbott and Wolmar (maybe Thomas) are more like the "let's have more diversity on the ballot" option from those selecting them so far.

(Technically there's a shortlisting panel after, but I doubt it will do anything.)

Edit: I should add that Wolmar does not strike me as the sort of guy who could shoot to the front overnight from the back. Abbott more so, but she seems to be half-wheeling this, which I don't understand; unlike Khan or Jowell she has no real other way of getting back to frontline politics.

TheScreamingEagles

Scrapheap_as_was said:

Scrapheap_as_was said:

england can't even lose right.

If one more wicket goes down before tea then it's delayed and I assume my bet is looking good.... so it won't.

Stick your money on a sure fire winner.

Sol Campbell as Tory London Mayor candidate

Scrapheap_as_was

TheScreamingEagles said:

Scrapheap_as_was said:

Scrapheap_as_was said:

england can't even lose right.

If one more wicket goes down before tea then it's delayed and I assume my bet is looking good.... so it won't.

Stick your money on a sure fire winner.

Sol Campbell as Tory London Mayor candidate

I've put all my cricket winnings today on it....

OblitusSumMe

If Wood and Buttler keep up their partnership strike rate to the close they will have fallen a mere 27 runs short of victory.

NickPalmer

Yep, Islington North (in fact I think both Islingtons) nominate tomorrow.I'd think Wolmar has a shot at the male nomination (Khan will get it if he doesn't, as if Jowell is going to get a nomination I think it'll be for the women's nomination). Hard to predict the women's one.

Wolmar's main pitch is indeed transport - lots more cycling support, and IIRC Crossrail 2 instead of HS2 (lost the Josias vote there, didn't he?).

Does anyone have a count on nominations for deputy leader, by the way? I'm a signed-up member of the Creasey team but haven't got an overview.

Omnium

Labour leaders: Brown is so bad he's unemployable. Ed is far better though, and I imagine he'll leave politics and become fairly successful. He can't really have anything in politics now I think. As an aside I wonder about the fate of Mr Cooper. He really is in Gordo territory.

Mayor: Boris is a very hard act to follow. He's been a good mayor really, and his persona has gone far beyond that. Labour should wait until the Tories declare their candidate. They won't of course, 'cos they're daft - but they should. For Labour, Khan, Jowell, and Lammy all seem unlilkely to me. I really don't know who that leaves.

Richard_Tyndall

TheScreamingEagles said:

Douglas Carswell has retweeted this

https://twitter.com/WinstonMcK/status/605473610610929666

Pretty daft of Winston to be using that particular analogy as well given that Moses led his people to the gates of the promised land but was not allowed to enter. Maybe he is being clever and actually wants Farage to step down :-)

Scott_P

malcolmg said:

You really do have to wonder how low some people can stoop, certainly lower than rattlesnakes for sure. Desperate.

Everyone is agreed Salmond demeaned himself and those he claims to represent. Stop going on about it

acf2310

Having had some experience of statistical modelling I am deeply suspicious of all these new 'models' we are seeing from YouGov / ComRes etc appearing so quickly after the election.

This sort of thing takes work. As it is we seem to just be getting a quick, possibly botched job, in order that they can get back into the marketplace as soon as they can.

JosiasJessop

Disraeli said:

JosiasJessop said:

AndreaParma_82 said:

When is Islington North nominating? It could be her best shot for 5th nom.

I suppose Thomas will get Harrow West and possibly Harrow East. But he needs other 2 somewhere...where?

Where could Wolmar get 3 further noms?

TheWhiteRabbit said:

David Boothroyd ‏@220_d_92_20 16h16 hours ago
"London CLP nominations state of play: @TessaJowell 34, @SadiqKhan 26, @DavidLammy 8 @DianeforLondon 4, @christianwolmar 2 @GarethThomasMP 1"

I'm missing one, never mind.

Just past the halfway stage and no more nominations for outsiders.

It will be a real plus for me if Abbott fails to make the ballot (there are only two candidates for the woman nomination of each CLP) but rather unlikely still.

It'd be great if Wolmar got a nomination. I don't agree with everything he says about London's transport, but he's knowledgeable and obviously cares a great deal about the capital.

If I had a vote in London, and he was standing, I'd vote for him.

What are his spending plans like?

As a London ratepayer, it would be nice to get someone whose spending plans were a happy medium between Boris (too little) and Ken (too much).

As a London ratepayer, you have much more hanging on this than I have!

Judge for yourself. His website is at: http://www.wolmarforlondon.co.uk/

Scott_P

@bbclaurak: unexpected FIFA press conference just been called - for 5pm our time... Maybe nothing of much interest at all, but then again.............?

MikeSmithson

I've just put £2 on Mary Creagh for the LAB leadership at 180 on Betfair. If she gets the nominations to be on the ballot that will move in sharply.

Disraeli

tlg86 said:

Disraeli said:

Sandpit said:

If I were a leader in the Out campaign I would want to make it very clear indeed that there's no Status Quo option here, it's the Superstate or out.

Actually, I think that BOTH sides need to emphasise this point. One of the things that you hear people say is something along the lines of "We voted for the EEC in 1975, not the EU".
If the Superstate idea is made clear by the INNERS then this forestalls some potential challenges in the future along the line of "we were not told about this" or "we thought that we were voting on something else".

That would very much play into the No campaign's hands. Right now it's hard to see how the debate will take shape, lots of known unknowns, and probably lots of unknown unknowns!

:-)

There are known knowns. These are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say, there are things that we know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don't know we don't know.

Donald Rumsfeld

Omnium

Scrapheap_as_was said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Scrapheap_as_was said:

Scrapheap_as_was said:

england can't even lose right.

If one more wicket goes down before tea then it's delayed and I assume my bet is looking good.... so it won't.

Stick your money on a sure fire winner.

Sol Campbell as Tory London Mayor candidate

I've put all my cricket winnings today on it....

I cannot imagine why anyone might imagine that Sol Campbell would be worthy of any responsibility.

TheWhiteRabbit

MikeSmithson said:

I've just put £2 on Mary Creagh for the LAB leadership at 180 on Betfair. If she gets the nominations to be on the ballot that will move in sharply.

She's on 6 according to Guido, with 109 declared. That leaves 123 by my count... she's going to need those "sympathy" or "spill over" votes. If Kendall had raced to 35, then I might see it, but she too is struggling at 21.

TheWhiteRabbit

NickPalmer said:

Yep, Islington North (in fact I think both Islingtons) nominate tomorrow.I'd think Wolmar has a shot at the male nomination (Khan will get it if he doesn't, as if Jowell is going to get a nomination I think it'll be for the women's nomination). Hard to predict the women's one.

Wolmar's main pitch is indeed transport - lots more cycling support, and IIRC Crossrail 2 instead of HS2 (lost the Josias vote there, didn't he?).

Does anyone have a count on nominations for deputy leader, by the way? I'm a signed-up member of the Creasey team but haven't got an overview.

I have Islington South and Finsbury as having chosen Jowell/Khan.

Richard_Tyndall

Disraeli said:

tlg86 said:

Disraeli said:

Sandpit said:

If I were a leader in the Out campaign I would want to make it very clear indeed that there's no Status Quo option here, it's the Superstate or out.

Actually, I think that BOTH sides need to emphasise this point. One of the things that you hear people say is something along the lines of "We voted for the EEC in 1975, not the EU".
If the Superstate idea is made clear by the INNERS then this forestalls some potential challenges in the future along the line of "we were not told about this" or "we thought that we were voting on something else".

That would very much play into the No campaign's hands. Right now it's hard to see how the debate will take shape, lots of known unknowns, and probably lots of unknown unknowns!

:-)

There are known knowns. These are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say, there are things that we know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don't know we don't know.

Donald Rumsfeld

I never understood why he was mocked for that. It is an absolutely accurate statement and one that forms the basis of safety systems in industries all round the world.

TheWhiteRabbit

Also Nick

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2015/06/list-mps-endorsements-labour-deputy-leadership-candidates-0

According to another NS article you can add to the Eagle column:
Ann Clwyd (Cynon Valley)
Bill Esterson (Sefton Central)

PeterC

On topic, this Michael Cockerell documentary is essential viewing for all students of the 1975 referendum:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3wqAONXOxSk

rottenborough

MikeSmithson said:

I've just put £2 on Mary Creagh for the LAB leadership at 180 on Betfair. If she gets the nominations to be on the ballot that will move in sharply.

Oh. Makes the 15/1 I got on her two weeks ago look positively pathetic.

TOPPING

Richard_Tyndall said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Douglas Carswell has retweeted this

https://twitter.com/WinstonMcK/status/605473610610929666

Pretty daft of Winston to be using that particular analogy as well given that Moses led his people to the gates of the promised land but was not allowed to enter. Maybe he is being clever and actually wants Farage to step down :-)

Carswell joined a mood not a political party (not that we couldn't have told him so, but anyway...).

Of course the exciting thing (for me) would be for him to fashion a sensible, centre-right, anti-EU (or EU-sceptical) party with policies to match on that side of the political spectrum.

Carswell is a sensible enough bloke and could put something sensible together (he could call it the, er, Sensible Party [oh yes, UKIP as a name has to go]).

But there is Nige so the Kippers will remain a single issue pressure group with 4m voters in support.

What a waste.

Flightpathl

Sandpit said:

Dan Hannan writes a very eloquent prophecy of how the UK can quickly prosper outside the EU. Will be interesting to come back to it 5 years down the line, if we were to leave.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/11644904/A-vision-of-Britain-outside-the-EU-confident-successful-and-free.html

It’s 2020, and the UK is flourishing outside of the EU. The rump Union, now a united bloc, continues its genteel decline, but Britain has become the most successful and competitive knowledge-based economy in the region. Our universities attract the world’s brightest students. We lead the way in software, biotech, law, finance and the audio-visual sector. We have forged a distinctive foreign policy, allied to Europe, but giving due weight to the US, India and other common-law, Anglophone democracies.

More intangibly but no less significantly, we have recovered our self-belief. As Nicolas Sarkozy, President of the European Federation, crossly put it: “Britain has become Hong Kong to Europe’s China.”

Hilarious rubbish. Did being in the EU affect our decision to ally with the USA and invade Iraq? Hannan only shows himself to be thick. If our universities are attracting the brightest students BTW, then immigration will still be soaring. Along with inflation.

Carnyx

Scott_P said:

malcolmg said:

You really do have to wonder how low some people can stoop, certainly lower than rattlesnakes for sure. Desperate.

Everyone is agreed Salmond demeaned himself and those he claims to represent. Stop going on about it

I have tried to keep out of this but this is going too far, and on the second thread too. I will say that I noticed, during indyref and at the time, that Mr Kennedy was simply not taking a role in the campaign commensurate with his personal status and political reputation, and this surprised me at the time. Indeed so much so that it came to mind again when I heard the sad news. Given also the contemporary evidence adduced by TUD on the previous thread, it might be time for you to admit that you might be wrong - or that the tweets you adduce are.

One reason I have tried to keep out of it is that I have been very upset by some of what has been said today, partly here - though some of that has been nasty enough a way to describe someone trying to assess a fellow pol's life achievement in the context of major current issues, which indyref and Europe certainly are.

But also what has been said elsewhere. What do you think of the people blaming the SNP for his death? What do you think of the London newspaper (which I won't link to as it was so vile) which paints such a miserable picture? If you are upset for Mr Kennedy then you ought to be a hundred times more upset about that newspaper. Or is it just because Mr Salmond dared to express an opinion? In which case what about the rest of Mr Salmond's comments praising Mr Kennedy? Are they wrong too or are you merely tryng to troll the rest of us today?

While on the subject of Mr Kennedy, I didn't see any comments on PB about what actually happened in the infamous QT affair, and this is perhaps worth mentioning in justice to him. As I recall, it was firmly denied by at least one journo at the time that drink had anything to do with it - strikingly so, because they wouldn't give a reason. It now emerges that it was because Mr Kennedy's father had broken his hip and gone into hospital for surgery that day and Mr K had nonetheless insisted on proceeding with the event despite being deeply upset, but then refused to use this as an excuse for his performance.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/jun/02/charles-kennedy-celia-munro-confidante-tragedies-alcoholism

Omnium

Richard_Tyndall said:

Disraeli said:

tlg86 said:

Disraeli said:

Sandpit said:

If I were a leader in the Out campaign I would want to make it very clear indeed that there's no Status Quo option here, it's the Superstate or out.

Actually, I think that BOTH sides need to emphasise this point. One of the things that you hear people say is something along the lines of "We voted for the EEC in 1975, not the EU".
If the Superstate idea is made clear by the INNERS then this forestalls some potential challenges in the future along the line of "we were not told about this" or "we thought that we were voting on something else".

That would very much play into the No campaign's hands. Right now it's hard to see how the debate will take shape, lots of known unknowns, and probably lots of unknown unknowns!

:-)

There are known knowns. These are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say, there are things that we know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don't know we don't know.

Donald Rumsfeld

I never understood why he was mocked for that. It is an absolutely accurate statement and one that forms the basis of safety systems in industries all round the world.

Because the press were, in this example, stupid. Try to find a journalist that is prepared to stand by his criticism of the time.

I'm sure that boardrooms around the world have had this statement mentioned. Not in mockery, but because it's completely true.

tlg86

Richard_Tyndall said:

Disraeli said:

tlg86 said:

Disraeli said:

Sandpit said:

If I were a leader in the Out campaign I would want to make it very clear indeed that there's no Status Quo option here, it's the Superstate or out.

Actually, I think that BOTH sides need to emphasise this point. One of the things that you hear people say is something along the lines of "We voted for the EEC in 1975, not the EU".
If the Superstate idea is made clear by the INNERS then this forestalls some potential challenges in the future along the line of "we were not told about this" or "we thought that we were voting on something else".

That would very much play into the No campaign's hands. Right now it's hard to see how the debate will take shape, lots of known unknowns, and probably lots of unknown unknowns!

:-)

There are known knowns. These are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say, there are things that we know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don't know we don't know.

Donald Rumsfeld

I never understood why he was mocked for that. It is an absolutely accurate statement and one that forms the basis of safety systems in industries all round the world.

Yes, it made a lot of sense. I'm not sure if he said this but what really matters is that there are unknown knowns. That is to say there are things that you know but you just don't realize it. I do quite a lot of data validation and I quite often spot things without realizing the significance of them until they come up in a different context. The 2015 GE is a good example - we all knew Ed was crap, we just didn't realize that enough of the electorate agreed with us.

Charles

Richard_Tyndall said:

Disraeli said:

tlg86 said:

Disraeli said:

Sandpit said:

If I were a leader in the Out campaign I would want to make it very clear indeed that there's no Status Quo option here, it's the Superstate or out.

Actually, I think that BOTH sides need to emphasise this point. One of the things that you hear people say is something along the lines of "We voted for the EEC in 1975, not the EU".
If the Superstate idea is made clear by the INNERS then this forestalls some potential challenges in the future along the line of "we were not told about this" or "we thought that we were voting on something else".

That would very much play into the No campaign's hands. Right now it's hard to see how the debate will take shape, lots of known unknowns, and probably lots of unknown unknowns!

:-)

There are known knowns. These are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say, there are things that we know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don't know we don't know.

Donald Rumsfeld

I never understood why he was mocked for that. It is an absolutely accurate statement and one that forms the basis of safety systems in industries all round the world.

I always liked the concept of unknown knowns: the things that you don't know that you know

Scott_P

Carnyx said:

While on the subject of Mr Kennedy, I didn't see any comments on PB about what actually happened in the infamous QT affair, and this is perhaps worth mentioning in justice to him. As I recall, it was firmly denied by at least one journo at the time that drink had anything to do with it - strikingly so, because they wouldn't give a reason. It now emerges that it was because Mr Kennedy's father had broken his hip and gone into hospital for surgery that day and Mr K had nonetheless insisted on proceeding with the event despite being deeply upset, but then refused to use this as an excuse for his performance.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/jun/02/charles-kennedy-celia-munro-confidante-tragedies-alcoholism

I posted that on the previous thread

meanwhile

@paulwaugh: Asked re Salmond's remarks on Charles Kennedy, No.10: the PM believes 'our focus' tday shd be on his family + contribution to political life

Salmond made enough of an arse of himself that political journalists are asking the Prime Minister to comment, which to his credit he declined to do

Morris_Dancer

Mr. Charles, indeed. Occasionally I've known stuff and have no idea how or where I might've learnt it.

Edited extra bit: on a very light note, XCOM 2 has been announced. At the moment, it's PC (and Mac/Linux) only, though many think it will come to PS4/Xbone sooner or later. I hope it does.

Charles

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Charles, indeed. Occasionally I've known stuff and have no idea how or where I might've learnt it.

It more important than just trivia though - it's the whole basis of specialism.

Bond_James_Bond

Disraeli said:

*Tongue-in-cheek mode on*
I'm not so bothered about the actual question, but we do need to be aware that if Scotland votes differently to the rest of the UK, then Scotland may well feel that they have no alternative but to call another referendum on independence (which I am pretty sure the YES-side will win this time)

Therefore, I think that Scotland should vote separately first, Then the rest of the UK can vote taking the Scotland vote into account.
*Tongue-in-cheek mode off*

Irrelevant surely.

If the UK votes to leave, Scotland's out of the EU.

If Scotland then votes to stay in the UK, Scotland's out of the EU.

If Scotland then votes to leave the UK, Scotland's out of the EU.

All courses conjecturally open to Scotland lead to EU exit, apart from a victory for In and another No vote.

Scott_P

@kiranstacey: Have been told by two people in the Lib Dems that Charles Kennedy died of a heart attack.

Flightpathl

TheScreamingEagles said:

This is turning into Westminster's most entertaining fight

http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/steerpike/2015/06/lynton-crosby-vs-lord-ashcroft-round-two-hes-not-a-pollster/

Crosby is tight about Ashcroft though. He is not a pollster. He is no different to some hack at the Guardian ordering an ICM.

Sunil_Prasannan

Scott_P said:

@kiranstacey: Have been told by two people in the Lib Dems that Charles Kennedy died of a heart attack.

RIP Charles Kennedy

Sunil_Prasannan

Omnium said:

Scrapheap_as_was said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Scrapheap_as_was said:

Scrapheap_as_was said:

england can't even lose right.

If one more wicket goes down before tea then it's delayed and I assume my bet is looking good.... so it won't.

Stick your money on a sure fire winner.

Sol Campbell as Tory London Mayor candidate

I've put all my cricket winnings today on it....

I cannot imagine why anyone might imagine that Sol Campbell would be worthy of any responsibility.

With no power comes no responsibility?

Theuniondivvie

Scott_P said:

Everyone is agreed Salmond demeaned himself and those he claims to represent. Stop going on about it

Scott_P said:

I posted that on the previous thread

meanwhile blah, blah, cut'n'paste blah, SNP bad blah, Eck bad blah, I want to marry David Cameron blah.

No one's going to take your advice if you won't, matey.

JPJ2

Scott-P

You may, or may not, have support on PB for your comments-you won't have much in Scotland

Scott_P

JPJ2 said:

Scott-P

You may, or may not, have support on PB for your comments-you won't have much in Scotland

And yet many of the comments I have seen supporting the view that Alex Salmond is a World Class numpty who has judged this one as badly as his "victory tour" are from fellow Scots. YMMV

OldKingCole

tlg86 said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Disraeli said:

tlg86 said:

Disraeli said:

Sandpit said:

If I were a leader in the Out campaign I would want to make it very clear indeed that there's no Status Quo option here, it's the Superstate or out.

Actually, I think that BOTH sides need to emphasise this point. One of the things that you hear people say is something along the lines of "We voted for the EEC in 1975, not the EU".
If the Superstate idea is made clear by the INNERS then this forestalls some potential challenges in the future along the line of "we were not told about this" or "we thought that we were voting on something else".

That would very much play into the No campaign's hands. Right now it's hard to see how the debate will take shape, lots of known unknowns, and probably lots of unknown unknowns!

:-)

There are known knowns. These are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say, there are things that we know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don't know we don't know.

Donald Rumsfeld

I never understood why he was mocked for that. It is an absolutely accurate statement and one that forms the basis of safety systems in industries all round the world.

Yes, it made a lot of sense. I'm not sure if he said this but what really matters is that there are unknown knowns. That is to say there are things that you know but you just don't realize it. I do quite a lot of data validation and I quite often spot things without realizing the significance of them until they come up in a different context. The 2015 GE is a good example - we all knew Ed was crap, we just didn't realize that enough of the electorate agreed with us.

Actually the English (and Welsh) electorate didn't; it was the Scots who won it for Cameron!

Plato

For @kle4 Have you tried iZombie yet? Just seen the first 10 shows and its rather fun - yet another CW series that looks like it could be worth watching for cop/drama/comedy.

Just about to catch up with Wayward Pines and Mr Robot.

Flightpathl

OldKingCole said:

tlg86 said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Disraeli said:

tlg86 said:

Disraeli said:

Sandpit said:

If I were a leader in the Out campaign I would want to make it very clear indeed that there's no Status Quo option here, it's the Superstate or out.

Actually, I think that BOTH sides need to emphasise this point. One of the things that you hear people say is something along the lines of "We voted for the EEC in 1975, not the EU".
If the Superstate idea is made clear by the INNERS then this forestalls some potential challenges in the future along the line of "we were not told about this" or "we thought that we were voting on something else".

That would very much play into the No campaign's hands. Right now it's hard to see how the debate will take shape, lots of known unknowns, and probably lots of unknown unknowns!

:-)

There are known knowns. These are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say, there are things that we know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don't know we don't know.

Donald Rumsfeld

I never understood why he was mocked for that. It is an absolutely accurate statement and one that forms the basis of safety systems in industries all round the world.

Yes, it made a lot of sense. I'm not sure if he said this but what really matters is that there are unknown knowns. That is to say there are things that you know but you just don't realize it. I do quite a lot of data validation and I quite often spot things without realizing the significance of them until they come up in a different context. The 2015 GE is a good example - we all knew Ed was crap, we just didn't realize that enough of the electorate agreed with us.

Actually the English (and Welsh) electorate didn't; it was the Scots who won it for Cameron!

In the game of 3 dimensional chess that was the 2015 election, Cameron won it for himself.

Morris_Dancer

Miss Plato, there's at least one book called iZombie, by Jo Michaels, which I think is entirely unrelated to the series. Not my usual cup of tea (YA + zombies) but it's pretty good.

Bond_James_Bond

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Charles, indeed. Occasionally I've known stuff and have no idea how or where I might've learnt it.

Edited extra bit: on a very light note, XCOM 2 has been announced. At the moment, it's PC (and Mac/Linux) only, though many think it will come to PS4/Xbone sooner or later. I hope it does.

I liked Xenonauts a lot personally. I think I paid £10 via Steam.

Flightpathl

Scott_P said:

JPJ2 said:

Scott-P

You may, or may not, have support on PB for your comments-you won't have much in Scotland

And yet many of the comments I have seen supporting the view that Alex Salmond is a World Class numpty who has judged this one as badly as his "victory tour" are from fellow Scots. YMMV

Let's not worry too much. Salmond is not the leader of the SNP, he is not the leader of Westminster SNP MPs and does not have to give an official SNP eulogy in either Holyrood or Westminster. With a sad irony Guido has a picture of him today in a Westminster drinking den.