Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Happy tenth anniversary David
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Happy tenth anniversary David
Today is the tenth anniversary of David Cameron’s election as Conservative Leader, and what a ten years it has been.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-35022119
Talking about turbulent times.
Always on the precipice but never over it.
The missing part of Beveridge is tackling the evil of Idleness.
Oddly, it feels very normal now. The left went into complete meltdown on May 8th and with the stupidity of the PLP it doesn't feel that strange that Corbyn is their leader.
But in terms of how they view inequality they are vastly different. Liberals TOLERATE inequality and are quite happy for the wealthy cohort to be in constant turmoil at the hands of the market. If the entire wealthy elite changes in a single generation this is perfectly fine.
Tories want to maintain the existing elite. So they are vehemently against inheritance tax (which a liberal would view as one of the best taxes to levy as it has no impact on the Market) and will always seek to maintain privilege.
"Labour: Tony Blair, Gordon Brown, Harriet Harman, Ed Miliband, Harriet Harman and Jeremy Corbyn**.
For the Liberal Democrats: Charles Kennedy, Vince Cable, Sir Menzies Campbell, Nick Clegg and Tim Farron.
For UKIP: Roger Knapman, Nigel Farage, Lord Pearson, Jeffrey Titford, Nigel Farage and Suzanne Evans.
For the SNP: Alex Salmond and Nicola Sturgeon."
Iraq destroyed Blair, the financial crash destroyed Brown, the SNP destroyed Miliband.
Lord Ashdown's thirst for power destroyed the LD.
Nigel Farage's quest for a commons seat looks like an unhealthy obsession.
And the SNP have been too succesful and as a result the voters are scared of them.
Cameron has seen 4 permanent Labour Leaders. Blair saw 5 Conservative Leaders. It will be touch and go whether Cameron equals Blair. Thatcher saw 4 Labour Leaders.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CPvpeSsWIAATeuR.jpg
https://thestack.com/world/2015/12/04/google-proposes-needle-less-system-for-drawing-blood/
Can't come quick enough for my liking...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberal_conservatism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservative_liberalism
I'm a liberal conservative (and a Conservative).
The Conservative party ideally should be a broad tent of liberals, conservatives, and everything between/combination of.
Cameron has, of course, enjoyed his share of "luck" - coming into the leadership as Labour passed its zenith and began its own decline via Brown and Miliband to Corbyn.
Coalition in 2010 might have been wafer-thin majority under different circumstances. History tells us the likelihood is Cameron would have prevailed in 2015 but perhaps we'd be talking Coalition now instead of then.
It was however the economic transformation of 2008-09 that led the political transformation. Northern Rock and later Lehmann destroyed Labour's decade-long reputation for economic management which had seen it through two re-election campaigns. Conservative (both large and small "c") economic values filled the gap - the virtues of sound public finances and the need to trim back the State suddenly came back into fashion and relevance.
In truth, no coherent alternative economic message has emerged - yes, there are nuances over, for instance, the role of immigration, but Osborne economics remain in the ascendant and will do until or unless people forget the bad times and are willing to see Government spend more and tax less again.
I'm not a Conservative but it's clear that, like every other Party, the Tories like a winner and that's Cameron - had he lost in May, he wouldn't have survived long as leader. There's little or no room for sentimentality in politics - if, like Margaret Thatcher, he stops being a winner, I've little doubt the Party will find a way to solve that problem.
https://twitter.com/davidcmoore1/status/673574259806093312
Like it or not, the Front Nationale is a mainstream party.
File the second part of that statement under "Catholics....Pope" etc.
But the Germans have in recent weeks been very publicly critical of the Saudis. I wonder what's got into them
Officiel : le FN à 31% au niveau national devant LR (27%) et le PS (23%) #RadioLondres #Régionales2015
"Many people have missed the point of David Cameron’s attempt to bracket opponents of his latest war with ‘terrorist sympathisers’. It is this. Our Prime Minister (earlier than many) is beginning to suffer from Downing Street Disorder.
It starts with being unable to believe that anyone can possibly disagree with you, unless they are mad or wicked. It ends with being so cut off from the world that you are unable to make a phone call or use public transport.
The only cure is to be turned out of office, but many victims never fully recover."
http://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/
1)The Tory Party
2) The Lib Dems via the coalition
3) UKIP
4) Labour, who couldn't cope with the Tories having centrist, one nation Tory in charge, so Labour moved further leftwards to keep their usual distance from the Tories
5) The SNP (although that was mostly organic)
Earlier this year, the FN got 25% in the Department elections, only a few percent behind the UMP/Republicans.
But in the second round, they had a terrible time.
The FN ended up with just 62 seats, out of something like 4,000. They ended up with fewer seats than the Communist Party.
Essentially, the two round voting system screws the transfer unfriendly. If the FN can improve their transfer friendly-ness, and start picking up Republican votes in PS/FN contests, they are in with a shout in the event of a PS-FN matchup for the Presidency.
On the other hand, if they prove as transfer-unfriendly as they did in March, then they will really struggle in 2017, even if they top the first round.
It took you two attempts to get back above 200 seats so again not too many seats to choose from. I don't recall the Conservatives winning Cheadle in 2005 though there were plenty on here at the time saying they would.
I can understand why Ukip didn't want to associate with FN. I suspect FN are less concerned about what people think about them. The bottom line is, a good chunk of the French electorate are voting for them. That probably reflects quite badly on the other parties in France, but then I'd suggest Ukip's rise reflects badly on Labour and the Tories, so they do have that in common.
Worth reading.
The author says on his profile this -
If you could effect one major policy change in the governing of your country, what would it be? > The dismantling of the prevailing segregationist multi-cultural model, combined with a thoroughgoing assault on the moral and cultural relativism underpinning it.
What do you consider to be the main threat to the future peace and security of the world? > Religious fanaticism and its hand-maidens, sectarian hatred, woman hatred and Jew hatred. A combination of these things is already tearing a number of countries to pieces before our eyes. Nuclear proliferation comes a close second.
I couldn't agree more. Like DavidL on a previous thread I have no problem at all with putting our cultural paradigm first.
On topic, I hope whoever succeeds Cameron is not a numpty. If Corbyn or someone of his ilk gets in, we're stuffed.
(only kidding!!!!)
It's probably 50/50 whether they reach a majority - on my (hacked together spreadsheet which assumes 90% PS->Republicans, and 66% Republicans-> PS) they make it by two. But it'll certainly be close. And the Republican -> PS round two was well above 66% in March.
Would you like a small bet?
They didn't manage to turn that into a majority in the second round.
Trying to be in and out of govt at the same time is hardly a tenable position.
Sadly, I've heard and read some people suggest that the Israeli victims *deserved* it. Because, well, you know, they're Israeli.
I wonder if they'll have the same view if such attacks become anywhere near frequent in this country.
http://edition.cnn.com/2015/11/03/middleeast/israels-new-terror-after-jerusalem-knife-attacks/
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/nov/02/eighty-year-old-woman-among-four-israelis-knifed-two-attacks
http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/what-provoked-palestinian-knife-attacks-in-israel
http://www.itv.com/news/2015-12-06/rolling-stone-ronnie-wood-set-to-become-a-father-again/
Take a look at this (http://www.interieur.gouv.fr/Elections/Les-resultats/Departementales/elecresult__departementales-2015/(path)/departementales-2015/062/index.html) to see how transfer unfriendly the FN was in Pas de Calais in March.
Despite being the number one party with 20% more than the second placed party (41.5% vs 23.1%), the FN got just 12 out of 62 seats.
The French electoral system is staggeringly tough on the FN.
Anything that has the by line Iain Martin attached to it should immediately be discounted given that the old deadbeat managed to lose about half the readership of the Scotsman when he edited it for Andrew Neil. They have admittedly since managed to lose the other half!
For reasons I won't explain I ended up with a copy of the Mail on Sunday (I ordered the Sunday Mail) and read their totally ludicrous story on the SNP MP whose previous oil sector employment used a perfectly legal and widespread tax avoidance scheme as part of his pay. That unbelievably was their front page since it was clearly a slow news day with bombs raining down in Syria and half of the North of England under water. All they have done is to make themselves and PBers who retweeted this rubbish last night look really really silly and no-one but no-one believes that it amounts to a hill of beans.
As for the for the Forth Bridge the trouble is that it was a different part of the Bridge, a small point of detail covered elsewhere in the papers. If I were Tory/Labour and Liberal I wouldn't talk too long about this issue given the flak Salmond took for deciding on a new one and the failure of any of these parties to order one since it was first called for in the 1980s!
As for Iain Martin the best bit of his blog is where he shows off the rates for world side syndication! Hud the front page and me back!
You would have thought they would be dominant. They actually ended up with just 12 out of 62 seats. That's harsh.
:-)
Whatever your politics it's clear that Cameron and Osborne have steered a decent course.
It couldn't have happened without Clegg though. Whatever the politics - he (and the LDs of the time) deserve enormous credit.
Although in fairness, its hard to do without being sanctimonius, a la Martin Freeman.
I have not really looked at the process in the last five years or so, but back when I did, there were five parameters against which potential events were assessed to ascertain whether they should make it onto the Register:
1. deaths
2. injuries
3. hit to GDP
4. disruption of infrastructure
5. societal panic caused.
I always have argued that there should be a sixth - threat to the fabric of society.
Does that also apply here to UKIP, modified to take account of the differing electoral systems.
"In a democracy you have to have consensus in order to represent the people" when trying to make an excuse as to why the socialists voted for Juncker and Schultz on the european level.
In Britain or America she would have been crucified, which is why the left is dead in the continent.
Whatever your politics I suppose you could call that a good result, in as much as Cameron and Osborne have done nothing much more or less than either of the other two parties would have done over the same period.
That is why politics in europe drifts towards incompetent centre-right or centre-left governments composed of or supported by losers.
You are quite right it is ( tax avoidance) perfectly legal and probably widespread.
Unfortunately Ms Sturgeon the Party leader refers to tax avoidance as " obscene, despicable and immoral". Which makes the SNP MP's position somewhat delicate if not rather tricky.
http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/13201727.Sturgeon_demands_zero_tolerance_on_obscene_and_despicable_tax_avoidance/
In amongst all the chaotic themes of government something has been going right for Cameron.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CVkH0iCWUAE7r2o.jpg:large
As that's the well established furrow of the UK plough, then that is a very conservative solution.