Interesting the previous Tory candidate has continued campaigning and bills himself as the 'Conservative Parliamentary Spokesperson for Tooting'. Also a good CV. Still think it would be a big ask for the Conservatives - both parties increased their votes in 2015, not sure there is alot left to squeeze.
Still think Ken would have the edge - there's still enough residual Ken the radical anti establishment to carry him over the line. We'll be heading to proper doldrums/mid-term by then as well.
A question for our Scottish friends.
What tipped the scales against Labour so much in 15? I mean I know years of taking for granted the seats, not doing anything for constituents etc. But why 15? Was it the realisation that there was no risk of Indy by voting SNP?
I wonder if avoiding the risk of Corbo as PM would be enough to tip 25-75 of the more precarious Northern seats away from Labour in a similar way...
Yes vote == SNP vote. It was that simple. Support for indy rose so support for the snp rose.
What's odd though is that the SNP rise only happened after the referendum.
In the 2014 European elections, right in the thick of the referendum campaign, Labour came within 4% of the SNP in Scotland (there was actually a small swing TOWARDS Labour compared to 2009).
Every arguement was won by the Yes campaign,
Inside your head.
Meanwhile, in the real world, things like "currency" and "prospective oil tax revenue" were big fails for the SNP
Banks, lenders of last resort, defence, financial services generally, the BBC. Maybe a list of the arguments Dair thinks they did win would be shorter.
It does not matter what I think. What matters is what voters think.
In the last 12 months of the campaign, support for Independence went from 30% to 45%.
Over the course of the campaign and it's subsequent fallout, the historic, generally appetite for Independence shifted from 25% to 49%.
That's the new baseline. People were persuaded and they were persuaded by the Yes argument and absolutely nothing that Loyalists have said has changed their minds.
Since you have read it twice, I guess you have no objections to the content of that response.
I don't think any of the Scottish pro-Independence posters on PB are members of the SNP. I'm certainly not and probably won't be voting for the SNP on the Glasgow List in May.
Interesting the previous Tory candidate has continued campaigning and bills himself as the 'Conservative Parliamentary Spokesperson for Tooting'. Also a good CV. Still think it would be a big ask for the Conservatives - both parties increased their votes in 2015, not sure there is alot left to squeeze.
Still think Ken would have the edge - there's still enough residual Ken the radical anti establishment to carry him over the line. We'll be heading to proper doldrums/mid-term by then as well.
A question for our Scottish friends.
What tipped the scales against Labour so much in 15? I mean I know years of taking for granted the seats, not doing anything for constituents etc. But why 15? Was it the realisation that there was no risk of Indy by voting SNP?
I wonder if avoiding the risk of Corbo as PM would be enough to tip 25-75 of the more precarious Northern seats away from Labour in a similar way...
Yes vote == SNP vote. It was that simple. Support for indy rose so support for the snp rose.
What's odd though is that the SNP rise only happened after the referendum.
In the 2014 European elections, right in the thick of the referendum campaign, Labour came within 4% of the SNP in Scotland (there was actually a small swing TOWARDS Labour compared to 2009).
The SNP got 29 percent at the euros, TNS BRMB polled independence support at... 30 percent.
Very dodgy statistics there.
In an election votes go to one of the options but in the polls Don't Know was a major factor that's not one in an election.
Of those expressing an opinion it wasn't 30% for Yes but in reality 42% (30/72 excluding the 28% who said Don't Know). There is a reason Opinion Polls normally exclude or reallocate those who say Don't Know.
Well I'll make a transcript for you in case you can't read:
Media Statement Wednesday, December 16, 2015
In response to Alex Salmond
A spokesperson for the Trump Organization said:
Does anyone care what this man thinks? He's a has-been and totally irrelevant. The fact that he doesn't even know what's going on in his own constituency says it all. We have a permanent clubhouse and the business is flourishing. He should go back to doing what he does best-unveiling pompous portraits of himself that pander to his already overinflated ego.
The Trump Organization...
[redacted]
Does anyone disagree with the contents of this response?
Yes. Me. Vehemently. For Trump to accuse somebody else of pandering to an overinflated ego is to require a new definition of chutzpah. I disagree with the SNP generally and Scottish Independence specifically, but that doesn't mean their battle was not sincerely meant nor that they intended anything other than the betterment of Scots. Trump's endgame is everybody kneeling to him in concentric circles. To heck with him.
That's the whole point, you can replace Trump with Salmond and you are still talking about the same guy, with the same personality. It's just amusing that two so similar people clash in public.
Interesting the previous Tory candidate has continued campaigning and bills himself as the 'Conservative Parliamentary Spokesperson for Tooting'. Also a good CV. Still think it would be a big ask for the Conservatives - both parties increased their votes in 2015, not sure there is alot left to squeeze.
Still think Ken would have the edge - there's still enough residual Ken the radical anti establishment to carry him over the line. We'll be heading to proper doldrums/mid-term by then as well.
A question for our Scottish friends.
What tipped the scales against Labour so much in 15? I mean I know years of taking for granted the seats, not doing anything for constituents etc. But why 15? Was it the realisation that there was no risk of Indy by voting SNP?
I wonder if avoiding the risk of Corbo as PM would be enough to tip 25-75 of the more precarious Northern seats away from Labour in a similar way...
Yes vote == SNP vote. It was that simple. Support for indy rose so support for the snp rose.
What's odd though is that the SNP rise only happened after the referendum.
In the 2014 European elections, right in the thick of the referendum campaign, Labour came within 4% of the SNP in Scotland (there was actually a small swing TOWARDS Labour compared to 2009).
Every arguement was won by the Yes campaign,
Inside your head.
Meanwhile, in the real world, things like "currency" and "prospective oil tax revenue" were big fails for the SNP
Banks, lenders of last resort, defence, financial services generally, the BBC. Maybe a list of the arguments Dair thinks they did win would be shorter.
It does not matter what I think. What matters is what voters think.
In the last 12 months of the campaign, support for Independence went from 30% to 45%.
Over the course of the campaign and it's subsequent fallout, the historic, generally appetite for Independence shifted from 25% to 49%.
That's the new baseline. People were persuaded and they were persuaded by the Yes argument and absolutely nothing that Loyalists have said has changed their minds.
No it didn't. Not once you exclude Don't Knows. Otherwise it's equally valid to say that No surged from 42% to 55%
Meanwhile, in the real world, things like "currency" and "prospective oil tax revenue" were big fails for the SNP
The trouble with this arguemnt is that you are arguing the majority of Scots started the indy campaign in favour of independence and currency and oil pushhed them towards No. The polling tells the exact opposite story.
I think we've reached the stage where the Loylists are simply too indoctrinated to actually think rationally about the debate.
Fortunately they weren't the first to reach that stage.
Interesting the previous Tory candidate has continued campaigning and bills himself as the 'Conservative Parliamentary Spokesperson for Tooting'. Also a good CV. Still think it would be a big ask for the Conservatives - both parties increased their votes in 2015, not sure there is alot left to squeeze.
Still think Ken would have the edge - there's still enough residual Ken the radical anti establishment to carry him over the line. We'll be heading to proper doldrums/mid-term by then as well.
A question for our Scottish friends.
What tipped the scales against Labour so much in 15? I mean I know years of taking for granted the seats, not doing anything for constituents etc. But why 15? Was it the realisation that there was no risk of Indy by voting SNP?
I wonder if avoiding the risk of Corbo as PM would be enough to tip 25-75 of the more precarious Northern seats away from Labour in a similar way...
Yes vote == SNP vote. It was that simple. Support for indy rose so support for the snp rose.
What's odd though is that the SNP rise only happened after the referendum.
In the 2014 European elections, right in the thick of the referendum campaign, Labour came within 4% of the SNP in Scotland (there was actually a small swing TOWARDS Labour compared to 2009).
Every arguement was won by the Yes campaign,
Inside your head.
Meanwhile, in the real world, things like "currency" and "prospective oil tax revenue" were big fails for the SNP
Banks, lenders of last resort, defence, financial services generally, the BBC. Maybe a list of the arguments Dair thinks they did win would be shorter.
It does not matter what I think. What matters is what voters think.
Interesting the previous Tory candidate has continued campaigning and bills himself as the 'Conservative Parliamentary Spokesperson for Tooting'. Also a good CV. Still think it would be a big ask for the Conservatives - both parties increased their votes in 2015, not sure there is alot left to squeeze.
Still think Ken would have the edge - there's still enough residual Ken the radical anti establishment to carry him over the line. We'll be heading to proper doldrums/mid-term by then as well.
A question for our Scottish friends.
What tipped the scales against Labour so much in 15? I mean I know years of taking for granted the seats, not doing anything for constituents etc. But why 15? Was it the realisation that there was no risk of Indy by voting SNP?
I wonder if avoiding the risk of Corbo as PM would be enough to tip 25-75 of the more precarious Northern seats away from Labour in a similar way...
Yes vote == SNP vote. It was that simple. Support for indy rose so support for the snp rose.
What's odd though is that the SNP rise only happened after the referendum.
In the 2014 European elections, right in the thick of the referendum campaign, Labour came within 4% of the SNP in Scotland (there was actually a small swing TOWARDS Labour compared to 2009).
Every arguement was won by the Yes campaign,
Inside your head.
Meanwhile, in the real world, things like "currency" and "prospective oil tax revenue" were big fails for the SNP
Banks, lenders of last resort, defence, financial services generally, the BBC. Maybe a list of the arguments Dair thinks they did win would be shorter.
It does not matter what I think. What matters is what voters think.
In the last 12 months of the campaign, support for Independence went from 30% to 45%.
Over the course of the campaign and it's subsequent fallout, the historic, generally appetite for Independence shifted from 25% to 49%.
That's the new baseline. People were persuaded and they were persuaded by the Yes argument and absolutely nothing that Loyalists have said has changed their minds.
No it didn't. Not once you exclude Don't Knows. Otherwise it's equally valid to say that No surged from 42% to 55%
Your pathetic use of "facts" to prove your point demonstrates you are nothing more than a unionist shill.
Labour is going to try to get the welfare savings from the move to Universal Credit ruled illegal.
Every chance of succeeding I'm afraid - worth remembering (and very little publicity was given to this) that the £26,000 welfare cap was only ruled legal by 3-2 in the Supreme Court earlier this year.
The judgements in that case bear reading because to my mind even those which are in favour of the Government, such as the lead Judgement by Lord Reed, are a mass of considerations which should have nothing to do with the law at all. It is frankly horrifying how far the ECHR and the mindset it apparently creates in the Judiciary entitles them to pass judgement on public policy, the determination of Parliament and our democratic process.
The judgement of Baroness Hale in particular seems to start from the premise that because the government has put the detailed regulations in secondary legislation (as authorised by the Act) that gives the Courts free rein to determine whether that secondary legislation is "legitimate", whether it has been approved by Parliament or not.
This sort of idiocy (and I say this as a lawyer) is why we have not been able to build a runway in southern England for over 30 years, have a major problem with decrepit and unreplaced power stations and frankly cannot get anything done. To call it self indulgent would be masterful understatement.
Interesting the previous Tory candidate has continued campaigning and bills himself as the 'Conservative Parliamentary Spokesperson for Tooting'. Also a good CV. Still think it would be a big ask for the Conservatives - both parties increased their votes in 2015, not sure there is alot left to squeeze.
Still think Ken would have the edge - there's still enough residual Ken the radical anti establishment to carry him over the line. We'll be heading to proper doldrums/mid-term by then as well.
A question for our Scottish friends.
What tipped the scales against Labour so much in 15? I mean I know years of taking for granted the seats, not doing anything for constituents etc. But why 15? Was it the realisation that there was no risk of Indy by voting SNP?
I wonder if avoiding the risk of Corbo as PM would be enough to tip 25-75 of the more precarious Northern seats away from Labour in a similar way...
Yes vote == SNP vote. It was that simple. Support for indy rose so support for the snp rose.
What's odd though is that the SNP rise only happened after the referendum.
In the 2014 European elections, right in the thick of the referendum campaign, Labour came within 4% of the SNP in Scotland (there was actually a small swing TOWARDS Labour compared to 2009).
Every arguement was won by the Yes campaign,
Inside your head.
Meanwhile, in the real world, things like "currency" and "prospective oil tax revenue" were big fails for the SNP
Banks, lenders of last resort, defence, financial services generally, the BBC. Maybe a list of the arguments Dair thinks they did win would be shorter.
It does not matter what I think. What matters is what voters think.
In the last 12 months of the campaign, support for Independence went from 30% to 45%.
Over the course of the campaign and it's subsequent fallout, the historic, generally appetite for Independence shifted from 25% to 49%.
That's the new baseline. People were persuaded and they were persuaded by the Yes argument and absolutely nothing that Loyalists have said has changed their minds.
The problem is, dair, the voters don't think what you think they think.
cf;
"I think we've reached the stage where the Loylists are simply too indoctrinated to actually think rationally about the debate"
That's the kind of conclusion you come to when you've lost the argument.
Interesting the previous Tory candidate has continued campaigning and bills himself as the 'Conservative Parliamentary Spokesperson for Tooting'. Also a good CV. Still think it would be a big ask for the Conservatives - both parties increased their votes in 2015, not sure there is alot left to squeeze.
Still think Ken would have the edge - there's still enough residual Ken the radical anti establishment to carry him over the line. We'll be heading to proper doldrums/mid-term by then as well.
A question for our Scottish friends.
What tipped the scales against Labour so much in 15? I mean I know years of taking for granted the seats, not doing anything for constituents etc. But why 15? Was it the realisation that there was no risk of Indy by voting SNP?
I wonder if avoiding the risk of Corbo as PM would be enough to tip 25-75 of the more precarious Northern seats away from Labour in a similar way...
Yes vote == SNP vote. It was that simple. Support for indy rose so support for the snp rose.
What's odd though is that the SNP rise only happened after the referendum.
In the 2014 European elections, right in the thick of the referendum campaign, Labour came within 4% of the SNP in Scotland (there was actually a small swing TOWARDS Labour compared to 2009).
Every arguement was won by the Yes campaign,
Inside your head.
Meanwhile, in the real world, things like "currency" and "prospective oil tax revenue" were big fails for the SNP
Banks, lenders of last resort, defence, financial services generally, the BBC. Maybe a list of the arguments Dair thinks they did win would be shorter.
It does not matter what I think. What matters is what voters think.
Indeed.
They voted No.
No, you misunderstand, it only matters what voters think when they get it right.
Ugh, I feel like crap. Probably overdosed on the Star Wars advertising saturating every form of media, now that I'm actually about to see it in 12 hous. I hear amazonian tribes are really looking forward to it, though.
A pleasant night to all - I welcome Ken back, I used to like him and now I find him very bitter, so maybe being an MP would bring the old Ken back.
"Campaign group Republic said there was "no good reason" why Prince William receives the information."
Other than him being a future head of state. I understand they don't like the hereditary system, but it's what we have, and so rules/procedures are designed around that fact.
Interesting the previous Tory candidate has continued campaigning and bills himself as the 'Conservative Parliamentary Spokesperson for Tooting'. Also a good CV. Still think it would be a big ask for the Conservatives - both parties increased their votes in 2015, not sure there is alot left to squeeze.
Still think Ken would have the edge - there's still enough residual Ken the radical anti establishment to carry him over the line. We'll be heading to proper doldrums/mid-term by then as well.
A question for our Scottish friends.
What tipped the scales against Labour so much in 15? I mean I know years of taking for granted the seats, not doing anything for constituents etc. But why 15? Was it the realisation that there was no risk of Indy by voting SNP?
I wonder if avoiding the risk of Corbo as PM would be enough to tip 25-75 of the more precarious Northern seats away from Labour in a similar way...
Yes vote == SNP vote. It was that simple. Support for indy rose so support for the snp rose.
What's odd though is that the SNP rise only happened after the referendum.
In the 2014 European elections, right in the thick of the referendum campaign, Labour came within 4% of the SNP in Scotland (there was actually a small swing TOWARDS Labour compared to 2009).
The SNP got 29 percent at the euros, TNS BRMB polled independence support at... 30 percent.
Very dodgy statistics there.
In an election votes go to one of the options but in the polls Don't Know was a major factor that's not one in an election.
Of those expressing an opinion it wasn't 30% for Yes but in reality 42% (30/72 excluding the 28% who said Don't Know). There is a reason Opinion Polls normally exclude or reallocate those who say Don't Know.
Don't Know means No.
The IPSOS Mori even of referendum poll was 45% Yes, 50% No 5% DK.
YouGov's eve of referendum poll was 45% Yes, 49% No 6% DK
Panelbase's eve of referendum poll was 45% Yes, 50% No 5% DK.
Actual result? Same as adding the DK to the No figure in each case.
No it didn't. Not once you exclude Don't Knows. Otherwise it's equally valid to say that No surged from 42% to 55%
Two of the Indy polls 12 months before 14/09/14 had No on 59% even with DKs. It's difficult to see what interpretation would allow one to say that No subsequently surged to 55% 12 months later.
The average No vote of the five September 2013 polls was 53.2%. I suppose if one didn't mind looking ridiculous, one could say No surged by an almighty 1.8% in 12 months.
I expect this was discussed earlier, but if Ken returns to the Commons then would Ken not be the favourite for next Labour leader? As to Ken as next Prime Minister ...
That graph should terrify Cameron and his FO friends
The initial rise in Yes in the first quarter of the graph is based on the polling in the month after the "No Currency Union" speech by Osbourne and the pact by the shadow chancellors.
Surely the question is what does Prince William actually do with all this information?
Does he read it all and memorise it? Or just file it in his office?
What is he actually going to do as a result of knowing it?
If the answer is nothing then why bother spending time on it?
If it's "preparation for being Monarch" how is he going to remember any of it by then? I doubt his memory lasts 30 or 40 years. If he's worried he may need the info when he becomes Monarch then presumably he could just ask for old minutes at that time?
Surely the question is what does Prince William actually do with all this information?
Does he read it all and memorise it? Or just file it in his office?
What is he actually going to do as a result of knowing it?
If the answer is nothing then why bother spending time on it?
If it's "preparation for being Monarch" how is he going to remember any of it by then? I doubt his memory lasts 30 or 40 years. If he's worried he may need the info when he becomes Monarch then presumably he could just ask for old minutes at that time?
I doubt it is for him to memorise every detail of every report, but rather as training for what is to come.
Surely the question is what does Prince William actually do with all this information?
Does he read it all and memorise it? Or just file it in his office?
What is he actually going to do as a result of knowing it?
If the answer is nothing then why bother spending time on it?
If it's "preparation for being Monarch" how is he going to remember any of it by then? I doubt his memory lasts 30 or 40 years. If he's worried he may need the info when he becomes Monarch then presumably he could just ask for old minutes at that time?
Not to remember the specifics, but so he is used to considering such issues, no different to any other form of training by experience.it really is a fantastically dull scandal that has emerged.
Surely the question is what does Prince William actually do with all this information?
Does he read it all and memorise it? Or just file it in his office?
What is he actually going to do as a result of knowing it?
If the answer is nothing then why bother spending time on it?
If it's "preparation for being Monarch" how is he going to remember any of it by then? I doubt his memory lasts 30 or 40 years. If he's worried he may need the info when he becomes Monarch then presumably he could just ask for old minutes at that time?
I don't see why he'd need an eidetic memory. Having an understanding of what has come before helps with going forwards.
I never knew Hilary Clinton was a top cattle futures trader. She managed to turn an initial $1,000 investment into $100,000.
Economists from Auburn University and University of North Florida concluded that there was only a 1 in 250 million chance that Clinton could have made the profits legitimately. Guess she is just really lucky...
"Campaign group Republic said there was "no good reason" why Prince William receives the information."
Other than him being a future head of state. I understand they don't like the hereditary system, but it's what we have, and so rules/procedures are designed around that fact.
I never knew Hilary Clinton was a top cattle futures trader. She managed to turn an initial $1,000 investment into $100,000.
Economists from Auburn University and University of North Florida concluded that there was only a 1 in 250 million chance that Clinton could have made the profits legitimately. Guess she is just really lucky...
TBH that list is pretty thin gruel - the author lists eight 'scandals', but rates all but one of them either 1 or 2 out of 10 for seriousness of the original alleged scandal. The exception he rates at 5 out of 10, but admits Hillary had very little to do with it. In any case most of this stuff is very well known, and in the price.
"Campaign group Republic said there was "no good reason" why Prince William receives the information."
Other than him being a future head of state. I understand they don't like the hereditary system, but it's what we have, and so rules/procedures are designed around that fact.
Slow news day.
Agreed completely. I'm a republican but unless or until the constitution changes it should be followed. William is two heartbeats from being King.
I'd even accept Harry having been briefed too at least until William became a father.
"Campaign group Republic said there was "no good reason" why Prince William receives the information."
Other than him being a future head of state. I understand they don't like the hereditary system, but it's what we have, and so rules/procedures are designed around that fact.
Slow news day.
Agreed completely. I'm a republican but unless or until the constitution changes it should be followed. William is two heartbeats from being King.
I'd even accept Harry having been briefed too at least until William became a father.
I think if anything the conclusion should be that, contrary to reports, Charles knows how to keep his gob shut. Sure, he's intervenes too much on a few things - but think of all the things he hasn't...
I never knew Hilary Clinton was a top cattle futures trader. She managed to turn an initial $1,000 investment into $100,000.
Economists from Auburn University and University of North Florida concluded that there was only a 1 in 250 million chance that Clinton could have made the profits legitimately. Guess she is just really lucky...
I never knew Hilary Clinton was a top cattle futures trader. She managed to turn an initial $1,000 investment into $100,000.
Economists from Auburn University and University of North Florida concluded that there was only a 1 in 250 million chance that Clinton could have made the profits legitimately. Guess she is just really lucky...
TBH that list is pretty thin gruel - the author lists eight 'scandals', but rates all but one of them either 1 or 2 out of 10 for seriousness of the original alleged scandal. The exception he rates at 5 out of 10, but admits Hillary had very little to do with it. In any case most of this stuff is very well known, and in the price.
I never knew Hilary Clinton was a top cattle futures trader. She managed to turn an initial $1,000 investment into $100,000.
Economists from Auburn University and University of North Florida concluded that there was only a 1 in 250 million chance that Clinton could have made the profits legitimately. Guess she is just really lucky...
I never knew Hilary Clinton was a top cattle futures trader. She managed to turn an initial $1,000 investment into $100,000.
Economists from Auburn University and University of North Florida concluded that there was only a 1 in 250 million chance that Clinton could have made the profits legitimately. Guess she is just really lucky...
TBH that list is pretty thin gruel - the author lists eight 'scandals', but rates all but one of them either 1 or 2 out of 10 for seriousness of the original alleged scandal. The exception he rates at 5 out of 10, but admits Hillary had very little to do with it. In any case most of this stuff is very well known, and in the price.
I was expecting more beef.
Truth is you have a measure of sanity and people who are addicted to this bollox do not have two brain cells to rub together.
N~20,000 (meaning that this was almost certainly done online) #EUReferendum https://t.co/FhxvQ0KJLL
Get in!
Come on England, don't let me down.
Given his lordship's record at the general election and 2 new polls with Remain ahead would not get too excited
O/T Had quite an interesting evening at the parliamentary carols as a guest of James Davies MP, a friend of a friend, readings by John Bercow, Chris Bryant and Michael Fallon and Diane Abbott nearby then a drink on the Commons Terrace and a meal with Bill Cash walking by. Then saw Mark Gambill (Luke Skywalker) and Peter Mayhew (Chewbacca) coming out of the Star Wars Premiere, Gambill winding down his window and being chased by fans down Charing Cross Road. Simon Pegg, Benedict Cumberbatch, Stephen Fry, Brooklyn and Romeo Beckham and Brian May also coming out of the film
I never knew Hilary Clinton was a top cattle futures trader. She managed to turn an initial $1,000 investment into $100,000.
Economists from Auburn University and University of North Florida concluded that there was only a 1 in 250 million chance that Clinton could have made the profits legitimately. Guess she is just really lucky...
I'm sorry, but that "1 in 250 million chance" statement is bullshit (scuse my French, but "nonsense" is insufficiently harsh). The "1 in 250 million" statement is true if each purchasing decision was taken at random *and* independent of each other (e.g. by a balanced roulette wheel, identical balls with random entry points and speed, and no escaping). But they weren't. Such fuckwitted abuse of statistics is what got Sally Clark killed, and I'll thank you not to repeat it. Economists never get fired for being wrong so they are free to spout such stupidities, but i hope we at PB have a more critical eye.
N~20,000 (meaning that this was almost certainly done online) #EUReferendum https://t.co/FhxvQ0KJLL
Get in!
Come on England, don't let me down.
Given his lordship's record at the general election and 2 new polls with Remain ahead would not get too excited
O/T Had quite an interesting evening at the parliamentary carols as a guest of James Davies MP, a friend of a friend, readings by John Bercow, Chris Bryant and Michael Fallon and Diane Abbott nearby then a drink on the Commons Terrace and a meal with Bill Cash walking by. Then saw Mark Gambill (Luke Skywalker) and Peter Mayhew (Chewbacca) coming out of the Star Wars Premiere, Gambill winding down his window and being chased by fans down Charing Cross Road. Simon Pegg, Benedict Cumberbatch, Stephen Fry, Brooklyn and Romeo Beckham and Brian May also coming out of the film
Interesting the previous Tory candidate has continued campaigning and bills himself as the 'Conservative Parliamentary Spokesperson for Tooting'. Also a good CV. Still think it would be a big ask for the Conservatives - both parties increased their votes in 2015, not sure there is alot left to squeeze.
Still think Ken would have the edge - there's still enough residual Ken the radical anti establishment to carry him over the line. We'll be heading to proper doldrums/mid-term by then as well.
A question for our Scottish friends.
What tipped the scales against Labour so much in 15? I mean I know years of taking for granted the seats, not doing anything for constituents etc. But why 15? Was it the realisation that there was no risk of Indy by voting SNP?
I wonder if avoiding the risk of Corbo as PM would be enough to tip 25-75 of the more precarious Northern seats away from Labour in a similar way...
Yes vote == SNP vote. It was that simple. Support for indy rose so support for the snp rose.
What's odd though is that the SNP rise only happened after the referendum.
In the 2014 European elections, right in the thick of the referendum campaign, Labour came within 4% of the SNP in Scotland (there was actually a small swing TOWARDS Labour compared to 2009).
Every arguement was won by the Yes campaign,
Inside your head.
Meanwhile, in the real world, things like "currency" and "prospective oil tax revenue" were big fails for the SNP
Banks, lenders of last resort, defence, financial services generally, the BBC. Maybe a list of the arguments Dair thinks they did win would be shorter.
It does not matter what I think. What matters is what voters think.
In the last 12 months of the campaign, support for Independence went from 30% to 45%.
Over the course of the campaign and it's subsequent fallout, the historic, generally appetite for Independence shifted from 25% to 49%.
That's the new baseline. People were persuaded and they were persuaded by the Yes argument and absolutely nothing that Loyalists have said has changed their minds.
No it didn't. Not once you exclude Don't Knows. Otherwise it's equally valid to say that No surged from 42% to 55%
Dair is doing his best to make this site unreadable.
Any evidence that polls with 10,000 do better than those with 1,000?
Yes. But the improvement is *tiny* (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margin_of_error ). The Ashcroft poll is not compatible with the phone polls showing a significant Remain lead, nor with the ICM poll showing neck-and-neck. Choose whichever poll you feel suits your worldview, but somebody here is fucking up bigstyle (I haven't got a clue which!). The sole advantage of this clusterfuck is that at least the pollsters aren't herding this time...:-)
Meanwhile, in the real world, things like "currency" and "prospective oil tax revenue" were big fails for the SNP
The trouble with this arguemnt is that you are arguing the majority of Scots started the indy campaign in favour of independence and currency and oil pushhed them towards No. The polling tells the exact opposite story.
the Second Referendum and preventing Scotland from expressing herself democratically.
But that won't work.
Tick tock.
So SINDYREF 2 'nailed on' for the SNP Holyrood 2016 manifesto then?
Interesting the previous Tory candidate has continued campaigning and bills himself as the 'Conservative Parliamentary Spokesperson for Tooting'. Also a good CV. Still think it would be a big ask for the Conservatives - both parties increased their votes in 2015, not sure there is alot left to squeeze.
Still think Ken would have the edge - there's still enough residual Ken the radical anti establishment to carry him over the line. We'll be heading to proper doldrums/mid-term by then as well.
A question for our Scottish friends.
What tipped the scales against Labour so much in 15? I mean I know years of taking for granted the seats, not doing anything for constituents etc. But why 15? Was it the realisation that there was no risk of Indy by voting SNP?
I wonder if avoiding the risk of Corbo as PM would be enough to tip 25-75 of the more precarious Northern seats away from Labour in a similar way...
Them being willing partners of the Tories and fronting the campaign for them, unbelievably stupid.
"Campaign group Republic said there was "no good reason" why Prince William receives the information."
Other than him being a future head of state. I understand they don't like the hereditary system, but it's what we have, and so rules/procedures are designed around that fact.
Slow news day.
I believe that the head of the group "Republic" is an Aussie. Can we dream up some reason to deport him?
"Campaign group Republic said there was "no good reason" why Prince William receives the information."
Other than him being a future head of state. I understand they don't like the hereditary system, but it's what we have, and so rules/procedures are designed around that fact.
Slow news day.
I believe that the head of the group "Republic" is an Aussie. Can we dream up some reason to deport him?
No. We should give him a rousing rendition of "Get your shit stars off our flag"
"Campaign group Republic said there was "no good reason" why Prince William receives the information."
Other than him being a future head of state. I understand they don't like the hereditary system, but it's what we have, and so rules/procedures are designed around that fact.
Slow news day.
I believe that the head of the group "Republic" is an Aussie. Can we dream up some reason to deport him?
Currently running at an incredible 9.2C. This month will certainly be the warmest December in the CET series (current record at 8.1C). I predict it will finish up above 9C - smashing the record!
That's what you get when you get winds off the Sahara. There is a warning out because of Saharan dust affecting eastern England and causing breathing problems over the next few days. The two previous highs of 1934 and 1974 also had the same problem.
Interesting. Breaking a monthly average by a full degree must be a very, very rare event though. (not motivated enough to check that assertion, however!)
Funny stuff this weather. But it happens. The fact that it was warmer in 1948 shows... that it was warmer in 1948. Amazing how the winds blow sometimes.
Interesting the previous Tory candidate has continued campaigning and bills himself as the 'Conservative Parliamentary Spokesperson for Tooting'. Also a good CV. Still think it would be a big ask for the Conservatives - both parties increased their votes in 2015, not sure there is alot left to squeeze.
Still think Ken would have the edge - there's still enough residual Ken the radical anti establishment to carry him over the line. We'll be heading to proper doldrums/mid-term by then as well.
A question for our Scottish friends.
What tipped the scales against Labour so much in 15? I mean I know years of taking for granted the seats, not doing anything for constituents etc. But why 15? Was it the realisation that there was no risk of Indy by voting SNP?
I wonder if avoiding the risk of Corbo as PM would be enough to tip 25-75 of the more precarious Northern seats away from Labour in a similar way...
Yes vote == SNP vote. It was that simple. Support for indy rose so support for the snp rose.
What's odd though is that the SNP rise only happened after the referendum.
In the 2014 European elections, right in the thick of the referendum campaign, Labour came within 4% of the SNP in Scotland (there was actually a small swing TOWARDS Labour compared to 2009).
Every arguement was won by the Yes campaign,
Inside your head.
Meanwhile, in the real world, things like "currency" and "prospective oil tax revenue" were big fails for the SNP
Banks, lenders of last resort, defence, financial services generally, the BBC. Maybe a list of the arguments Dair thinks they did win would be shorter.
It does not matter what I think. What matters is what voters think.
In the last 12 months of the campaign, support for Independence went from 30% to 45%.
Over the course of the campaign and it's subsequent fallout, the historic, generally appetite for Independence shifted from 25% to 49%.
That's the new baseline. People were persuaded and they were persuaded by the Yes argument and absolutely nothing that Loyalists have said has changed their minds.
No it didn't. Not once you exclude Don't Knows. Otherwise it's equally valid to say that No surged from 42% to 55%
Dair is doing his best to make this site unreadable.
Oh for chrissake, did Ashcroft *really* do it like that? Does he take his socks off by keeping his shoes on and patiently unthreading his socks, then rethreading them once retrieved?. It's a simple question: REMAIN or LEAVE? What is it with this "mark out of a 100" bobbins?
Interesting the previous Tory candidate has continued campaigning and bills himself as the 'Conservative Parliamentary Spokesperson for Tooting'. Also a good CV. Still think it would be a big ask for the Conservatives - both parties increased their votes in 2015, not sure there is alot left to squeeze.
Still think Ken would have the edge - there's still enough residual Ken the radical anti establishment to carry him over the line. We'll be heading to proper doldrums/mid-term by then as well.
A question for our Scottish friends.
What tipped the scales against Labour so much in 15? I mean I know years of taking for granted the seats, not doing anything for constituents etc. But why 15? Was it the realisation that there was no risk of Indy by voting SNP?
I wonder if avoiding the risk of Corbo as PM would be enough to tip 25-75 of the more precarious Northern seats away from Labour in a similar way...
Yes vote == SNP vote. It was that simple. Support for indy rose so support for the snp rose.
What's odd though is that the SNP rise only happened after the referendum.
In the 2014 European elections, right in the thick of the referendum campaign, Labour came within 4% of the SNP in Scotland (there was actually a small swing TOWARDS Labour compared to 2009).
Every arguement was won by the Yes campaign,
Inside your head.
Meanwhile, in the real world, things like "currency" and "prospective oil tax revenue" were big fails for the SNP
Banks, lenders of last resort, defence, financial services generally, the BBC. Maybe a list of the arguments Dair thinks they did win would be shorter.
It does not matter what I think. What matters is what voters think.
In the last 12 months of the campaign, support for Independence went from 30% to 45%.
Over the course of the campaign and it's subsequent fallout, the historic, generally appetite for Independence shifted from 25% to 49%.
That's the new baseline. People were persuaded and they were persuaded by the Yes argument and absolutely nothing that Loyalists have said has changed their minds.
No it didn't. Not once you exclude Don't Knows. Otherwise it's equally valid to say that No surged from 42% to 55%
Dair is doing his best to make this site unreadable.
I know. It's an awful film to watch for the narrative, but it's pretty good to have on in the background when you're working, and just let it seep in...
Interesting the previous Tory candidate has continued campaigning and bills himself as the 'Conservative Parliamentary Spokesperson for Tooting'. Also a good CV. Still think it would be a big ask for the Conservatives - both parties increased their votes in 2015, not sure there is alot left to squeeze.
Still think Ken would have the edge - there's still enough residual Ken the radical anti establishment to carry him over the line. We'll be heading to proper doldrums/mid-term by then as well.
A question for our Scottish friends.
What tipped the scales against Labour so much in 15? I mean I know years of taking for granted the seats, not doing anything for constituents etc. But why 15? Was it the realisation that there was no risk of Indy by voting SNP?
I wonder if avoiding the risk of Corbo as PM would be enough to tip 25-75 of the more precarious Northern seats away from Labour in a similar way...
N~20,000 (meaning that this was almost certainly done online) #EUReferendum https://t.co/FhxvQ0KJLL
Get in!
Come on England, don't let me down.
Given his lordship's record at the general election and 2 new polls with Remain ahead would not get too excited
O/T Had quite an interesting evening at the parliamentary carols as a guest of James Davies MP, a friend of a friend, readings by John Bercow, Chris Bryant and Michael Fallon and Diane Abbott nearby then a drink on the Commons Terrace and a meal with Bill Cash walking by. Then saw Mark Gambill (Luke Skywalker) and Peter Mayhew (Chewbacca) coming out of the Star Wars Premiere, Gambill winding down his window and being chased by fans down Charing Cross Road. Simon Pegg, Benedict Cumberbatch, Stephen Fry, Brooklyn and Romeo Beckham and Brian May also coming out of the film
Mark HAMILL
Yes just looked him up and was waiting for the inevitable correction
Oh for chrissake, did Ashcroft *really* do it like that? Does he take his socks off by keeping his shoes on and patiently unthreading his socks, then rethreading them once retrieved?. It's a simple question: REMAIN or LEAVE? What is it with this "mark out of a 100" bobbins?
I think he's trying to prove his constituency wasn't the most bobbins bit of polling he's produced this year.
"Campaign group Republic said there was "no good reason" why Prince William receives the information."
Other than him being a future head of state. I understand they don't like the hereditary system, but it's what we have, and so rules/procedures are designed around that fact.
Slow news day.
I believe that the head of the group "Republic" is an Aussie. Can we dream up some reason to deport him?
"Campaign group Republic said there was "no good reason" why Prince William receives the information."
Other than him being a future head of state. I understand they don't like the hereditary system, but it's what we have, and so rules/procedures are designed around that fact.
Slow news day.
I believe that the head of the group "Republic" is an Aussie. Can we dream up some reason to deport him?
"Campaign group Republic said there was "no good reason" why Prince William receives the information."
Other than him being a future head of state. I understand they don't like the hereditary system, but it's what we have, and so rules/procedures are designed around that fact.
Slow news day.
I believe that the head of the group "Republic" is an Aussie. Can we dream up some reason to deport him?
Lizzie is also Queen of Oz...
Tony Abbott headed the Australian monarchist campaign in 1999 and was born in London
What a pity Salmond wasn't born in America. He could join the race for the Republican nomination and finish off Trumpy in the first 5 minutes of debate. The only reason these charactors can't lay a glove on Trump is that a) they are all useless and b) they are frighted of Trump. Salmond is neither.
On their current exchange I suspect Salmond knows his constituency rather well. The petition to ban Trunp is running at 1169 in Gordon, the Not to ban petition at 76 in the constituency ie 15 to one to ban the Trump!
"Campaign group Republic said there was "no good reason" why Prince William receives the information."
Other than him being a future head of state. I understand they don't like the hereditary system, but it's what we have, and so rules/procedures are designed around that fact.
Slow news day.
I believe that the head of the group "Republic" is an Aussie. Can we dream up some reason to deport him?
"Campaign group Republic said there was "no good reason" why Prince William receives the information."
Other than him being a future head of state. I understand they don't like the hereditary system, but it's what we have, and so rules/procedures are designed around that fact.
Slow news day.
I believe that the head of the group "Republic" is an Aussie. Can we dream up some reason to deport him?
"Campaign group Republic said there was "no good reason" why Prince William receives the information."
Other than him being a future head of state. I understand they don't like the hereditary system, but it's what we have, and so rules/procedures are designed around that fact.
Slow news day.
I believe that the head of the group "Republic" is an Aussie. Can we dream up some reason to deport him?
Lizzie is also Queen of Oz...
Tony Abbott headed the Australian monarchist campaign in 1999 and was born in London
What a pity Salmond wasn't born in America. He could join the race for the Republican nomination and finish off Trumpy in the first 5 minutes of debate. The only reason these charactors can't lay a glove on Trump is that a) they are all useless and b) they are frighted of Trump. Salmond is neither.
On their current exchange I suspect Salmond knows his constituency rather well. The petition to ban Trunp is running at 1169 in Gordon, the Not to ban petition at 76 in the constituency ie 15 to one to ban the Trump!
That's very thorough. Did you find any polyps up there?
Days of future past, modernist design, corporate men in mad men drag and elliptical sentences flattened by the chaos of events, one of the best designed films, still in the Sight&Sound top ten films evah...
...and all the special effects are British. God when we're good, we're good...
Comments
In the last 12 months of the campaign, support for Independence went from 30% to 45%.
Over the course of the campaign and it's subsequent fallout, the historic, generally appetite for Independence shifted from 25% to 49%.
That's the new baseline. People were persuaded and they were persuaded by the Yes argument and absolutely nothing that Loyalists have said has changed their minds.
In an election votes go to one of the options but in the polls Don't Know was a major factor that's not one in an election.
Of those expressing an opinion it wasn't 30% for Yes but in reality 42% (30/72 excluding the 28% who said Don't Know). There is a reason Opinion Polls normally exclude or reallocate those who say Don't Know.
It's just amusing that two so similar people clash in public.
A man whose time has come, gone, and is best forgotten.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yQw__kfAkYk&feature=youtu.be
The Duke of Cambridge occasionally receives copies of confidential cabinet documents
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-35116875
They voted No.
Be gone from this site.
The judgement of Baroness Hale in particular seems to start from the premise that because the government has put the detailed regulations in secondary legislation (as authorised by the Act) that gives the Courts free rein to determine whether that secondary legislation is "legitimate", whether it has been approved by Parliament or not.
This sort of idiocy (and I say this as a lawyer) is why we have not been able to build a runway in southern England for over 30 years, have a major problem with decrepit and unreplaced power stations and frankly cannot get anything done. To call it self indulgent would be masterful understatement.
They are very long but worth a read: https://www.supremecourt.uk/decided-cases/docs/UKSC_2014_0079_Judgment.pdf
So much of what is wrong with this country summed up in 100 pages of gibberish and judicial intervention in the democratic process.
"Feed the NHS, don't they know it's Christmas Time..."
cf;
"I think we've reached the stage where the Loylists are simply too indoctrinated to actually think rationally about the debate"
That's the kind of conclusion you come to when you've lost the argument.
I really don't understand what the issue is here. They will both be future monarchs. I think it is something to celebrate!
Ugh, I feel like crap. Probably overdosed on the Star Wars advertising saturating every form of media, now that I'm actually about to see it in 12 hous. I hear amazonian tribes are really looking forward to it, though.
A pleasant night to all - I welcome Ken back, I used to like him and now I find him very bitter, so maybe being an MP would bring the old Ken back.
Other than him being a future head of state. I understand they don't like the hereditary system, but it's what we have, and so rules/procedures are designed around that fact.
The IPSOS Mori even of referendum poll was
45% Yes, 50% No 5% DK.
YouGov's eve of referendum poll was
45% Yes, 49% No 6% DK
Panelbase's eve of referendum poll was
45% Yes, 50% No 5% DK.
Actual result? Same as adding the DK to the No figure in each case.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3361640/Saudi-millionaire-cleared-raping-teenager-telling-court-accidentally-penetrated-18-year-old-tripped-fell-her.html
At the European premiere of #StarWars, Cameron got muted applause, Osborne some boos! Tough crowd.
Stephen Bush @stephenkb 2h2 hours ago
Stephen Bush Retweeted Jonathan Haynes
The quiet unpopularity of George Osborne, Exhibit 7000.
I mean seriously, who the heck applauds a Prime Minister on the way to a film?
The average No vote of the five September 2013 polls was 53.2%. I suppose if one didn't mind looking ridiculous, one could say No surged by an almighty 1.8% in 12 months.
https://t.co/qvVFPZUiVF
Does he read it all and memorise it? Or just file it in his office?
What is he actually going to do as a result of knowing it?
If the answer is nothing then why bother spending time on it?
If it's "preparation for being Monarch" how is he going to remember any of it by then? I doubt his memory lasts 30 or 40 years. If he's worried he may need the info when he becomes Monarch then presumably he could just ask for old minutes at that time?
Economists from Auburn University and University of North Florida concluded that there was only a 1 in 250 million chance that Clinton could have made the profits legitimately. Guess she is just really lucky...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-k-wilson/a-clinton-scandal-primer_b_87792.html
REMAIN 38
LEAVE 47
N~20,000 (meaning that this was almost certainly done online)
#EUReferendum https://t.co/FhxvQ0KJLL
I was expecting more beef.
I'd even accept Harry having been briefed too at least until William became a father.
Come on England, don't let me down.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uJ3kV3Icm28
or
9 point leave lead...
Who knows?
I shall keep selling the favourite and earning a few pennies :-)
It has all those allegations (and more).
Plus it will make you seriously doubt the sanity of AEP.
I was thinking about buying The Clintons' War on Women but after researching one of the women who had made various allegations was left unconvinced.
O/T Had quite an interesting evening at the parliamentary carols as a guest of James Davies MP, a friend of a friend, readings by John Bercow, Chris Bryant and Michael Fallon and Diane Abbott nearby then a drink on the Commons Terrace and a meal with Bill Cash walking by. Then saw Mark Gambill (Luke Skywalker) and Peter Mayhew (Chewbacca) coming out of the Star Wars Premiere, Gambill winding down his window and being chased by fans down Charing Cross Road. Simon Pegg, Benedict Cumberbatch, Stephen Fry, Brooklyn and Romeo Beckham and Brian May also coming out of the film
tick tock.....
https://twitter.com/MSmithsonPB/status/677262783357014017
At least it'll answer your currency question - 'it's the Euro'!
But that will be your choice, if you vote to leave the UK and join the EU......
With Rigsby !!
-Tory income tax levels
-Tory ringfencing....
Tartan Tories!
Still a funny approach though.
What a pity Salmond wasn't born in America. He could join the race for the Republican nomination and finish off Trumpy in the first 5 minutes of debate. The only reason these charactors can't lay a glove on Trump is that a) they are all useless and b) they are frighted of Trump. Salmond is neither.
On their current exchange I suspect Salmond knows his constituency rather well. The petition to ban Trunp is running at 1169 in Gordon, the Not to ban petition at 76 in the constituency ie 15 to one to ban the Trump!
...and all the special effects are British. God when we're good, we're good...