Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Never mind Super Tuesday, get ready for Mega March

1235

Comments

  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,264
    Indigo said:

    I didn't realise Varoufakis was actually working for Labour on their economics team... the man that crashed the Greek economy even worse than it already was... what could possibly go wrong!

    He is a man who doesn't actually understand what debt is.
  • Options
    Indigo's post below is a brutal indictmemt of Cameron's honesty. I'd never put all those things together, but you have in black and white. Condemned by his own words.


    That's why I come to this website. People make better arguments than the actual opposition does.
  • Options
    IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966
    rcs1000 said:

    Indigo said:

    I didn't realise Varoufakis was actually working for Labour on their economics team... the man that crashed the Greek economy even worse than it already was... what could possibly go wrong!

    He is a man who doesn't actually understand what debt is.
    Aha should get on fine with McDonnell then :D
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,249
    Michigan MRG

    GOP
    Trump 33
    Rubio 18
    Cruz 18
    Kasich 10
    Carson 9

    Dems
    Clinton 56
    Sanders 33

    General election

    Clinton 44
    Trump 39

    Clinton 44
    Cruz 39

    Clinton 41
    Rubio 43
    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/docs/2016/MRG_MI_Poll_Spring_16_Pres_Prim-FINAL.pdf
  • Options
    TOPPING said:

    SeanT said:

    perdix:

    "It would have been totally pointless to have had a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty after it had been ratified. Even assuming that a referendum would have been held and said "no" to The Treaty, parliament with LibDems and Labour would never have passed any legislation to abrogate the Treaty. Cameron was unthinking in his language - he expected an early GE and a new parliament with an ungratified Treaty. William Hague's speech at Conference was correctly qualified.
    Typical kipper type logic."


    ****

    You miss my point. I'm saying Cameron was deliberately loose or "unthinking" with his language, because he likes to appear eurosceptic, whereas in truth he is anything but; as we see now, at last, in plain sight.

    He's too smart not to realise how the phrase "cast iron guarantee" would be understood by readers of the Sun. They would see it as a "cast iron guarantee". Coz that's wot he wrote. Very Deliberately. Very Thinkingly.

    He wanted the eurosceptic vote. But he isn't a eurosceptic. As Philip Stephens says in today's FT, he is, in truth, as europhile as Michael Heseltine.

    Cameron is a liar and a fraud and a charlatan. THAT is my point.

    He is no liar, he was talking about upcoming the 2007 election. He was not to know that Brown would shock everyone by cancelling the election.

    Had Cameron continued to 2010 with the same commitment then reneged on it he'd be a liar. But he was up-front and honest before the 2010 election and became PM on the back of the 2010 manifesto not the 2007 manifesto. If you want honesty, judge him on the 2010 that he went to the country on. He had fully cleared up that the situation had changed long before 2010.
    There you go with your facts, destroying the Cameron is a liar narrative.

    Just like in November 2015 he described four measures he wanted, of which he failed on one, migration. A biggie, of course, but as we know from all the committed EEA-ers, immigration is not something that troubles many Leavers.
    He only got one of his four pledges. He failed on migration as you say. He failed on child benefit. He failed on a concrete target to reduce red tape. He failed to get proper protection from the Eurozone, and even signed up the entire UK finance sector to EU regulation. And he also gave away his veto on new Eurozone treaties.
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 41,118

    isam said:

    TOPPING said:

    SeanT said:

    perdix:

    "It would have been totally pointless to have had a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty after it had been ratified. Even assuming that a referendum would have been held and said "no" to The Treaty, parliament with LibDems and Labour would never have passed any legislation to abrogate the Treaty. Cameron was unthinking in his language - he expected an early GE and a new parliament with an ungratified Treaty. William Hague's speech at Conference was correctly qualified.
    Typical kipper type logic."


    ****


    He's too smart not to realise how the phrase "cast iron guarantee" would be understood by readers of the Sun. They would see it as a "cast iron guarantee". Coz that's wot he wrote. Very Deliberately. Very Thinkingly.

    He wanted the eurosceptic vote. But he isn't a eurosceptic. As Philip Stephens says in today's FT, he is, in truth, as europhile as Michael Heseltine.

    Cameron is a liar and a fraud and a charlatan. THAT is my point.

    He is no liar, he was talking about upcoming the 2007 election. He was not to know that Brown would shock everyone by cancelling the election.

    Had Cameron continued to 2010 with the same commitment then reneged on it he'd be a liar. But he was up-front and honest before the 2010 election and became PM on the back of the 2010 manifesto not the 2007 manifesto. If you want honesty, judge him on the 2010 that he went to the country on. He had fully cleared up that the situation had changed long before 2010.
    There you go with your facts, destroying the Cameron is a liar narrative.

    Just like in November 2015 he described four measures he wanted, of which he failed on one, migration. A biggie, of course, but as we know from all the committed EEA-ers, immigration is not something that troubles many Leavers.
    "Cameron insists UK will not pay £1.7bn EU bill in full"

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29939774

    "Britain quietly settled its latest altercation over the European Union budget by paying a 1.7 billion-pound ($2.6 billion) bill that Prime Minister David Cameron originally derided as “appalling.”"

    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-09-03/u-k-settles-eu-bill-once-called-appalling-by-cameron
    It is amazing that no broadcast media interview has really given a kicking to either Cameron or Osborne and held them to account on this. It is an open goal. Where is Paxman? I know the two avoid Andrew O'Neill. If you are reading, LauraK or Peston, what are you waiting for?
    Nabavi said at the time that it doesn't mean they paid it
  • Options
    Matt Hancock's dissembling unravelling.

    @tnewtondunn
    Guidance to civil servants on EU papers leaked: gives broad remit to withhold anything "in support of", ie much more
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,249
    SeanT said:

    Indigo said:

    isam said:

    SeanT said:

    Sean_F said:

    AndyJS said:

    AndyJS said:

    Good evening, just done the competition. I estimated turnout at 62%. Leave 50.6%.

    Is that for shits and giggles, to maximise your chances of winning the competition, or are you serious?
    I'm confident about the turnout figure. The result itself could go either way IMO.
    I don't have the foggiest.

    Best I can say at the moment is that opinions are diverging, largely on age and class lines.

    I sense a clustering groupthink in AB professional groups in the south-east towards Remain - who all largely vote - but what I don't know is if there's enough of them to carry it if the rest of England and half of Wales vote Leave.
    https://yougov.co.uk/news/2016/02/26/analysis-dont-get-too-comfortable-out-campaign-has/

    This article from Yougov is worth reading, about the gap in turnout between each side.
    That's tic, compared to the LEAVERS.
    ... and while the middle class Tory types chat to each other about treaty change, GDP and CAP, Farage et al will be visiting every hell hole in England telling the underclass this is their chance
    Which is why he'll lose overwhelmingly if he's in charge. As those people don't vote.

    It doesn't even make sense. Look at YouGov's graph of where is e
    Although one could ask how many white van men opt into You Gov's polling pool. I would say those figures are very suspect indeed if you consider where the high watermark of kipperdom fell at the last election. Grotty seaside towns and rundown working class areas (the "left behind").
    Er, he's simply wrong. Look at the map. These are the most eurosceptic areas:

    1. Havering
    2. Peterborough
    3. Bracknell Forest
    4. Blackpool
    5. Blackburn with Darwen
    6. Southend-on-Sea
    7. Warri

    http://www.economist.com/news/britain/21693223-britains-great-european-divide-really-about-education-and-class-tale-two-cities
    Remain have one key advantage over Yes in indyref and Labour last May, they are backed by the middle classes who vote more often than the working classes, even if the old back Leave. In indyref and the general election both the middle classes AND the old backed No and the Tories respectively, giving them a big advantage on turnout, in EU ref the middle class will back Remain diluting elderly voters backing for Leave
  • Options
    Oh and doesn't Havering have a Tory MP too? While Central London's Labour areas are europhile while Outer London's more Tory areas are more eurosceptic.

    Look at the South West too. Labour's best area in the South West is Bristol, the only area in the South West to be Europhile.

    Outside of Bristol, Somerset and North Somerset are very Eurosceptic - and unanimously Tory.

    Plymouth is a Tory city compared to Bristol, and guess what it's a Eurosceptic one.
  • Options
    TCPoliticalBettingTCPoliticalBetting Posts: 10,819
    edited February 2016
    Priti Patel has today said that:
    “Jeremy Heywood’s unconstitutional act threatens the reputation of the civil service. Secretaries of State are responsible for their departments. For an unelected official to prevent them being aware of the information they need for their duties is wrong.”
    http://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2016/02/banning-leave-ministers-from-getting-civil-service-support-is-both-wrong-and-dangerous.html
  • Options

    TOPPING said:

    SeanT said:

    perdix:

    "It would have been totally pointless to have had a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty after it had been ratified. Even assuming that a referendum would have been held and said "no" to The Treaty, parliament with LibDems and Labour would never have passed any legislation to abrogate the Treaty. Cameron was unthinking in his language - he expected an early GE and a new parliament with an ungratified Treaty. William Hague's speech at Conference was correctly qualified.
    Typical kipper type logic."


    ****

    You miss my point. I'm saying Cameron was deliberately loose or "unthinking" with his language, because he likes to appear eurosceptic, whereas in truth he is anything but; as we see now, at last, in plain sight.

    He's too smart not to realise how the phrase "cast iron guarantee" would be understood by readers of the Sun. They would see it as a "cast iron guarantee". Coz that's wot he wrote. Very Deliberately. Very Thinkingly.

    He wanted the eurosceptic vote. But he isn't a eurosceptic. As Philip Stephens says in today's FT, he is, in truth, as europhile as Michael Heseltine.

    Cameron is a liar and a fraud and a charlatan. THAT is my point.

    He is no liar, he was talking about upcoming the 2007 election. He was not to know that Brown would shock everyone by cancelling the election.

    Had Cameron continued to 2010 with the same commitment then reneged on it he'd be a liar. But he was up-front and honest before the 2010 election and became PM on the back of the 2010 manifesto not the 2007 manifesto. If you want honesty, judge him on the 2010 that he went to the country on. He had fully cleared up that the situation had changed long before 2010.
    There you go with your facts, destroying the Cameron is a liar narrative.

    Just like in November 2015 he described four measures he wanted, of which he failed on one, migration. A biggie, of course, but as we know from all the committed EEA-ers, immigration is not something that troubles many Leavers.
    He only got one of his four pledges. He failed on migration as you say. He failed on child benefit. He failed on a concrete target to reduce red tape. He failed to get proper protection from the Eurozone, and even signed up the entire UK finance sector to EU regulation. And he also gave away his veto on new Eurozone treaties.
    How has he given away a veto on Treaties? That can only be given away by Treaty.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 59,029

    Priti Patel has today said that:
    “Jeremy Heywood’s unconstitutional act threatens the reputation of the civil service. Secretaries of State are responsible for their departments. For an unelected official to prevent them being aware of the information they need for their duties is wrong.”
    http://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2016/02/banning-leave-ministers-from-getting-civil-service-support-is-both-wrong-and-dangerous.html

    Although I don't agree wit the ban, the country could probably do with a little less meddling from ministers for a few weeks :p
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,039
    Pong said:

    Thanks for the article David.

    Unless there's some kind of GOTV failure for trump tomorrow it looks like he's got the nomination in the bag. He should be somewhere between a 2/1 & 6/4 shot for POTUS.

    How would you price up Bernie ?
  • Options
    Looking at the Irish counts, with 8 more seats to be declared, I think they are going to pan out something like this:

    Longford-Westmeath: (1 FF already declared), remaining three FG, Ind, SF
    Dublin Bay North (1 FG already declared), remaining four FF, SF, plus two out of Lab and two independents
    Dublin South Central: Final seat between FF and PBP-AAA, probably the latter.

    If I'm right, that will make:

    FG 50
    FF 44
    SF 24
    Lab 6 or 7
    PBP-AAA 6
    Indies+minor 27 or 28

  • Options
    IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966

    Priti Patel has today said that:
    “Jeremy Heywood’s unconstitutional act threatens the reputation of the civil service. Secretaries of State are responsible for their departments. For an unelected official to prevent them being aware of the information they need for their duties is wrong.”
    http://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2016/02/banning-leave-ministers-from-getting-civil-service-support-is-both-wrong-and-dangerous.html

    According to Oborne, Jeremy Heywood is "a perfect manifestation of everything that has gone so very wrong with the British civil service over the past 15 years."
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,039
    edited February 2016

    Looking at the Irish counts, with 8 more seats to be declared, I think they are going to pan out something like this:

    Longford-Westmeath: (1 FF already declared), remaining three FG, Ind, SF
    Dublin Bay North (1 FG already declared), remaining four FF, SF, plus two out of Lab and two independents
    Dublin South Central: Final seat between FF and PBP-AAA, probably the latter.

    If I'm right, that will make:

    FG 50
    FF 44
    SF 24
    Lab 6 or 7
    PBP-AAA 6
    Indies+minor 27 or 28

    My quick estimate yielded a FF Gov't if FPTP was used.

    Fine Gael seem to do better from the STV than FF.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,249

    Oh and doesn't Havering have a Tory MP too? While Central London's Labour areas are europhile while Outer London's more Tory areas are more eurosceptic.

    Look at the South West too. Labour's best area in the South West is Bristol, the only area in the South West to be Europhile.

    Outside of Bristol, Somerset and North Somerset are very Eurosceptic - and unanimously Tory.

    Plymouth is a Tory city compared to Bristol, and guess what it's a Eurosceptic one.

    Generally true, although the likes of Kensington and Chelsea and City of London and Westminster are very Tory and very Europhile while Grimsby is Labour and very Eurosceptic
  • Options
    MP_SEMP_SE Posts: 3,642

    Matt Hancock's dissembling unravelling.

    @tnewtondunn
    Guidance to civil servants on EU papers leaked: gives broad remit to withhold anything "in support of", ie much more

    A free and fair referendum? LOL.
  • Options

    How has he given away a veto on Treaties? That can only be given away by Treaty.

    It's the standard Leave assymetry. Anything we agree to is absolute. Anything the others agree to is worthless.

    Two things written down and formally agreed to by 28 countries. They ignore one and believe the other. They are immune to reason.
  • Options
    @paulwaugh
    Moderate Labour MPs have walked out of PLP, cos Corbyn has left the building for ITV prog recording. "He's not coming back," says one. No Qs
  • Options
    Pulpstar said:

    My quick estimate yielded a FF Gov't if FPTP was used.

    Fine Gael seem to do better from the STV than FF.

    There was a suggestion in one of the Irish papers that FG had done a better job of optimising the number of candidates in each seat.
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,552
    edited February 2016

    TOPPING said:

    SeanT said:

    perdix:

    "It would have been totally pointless to have h at Conference was correctly qualified.
    Typical kipper type logic."


    ****

    You miss my point. I'm saying Cd a charlatan. THAT is my point.

    He is no liar, he was talking about upcoming the 2007 election. He was not to know that Brown would shock everyone by cancelling the election.

    Had Cameron continued to 2010 with the same commitment then reneged on it he'd be a liar. But he was up-front and honest before the 2010 election and became PM on the back of the 2010 manifesto not the 2007 manifesto. If you want honesty, judge him on the 2010 that he went to the country on. He had fully cleared up that the situation had changed long before 2010.
    There you go with your facts, destroying the Cameron is a liar narrative.

    Just like in November 2015 he described four measures he wanted, of which he failed on one, migration. A biggie, of course, but as we know from all the committed EEA-ers, immigration is not something that troubles many Leavers.
    He only got one of his four pledges. He failed on migration as you say. He failed on child benefit. He failed on a concrete target to reduce red tape. He failed to get proper protection from the Eurozone, and even signed up the entire UK finance sector to EU regulation. And he also gave away his veto on new Eurozone treaties.
    Nope.

    Here are the objectives (November 2015):

    Objective one: protect the single market for Britain and others outside the Eurozone. What I mean by that is a set of binding principles that guarantee fairness between Euro and non-Euro countries.
    Verdict: success - he got the protection eurozone vs non-eurozone. Plus no to SSM/SRM.

    Objective two: write competitiveness into the DNA of the whole European Union. And this includes cutting the total burden on business.
    Verdict: he got a lot of waffle about competitiveness. Nothing to get amazed or outraged about either way.

    Objective three: exempt Britain from an “ever closer union” and bolster national parliaments. Not through warm words but through legally binding and irreversible changes.
    Verdict: success

    Objective four: tackle abuses of the right to free movement, and enable us to control migration from the European Union, in line with our manifesto.
    Verdict: fail
  • Options
    TCPoliticalBettingTCPoliticalBetting Posts: 10,819
    edited February 2016
    Indigo said:

    Priti Patel has today said that:
    “Jeremy Heywood’s unconstitutional act threatens the reputation of the civil service. Secretaries of State are responsible for their departments. For an unelected official to prevent them being aware of the information they need for their duties is wrong.”
    http://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2016/02/banning-leave-ministers-from-getting-civil-service-support-is-both-wrong-and-dangerous.html

    According to Oborne, Jeremy Heywood is "a perfect manifestation of everything that has gone so very wrong with the British civil service over the past 15 years."
    Tomorrow's chat with Heywood at the HoC committee could be pop corn time. Actually important if Haywood was publically admonished and cut down to size. But is Bernard's group up to it?
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 59,029

    Pulpstar said:

    My quick estimate yielded a FF Gov't if FPTP was used.

    Fine Gael seem to do better from the STV than FF.

    There was a suggestion in one of the Irish papers that FG had done a better job of optimising the number of candidates in each seat.
    Sounds like a particularly dreadful system.
  • Options
    RobD said:

    Pulpstar said:

    My quick estimate yielded a FF Gov't if FPTP was used.

    Fine Gael seem to do better from the STV than FF.

    There was a suggestion in one of the Irish papers that FG had done a better job of optimising the number of candidates in each seat.
    Sounds like a particularly dreadful system.
    It's very good at generating opposition parties!
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,193
    I decided to spend my Leap Day getting away from politics.

    I ended up hand-feeding otters.....
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,039

    RobD said:

    Pulpstar said:

    My quick estimate yielded a FF Gov't if FPTP was used.

    Fine Gael seem to do better from the STV than FF.

    There was a suggestion in one of the Irish papers that FG had done a better job of optimising the number of candidates in each seat.
    Sounds like a particularly dreadful system.
    It's very good at generating opposition parties!
    Gives independents a real chance to get a seat, far more than our system.
  • Options
    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    SeanT said:

    perdix:

    "It would have been totally pointless to have h at Conference was correctly qualified.
    Typical kipper type logic."


    ****

    You miss my point. I'm saying Cd a charlatan. THAT is my point.

    He is no liar, he was talking about upcoming the 2007 election. He was not to know that Brown would shock everyone by cancelling the election.

    Had Cameron continued to 2010 with the same commitment then reneged on it he'd be a liar. But he was up-front and honest before the 2010 election and became PM on the back of the 2010 manifesto not the 2007 manifesto. If you want honesty, judge him on the 2010 that he went to the country on. He had fully cleared up that the situation had changed long before 2010.
    There you go with your facts, destroying the Cameron is a liar narrative.

    Just like in November 2015 he described four measures he wanted, of which he failed on one, migration. A biggie, of course, but as we know from all the committed EEA-ers, immigration is not something that troubles many Leavers.
    He only got one of his four pledges. He failed on migration as you say. He failed on child benefit. He failed on a concrete target to reduce red tape. He failed to get proper protection from the Eurozone, and even signed up the entire UK finance sector to EU regulation. And he also gave away his veto on new Eurozone treaties.
    Nope.

    Here are the objectives (November 2015):

    Objective one: protect the single market for Britain and others outside the Eurozone. What I mean by that is a set of binding principles that guarantee fairness between Euro and non-Euro countries.
    Verdict: success - he got the protection eurozone vs non-eurozone. Plus no to SSM/SRM.

    Objective two: write competitiveness into the DNA of the whole European Union. And this includes cutting the total burden on business.
    Verdict: he got a lot of waffle about competitiveness. Nothing to get amazed or outraged about either way.

    Objective three: exempt Britain from an “ever closer union” and bolster national parliaments. Not through warm words but through legally binding and irreversible changes.
    Verdict: success

    Objective four: tackle abuses of the right to free movement, and enable us to control migration from the European Union, in line with our manifesto.
    Verdict: fail
    The yardstick to measure it is his actual letter to Tusk, not a speech he gave summarising it.
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 36,013
    isam said:

    SeanT said:

    Sean_F said:

    AndyJS said:

    AndyJS said:

    Good evening, just done the competition. I estimated turnout at 62%. Leave 50.6%.

    Is that for shits and giggles, to maximise your chances of winning the competition, or are you serious?
    I'm confident about the turnout figure. The result itself could go either way IMO.
    I don't have the foggiest.

    Best I can say at the moment is that opinions are diverging, largely on age and class lines.

    I sense a clustering groupthink in AB professional groups in the south-east towards Remain - who all largely vote - but what I don't know is if there's enough of them to carry it if the rest of England and half of Wales vote Leave.
    https://yougov.co.uk/news/2016/02/26/analysis-dont-get-too-comfortable-out-campaign-has/

    This article from Yougov is worth reading, about the gap in turnout between each side.
    That's fascinating. It really is all about turnout. Must give the REMAINIANS a few jitters. They could convincingly win public opinion, be well ahead in the polls, but still lose, because their supporters are so apathetic, compared to the LEAVERS.
    ... and while the middle class Tory types chat to each other about treaty change, GDP and CAP, Farage et al will be visiting every hell hole in England telling the underclass this is their chance
    We already have the votes, more or less, of working class voters who are fired up about immigration. There is no great well of potential Leave voters who need to be persuaded to turn out. Certainty to vote is far stronger with Leave than with Remain.

    Remain do have concentrate on turning out their base. We have to concentrate on winning over undecideds.
  • Options
    By my reckoning:

    1. Havering - One Tory MP, One Labour MP
    2. Peterborough - Tory MP
    3. Bracknell Forest - Tory MP
    4. Blackpool - One Tory MP, One Labour MP
    5. Blackburn with Darwen - One Tory MP, One Labour MP
    6. Southend-on-Sea - Two Tory MPs
    7. Warrington - One Tory MP, One Labour MP
    8. South Tyneside - Two Labour MPs
    9. Sandwell - Three Labour MPs, One Tory MP
    10. Cumbria - Three Labour MPs, Two Tory MPs, One Lib Dem MP

    So all in all other than Tyneside every single area has either some Tory or unanimous Tory representation. Contrast with the big Labour cities like Liverpool, Manchester, Newcastle Upon Tyne, Sunderland, Leeds etc
  • Options
    GOP establishment doing their too little, too late thing.

    https://twitter.com/MittRomney/status/704371093549805569
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 59,029

    RobD said:

    Pulpstar said:

    My quick estimate yielded a FF Gov't if FPTP was used.

    Fine Gael seem to do better from the STV than FF.

    There was a suggestion in one of the Irish papers that FG had done a better job of optimising the number of candidates in each seat.
    Sounds like a particularly dreadful system.
    It's very good at generating opposition parties!
    Any system where you can gain advantages as you describe sounds pretty unfair. And yes, plenty of big parties vying for position.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 59,029
    Pulpstar said:

    RobD said:

    Pulpstar said:

    My quick estimate yielded a FF Gov't if FPTP was used.

    Fine Gael seem to do better from the STV than FF.

    There was a suggestion in one of the Irish papers that FG had done a better job of optimising the number of candidates in each seat.
    Sounds like a particularly dreadful system.
    It's very good at generating opposition parties!
    Gives independents a real chance to get a seat, far more than our system.
    Those pesky independents!!
  • Options
    AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670

    Priti Patel has today said that:
    “Jeremy Heywood’s unconstitutional act threatens the reputation of the civil service. Secretaries of State are responsible for their departments. For an unelected official to prevent them being aware of the information they need for their duties is wrong.”
    http://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2016/02/banning-leave-ministers-from-getting-civil-service-support-is-both-wrong-and-dangerous.html

    They have got drunk on the taste of civil service boundary transgression with the Scottish IndyRef. Pleased as punch with the universal praise they got for inappropriate behaviour they are doing the same again but are doing it in a completely different environment.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 59,029

    GOP establishment doing their too little, too late thing.

    https://twitter.com/MittRomney/status/704371093549805569


    Haven't they been trying for months?
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,552
    edited February 2016

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    SeanT said:

    perdix:

    "It would have been totally pointless to have h at Conference was correctly qualified.
    Typical kipper type logic."


    ****

    You miss my point. I'm saying Cd a charlatan. THAT is my point.

    He is no liar, he was talking about upcoming the 2007 election. He was not to know that Brown would shock everyone by cancelling the election.

    Had Cameron continued to 2010 with the same commitment then reneged on it he'd be a liar. But he was up-front and honest before the 2010 election and became PM on the back of the 2010 manifesto not the 2007 manifesto. If you want honesty, judge him on the 2010 that he went to the country on. He had fully cleared up that the situation had changed long before 2010.
    There you go with your facts, destroying the Cameron is a liar narrative.

    Just like in November 2015 he described four measures he wanted, of which he failed on one, migration. A biggie, of course, but as we know from all the committed EEA-ers, immigration is not something that troubles many Leavers.
    He only got one of his four pledges. He failed on migration as you say. He failed on child benefit. He failed on a concrete target to reduce red tape. He failed to get proper protection from the Eurozone, and even signed up the entire UK finance sector to EU regulation. And he also gave away his veto on new Eurozone treaties.
    Nope.

    Here are the objectives (November 2015):

    Objective one: protect the single market for Britain and others outside the Eurozone. What I mean by that is a set of binding principles that guarantee fairness between Euro and non-Euro countries.
    Verdict: success - he got the protection eurozone vs non-eurozone. Plus no to SSM/SRM.

    Objective two: write competitiveness into the DNA of the whole European Union. And this includes cutting the total burden on business.
    Verdict: he got a lot of waffle about competitiveness. Nothing to get amazed or outraged about either way.

    Objective three: exempt Britain from an “ever closer union” and bolster national parliaments. Not through warm words but through legally binding and irreversible changes.
    Verdict: success

    Objective four: tackle abuses of the right to free movement, and enable us to control migration from the European Union, in line with our manifesto.
    Verdict: fail
    The yardstick to measure it is his actual letter to Tusk, not a speech he gave summarising it.
    God help me I have just re-read the letter. Not a great deal of difference tbh.

    What in particular do you think he failed on?
  • Options
    TCPoliticalBettingTCPoliticalBetting Posts: 10,819
    edited February 2016
    Indigo said:


    It is amazing that no broadcast media interview has really given a kicking to either Cameron or Osborne and held them to account on this. It is an open goal. Where is Paxman? I know the two avoid Andrew O'Neill. If you are reading, LauraK or Peston, what are you waiting for?

    It the age old problem, the leftie media types love the EU, it gets them their nice foreign holidays and their cheap Polish tradesmen and cheap Eastern European nannies for the kids. They would rather cut out their own livers and fry them with onions that say or suggest anything naughty about their beloved EU.

    LauraK and Peston are now arch rivals. Competing for every story and to get one ahead of the other. One of them is going to work it out and skewer Cameron or Osborne. That new chap on Sky politics (ex C4) seems to have sunk without trace.
  • Options
    Has the Civil Service ever been told to support one side in an election before? And withold any information that could help the other side??
  • Options

    How has he given away a veto on Treaties? That can only be given away by Treaty.

    It's the standard Leave assymetry. Anything we agree to is absolute. Anything the others agree to is worthless.

    Two things written down and formally agreed to by 28 countries. They ignore one and believe the other. They are immune to reason.
    Gove and Hannan are exemplars of enlightened reason. I'm sure that your mind is with them but the heart has its reasons.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,249
    Monmouth

    http://www.monmouth.edu/assets/0/32212254770/32212254991/32212254992/32212254994/32212254995/30064771087/493ca395-91a3-466e-83f0-8c006dbfaa1e.pdf

    Alabama

    GOP
    Trump: 42%
    Rubio: 19%
    Cruz: 16%
    Carson: 11%
    Kasich: 5%

    Dems
    Clinton 71
    Sanders 23


    Oklahoma:
    GOP
    Trump: 35
    Cruz: 23
    Rubio: 22
    Kasich: 8
    Carson: 7

    Dems
    Sanders 48
    Clinton 43
  • Options
    Alistair said:

    Priti Patel has today said that:
    “Jeremy Heywood’s unconstitutional act threatens the reputation of the civil service. Secretaries of State are responsible for their departments. For an unelected official to prevent them being aware of the information they need for their duties is wrong.”
    http://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2016/02/banning-leave-ministers-from-getting-civil-service-support-is-both-wrong-and-dangerous.html

    They have got drunk on the taste of civil service boundary transgression with the Scottish IndyRef. Pleased as punch with the universal praise they got for inappropriate behaviour they are doing the same again but are doing it in a completely different environment.
    Pritti is the type to bring a gun to a knife fight.
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 36,013

    taffys said:

    isam said:

    SeanT said:

    Sean_F said:

    AndyJS said:

    AndyJS said:

    Good evening, just done the competition. I estimated turnout at 62%. Leave 50.6%.

    Is that for shits and giggles, to maximise your chances of winning..
    I'm confident about the turnout figure. ...IMO.
    I don't have the foggiest.

    Best I can say at the moment is that opinions are diverging, largely on age and class lines.

    I sense a clustering groupthink in AB professional groups in the south-east towards Remain - who all largely vote - but what I don't know is if there's enough of them to carry it if the rest of England and half of Wales vote Leave.
    https://yougov.co.uk/news/2016/02/26/analysis-dont-get-too-comfortable-out-campaign-has/

    This article from Yougov is worth reading, about the gap in turnout between each side.
    That's to the LEAVERS.
    ... and while the middle class Tory types chat to each other about treaty change, GDP and CAP, Farage et al will be visiting every hell hole in England telling the underclass this is their chance
    Which is why he'll lose overwhelmingly if he's in charge. As those people don't vote.

    It doesn't even make sense. Look at YouGov's graph of where is eurosceptic and where is europhile. Does euroscepticism correlate with being a hellhole? No, quite the opposite, those are the most europhile areas in the country. Euroscepticism is at its highest by and large where the right wing vote is the highest, that is the target demographic to get out the vote.
    The most europhile areas, the ones that agree with David Cameron, are generally those that wouldn;t vote tory in a month of Sundays. Inner Cities, University towns, Scotland, the North West.

    If I was Cameron looking at that map, I'd be bricking it. The entire constituency that put me in Downing street is against me.

    True. To fully evaluate this needs a new model beyond most of our polling companies. May be REMAIN have this model arising out of the GE2015 work of the Conservatives? This could then be the driver for all these dead cat antics from project fear, just trying a new one each day to see what will change the underlying polling? Meanwhile the cr*p LEAVE campaigns muddle along wasting time until one gets designated by the Commission. Farage's destructive tendencies are probably the biggest threat to LEAVE.
    The real issue is whether Project Fear works with apathetic voters. Remain voters do seem to be apathetic at this stage.
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,552
    Sean_F said:

    isam said:

    SeanT said:

    Sean_F said:

    AndyJS said:

    AndyJS said:

    Good evening, just done the competition. I estimated turnout at 62%. Leave 50.6%.

    Is that for shits and giggles, to maximise your chances of winning the competition, or are you serious?
    I'm confident about the turnout figure. The result itself could go either way IMO.
    I don't have the foggiest.

    Best I can say at the moment is that opinions are diverging, largely on age and class lines.

    I sense a clustering groupthink in AB professional groups in the south-east towards Remain - who all largely vote - but what I don't know is if there's enough of them to carry it if the rest of England and half of Wales vote Leave.
    https://yougov.co.uk/news/2016/02/26/analysis-dont-get-too-comfortable-out-campaign-has/

    This article from Yougov is worth reading, about the gap in turnout between each side.
    That's fascinating. It really is all about turnout. Must give the REMAINIANS a few jitters. They could convincingly win public opinion, be well ahead in the polls, but still lose, because their supporters are so apathetic, compared to the LEAVERS.
    ... and while the middle class Tory types chat to each other about treaty change, GDP and CAP, Farage et al will be visiting every hell hole in England telling the underclass this is their chance
    We already have the votes, more or less, of working class voters who are fired up about immigration. There is no great well of potential Leave voters who need to be persuaded to turn out. Certainty to vote is far stronger with Leave than with Remain.

    Remain do have concentrate on turning out their base. We have to concentrate on winning over undecideds.
    so you are a non-EEA man, then?
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,249
    Massachusetts Amherst poll

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/docs/2016/UMass_Amherst_Feb_2016.pdf

    GOP
    Trump: 47
    Rubio: 15
    Cruz: 15
    Kasich: 11
    Carson: 2

    Dems
    Clinton 47
    Sanders 44
  • Options

    Has the Civil Service ever been told to support one side in an election before? And withold any information that could help the other side??

    There was unfortunately a bit of this in the ScotIndyref but there were no UK cabinet ministers to cut off from documents.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 59,029

    Has the Civil Service ever been told to support one side in an election before? And withold any information that could help the other side??

    The government doesn't usually have a position in elections.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,039

    GOP establishment doing their too little, too late thing.

    https://twitter.com/MittRomney/status/704371093549805569

    Oh Lord, Is that Romney plan REALLY going to come about ?

    Ludicrous but I covered at 1088-1 for £2 (I'm playing a backing game in POTUS)
  • Options
    AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670

    Has the Civil Service ever been told to support one side in an election before? And withold any information that could help the other side??

    Well given that they gave out awards for their performance in the Scottish IndyRef I would assume so.
  • Options
    TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 40,399
    edited February 2016
    RobD said:

    GOP establishment doing their too little, too late thing.

    https://twitter.com/MittRomney/status/704371093549805569


    Haven't they been trying for months?
    Now they're taking the gloves off (which to some degree is indistinguishable from them keeping their gloves on).
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,039
    Is Oklahoma particularly white and rural ?
  • Options
    I missed this article today
    Maj Gen Julian Thompson commanded 3 Commando Brigade during the Falklands War "I fought for Britain and I know how the EU weakens our defences
    The myth that leaving the EU would harm British national security must be destroyed once and for all "
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/defence/12176954/I-fought-for-Britain-and-I-know-how-the-EU-weakens-our-defences.html
  • Options
    Pulpstar said:

    Is Oklahoma particularly white and rural ?

    I believe it has highest native population in mainland USA.
  • Options
    Alistair said:

    Has the Civil Service ever been told to support one side in an election before? And withold any information that could help the other side??

    Well given that they gave out awards for their performance in the Scottish IndyRef I would assume so.
    Did they release papers showing independence would hurt Scotland??
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 41,118

    By my reckoning:

    1. Havering - One Tory MP, One Labour MP
    2. Peterborough - Tory MP
    3. Bracknell Forest - Tory MP
    4. Blackpool - One Tory MP, One Labour MP
    5. Blackburn with Darwen - One Tory MP, One Labour MP
    6. Southend-on-Sea - Two Tory MPs
    7. Warrington - One Tory MP, One Labour MP
    8. South Tyneside - Two Labour MPs
    9. Sandwell - Three Labour MPs, One Tory MP
    10. Cumbria - Three Labour MPs, Two Tory MPs, One Lib Dem MP

    So all in all other than Tyneside every single area has either some Tory or unanimous Tory representation. Contrast with the big Labour cities like Liverpool, Manchester, Newcastle Upon Tyne, Sunderland, Leeds etc

    Havering has 2 Tory MPs by my reckoning.. Rosindale and Watkinson
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,039

    Pulpstar said:

    Is Oklahoma particularly white and rural ?

    I believe it has highest native population in mainland USA.
    Bernie seems to do better in all the picturesque places where noone actually lives.
  • Options
    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    OK. Does anyone know what the yield (per year) on two year Swiss Government Bonds is?

    (I do. It's a quiz question. Obviously.)

    -0.5% ?
    Swiss bond holders wish!

    -1.23% per year.
    Oh dear.

    A bond issues a divvy (or nuffinck); That defines a rate-of-return (or 'yield'). Unless the Swiss are charging rental-fees.
  • Options
    RogerRoger Posts: 18,951
    edited February 2016
    The Euro referendum on Channel 4 in a nutshell. Nicola Sturgeon in London arguing coherently why we would be better off staying in the EU and Boris behaving like an idiot swinging like an ape in a bus factory in Belfast.

    While my predictive powers have taken a slight upturn I'll predict that when this referendum is over Boris will be the biggest loser and at best he'll be left swinging in the wilderness like a poor mans Farage.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,039
    Anyone know how hispanics are breaking for Clinton-Sanders ?

    *Half an eye on California.
  • Options

    Gove and Hannan are exemplars of enlightened reason. I'm sure that your mind is with them but the heart has its reasons.

    They are indeed, especially Gove.

    My main disagreement with them is that I give much more weight to the economic and practical risks of Brexit, plus I'd like to know in general terms what I'd be voting for if I voted Leave.
  • Options
    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    SeanT said:

    perdix:

    "It would have been totally pointless to have h at Conference was correctly qualified.
    Typical kipper type logic."


    ****

    You miss my point. I'm saying Cd a charlatan. THAT is my point.

    He is no liar, he was talking about upcoming the 2007 election. He was not to know that Brown would shock everyone by cancelling the election.

    Had Cameron continued to 2010 with the same commitment then reneged on it he'd be a liar. But he was up-front and honest before the 2010 election and became PM on the back of the 2010 manifesto not the 2007 manifesto. If you want honesty, judge him on the 2010 that he went to the country on. He had fully cleared up that the situation had changed long before 2010.
    There you go with your facts, destroying the Cameron is a liar narrative.

    Just like in November 2015 he described four measures he wanted, of which he failed on one, migration. A biggie, of course, but as we know from all the committed EEA-ers, immigration is not something that troubles many Leavers.
    He only got one of his four pledges. He failed on migration as you say. He failed on child benefit. He failed on a concrete target to reduce red tape. He failed to get proper protection from the Eurozone, and even signed up the entire UK finance sector to EU regulation. And he also gave away his veto on new Eurozone treaties.
    Nope.

    Here are the objectives (November 2015):

    Obj eu, in line with our manifesto.
    Verdict: fail
    The yardstick to measure it is his actual letter to Tusk, not a speech he gave summarising it.
    God help me I have just re-read the letter. Not a great deal of difference tbh.

    What in particular do you think he failed on?
    Can't load pdf right now but from memory he wanted a specific target to cut EU laws by, protection to stop Eurozone ganging up on non-Eurozone nations, to stop all in-work benefits to migrants for four years, and to end child benefit being sent over seas.

    And this was after he had been negotiating for years. Demands for CAP reform, EU budget cuts, fast tracking of trade deals with USA, India, Japan, ASEAN, social chapter and emergency brake on migration had all been dropped prior.
  • Options
    isam said:

    By my reckoning:

    1. Havering - One Tory MP, One Labour MP
    2. Peterborough - Tory MP
    3. Bracknell Forest - Tory MP
    4. Blackpool - One Tory MP, One Labour MP
    5. Blackburn with Darwen - One Tory MP, One Labour MP
    6. Southend-on-Sea - Two Tory MPs
    7. Warrington - One Tory MP, One Labour MP
    8. South Tyneside - Two Labour MPs
    9. Sandwell - Three Labour MPs, One Tory MP
    10. Cumbria - Three Labour MPs, Two Tory MPs, One Lib Dem MP

    So all in all other than Tyneside every single area has either some Tory or unanimous Tory representation. Contrast with the big Labour cities like Liverpool, Manchester, Newcastle Upon Tyne, Sunderland, Leeds etc

    Havering has 2 Tory MPs by my reckoning.. Rosindale and Watkinson
    Yes my mistake, it's even more Tory than I realised.

    Across the three Havering constituencies I make it 62,610 Tory votes to 39,201 Labour ones. Not exactly the most Labour area of the region, certainly not comparable to europhile Liverpool etc
  • Options
    Pulpstar said:

    Anyone know how hispanics are breaking for Clinton-Sanders ?

    *Half an eye on California.

    Leaned towards Clinton in Nevada.
  • Options

    How has he given away a veto on Treaties? That can only be given away by Treaty.

    It's the standard Leave assymetry. Anything we agree to is absolute. Anything the others agree to is worthless.

    Two things written down and formally agreed to by 28 countries. They ignore one and believe the other. They are immune to reason.
    Gove and Hannan are exemplars of enlightened reason. I'm sure that your mind is with them but the heart has its reasons.
    They're the ones who've won me over as I'm currently leaning. Very thoughtful and intelligent, not remotely fear or prejudice.
  • Options
    TheWhiteRabbitTheWhiteRabbit Posts: 12,388
    edited February 2016
    Pulpstar said:

    Anyone know how hispanics are breaking for Clinton-Sanders ?

    *Half an eye on California.

    Only Nevada had a non-nelgible number, exit polls said Clinton 46%, Sanders 54% (for 'Latinos'); Clinton won overall 53:47 so a small pro-Sanders bias.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,039

    Pulpstar said:

    Anyone know how hispanics are breaking for Clinton-Sanders ?

    *Half an eye on California.

    Only Nevada had a non-nelgible number, exit polls said Clinton 46%, Sanders 54%; Clinton won overall 53:47 so a small pro-Sanders bias.
    Pretty much even stevens then.
  • Options
    bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 21,932

    Indigo said:


    It is amazing that no broadcast media interview has really given a kicking to either Cameron or Osborne and held them to account on this. It is an open goal. Where is Paxman? I know the two avoid Andrew O'Neill. If you are reading, LauraK or Peston, what are you waiting for?

    It the age old problem, the leftie media types love the EU, it gets them their nice foreign holidays and their cheap Polish tradesmen and cheap Eastern European nannies for the kids. They would rather cut out their own livers and fry them with onions that say or suggest anything naughty about their beloved EU.

    LauraK and Peston are now arch rivals. Competing for every story and to get one ahead of the other. One of them is going to work it out and skewer Cameron or Osborne. That new chap on Sky politics (ex C4) seems to have sunk without trace.
    You think LauraK would skewer Cameron?

    More chance of me voting Tory
  • Options

    Gove and Hannan are exemplars of enlightened reason. I'm sure that your mind is with them but the heart has its reasons.

    They are indeed, especially Gove.

    My main disagreement with them is that I give much more weight to the economic and practical risks of Brexit, plus I'd like to know in general terms what I'd be voting for if I voted Leave.
    If we vote for Leave we'll have a little under four years of Tory government still remaining. It will almost certainly be an EEA/EFTA style negotiation under those circumstances as almost all vocal Tory Leavers back (plus its the closest to Remain so Tories Remainers who want the Single Market would go for that too).
  • Options

    I missed this article today
    Maj Gen Julian Thompson commanded 3 Commando Brigade during the Falklands War "I fought for Britain and I know how the EU weakens our defences
    The myth that leaving the EU would harm British national security must be destroyed once and for all "
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/defence/12176954/I-fought-for-Britain-and-I-know-how-the-EU-weakens-our-defences.html

    Indeed. He was also on Sky News at lunchtime pointing out the offensive idiocy of the idea that the EU has prevented war in Europe.
  • Options
    Roger said:

    The Euro referendum on Channel 4 in a nutshell. Nicola Sturgeon in London arguing coherently why we would be better off staying in the EU and Boris behaving like an idiot swinging like an ape in a bus factory in Belfast.

    While my predictive powers have taken a slight upturn I'll predict that when this referendum is over Boris will be the biggest loser and at best he'll be left swinging in the wilderness like a poor mans Farage.

    Sturgeon in London arguing for unionism; "we're through the looking-glass, people."
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 41,118
    edited February 2016

    isam said:

    By my reckoning:

    1. Havering - One Tory MP, One Labour MP
    2. Peterborough - Tory MP
    3. Bracknell Forest - Tory MP
    4. Blackpool - One Tory MP, One Labour MP
    5. Blackburn with Darwen - One Tory MP, One Labour MP
    6. Southend-on-Sea - Two Tory MPs
    7. Warrington - One Tory MP, One Labour MP
    8. South Tyneside - Two Labour MPs
    9. Sandwell - Three Labour MPs, One Tory MP
    10. Cumbria - Three Labour MPs, Two Tory MPs, One Lib Dem MP

    So all in all other than Tyneside every single area has either some Tory or unanimous Tory representation. Contrast with the big Labour cities like Liverpool, Manchester, Newcastle Upon Tyne, Sunderland, Leeds etc

    Havering has 2 Tory MPs by my reckoning.. Rosindale and Watkinson
    Yes my mistake, it's even more Tory than I realised.

    Across the three Havering constituencies I make it 62,610 Tory votes to 39,201 Labour ones. Not exactly the most Labour area of the region, certainly not comparable to europhile Liverpool etc
    If the third constituency you are talking of, the Labour one, is Dagenham and Rainham, most of that isn't in Havering anyway.

    Havering is Tory and UKIP with the rest nowhere

    EDIT.. that's wrong actually, Labour and UKIP were neck and neck 2nd in the GE really, though UKIP and Tory run the council
  • Options

    Gove and Hannan are exemplars of enlightened reason. I'm sure that your mind is with them but the heart has its reasons.

    They are indeed, especially Gove.

    My main disagreement with them is that I give much more weight to the economic and practical risks of Brexit, plus I'd like to know in general terms what I'd be voting for if I voted Leave.
    If we vote for Leave we'll have a little under four years of Tory government still remaining. It will almost certainly be an EEA/EFTA style negotiation under those circumstances as almost all vocal Tory Leavers back (plus its the closest to Remain so Tories Remainers who want the Single Market would go for that too).
    Do we have the position of the six cabinet ministers and Boris on this?
  • Options

    I missed this article today
    Maj Gen Julian Thompson commanded 3 Commando Brigade during the Falklands War "I fought for Britain and I know how the EU weakens our defences
    The myth that leaving the EU would harm British national security must be destroyed once and for all "
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/defence/12176954/I-fought-for-Britain-and-I-know-how-the-EU-weakens-our-defences.html

    Actually it was NATO/CIA who pushed for the regime change in the Ukraine and subsequent military action against rebellious provinces and it was the EU through the Normandy Four who brought the peace.
    Similarly it was NATO/CIA who pushed Georgia to invade South Ossetia and the EU who again made the peace.
    It has also been NATO/CIA who have been sponsoring the radical salafist jihadis who have caused such mayhem in Libya, Iraq and Syria. Good reason Hollande went to the EU not NATO after the Paris attacks.

    Neither NATO nor the EU are particularly beneficial to our national security. Maybe NATO will improve once Trump becomes President.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=73-xpW1tFV8

    Keep wearing that bullet proof vest Donald!
  • Options
    The footage from Macedonia makes even pro-immigration social democrats like me question my views.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,039
    LondonBob said:

    I missed this article today
    Maj Gen Julian Thompson commanded 3 Commando Brigade during the Falklands War "I fought for Britain and I know how the EU weakens our defences
    The myth that leaving the EU would harm British national security must be destroyed once and for all "
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/defence/12176954/I-fought-for-Britain-and-I-know-how-the-EU-weakens-our-defences.html

    Actually it was NATO/CIA who pushed for the regime change in the Ukraine and subsequent military action against rebellious provinces and it was the EU through the Normandy Four who brought the peace.
    Similarly it was NATO/CIA who pushed Georgia to invade South Ossetia and the EU who again made the peace.
    It has also been NATO/CIA who have been sponsoring the radical salafist jihadis who have caused such mayhem in Libya, Iraq and Syria. Good reason Hollande went to the EU not NATO after the Paris attacks.

    Neither NATO nor the EU are particularly beneficial to our national security. Maybe NATO will improve once Trump becomes President.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=73-xpW1tFV8

    Keep wearing that bullet proof vest Donald!
    Emergency committee for Israel.

    That's so a Rubio front.
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,552

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    SeanT said:

    perdix:

    "It would have been totally pointless to have h at Conference was correctly qualified.
    Typical kipper type logic."


    ****

    You miss my point. I'm saying Cd a charlatan. THAT is my point.

    He is no liar, he was talking about upcoming the 2007 election. He was not to know that Brown would shock everyone by cancelling the election.

    Had Cameron continued to 2010 with the same commitment then reneged on it he'd be a liar. But he was up-front and honest before the 2010 election and became PM on the back of the 2010 manifesto not the 2007 manifesto. If you want honesty, judge him on the 2010 that he went to the country on. He had fully cleared up that the situation had changed long before 2010.
    There you go with your facts, destroying the Cameron is a liar narrative.

    Just like in November 2015 he described four measures he wanted, of which he failed on one, migration. A biggie, of course, but as we know from all the committed EEA-ers, immigration is not something that troubles many Leavers.
    He only got one of his four pledges. He failed on migration as you say. He failed on child benefit. He failed on a concrete target to reduce red tape. He failed to get proper protection from the Eurozone, and even signed up the entire UK finance sector to EU regulation. And he also gave away his veto on new Eurozone treaties.
    Nope.

    Here are the objectives (November 2015):

    Obj eu, in line with our manifesto.
    Verdict: fail
    The yardstick to measure it is his actual letter to Tusk, not a speech he gave summarising it.
    God help me I have just re-read the letter. Not a great deal of difference tbh.

    What in particular do you think he failed on?
    Can't load pdf right now but from memory he wanted a specific target to cut EU laws by, protection to stop Eurozone ganging up on non-Eurozone nations, to stop all in-work benefits to migrants for four years, and to end child benefit being sent over seas.

    And this was after he had been negotiating for years. Demands for CAP reform, EU budget cuts, fast tracking of trade deals with USA, India, Japan, ASEAN, social chapter and emergency brake on migration had all been dropped prior.
    Sorry dashing will take a look
  • Options
    LondonBobLondonBob Posts: 467
    edited February 2016
    HYUFD said:

    Michigan MRG

    GOP
    Trump 33
    Rubio 18
    Cruz 18
    Kasich 10
    Carson 9

    Dems
    Clinton 56
    Sanders 33

    General election

    Clinton 44
    Trump 39

    Clinton 44
    Cruz 39

    Clinton 41
    Rubio 43
    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/docs/2016/MRG_MI_Poll_Spring_16_Pres_Prim-FINAL.pdf

    As I read that for the methodology they assume the same turnout as last time, so I am putting that down as one of the many polls that understate Trump who brings so many new people to the polls.

    Vermont, Georgia, Alabama and Texas all have twenty percent cut off.

    New poll showing Cruz and Trump level in Texas.

    http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/polls/arg-23924
  • Options

    Priti Patel has today said that:
    “Jeremy Heywood’s unconstitutional act threatens the reputation of the civil service. Secretaries of State are responsible for their departments. For an unelected official to prevent them being aware of the information they need for their duties is wrong.”
    http://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2016/02/banning-leave-ministers-from-getting-civil-service-support-is-both-wrong-and-dangerous.html

    The Government policy is to Remain.
    "There is no separate process for departments whose ministers are campaigning to leave the EU beyond the guidance published on Monday. Day-to-day business will continue to be conducted in the usual way and all ministers will retain access to any papers relevant to their departments other than those specifically regarding the in-out question.”
  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    edited February 2016
    isam said:

    isam said:

    By my reckoning:

    1. Havering - One Tory MP, One Labour MP
    2. Peterborough - Tory MP
    3. Bracknell Forest - Tory MP
    4. Blackpool - One Tory MP, One Labour MP
    5. Blackburn with Darwen - One Tory MP, One Labour MP
    6. Southend-on-Sea - Two Tory MPs
    7. Warrington - One Tory MP, One Labour MP
    8. South Tyneside - Two Labour MPs
    9. Sandwell - Three Labour MPs, One Tory MP
    10. Cumbria - Three Labour MPs, Two Tory MPs, One Lib Dem MP

    So all in all other than Tyneside every single area has either some Tory or unanimous Tory representation. Contrast with the big Labour cities like Liverpool, Manchester, Newcastle Upon Tyne, Sunderland, Leeds etc

    Havering has 2 Tory MPs by my reckoning.. Rosindale and Watkinson
    Yes my mistake, it's even more Tory than I realised.

    Across the three Havering constituencies I make it 62,610 Tory votes to 39,201 Labour ones. Not exactly the most Labour area of the region, certainly not comparable to europhile Liverpool etc
    If the third constituency you are talking of, the Labour one, is Dagenham and Rainham, most of that isn't in Havering anyway.

    Havering is Tory and UKIP with the rest nowhere
    Yes it is the third one I was looking at, I'm from Warrington which as I said is also on that list and again a very Tory locale compared to the rest of our region, so I was going off the Wiki list of Havering MPs. Certainly then Havering is a lot more Tory than its nearby eurosceptic central London areas.

    So all in all the list shows nothing like SeanT seemed to think it did. As is crystal clear if you view the YouGov Map and a Constituency Map side-by-side. The red of regions of Labour MPs in a constituency map coincides almost perfectly with green Europhile areas.

    While huge swathes of the country are blue in a constituency map and Eurosceptic.

    Fur Leave to win, the high-turnout, elderly, sceptical vote needs to be kept on side and turnout to win. If Leave wins by a considerable margin the groups that got the Tories elected like elderly sceptics et Leave can win the referendum. "Project Fear" is quite sensibly about trying to put the frighteners on these high turnout voters.

    If Leave ignores these high turnout voters that should be in Leave's column to go hunting for unregistered non-voters it would be a terrible mistake.
  • Options
    SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    Latest polls for tomorrow:
    https://politicalwire.com/2016/02/29/trump-leads-in-alabama-and-oklahoma/

    Alabama: Trump 42%, Rubio 19%, Cruz 16%, Carson 11%, Kasich 5% (Monmouth)

    Oklahoma: Trump 35%, Cruz 23%, Rubio 22%, Kasich 8%, Carson 7% (Monmouth)

    Texas: Cruz 33%, Trump 32%, Rubio 17%, Kasich 7%, Carson 6% (ARG)

    Massachusetts: Trump 47%, Rubio 15%, Cruz 15%, Kasich 11%, Carson 2% (UMass)
  • Options

    If we vote for Leave we'll have a little under four years of Tory government still remaining. It will almost certainly be an EEA/EFTA style negotiation under those circumstances as almost all vocal Tory Leavers back (plus its the closest to Remain so Tories Remainers who want the Single Market would go for that too).

    I don't know whether my friends and acquaintances in the Conservative Party are atypical, but those who favour Leave are mainly motivated by concerns over the immigration numbers. That's probably true of many non-Conservative Leavers as well. Therefore, if Leave do win, and we end up back where we started on free movement, there will be one hell of a row, both in the party and in the country as a whole.
  • Options
    perdixperdix Posts: 1,806
    RobD said:

    Has the Civil Service ever been told to support one side in an election before? And withold any information that could help the other side??

    The government doesn't usually have a position in elections.
    The job of the civil service is to support government policy - that is what it's for.

  • Options

    If we vote for Leave we'll have a little under four years of Tory government still remaining. It will almost certainly be an EEA/EFTA style negotiation under those circumstances as almost all vocal Tory Leavers back (plus its the closest to Remain so Tories Remainers who want the Single Market would go for that too).

    I don't know whether my friends and acquaintances in the Conservative Party are atypical, but those who favour Leave are mainly motivated by concerns over the immigration numbers. That's probably true of many non-Conservative Leavers as well. Therefore, if Leave do win, and we end up back where we started on free movement, there will be one hell of a row, both in the party and in the country as a whole.
    I think the way to reconcile it is quite simple, negotiate a leave to EFTA then hold a further referendum in 2018/9 to finish this once and for all.

    Between the voters for Remain and the voters for Leave to EEA/EFTA I think that would be confirmed by an overwhelming margin. Especially if you have relative Leave heavyweights like Gove, Boris, Hannan, and I believe from memory Carswell all campaigning for yes to EEA.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,039
    Trump seems to be picking up steam lol
  • Options
    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Anyone know how hispanics are breaking for Clinton-Sanders ?

    *Half an eye on California.

    Only Nevada had a non-nelgible number, exit polls said Clinton 46%, Sanders 54%; Clinton won overall 53:47 so a small pro-Sanders bias.
    Pretty much even stevens then.
    Well, obviously, 54:46 was a boost to Sander's chances, just not enough to take the state.
  • Options
    AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    edited February 2016
    LondonBob said:

    I missed this article today
    Maj Gen Julian Thompson commanded 3 Commando Brigade during the Falklands War "I fought for Britain and I know how the EU weakens our defences
    The myth that leaving the EU would harm British national security must be destroyed once and for all "
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/defence/12176954/I-fought-for-Britain-and-I-know-how-the-EU-weakens-our-defences.html

    Actually it was NATO/CIA who pushed for the regime change in the Ukraine and subsequent military action against rebellious provinces and it was the EU through the Normandy Four who brought the peace.
    Similarly it was NATO/CIA who pushed Georgia to invade South Ossetia and the EU who again made the peace.
    It has also been NATO/CIA who have been sponsoring the radical salafist jihadis who have caused such mayhem in Libya, Iraq and Syria. Good reason Hollande went to the EU not NATO after the Paris attacks.

    Neither NATO nor the EU are particularly beneficial to our national security. Maybe NATO will improve once Trump becomes President.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=73-xpW1tFV8

    Keep wearing that bullet proof vest Donald!
    The USA specifically told Georgia _not_ to attack South Ossetia.
  • Options
    bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 21,932
    Still a few The New Day papers left in my Newsagents an hour ago.

    Does not bode well if they don't go when they are free.

    25p rest of week

    50p next week

    Bound to fail IMO.

    Had to be priced at no more than 35p to have a chance of getting your Star/Sun/Express readers Methinks
  • Options

    If we vote for Leave we'll have a little under four years of Tory government still remaining. It will almost certainly be an EEA/EFTA style negotiation under those circumstances as almost all vocal Tory Leavers back (plus its the closest to Remain so Tories Remainers who want the Single Market would go for that too).

    I don't know whether my friends and acquaintances in the Conservative Party are atypical, but those who favour Leave are mainly motivated by concerns over the immigration numbers. That's probably true of many non-Conservative Leavers as well. Therefore, if Leave do win, and we end up back where we started on free movement, there will be one hell of a row, both in the party and in the country as a whole.

    Indeed. There is going to be one hell of a row. And the PM who delivers the almost inevitable EEA-like agreement is going to be hated. But is there any feasible PM who would sacrifice free movement of goods, services and capital in order to secure significant restrictions on free movement of people? I can't see one.

  • Options
    AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited February 2016
    The latest from Project Fear:

    "Brexit ‘could leave UK with blackouts and gas shortages’"
    http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/business/industries/utilities/article4701374.ece
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,039

    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Anyone know how hispanics are breaking for Clinton-Sanders ?

    *Half an eye on California.

    Only Nevada had a non-nelgible number, exit polls said Clinton 46%, Sanders 54%; Clinton won overall 53:47 so a small pro-Sanders bias.
    Pretty much even stevens then.
    Well, obviously, 54:46 was a boost to Sander's chances, just not enough to take the state.
    It's the black vote that's really going to finish off Sanders in Dixie. (And did it in S Carolina)
  • Options
    Alistair said:

    LondonBob said:

    I missed this article today
    Maj Gen Julian Thompson commanded 3 Commando Brigade during the Falklands War "I fought for Britain and I know how the EU weakens our defences
    The myth that leaving the EU would harm British national security must be destroyed once and for all "
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/defence/12176954/I-fought-for-Britain-and-I-know-how-the-EU-weakens-our-defences.html

    Actually it was NATO/CIA who pushed for the regime change in the Ukraine and subsequent military action against rebellious provinces and it was the EU through the Normandy Four who brought the peace.
    Similarly it was NATO/CIA who pushed Georgia to invade South Ossetia and the EU who again made the peace.
    It has also been NATO/CIA who have been sponsoring the radical salafist jihadis who have caused such mayhem in Libya, Iraq and Syria. Good reason Hollande went to the EU not NATO after the Paris attacks.

    Neither NATO nor the EU are particularly beneficial to our national security. Maybe NATO will improve once Trump becomes President.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=73-xpW1tFV8

    Keep wearing that bullet proof vest Donald!
    The USA specifically told Georgia _not_ to attack South Ossetia.
    Well some folks encouraged them but ultimately George W, Rice and Gates overrode them. Even George W became bored of the bombers boys in his second term.
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 36,013
    isam said:

    isam said:

    By my reckoning:

    1. Havering - One Tory MP, One Labour MP
    2. Peterborough - Tory MP
    3. Bracknell Forest - Tory MP
    4. Blackpool - One Tory MP, One Labour MP
    5. Blackburn with Darwen - One Tory MP, One Labour MP
    6. Southend-on-Sea - Two Tory MPs
    7. Warrington - One Tory MP, One Labour MP
    8. South Tyneside - Two Labour MPs
    9. Sandwell - Three Labour MPs, One Tory MP
    10. Cumbria - Three Labour MPs, Two Tory MPs, One Lib Dem MP

    So all in all other than Tyneside every single area has either some Tory or unanimous Tory representation. Contrast with the big Labour cities like Liverpool, Manchester, Newcastle Upon Tyne, Sunderland, Leeds etc

    Havering has 2 Tory MPs by my reckoning.. Rosindale and Watkinson
    Yes my mistake, it's even more Tory than I realised.

    Across the three Havering constituencies I make it 62,610 Tory votes to 39,201 Labour ones. Not exactly the most Labour area of the region, certainly not comparable to europhile Liverpool etc
    If the third constituency you are talking of, the Labour one, is Dagenham and Rainham, most of that isn't in Havering anyway.

    Havering is Tory and UKIP with the rest nowhere
    What we need to bear in mind is that "working class" and "Conservative" are quite compatible in much of England.

    The most eurosceptic constituencies will be working class Conservative, with a big UKIP vote. The most europhile will be middle class Labour (or SNP) with little UKIP vote.

    The spectrum (from Leave to Remain) is roughly, English working class right wing seats, English middle class right wing seats, Welsh right wing seats, UUP/DUP seats, English left wing working class seats, Welsh (English speaking) left wing seats, English left wing middle class seats, Scottish working class seats, Welsh-speaking seats, Scottish middle class seats, Irish Nationalist seats.
  • Options
    Sean_F said:

    isam said:

    isam said:

    By my reckoning:

    1. Havering - One Tory MP, One Labour MP
    2. Peterborough - Tory MP
    3. Bracknell Forest - Tory MP
    4. Blackpool - One Tory MP, One Labour MP
    5. Blackburn with Darwen - One Tory MP, One Labour MP
    6. Southend-on-Sea - Two Tory MPs
    7. Warrington - One Tory MP, One Labour MP
    8. South Tyneside - Two Labour MPs
    9. Sandwell - Three Labour MPs, One Tory MP
    10. Cumbria - Three Labour MPs, Two Tory MPs, One Lib Dem MP

    So all in all other than Tyneside every single area has either some Tory or unanimous Tory representation. Contrast with the big Labour cities like Liverpool, Manchester, Newcastle Upon Tyne, Sunderland, Leeds etc

    Havering has 2 Tory MPs by my reckoning.. Rosindale and Watkinson
    Yes my mistake, it's even more Tory than I realised.

    Across the three Havering constituencies I make it 62,610 Tory votes to 39,201 Labour ones. Not exactly the most Labour area of the region, certainly not comparable to europhile Liverpool etc
    If the third constituency you are talking of, the Labour one, is Dagenham and Rainham, most of that isn't in Havering anyway.

    Havering is Tory and UKIP with the rest nowhere
    What we need to bear in mind is that "working class" and "Conservative" are quite compatible in much of England.

    The most eurosceptic constituencies will be working class Conservative, with a big UKIP vote. The most europhile will be middle class Labour (or SNP) with little UKIP vote.

    The spectrum (from Leave to Remain) is roughly, English working class right wing seats, English middle class right wing seats, Welsh right wing seats, UUP/DUP seats, English left wing working class seats, Welsh (English speaking) left wing seats, English left wing middle class seats, Scottish working class seats, Welsh-speaking seats, Scottish middle class seats, Irish Nationalist seats.
    Agreed but the right wing working class are regular voters, not "hellhole" "daytime drinkers".
  • Options
    AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited February 2016
    The most interesting places will arguably be middle-class areas with high older populations. Places like Stratford-on-Avon and Malvern. Those two factors pull in opposite directions on this issue.
    Sean_F said:

    isam said:

    isam said:

    By my reckoning:

    1. Havering - One Tory MP, One Labour MP
    2. Peterborough - Tory MP
    3. Bracknell Forest - Tory MP
    4. Blackpool - One Tory MP, One Labour MP
    5. Blackburn with Darwen - One Tory MP, One Labour MP
    6. Southend-on-Sea - Two Tory MPs
    7. Warrington - One Tory MP, One Labour MP
    8. South Tyneside - Two Labour MPs
    9. Sandwell - Three Labour MPs, One Tory MP
    10. Cumbria - Three Labour MPs, Two Tory MPs, One Lib Dem MP

    So all in all other than Tyneside every single area has either some Tory or unanimous Tory representation. Contrast with the big Labour cities like Liverpool, Manchester, Newcastle Upon Tyne, Sunderland, Leeds etc

    Havering has 2 Tory MPs by my reckoning.. Rosindale and Watkinson
    Yes my mistake, it's even more Tory than I realised.

    Across the three Havering constituencies I make it 62,610 Tory votes to 39,201 Labour ones. Not exactly the most Labour area of the region, certainly not comparable to europhile Liverpool etc
    If the third constituency you are talking of, the Labour one, is Dagenham and Rainham, most of that isn't in Havering anyway.

    Havering is Tory and UKIP with the rest nowhere
    What we need to bear in mind is that "working class" and "Conservative" are quite compatible in much of England.

    The most eurosceptic constituencies will be working class Conservative, with a big UKIP vote. The most europhile will be middle class Labour (or SNP) with little UKIP vote.

    The spectrum (from Leave to Remain) is roughly, English working class right wing seats, English middle class right wing seats, Welsh right wing seats, UUP/DUP seats, English left wing working class seats, Welsh (English speaking) left wing seats, English left wing middle class seats, Scottish working class seats, Welsh-speaking seats, Scottish middle class seats, Irish Nationalist seats.
  • Options
    LondonBob said:

    I missed this article today
    Maj Gen Julian Thompson commanded 3 Commando Brigade during the Falklands War "I fought for Britain and I know how the EU weakens our defences
    The myth that leaving the EU would harm British national security must be destroyed once and for all "
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/defence/12176954/I-fought-for-Britain-and-I-know-how-the-EU-weakens-our-defences.html

    Actually it was NATO/CIA who pushed for the regime change in the Ukraine and subsequent military action against rebellious provinces and it was the EU through the Normandy Four who brought the peace.
    Similarly it was NATO/CIA who pushed Georgia to invade South Ossetia and the EU who again made the peace.
    It has also been NATO/CIA who have been sponsoring the radical salafist jihadis who have caused such mayhem in Libya, Iraq and Syria. Good reason Hollande went to the EU not NATO after the Paris attacks.

    Neither NATO nor the EU are particularly beneficial to our national security. Maybe NATO will improve once Trump becomes President.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=73-xpW1tFV8

    Keep wearing that bullet proof vest Donald!
    Ah. Radio Moscow calling.
  • Options

    New AV Thread New AV Thread

  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 36,013
    AndyJS said:

    The most interesting places will arguably be middle-class areas with high older populations. Places like Stratford-on-Avon and Malvern. Those two factors pull in opposite directions on this issue.

    Sean_F said:

    isam said:

    isam said:

    By my reckoning:

    1. Havering - One Tory MP, One Labour MP
    2. Peterborough - Tory MP
    3. Bracknell Forest - Tory MP
    4. Blackpool - One Tory MP, One Labour MP
    5. Blackburn with Darwen - One Tory MP, One Labour MP
    6. Southend-on-Sea - Two Tory MPs
    7. Warrington - One Tory MP, One Labour MP
    8. South Tyneside - Two Labour MPs
    9. Sandwell - Three Labour MPs, One Tory MP
    10. Cumbria - Three Labour MPs, Two Tory MPs, One Lib Dem MP

    So all in all other than Tyneside every single area has either some Tory or unanimous Tory representation. Contrast with the big Labour cities like Liverpool, Manchester, Newcastle Upon Tyne, Sunderland, Leeds etc

    Havering has 2 Tory MPs by my reckoning.. Rosindale and Watkinson
    Yes my mistake, it's even more Tory than I realised.

    Across the three Havering constituencies I make it 62,610 Tory votes to 39,201 Labour ones. Not exactly the most Labour area of the region, certainly not comparable to europhile Liverpool etc
    If the third constituency you are talking of, the Labour one, is Dagenham and Rainham, most of that isn't in Havering anyway.

    Havering is Tory and UKIP with the rest nowhere
    What we need to bear in mind is that "working class" and "Conservative" are quite compatible in much of England.

    The most eurosceptic constituencies will be working class Conservative, with a big UKIP vote. The most europhile will be middle class Labour (or SNP) with little UKIP vote.

    The spectrum (from Leave to Remain) is roughly, English working class right wing seats, English middle class right wing seats, Welsh right wing seats, UUP/DUP seats, English left wing working class seats, Welsh (English speaking) left wing seats, English left wing middle class seats, Scottish working class seats, Welsh-speaking seats, Scottish middle class seats, Irish Nationalist seats.
    I think places like Malvern would be firmly Leave on current numbers. I think it's in places like Surrey and Buckinghamshire that you'd see a greater split.
  • Options
    bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 21,932
    AndyJS said:

    The latest from Project Fear:

    "Brexit ‘could leave UK with blackouts and gas shortages’"
    http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/business/industries/utilities/article4701374.ece

    The status quo is much better

    http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/business/industries/utilities/article4700821.ece

    Ted Heath all over again!!
  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    edited February 2016
    SeanT said:

    To be fair I think we are at cross purposes, because you are incapable of expressing yourself coherently.

    My point is that the eurosceptic vote is concentrated in WWC areas, with the old, the uneducated especially represented, along with a large tranche of Tories of all stripes (as I said).

    Your point was.... dunno.

    My point is that Eurosceptic correlates with right wing voters and not hellholes which is what I said. Europhile correlates with Labour/SNP/PC.

    To get out the Eurosceptic vote the Leave campaign needs to win the vast majority right wing Tory style voters first and foremost and appeal to lefties secondary. This again is what I said which you objected to so vehemently:

    isam said:

    ... and while the middle class Tory types chat to each other about treaty change, GDP and CAP, Farage et al will be visiting every hell hole in England telling the underclass this is their chance

    Which is why he'll lose overwhelmingly if he's in charge. As those people don't vote.

    It doesn't even make sense. Look at YouGov's graph of where is eurosceptic and where is europhile. Does euroscepticism correlate with being a hellhole? No, quite the opposite, those are the most europhile areas in the country. Euroscepticism is at its highest by and large where the right wing vote is the highest, that is the target demographic to get out the vote.
    I stand by that Euroscepticism is at its highest by and large where the right wing vote is highest. I never said that it's not a WWC right-wing vote did I? Just that it's not a hell hole.

    I do not think Warrington is a hellhole. I don't think isam considers Havering to be a hellhole. While we do indeed have more right wing voters than our neighbours. I fail to understand what I've written that is objectionable to you.
  • Options
    AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited February 2016
    Warwick is likely to vote Remain, the reason being the very large proportion of people with degrees in that district. St Albans is another example.
    Sean_F said:

    AndyJS said:

    The most interesting places will arguably be middle-class areas with high older populations. Places like Stratford-on-Avon and Malvern. Those two factors pull in opposite directions on this issue.

    Sean_F said:

    isam said:

    isam said:

    By my reckoning:

    1. Havering - One Tory MP, One Labour MP
    2. Peterborough - Tory MP
    3. Bracknell Forest - Tory MP
    4. Blackpool - One Tory MP, One Labour MP
    5. Blackburn with Darwen - One Tory MP, One Labour MP
    6. Southend-on-Sea - Two Tory MPs
    7. Warrington - One Tory MP, One Labour MP
    8. South Tyneside - Two Labour MPs
    9. Sandwell - Three Labour MPs, One Tory MP
    10. Cumbria - Three Labour MPs, Two Tory MPs, One Lib Dem MP

    So all in all other than Tyneside every single area has either some Tory or unanimous Tory representation. Contrast with the big Labour cities like Liverpool, Manchester, Newcastle Upon Tyne, Sunderland, Leeds etc

    Havering has 2 Tory MPs by my reckoning.. Rosindale and Watkinson
    Yes my mistake, it's even more Tory than I realised.

    Across the three Havering constituencies I make it 62,610 Tory votes to 39,201 Labour ones. Not exactly the most Labour area of the region, certainly not comparable to europhile Liverpool etc
    If the third constituency you are talking of, the Labour one, is Dagenham and Rainham, most of that isn't in Havering anyway.

    Havering is Tory and UKIP with the rest nowhere
    What we need to bear in mind is that "working class" and "Conservative" are quite compatible in much of England.

    The most eurosceptic constituencies will be working class Conservative, with a big UKIP vote. The most europhile will be middle class Labour (or SNP) with little UKIP vote.

    The spectrum (from Leave to Remain) is roughly, English working class right wing seats, English middle class right wing seats, Welsh right wing seats, UUP/DUP seats, English left wing working class seats, Welsh (English speaking) left wing seats, English left wing middle class seats, Scottish working class seats, Welsh-speaking seats, Scottish middle class seats, Irish Nationalist seats.
    I think places like Malvern would be firmly Leave on current numbers. I think it's in places like Surrey and Buckinghamshire that you'd see a greater split.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,249
    LondonBob said:

    HYUFD said:

    Michigan MRG

    GOP
    Trump 33
    Rubio 18
    Cruz 18
    Kasich 10
    Carson 9

    Dems
    Clinton 56
    Sanders 33

    General election

    Clinton 44
    Trump 39

    Clinton 44
    Cruz 39

    Clinton 41
    Rubio 43
    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/docs/2016/MRG_MI_Poll_Spring_16_Pres_Prim-FINAL.pdf

    As I read that for the methodology they assume the same turnout as last time, so I am putting that down as one of the many polls that understate Trump who brings so many new people to the polls.

    Vermont, Georgia, Alabama and Texas all have twenty percent cut off.

    New poll showing Cruz and Trump level in Texas.

    http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/polls/arg-23924
    Equally you could argue Hispanics will turn out against him
This discussion has been closed.