the usual "we're the best" attitude which is the gut response of any criticism has kicked in.
Physician, heal thyself.
Scotland invented Universal Public Education. For that alone, there is a certain moral high ground.
I'm struggling to think of anything that England, the British Empire or the vetigial UK has done for the world which is remotely positive.
At best a good argument could be made for the European Convention on Human Rights and the ECHR which Churchill can claim responsibility for. But sadly it seems the UK wants to turn her back on this outstanding, ground-breaking legacy.
Theres football, and democracy, and railways...
But apart from that what have the Romans ever done for us?
All the actual evidence says that "fear of SNP" was not an issue in the general election. There is not a single piece of analysis that suggests the voting share was effected overall. None.
Fear of a Labour-SNP coalition was absolutely an issue. The question is whether there is anything that can make it not a issue, other than independence.
No it wasn't. There is evidence, we have surveys and analysis which quite clearly concludes that it was not an issue** and not a single piece of evidence that it made a difference.
**This doesn't mean it did not change any votes but the evidence indicates that the attraction to the SNP balanced the fear of the SNP amongst voters meaning that no effective difference in the final result can b found.
Do you have links to these analyses and surveys?
It's a very very counterintuitive conclusion. That doesn't mean it is wrong but I would want to look very closely at the methodology and reasoning behind such studies.
From memory there were a couple of polls which both indicated fear of SNP matched attraction to SNP, one was commissioned by Wings. I'll happily concede the evidence is limited.
However, the evidence that fear of SNP changed the result is NON EXISTENT.
I'll take limited evidence over non-existed evidence every day of the week.
Sorry, just seen this reply.
If that's the case I would file it under interesting things to consider. It's always worth challenging popularly accepted narratives, even if one ends up concluding they are right.
I wouldn't assert it as fact with any confidence though. The evidence we have that it was a factor is the testimony of the Conservative and UKIP campaigns and simply the experience of being here in the final days of the campaign. It's something that people really were talking about. It's not just a media concoction.
Of course, it's possible that any negative effect was offset by a positive one but I'd be very cautious about that conclusion. The negative effect was real and intense!
the usual "we're the best" attitude which is the gut response of any criticism has kicked in.
Physician, heal thyself.
Scotland invented Universal Public Education. .
Shame the SNP is letting the side down then, isn't it?
Myths endure forever. Take, for instance, the myth that Scotland is a more equal, egalitarian, kind of place than England. It is an idea much-cherished north of the border and a stubbornly persistent one too. Helpfully, it’s also resistant to evidence, allowing Scots to maintain the pretence that, as the late John Smith once (complacently) put it, ‘The Scots are a more moral people‘.
Awkwardly, however, it’s better to be poor in England than in Scotland.......While 54 percent of Scottish medical students are from the wealthiest 20 percent of postcodes, just (a relative term, to be sure) 38 percent of English medical students are from similarly advantaged communities.
Moreover, twice as many English students come from the poorest 20 percent of postcodes as is the case in Scotland.
the usual "we're the best" attitude which is the gut response of any criticism has kicked in.
Physician, heal thyself.
Scotland invented Universal Public Education. For that alone, there is a certain moral high ground.
I'm struggling to think of anything that England, the British Empire or the vetigial UK has done for the world which is remotely positive.
At best a good argument could be made for the European Convention on Human Rights and the ECHR which Churchill can claim responsibility for. But sadly it seems the UK wants to turn her back on this outstanding, ground-breaking legacy.
Theres football, and democracy, and railways...
But apart from that what have the Romans ever done for us?
the usual "we're the best" attitude which is the gut response of any criticism has kicked in.
Physician, heal thyself.
Scotland invented Universal Public Education. For that alone, there is a certain moral high ground.
I'm struggling to think of anything that England, the British Empire or the vetigial UK has done for the world which is remotely positive.
At best a good argument could be made for the European Convention on Human Rights and the ECHR which Churchill can claim responsibility for. But sadly it seems the UK wants to turn her back on this outstanding, ground-breaking legacy.
Are you unwell? Your heart doesn't really seem to be in your trolling today. Perhaps you should retire to bed for the rest of the day.
the usual "we're the best" attitude which is the gut response of any criticism has kicked in.
Physician, heal thyself.
Scotland invented Universal Public Education. For that alone, there is a certain moral high ground.
I'm struggling to think of anything that England, the British Empire or the vetigial UK has done for the world which is remotely positive.
At best a good argument could be made for the European Convention on Human Rights and the ECHR which Churchill can claim responsibility for. But sadly it seems the UK wants to turn her back on this outstanding, ground-breaking legacy.
Theres football, and democracy, and railways...
But apart from that what have the Romans ever done for us?
On topic I cannot quite believe that electoral reform is even being discussed with the Labour party- we really are back to the dismal days of the 1980's when it looked like the only way to dislodge the Tories was to change the electoral system.
FWIW- I think that Farron is more useless that Corbyn- if that is at all conceivable. Farron has less charisma than Ed Miliband- and that is something to behold.
Mr. Tyson, Farron's task is harder than Corbyn's, although the former appears to be watching the latter's huge unpopularity and has decided to ape him..
the usual "we're the best" attitude which is the gut response of any criticism has kicked in.
Physician, heal thyself.
Scotland invented Universal Public Education. For that alone, there is a certain moral high ground.
I'm struggling to think of anything that England, the British Empire or the vetigial UK has done for the world which is remotely positive.
At best a good argument could be made for the European Convention on Human Rights and the ECHR which Churchill can claim responsibility for. But sadly it seems the UK wants to turn her back on this outstanding, ground-breaking legacy.
Theres football, and democracy, and railways...
But apart from that what have the Romans ever done for us?
Nothing wrong with the LDs seeking out the Labour view on electoral reform given there is a new leader in place. I doubt Labour will ever deliver on electoral reform in all honesty as they have a lot of committed pro-FPTP people (that system perpetuates them in Opposition and makes them the only credible alternative Government on offer).
I don't see electoral reform as a "panacea" any more than I believe the long-term viability of a CON-UKIP coalition. Electoral reform is one part of a larger picture covering our political structure and institutions and to be honest the LDs got too hung up on voting systems rather than asking the big questions about devolution and re-invigorating local democracy which I consider much more important.
I've long argued on here and elsewhere Nick Clegg got it completely wrong on AV - it's not proportional and has never been LD policy. I think he thought he couldn't recommend the Coalition to the Party without some sop to electoral reform and as the Conservatives wouldn't even put STV on a referendum (and that was their mistake), AV was the only game in town. He also fell into the trap of believing his own charisma could win the argument if the Conservatives stayed out of the fight.
None of this matters - even after two heavy defeats, the Conservatives weren't interested in electoral reform after 2001 because FPTP works as well for them as it does for Labour.
So you approve of the government giving huge payments/subsidies to high earners for their pensions?
I approve of encouraging people to save for their retirement so the next generation won't have to pay for it like I have to for the current retired lot. What is more conservative than working hard, putting money away and taking responsibility for one's own retirement rather than lumbering it on the taxpayer of the future?
the usual "we're the best" attitude which is the gut response of any criticism has kicked in.
Physician, heal thyself.
Scotland invented Universal Public Education. For that alone, there is a certain moral high ground.
I'm struggling to think of anything that England, the British Empire or the vetigial UK has done for the world which is remotely positive.
At best a good argument could be made for the European Convention on Human Rights and the ECHR which Churchill can claim responsibility for. But sadly it seems the UK wants to turn her back on this outstanding, ground-breaking legacy.
Theres football, and democracy, and railways...
But apart from that what have the Romans ever done for us?
Many of these were invented and discovered in the union. It'd be a shame to break something that works, eh?
And of course Scots were very enthusiastic participants in the British Empire, whether militarily, in civil engineering, business or missionary zeal.
Although, as we covered the other day, in the early days of the Empire, there was little choice other than Scots given the education differential between the nations.
the usual "we're the best" attitude which is the gut response of any criticism has kicked in.
Physician, heal thyself.
Scotland invented Universal Public Education. For that alone, there is a certain moral high ground.
I'm struggling to think of anything that England, the British Empire or the vetigial UK has done for the world which is remotely positive.
At best a good argument could be made for the European Convention on Human Rights and the ECHR which Churchill can claim responsibility for. But sadly it seems the UK wants to turn her back on this outstanding, ground-breaking legacy.
Parts of the ancient world had public education systems.
As to positive achievements for the UK, establishing North America, Australia, and New Zealand, winning both World Wars and the Napoleonic War, providing the world with a lingua Franca, spreading capitalism, exporting Common Law, but apart from that, not much.
On topic I cannot quite believe that electoral reform is even being discussed with the Labour party- we really are back to the dismal days of the 1980's when it looked like the only way to dislodge the Tories was to change the electoral system.
FWIW- I think that Farron is more useless that Corbyn- if that is at all conceivable. Farron has less charisma than Ed Miliband- and that is something to behold.
I think that we will have to assess whether Farron has had positive effect after the May elections. Considering the point that he took over it was never going to be easy to get a decent press profile. It could be worse: Farron has steadied the ship - Corbyn has scuttled his.
It is said that "there is no such thing as bad publicity", but Corbyn is doing his best to disprove that!
the usual "we're the best" attitude which is the gut response of any criticism has kicked in.
Physician, heal thyself.
Scotland invented Universal Public Education. For that alone, there is a certain moral high ground.
I'm struggling to think of anything that England, the British Empire or the vetigial UK has done for the world which is remotely positive.
At best a good argument could be made for the European Convention on Human Rights and the ECHR which Churchill can claim responsibility for. But sadly it seems the UK wants to turn her back on this outstanding, ground-breaking legacy.
Theres football, and democracy, and railways...
But apart from that what have the Romans ever done for us?
Those claims seem somewhat tenuous.
If that's the best you can come up with...
OK, how about rescuing Europe from tyranny three times in 150 years? I know we needed help each time, but if we had given up or not got involved Europe would have been a very different and much worse place.
On topic I cannot quite believe that electoral reform is even being discussed with the Labour party- we really are back to the dismal days of the 1980's when it looked like the only way to dislodge the Tories was to change the electoral system.
FWIW- I think that Farron is more useless that Corbyn- if that is at all conceivable. Farron has less charisma than Ed Miliband- and that is something to behold.
Any proposal for electoral reform has to consider why the AV referendum failed. I would suggest that what the public asked themselves was "why is this change being proposed?"
That question had two answers:
(1) The Lib Dems are proposing it because it will produce more Lib Dem MPs (2) PR advocates are proposing it because they want to move away from FPTP and see it as a stepping stone.
Reason (1) was rejected by the public on the grounds of it being pure partisan self-interest; reason (2) was rejected on the grounds that "if even you who are proposing it don't believe in it, why should we?" - hence the proposal failed spectacularly.
So why are Labour and the Lib Dems proposing PR now? To get fewer Tories. I can't see that going down any better than the AV ref.
the usual "we're the best" attitude which is the gut response of any criticism has kicked in.
Physician, heal thyself.
Scotland invented Universal Public Education. .
Shame the SNP is letting the side down then, isn't it?
Myths endure forever. Take, for instance, the myth that Scotland is a more equal, egalitarian, kind of place than England. It is an idea much-cherished north of the border and a stubbornly persistent one too. Helpfully, it’s also resistant to evidence, allowing Scots to maintain the pretence that, as the late John Smith once (complacently) put it, ‘The Scots are a more moral people‘.
Awkwardly, however, it’s better to be poor in England than in Scotland.......While 54 percent of Scottish medical students are from the wealthiest 20 percent of postcodes, just (a relative term, to be sure) 38 percent of English medical students are from similarly advantaged communities.
Moreover, twice as many English students come from the poorest 20 percent of postcodes as is the case in Scotland.
Comments
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scottish_inventions_and_discoveries
Many of these were invented and discovered in the union. It'd be a shame to break something that works, eh?
If that's the case I would file it under interesting things to consider. It's always worth challenging popularly accepted narratives, even if one ends up concluding they are right.
I wouldn't assert it as fact with any confidence though. The evidence we have that it was a factor is the testimony of the Conservative and UKIP campaigns and simply the experience of being here in the final days of the campaign. It's something that people really were talking about. It's not just a media concoction.
Of course, it's possible that any negative effect was offset by a positive one but I'd be very cautious about that conclusion. The negative effect was real and intense!
I think we'll see more research on this anyway.
Myths endure forever. Take, for instance, the myth that Scotland is a more equal, egalitarian, kind of place than England. It is an idea much-cherished north of the border and a stubbornly persistent one too. Helpfully, it’s also resistant to evidence, allowing Scots to maintain the pretence that, as the late John Smith once (complacently) put it, ‘The Scots are a more moral people‘.
Awkwardly, however, it’s better to be poor in England than in Scotland.......While 54 percent of Scottish medical students are from the wealthiest 20 percent of postcodes, just (a relative term, to be sure) 38 percent of English medical students are from similarly advantaged communities.
Moreover, twice as many English students come from the poorest 20 percent of postcodes as is the case in Scotland.
Universal....just not for poor people
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/01/land-of-opportunity-its-better-to-be-poor-in-england-than-in-scotland/
If that's the best you can come up with...
FWIW- I think that Farron is more useless that Corbyn- if that is at all conceivable. Farron has less charisma than Ed Miliband- and that is something to behold.
Nothing wrong with the LDs seeking out the Labour view on electoral reform given there is a new leader in place. I doubt Labour will ever deliver on electoral reform in all honesty as they have a lot of committed pro-FPTP people (that system perpetuates them in Opposition and makes them the only credible alternative Government on offer).
I don't see electoral reform as a "panacea" any more than I believe the long-term viability of a CON-UKIP coalition. Electoral reform is one part of a larger picture covering our political structure and institutions and to be honest the LDs got too hung up on voting systems rather than asking the big questions about devolution and re-invigorating local democracy which I consider much more important.
I've long argued on here and elsewhere Nick Clegg got it completely wrong on AV - it's not proportional and has never been LD policy. I think he thought he couldn't recommend the Coalition to the Party without some sop to electoral reform and as the Conservatives wouldn't even put STV on a referendum (and that was their mistake), AV was the only game in town. He also fell into the trap of believing his own charisma could win the argument if the Conservatives stayed out of the fight.
None of this matters - even after two heavy defeats, the Conservatives weren't interested in electoral reform after 2001 because FPTP works as well for them as it does for Labour.
Fox News, Iowa
Trump 34 +11
Cruz 23 -4
Rubio 12 -3
Carson 7 -2
Paul 6 +1
Bush 4 -3
Christie 4 0
Huckabee 2 0
Kasich 2 +1
Santorum 2 +1
Fiorina 2 +1
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/interactive/2016/01/22/fox-news-poll-iowa-presidential-primary/
Fox News, N.H.
Trump 31 -2
Cruz 14 +2
Rubio 13 -2
Kasich 9 +2
Bush 7 -2
Christie 7 +2
Paul 5 0
Carson 5 +1
Fiorina 3 0
Huckabee 1 +1
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/interactive/2016/01/22/fox-news-poll-new-hampshire-presidential-primary/
Seems the Palin endorsement did wonders for Trump in Iowa.
As to positive achievements for the UK, establishing North America, Australia, and New Zealand, winning both World Wars and the Napoleonic War, providing the world with a lingua Franca, spreading capitalism, exporting Common Law, but apart from that, not much.
New Thread New Thread
It is said that "there is no such thing as bad publicity", but Corbyn is doing his best to disprove that!
That question had two answers:
(1) The Lib Dems are proposing it because it will produce more Lib Dem MPs
(2) PR advocates are proposing it because they want to move away from FPTP and see it as a stepping stone.
Reason (1) was rejected by the public on the grounds of it being pure partisan self-interest; reason (2) was rejected on the grounds that "if even you who are proposing it don't believe in it, why should we?" - hence the proposal failed spectacularly.
So why are Labour and the Lib Dems proposing PR now? To get fewer Tories. I can't see that going down any better than the AV ref.