Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The second YouGov poll in a row has the LAB lead down to ju

SystemSystem Posts: 12,183
edited July 2013 in General

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The second YouGov poll in a row has the LAB lead down to just 5pc

There’s a general rule about the Sun’s daily poll from YouGov – if the numbers are good for the Tories then they get Tweeted overnight. If not then we usually have to wait until the normal publication time of 6am.

Read the full story here


«134

Comments

  • RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737
    "today’s shares would give LAB an overall majority of 59 seats."

    Yawn, and the equivalent position five years ago "would have given" the Tories a 200 seat majority.

    Except it never came to pass. Funny that....
  • JohnLoonyJohnLoony Posts: 1,790
    I don't understand today's Matt cartoon, which isn't up to the usual brilliant standard.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/matt/

    Is the man (a) slipping on the carpet, and falling in the style of tennis players, or (b) jumping over the TV in celebration? And why is the woman blubbing so much?
  • JohnLoonyJohnLoony Posts: 1,790
    RodCrosby said:

    @JohnLoony

    Actuarially, you are odds-on to still be here in 12 months time, until you reach the age of around 107...

    Yea, indeed, verily, it is so; but it is much more of a stretch to survive for 36 months than for 12.
  • GeoffMGeoffM Posts: 6,071
    edited July 2013
    JohnLoony said:

    Is the man (a) slipping on the carpet, and falling in the style of tennis players, or (b) jumping over the TV in celebration? And why is the woman blubbing so much?

    Yes, it seems slightly more impenetrable than usual. Does it show the OTT tennis reactions of floods of tears at a loss and jumping the net in victory? I didn't see the match - maybe those things occurred on court at the Robson match?

    EDIT: Some Google-fu tells me that Robson didn't cry.

  • GeoffMGeoffM Posts: 6,071
    RodCrosby said:

    Except it never came to pass. Funny that....

    Quite right. They are meaningless.

    We should always take these extrapolations as "just a bit of fun" as they used to say on local election night broadcasts when the share of the votes nominally made the Compton Pauncefoot Ratepayers Party out to be poised for HM Loyal Opposition status in the Commons at the next GE.
  • redcliffe62redcliffe62 Posts: 342
    Seen the views on coalition government in Oz, and think a hard approach from Tory and Labour to say vote for us preferably of course, but at the very least vote for one of them as a LD vote is a wasted vote and we want a majority government might be attractive to the people.
    The Greens got heavily squeezed in QLD elections last time by this tactic. People went straight to the Tories in QLD, missing out the other option in an attempt to avoid another minority government as per national 2010 election being a possibility. It would work at the national level too in UK too in my view, particularly under FPTP.

    If debates are solely for PM then LD on polls of 8% have no more right than UKIP on the panel, so trying to nullify anyone who cannot be PM, used against Salmond despite having MP's is the way to go by both major parties.

    This would stop Farage from splitting centre and right wing vote as well as Clegg or a new LD leader like Swinson, who in my view could hoover up the female and younger vote who may feel they have no other option than Tweedledum or Tweedledummer.
    (This of course assumes she holds on in Scotland which after being seen as a Tory lackey may be difficult.)

    Not being there on stage would confirm the wasted vote position to many people and avoid LD momentum from media coverage.

    One debate with UKIP, LD's and main parties is perhaps justified to hear different policies and not just to decide who will be PM.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    YouGov internals - some directional encouragement for the Blues:

    Labour Lead (change) who do you trust more on:
    NHS +10 (-4)
    Asylum/Immigration -11 (-1)
    Laura Norder: -13 (-5)
    Education +5 (-4)
    Tax: -2 (-5)
    Unemployment: +5 (-1)
    Economy: -5 (-3)
    Europe: -2 (-2)

    http://cdn.yougov.com/cumulus_uploads/document/2bbhy6ug9e/YG-Archive-Pol-Sun-results-010713.pdf
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 42,971
    Off-topic:

    Beware of the one-sided nature of the source:
    http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/169483#.UdJiwGKURIl

    It would be interesting to see a Border Agency response to this.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    JohnLoony said:

    RodCrosby said:

    @JohnLoony

    Actuarially, you are odds-on to still be here in 12 months time, until you reach the age of around 107...

    Yea, indeed, verily, it is so; but it is much more of a stretch to survive for 36 months than for 12.
    Some actuaries will tell you that a 97 year old man is less likely to reach age 100 than a 3 year old girl. Longevity is very sex-specific.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    edited July 2013

    Off-topic:

    Beware of the one-sided nature of the source:
    http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/169483#.UdJiwGKURIl

    It would be interesting to see a Border Agency response to this.

    Same story from Kansas:

    http://www.kctv5.com/story/22509339/leawood-student-claims-he-was-racially-profiled-overseas

    However The Border Agency's likely response will be that it "does not comment on individual cases"

    Wait until the Mail gets hold of it and does a "compare and contrast" with some random passing hate preacher with a dusky complexion... or perhaps SeanT will beat them to it?

    Edit - one f his complaints is about being photographed & finger printed - which of course happens to everyone entering the US!
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,914
    edited July 2013
    The Tories have through no fault of their own started looking more competent and some of the economic figures have improved.

    But more significant is Labour appearing support the Tory changes. Tactically inept even if the changes were sound.

    It looks like they have serious leadership problems which is bad timing when their best talent is working for a New York charity........

    .....lets hope someone has a cunning plan
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,708
    Roger said:

    The Tories have through no fault of their own started looking more competent and some of the economic figures have improved.

    But more significant is Labour appearing support the Tory changes. Tactically inept even if the changes were sound.

    It looks like they have serious leadership problems which is bad timing when their best talent is working for a New York charity........

    .....lets hope someone has a cunning plan

    That would be the person whose big idea was the individual carbon ration card, and whose main contribution to Labour was destabilizing Brown by always looking like he was going to launch a coup, but never actually doing it. If that's their best talent they may as well give up now.
  • GeoffMGeoffM Posts: 6,071
    antifrank said:

    Some actuaries will tell you that a 97 year old man is less likely to reach age 100 than a 3 year old girl. Longevity is very sex-specific.

    It's amazing what you can do with age statistics. For example, since Arsenal last won a trophy, 98% of Justin Bieber's Twitter followers have been born.
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    GeoffM said:

    antifrank said:

    Some actuaries will tell you that a 97 year old man is less likely to reach age 100 than a 3 year old girl. Longevity is very sex-specific.

    It's amazing what you can do with age statistics. For example, since Arsenal last won a trophy, 98% of Justin Bieber's Twitter followers have been born.
    LOL
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    GeoffM said:

    antifrank said:

    Some actuaries will tell you that a 97 year old man is less likely to reach age 100 than a 3 year old girl. Longevity is very sex-specific.

    It's amazing what you can do with age statistics..
    I'm still chuckling over that Glastonbury tweet about the Rolling Stones -Imagine 1965 twenty something's waiting for a band that was big in 1917....
  • richardDoddrichardDodd Posts: 5,472
    Roger, that would be Banana man then..Labours Great Hope..heheh
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    On topic, there does potentially seem to be a new YouGov normal. While Labour are so incoherent about where they are heading, it's not surprising their polling lead is slipping.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    Roger said:

    some of the economic figures have improvec

    "BCC chief economist David Kern now sees a good chance that growth doubled to 0.6% in the April to June period from 0.3% in the first quarter.

    "The improvement in most key balances in our second-quarter survey supports our view that the UK upturn is slowly strengthening … The hope is slowly the economy moves up. Our last forecast was for growth just under 1% this year. I think we might be able to upgrade that," Kern said."

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2013/jul/02/bank-of-england-mark-carney-recovery
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,914
    edited July 2013
    @Edmund.

    I took your point the other day that by accepting all the Tory plans now they were saving themselves the awkward questions nearer the election. It might have worked when the Tories did it with because they've always been an ideological backwater but Labour are a crusade or they're nothing and how are they supposed to attract disaffected Lib Dems by aping the Tories?

    DM might not be the Messiah but he's a smart attractive and articulate politician
  • The economy is improving, Dave is getting grumpy and fractious in Brussels, George seems to have won the argument about cuts, Redward and Loretta can't seem to decide WTF they would do with spending, the unions open their mouths, Clegg opens his mouth, the sun is shining at last, Kate is going to have a baby, France is sinking.....things are looking up.

    Maybe we'll see a dead heat in the polls before long - then it'll get interesting.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 42,971

    Off-topic:

    Beware of the one-sided nature of the source:
    http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/169483#.UdJiwGKURIl

    It would be interesting to see a Border Agency response to this.

    Same story from Kansas:

    http://www.kctv5.com/story/22509339/leawood-student-claims-he-was-racially-profiled-overseas

    However The Border Agency's likely response will be that it "does not comment on individual cases"

    Wait until the Mail gets hold of it and does a "compare and contrast" with some random passing hate preacher with a dusky complexion... or perhaps SeanT will beat them to it?

    Edit - one f his complaints is about being photographed & finger printed - which of course happens to everyone entering the US!
    Yes. I read the story and was initially outraged for a few seconds before giving it some more thought. There may have been good reasons to prevent him from entering: we only have his side of the story. The suppositions in particular are interesting; for instance that he thinks it was the Israeli passport stamps that flagged him up when it may have been other matters or behaviours.

    A couple of points are worthy of investigation: women doing fingerprinting should not be able to wear the burka as they do so, and the accusations of racist (or at very least silly) language to the father.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 39,667
    Roger said:

    @Edmund.

    I took your point the other day that by accepting all the Tory plans now they were saving themselves the awkward questions nearer the election. It might have worked when the Tories did it with because they've always been an ideological backwater but Labour are a crusade or they're nothing and how are they supposed to attract disaffected Lib Dems by aping the Tories?

    DM might not be the Messiah but he's a smart attractive and articulate politician

    Is there any evidence they are repelling disaffected LibDems?

    Labour hit 35% or so in all opinion polls as soon as the Coalition was formed. That's a hell of a bounce for a party that had just been defeated so heavily in a GE and may well be unprecedented in previous UK electoral cycles - I can't think of another example, that's for sure. For the last three years there has been little indication that Labour is going to dip below that 35%. And if it doesn't the chances of the Tories winning in 2015 are almost zero and the chances of Labour winning most seats are very high.

    I agree that EdM is a poor leader. But he is the one that Labour has. That's not going to change at this stage. Those of us who want to see the Tories lose in 2015 just have to reconcile ourselves to that fact.

    The best Labour leader would have been Alan Johnson. But he did not want the job.

  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    Patrick said:

    Maybe we'll see a dead heat in the polls before long - then it'll get interesting.

    If the underlying Labour lead - currently ~8 drifts down to ~6 - a loss it's seen over the past 4-5 months - then dead heats will be within MOE....

  • MillsyMillsy Posts: 900
    This month's phone polls will be interesting - ICM, Ipsos-Mori and ComRes all showed a very modest recovery for Labour in June (+1 or +2 on May)
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,914
    Jessop.

    The story is garbage. Provincial Jewish newspapers live off stories of anti semitism. There's a new line of Jewish jokes which specialize in the genre.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    JohnLoony said:

    I don't understand today's Matt cartoon, which isn't up to the usual brilliant standard.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/matt/

    Is the man (a) slipping on the carpet, and falling in the style of tennis players, or (b) jumping over the TV in celebration? And why is the woman blubbing so much?

    She is crying because now everyone (who reads the Telegraph) will realise they are too poor to own a flat-screen television, and their set stopped working at the digital switchover.
  • Fat_SteveFat_Steve Posts: 361
    Ed Milliband < Neill Kinnock
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 42,971
    Roger said:

    Jessop.

    The story is garbage. Provincial Jewish newspapers live off stories of anti semitism. There's a new line of Jewish jokes which specialize in the genre.

    Perhaps it is rubbish; it smells a little for the reasons I have given before. But surely you think any such allegation should be investigated?

    Or are you saying that it is impossible, and should be ignored?
  • MillsyMillsy Posts: 900

    Roger said:

    @Edmund.

    I took your point the other day that by accepting all the Tory plans now they were saving themselves the awkward questions nearer the election. It might have worked when the Tories did it with because they've always been an ideological backwater but Labour are a crusade or they're nothing and how are they supposed to attract disaffected Lib Dems by aping the Tories?

    DM might not be the Messiah but he's a smart attractive and articulate politician

    Is there any evidence they are repelling disaffected LibDems?

    Labour hit 35% or so in all opinion polls as soon as the Coalition was formed. That's a hell of a bounce for a party that had just been defeated so heavily in a GE and may well be unprecedented in previous UK electoral cycles - I can't think of another example, that's for sure. For the last three years there has been little indication that Labour is going to dip below that 35%. And if it doesn't the chances of the Tories winning in 2015 are almost zero and the chances of Labour winning most seats are very high.

    I agree that EdM is a poor leader. But he is the one that Labour has. That's not going to change at this stage. Those of us who want to see the Tories lose in 2015 just have to reconcile ourselves to that fact.

    The best Labour leader would have been Alan Johnson. But he did not want the job.

    You don't think the Lib Dems will recover a few voters during the general election campaign?
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,914
    Jessop.

    "Or are you saying that it is impossible, and should be ignored?"

    Yes of course
  • MonikerDiCanioMonikerDiCanio Posts: 5,792
    UK business confidence at six-year high ;

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-23141396

    Bloody chinless boy fop wonder.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 39,667
    Millsy said:

    Roger said:

    @Edmund.

    I took your point the other day that by accepting all the Tory plans now they were saving themselves the awkward questions nearer the election. It might have worked when the Tories did it with because they've always been an ideological backwater but Labour are a crusade or they're nothing and how are they supposed to attract disaffected Lib Dems by aping the Tories?

    DM might not be the Messiah but he's a smart attractive and articulate politician

    Is there any evidence they are repelling disaffected LibDems?

    Labour hit 35% or so in all opinion polls as soon as the Coalition was formed. That's a hell of a bounce for a party that had just been defeated so heavily in a GE and may well be unprecedented in previous UK electoral cycles - I can't think of another example, that's for sure. For the last three years there has been little indication that Labour is going to dip below that 35%. And if it doesn't the chances of the Tories winning in 2015 are almost zero and the chances of Labour winning most seats are very high.

    I agree that EdM is a poor leader. But he is the one that Labour has. That's not going to change at this stage. Those of us who want to see the Tories lose in 2015 just have to reconcile ourselves to that fact.

    The best Labour leader would have been Alan Johnson. But he did not want the job.

    You don't think the Lib Dems will recover a few voters during the general election campaign?

    I imagine that is very likely - especially in LD/Tory seats.

  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,012
    edited July 2013
    Roger said:

    @Edmund.

    I took your point the other day that by accepting all the Tory plans now they were saving themselves the awkward questions nearer the election. It might have worked when the Tories did it with because they've always been an ideological backwater but Labour are a crusade or they're nothing and how are they supposed to attract disaffected Lib Dems by aping the Tories?

    DM might not be the Messiah but he's a smart attractive and articulate politician

    It's always and ever been about the economy. Labour ensured that this was the battleground with their opposition to every proposal/cut/etc. If the economy failed to recover then in would march the Eds. If it did recover, then the lack of an alternative proposal and now lack of differentiation would be a nail in their coffin. And so it has proved.

    Not for no reason are other posters this morning (post BCC report) trying to sidetrack the conversation onto housing, hospitals and so forth.

    It is a straight battle over the economy and the Tories are winning it.

    Will they win the war? Increasingly looking like they will.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 42,971
    Roger said:

    Jessop.

    "Or are you saying that it is impossible, and should be ignored?"

    Yes of course

    So what other realms of public affairs do you extend this relaxed attitude to? Ah yes, we know: accusations of abuse in the workplace. What was it now? Women who don't want to be touched inappropriately by stars/talent should just go and work in a hairdressers or somesuch.

    You were wrong about Rennard, weren't you?
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    edited July 2013

    Off-topic:

    Beware of the one-sided nature of the source:
    http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/169483#.UdJiwGKURIl

    It would be interesting to see a Border Agency response to this.

    Same story from Kansas:

    http://www.kctv5.com/story/22509339/leawood-student-claims-he-was-racially-profiled-overseas

    However The Border Agency's likely response will be that it "does not comment on individual cases"

    Wait until the Mail gets hold of it and does a "compare and contrast" with some random passing hate preacher with a dusky complexion... or perhaps SeanT will beat them to it?

    Edit - one f his complaints is about being photographed & finger printed - which of course happens to everyone entering the US!
    Yes. I read the story and was initially outraged for a few seconds before giving it some more thought. There may have been good reasons to prevent him from entering: we only have his side of the story. The suppositions in particular are interesting; for instance that he thinks it was the Israeli passport stamps that flagged him up when it may have been other matters or behaviours.

    A couple of points are worthy of investigation: women doing fingerprinting should not be able to wear the burka as they do so, and the accusations of racist (or at very least silly) language to the father.
    The Kansas story (where reporters actually spoke to Cantor, and which incidentally is a month old) does not say he was denied entry. That detail comes from the Israeli report and might be due to the end of the video interview where he surmises that if he were not Jewish, or was from Europe, "they would have found no problem letting me in".

    EDIT: there are other sources which say Cantor was denied entry but they seem to derive from the new report. Perhaps he was.

    The UKBA is part of the Home Office so perhaps Theresa May will be asked a question.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300

    UK business confidence at six-year high ;

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-23141396

    Bloody chinless boy fop wonder.

    What happened six years ago? Ah, yes: the global economic meltdown. So six-year-high means not yet reaching pre-crash levels.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,914
    edited July 2013
    Jessop

    "So what other realms of public affairs do you extend this relaxed attitude to?"

    The Kansas Jewish Chronicle is likely to be as reliable as your average Rag Mag. If we are to start investigating any far fetched nonsense from anyone with an angle we better get a Met police division onto Tapestry's blog
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,914
    edited July 2013
    Jessop.

    PS I was NOT wrong about Rennard. MODERATED
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    I misread the thread headline as :

    "The second YouGov poll in a row has LAB down to just 5pc"

    LOL .... not even Ed is that bad !! .... and hopefully Nick Palmer didn't make the same mistake else we'll all be sending him get well cards at some excellently well funded NHS trust hospital !!

    Titters ....
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    @tim A point I made on here ages ago.

    If we're going to do this with showy technology, we should be doing it with 21st century showy technology rather than 1980s showy technology.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    Even on the uniform swing calcs the Labour nailed on lead is approaching the number of Scottish Labour MPs.

    A yes vote could mean a short parly in r Uk.

    Any economic data out this week ?

  • TwistedFireStopperTwistedFireStopper Posts: 2,538
    edited July 2013
    Roger said:

    @Edmund.

    Labour are a crusade or they're nothing

    Roger, that's such an old cliché. It may well have been true back in the day, but, seriously, you can't call the likes of Milliband, Balls, Reeves, Berger, Burnham and Watson et al Crusaders. About the closest Labour have to a crusader is Harriet Harmon!

    It is clear, along with most mainstream politicians, Labour are nothing.

  • tim said:

    antifrank said:

    @tim A point I made on here ages ago.

    If we're going to do this with showy technology, we should be doing it with 21st century showy technology rather than 1980s showy technology.

    That's a £29 Billion move against the economic case for HS2 in the last seven days.
    I very much doubt that the entire £21 Billion will be stripped out of the business plan. As the article itself points out without HS2 it'll become increasingly difficult to work on overcrowded trains across the rest of the network.

    In any case it's very unlikely a government of any colour will cancel HS2.

  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548

    UK business confidence at six-year high ;

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-23141396

    Bloody chinless boy fop wonder.

    What happened six years ago? Ah, yes: the global economic meltdown. So six-year-high means not yet reaching pre-crash levels.
    If business confidence was high in 2007; months before the largest crisis of capitalism in eighty years, then I would suggest that business was pretty poor at predicting the future economy.
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    edited July 2013
    For those who dismiss Mr Hodges - perhaps Ms Sylvester will do instead re UNITE and Falkirk & Labour's issues. For those who don't know, she's married to Patrick Wintour and appears to be of a very similar mind. I posted several times as far back as early last year that Len McCluskey's party-within-a-party ambitions would come back to bite them and lo - it comes to pass.

    "Where does power really lie in the Labour Party? ...The facts of the Falkirk case are frankly shocking. The selection process has been suspended after it emerged that Unite — Labour’s biggest financial backer — had paid for dozens of people to join the party ahead of the ballot to choose the candidate. This in itself is allowed under party rules (a bizarre anomaly). But, crucially, it is claimed that some of these new members had no idea that they had been signed up.

    Batches of membership forms were sent to Labour headquarters, accompanied by a single Unite cheque. It is alleged that on at least one occasion just a list of names and addresses was submitted together with the combined subscription fees. When party staff raised concerns, they were reportedly told to process the applications — and backdate the membership so that the new activists could vote in the selection contest. With about 100 people added to an original membership of 200, this could clearly have influenced the outcome.

    That is not all. A consultative survey, paid for by Unite, asking whether there should be an all-women shortlist, was abandoned over fears that not all local party members had received it. This raised suspicions because the union’s preferred candidate — Karie Murphy — was a woman. A leftwinger who called for a party when Lady Thatcher died, she is also said to be close to Len McCluskey, the Unite general secretary. Although sources at the union dismiss the rumours that she is his girlfriend as “gossip”, it is certainly true that she works in the office of Tom Watson, Labour’s deputy chairman, who was once Mr McCluskey’s flat-mate. http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/opinion/columnists/rachelsylvester/article3805229.ece
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 42,971
    edited July 2013
    Roger said:

    Jessop.

    PS I was NOT wrong about Rennard. MODERATED
    Yes you were - your reaction was that women in such a position should put up or shut up. You were actually attacking the complainants, ffs.

    Quite what his weight has to do with anything is beyond me. Would it have been fine if he was thin?

    Your most hilarious comment was that the film industry is the least sexist industry!

  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,413
    Plato said:

    For those who dismiss Mr Hodges - perhaps Ms Sylvester will do instead re UNITE and Falkirk & Labour's issues. For those who don't know, she's married to Patrick Wintour and appears to be of a very similar mind. I posted several times as far back as early last year that Len McCluskey's party-within-a-party ambitions would come back to bite them and lo - it comes to pass.

    "Where does power really lie in the Labour Party? ...The facts of the Falkirk case are frankly shocking. The selection process has been suspended after it emerged that Unite — Labour’s biggest financial backer — had paid for dozens of people to join the party ahead of the ballot to choose the candidate. This in itself is allowed under party rules (a bizarre anomaly). But, crucially, it is claimed that some of these new members had no idea that they had been signed up.

    Batches of membership forms were sent to Labour headquarters, accompanied by a single Unite cheque. It is alleged that on at least one occasion just a list of names and addresses was submitted together with the combined subscription fees. When party staff raised concerns, they were reportedly told to process the applications — and backdate the membership so that the new activists could vote in the selection contest. With about 100 people added to an original membership of 200, this could clearly have influenced the outcome.

    That is not all. A consultative survey, paid for by Unite, asking whether there should be an all-women shortlist, was abandoned over fears that not all local party members had received it. This raised suspicions because the union’s preferred candidate — Karie Murphy — was a woman. A leftwinger who called for a party when Lady Thatcher died, she is also said to be close to Len McCluskey, the Unite general secretary. Although sources at the union dismiss the rumours that she is his girlfriend as “gossip”, it is certainly true that she works in the office of Tom Watson, Labour’s deputy chairman, who was once Mr McCluskey’s flat-mate. http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/opinion/columnists/rachelsylvester/article3805229.ece

    Just BAU for Labour inScotland , they just cannot get away from their old habits. They actually believe they should be running everything and will stoop to anything to get elected.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,914
    edited July 2013
    @PB's finest

    "It is clear, along with most mainstream politicians, Labour are nothing."

    Don't be cynical. Those who only care about themselves and their families vote Tory. Those who only care about themselves vote UKIP.
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    edited July 2013
    Oh and then there's this little snippet straight from Mr McCluskey's office... replace UNITE with say News Corp and imagine the fall out.

    It sets a target of recruiting 5,000 Unite members to Labour with a view to influencing selections. “This is emphatically not just a recruitment offensive to benefit the Labour Party with passive financial contributions,” the document states. “We are deadly serious about transforming Labour.” Revealingly, Mr McCluskey has begun writing to Labour politicians whom his union supports, addressing them as “Unite MPs”.

    "This is not just about Falkirk. Unite is running a deliberate and carefully targeted campaign to get its preferred candidates selected all over the country. I’ve been sent the minutes of the union’s executive council meeting, dated December 3, 2012, which describe the drive in Falkirk as “exemplary”. The document boasts of six other candidate selections on which Unite has had a “direct impact” — in Peterborough, Norwich South, Harlow, Hastings, Tamworth, and Crewe and Nantwich. “This is not an exhaustive list of the better candidates,” the minutes note; but without the union’s work “Progress [the Blairite think-tank] or other right-wing candidates would have been selected.”
  • david_kendrick1david_kendrick1 Posts: 325
    edited July 2013
    Most polls have the LDs about level with UKIP. But whenever there is an actual local election, UKIP far out-polls the LDs.

    Local election successes enthuses the on-the-ground activists--which is more important for UKIP than the other parties, as there are fewer of us, and we are more disorganised.

    I can't see how Farage could be excluded from all three TV debates, if his party had just won the Euro-elections. And if he were on just one, it would have to include Europe, and thus immigration. It might even be to his advantage to only appear when the discussion concentrates on our USP.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,543
    Plato said:

    A leftwinger who called for a party when Lady Thatcher died, she is also said to be close to Len McCluskey, the Unite general secretary. Although sources at the union dismiss the rumours that she is his girlfriend as “gossip”, it is certainly true that she works in the office of Tom Watson, Labour’s deputy chairman, who was once Mr McCluskey’s flat-mate. http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/opinion/columnists/rachelsylvester/article3805229.ece

    She works for someone who was once (I'd guess 20 years ago) McCluskey's flatmate? Cor! That's pretty conclusive, eh? The Times reinvented as Heat magazine...

    I don't really have a problem with unions or anyone else encouraging lots of people to join, unless they have a clear disagreement with the party and are seeking to overthrow the leadership (the Militant case). Obviously, though, only if they've agreed! I doubt if all the new members will in fact vote as a bloc - it's not my experience of union members.

  • Some good news out of Spain. Unemployment (not seasonally adjusted) down 130,000 compared with a forecast reduction of closer to 80,000.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    I'm leaning to the view that Coalition supporters should be mindful of the mental health of our PB Labour supporters.

    These poor souls handicapped as they are with blame for the state of the economy, a leader of the most dubious capability and a set of (non) policies and U turns so bewilderingly woeful as to drive them all barking mad or take up farming in Cheshire.

    Accordingly I propose that for an experimental period that OGH adopts "Ed is Crap Tuesday" where the first thread of the day is devoted to this new sport. No other Ed is totally useless thread will then be allowed for the remainder of the week. Thus by lancing the boil and evacuating the poison for one short period only it may be possible for PB lefties to maintain some level of political equilibrium and lead a more fulfilling life.

    Huzzah for "Ed is Crap Tuesday"
  • JackW said:

    I'm leaning to the view that Coalition supporters should be mindful of the mental health of our PB Labour supporters.

    These poor souls handicapped as they are with blame for the state of the economy, a leader of the most dubious capability and a set of (non) policies and U turns so bewilderingly woeful as to drive them all barking mad or take up farming in Cheshire.

    Accordingly I propose that for an experimental period that OGH adopts "Ed is Crap Tuesday" where the first thread of the day is devoted to this new sport. No other Ed is totally useless thread will then be allowed for the remainder of the week. Thus by lancing the boil and evacuating the poison for one short period only it may be possible for PB lefties to maintain some level of political equilibrium and lead a more fulfilling life.

    Huzzah for "Ed is Crap Tuesday"

    I haven't noticed many Labour supporters accepting anything in the way of blame for the state of the economy. Labour trully are the party with no shame!
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 26,658
    A very sensible comment by Richard Nabavi on the previous thres:

    "In all seriousness - I think this beautiful area of Sussex would be much more damaged by wind farms (and perhaps by expansion at Gatwick) than oil and gas production, which are relatively innocuous once the initial exploration and production drilling are complete."

    On thread the problem the Eds have is that they lack a vision and they do not have an aura of competance (the opposite in fact).

    They do not look like people who are able to cope with the difficult times we face.

  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 21,685
    JackW said:

    I'm leaning to the view that Coalition supporters should be mindful of the mental health of our PB Labour supporters.

    These poor souls handicapped as they are with blame for the state of the economy, a leader of the most dubious capability and a set of (non) policies and U turns so bewilderingly woeful as to drive them all barking mad or take up farming in Cheshire.

    Accordingly I propose that for an experimental period that OGH adopts "Ed is Crap Tuesday" where the first thread of the day is devoted to this new sport. No other Ed is totally useless thread will then be allowed for the remainder of the week. Thus by lancing the boil and evacuating the poison for one short period only it may be possible for PB lefties to maintain some level of political equilibrium and lead a more fulfilling life.

    Huzzah for "Ed is Crap Tuesday"

    Jack you used to avoid this low-rent partisan crap. What changed?
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    edited July 2013

    Plato said:

    A leftwinger who called for a party when Lady Thatcher died, she is also said to be close to Len McCluskey, the Unite general secretary. Although sources at the union dismiss the rumours that she is his girlfriend as “gossip”, it is certainly true that she works in the office of Tom Watson, Labour’s deputy chairman, who was once Mr McCluskey’s flat-mate. http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/opinion/columnists/rachelsylvester/article3805229.ece

    She works for someone who was once (I'd guess 20 years ago) McCluskey's flatmate? Cor! That's pretty conclusive, eh? The Times reinvented as Heat magazine...

    I don't really have a problem with unions or anyone else encouraging lots of people to join, unless they have a clear disagreement with the party and are seeking to overthrow the leadership (the Militant case). Obviously, though, only if they've agreed! I doubt if all the new members will in fact vote as a bloc - it's not my experience of union members.

    Oh come on - I know you're keen to be NPMP again, but that's a deliberate misreading of the story and the allegations. Unite members discovering they've been signed up to the Falkirk CLP without their consent?

    There are times when its important to accept your Party has screwed up and this is one of them. The whole CLP has been put in Special Measures - a device IIRC which was introduced to stop Militant pulling the same stunt back in the 80s. Unite have a publicly available strategy which is clearly being delivered on the ground - perhaps you could apply for funding :^ )
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    Roger said:

    @Edmund.

    but Labour are a crusade or they're nothing

    Bring back Pope Tony to invade the holy land again ??

  • richardDoddrichardDodd Posts: 5,472
    JJ..Does Roger consider himself to be in the film industry..how odd.
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724

    A very sensible comment by Richard Nabavi on the previous thres:

    "In all seriousness - I think this beautiful area of Sussex would be much more damaged by wind farms (and perhaps by expansion at Gatwick) than oil and gas production, which are relatively innocuous once the initial exploration and production drilling are complete."

    On thread the problem the Eds have is that they lack a vision and they do not have an aura of competance (the opposite in fact).

    They do not look like people who are able to cope with the difficult times we face.

    I must concur with Mr Nabavi's comment re Sussex - wind farms are a visual blight that affects a much larger % of the population than the alternative.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,304
    @another_richard

    You asked about inward investment into Spain: see this article about how Nissan (and others) are investing in ramping up car production in Spain - http://edition.cnn.com/2013/02/28/business/spain-auto-soares
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    Jonathan said:

    JackW said:

    I'm leaning to the view that Coalition supporters should be mindful of the mental health of our PB Labour supporters.

    These poor souls handicapped as they are with blame for the state of the economy, a leader of the most dubious capability and a set of (non) policies and U turns so bewilderingly woeful as to drive them all barking mad or take up farming in Cheshire.

    Accordingly I propose that for an experimental period that OGH adopts "Ed is Crap Tuesday" where the first thread of the day is devoted to this new sport. No other Ed is totally useless thread will then be allowed for the remainder of the week. Thus by lancing the boil and evacuating the poison for one short period only it may be possible for PB lefties to maintain some level of political equilibrium and lead a more fulfilling life.

    Huzzah for "Ed is Crap Tuesday"

    Jack you used to avoid this low-rent partisan crap. What changed?
    Dare I say experience of the economic wasted years of Labour government and frankly the truly awful opposition that Ed is providing.

    Labour has simply lost its way.

  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,543
    Plato said:



    I don't really have a problem with unions or anyone else encouraging lots of people to join, unless they have a clear disagreement with the party and are seeking to overthrow the leadership (the Militant case). Obviously, though, only if they've agreed! I doubt if all the new members will in fact vote as a bloc - it's not my experience of union members.

    Oh come on - I know you're keen to be NPMP again, but that's a deliberate misreading of the story and the allegations. Unite members discovering they've been signed up to the Falkirk CLP without their consent?

    There are times when its important to accept your Party has screwed up and this is one of them. The whole CLP has been put in Special Measures - a device IIRC which was introduced to stop Militant pulling the same stunt back in the 80s. Unite have a publicly available strategy which is clearly being delivered on the ground - perhaps you could apply for funding :^ )
    Duh, what part of the sentence that you were replying to: "Obviously, though, only if they've agreed!" is unclear?

  • JohnOJohnO Posts: 4,291
    tim said:

    Buffoon

    DanHodges
    @DPJHodges: @Labourpaul @roadto326 To be honest, it's fast approaching the point Labour may as well concede and start planning for 2020.

    Bufoon indeed - it should be 2025.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 21,685
    edited July 2013
    JackW said:

    Jonathan said:

    JackW said:

    I'm leaning to the view that Coalition supporters should be mindful of the mental health of our PB Labour supporters.

    These poor souls handicapped as they are with blame for the state of the economy, a leader of the most dubious capability and a set of (non) policies and U turns so bewilderingly woeful as to drive them all barking mad or take up farming in Cheshire.

    Accordingly I propose that for an experimental period that OGH adopts "Ed is Crap Tuesday" where the first thread of the day is devoted to this new sport. No other Ed is totally useless thread will then be allowed for the remainder of the week. Thus by lancing the boil and evacuating the poison for one short period only it may be possible for PB lefties to maintain some level of political equilibrium and lead a more fulfilling life.

    Huzzah for "Ed is Crap Tuesday"

    Jack you used to avoid this low-rent partisan crap. What changed?
    Dare I say experience of the economic wasted years of Labour government and frankly the truly awful opposition that Ed is providing.

    Labour has simply lost its way.

    Sad loss to the dwindling band of reasonable posters. EdM has had a bad 2013, after a decent 2012. Not more to it than that. No reason to get excited.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787

    JackW said:

    I'm leaning to the view that Coalition supporters should be mindful of the mental health of our PB Labour supporters.

    These poor souls handicapped as they are with blame for the state of the economy, a leader of the most dubious capability and a set of (non) policies and U turns so bewilderingly woeful as to drive them all barking mad or take up farming in Cheshire.

    Accordingly I propose that for an experimental period that OGH adopts "Ed is Crap Tuesday" where the first thread of the day is devoted to this new sport. No other Ed is totally useless thread will then be allowed for the remainder of the week. Thus by lancing the boil and evacuating the poison for one short period only it may be possible for PB lefties to maintain some level of political equilibrium and lead a more fulfilling life.

    Huzzah for "Ed is Crap Tuesday"

    I haven't noticed many Labour supporters accepting anything in the way of blame for the state of the economy. Labour trully are the party with no shame!
    A few do .... but quietly .... but above all the punters do by some distance.

  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,850
    Good morning, everyone.

    The early discussion thread for Germany is up here: http://enormo-haddock.blogspot.co.uk/2013/07/germany-early-discussion.html
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,304
    @RichardNabavi

    Re Shale gas drilling in Sussex. As a man from North London, I am particularly keen on gas drilling south of the river.

    However, you do underestimate the disruption from shale gas drilling. Most importantly, because shale gas has very high decline rates (up to 80% in the first year), you need to keep drilling to maintain production.

    And because you need a lot of water and a lot of horsepower to do the 'fracturing', this means there will be a *lot* of trucks on site. This is a good time lapse video of a well being drilled and fracced: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6_j7UkuzJTU
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    Jonathan said:

    JackW said:

    Jonathan said:

    JackW said:

    I'm leaning to the view that Coalition supporters should be mindful of the mental health of our PB Labour supporters.

    These poor souls handicapped as they are with blame for the state of the economy, a leader of the most dubious capability and a set of (non) policies and U turns so bewilderingly woeful as to drive them all barking mad or take up farming in Cheshire.

    Accordingly I propose that for an experimental period that OGH adopts "Ed is Crap Tuesday" where the first thread of the day is devoted to this new sport. No other Ed is totally useless thread will then be allowed for the remainder of the week. Thus by lancing the boil and evacuating the poison for one short period only it may be possible for PB lefties to maintain some level of political equilibrium and lead a more fulfilling life.

    Huzzah for "Ed is Crap Tuesday"

    Jack you used to avoid this low-rent partisan crap. What changed?
    Dare I say experience of the economic wasted years of Labour government and frankly the truly awful opposition that Ed is providing.

    Labour has simply lost its way.

    Sad loss to the dwindling band of reasonable posters. EdM has had a bad 2013, after a decent 2012. Not more to it than that. No reason to get excited.
    Apart from jumping on the Leveson bandwagon and get the welfare call wrong, what was good about Eds 2012 - a few polls ?
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216

    JackW said:

    I'm leaning to the view that Coalition supporters should be mindful of the mental health of our PB Labour supporters.

    These poor souls handicapped as they are with blame for the state of the economy, a leader of the most dubious capability and a set of (non) policies and U turns so bewilderingly woeful as to drive them all barking mad or take up farming in Cheshire.

    Accordingly I propose that for an experimental period that OGH adopts "Ed is Crap Tuesday" where the first thread of the day is devoted to this new sport. No other Ed is totally useless thread will then be allowed for the remainder of the week. Thus by lancing the boil and evacuating the poison for one short period only it may be possible for PB lefties to maintain some level of political equilibrium and lead a more fulfilling life.

    Huzzah for "Ed is Crap Tuesday"

    I haven't noticed many Labour supporters accepting anything in the way of blame for the state of the economy.
    A big boy made me do it, then he ran away....
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,304
    More on Spain from me. (From today's FT):

    "Spanish unemployment has fallen again, for the fourth consecutive month.

    Although the total number of people out of work remains high, there is relief that the data are continuing to head in the right direction, and at a better pace.

    The number of people out of work and registered for benefits fell by 2.6 per cent in June month-on-month to 4.76m.

    It was a reduction of 127,248 people, significantly stronger than the 83,000 forecast."
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,850
    Betting Post

    Backed Li to beat Radwanska in straight sets at 2.7. In their last five meetings this year and in 2012 Li's won 4/5 2-0.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,939
    One of the interesting internals in this poll is how badly Labour seems to do with current UKIP supporters. 0% think they have the best policies on immigration, 4% on law and order, 9% on schools etc. On schools 30% of UKIPers think the tories have the best policy although the average of the others is lower.

    This suggests to me that it remains likely that if UKIP support falls further, which seems likely at least until the euros, the tories are likely to gain disproportionately.

    The other concern for Labour would be the enthusiasm gap. The tories still have very high percentages who think their party has the best policies, Labour not so much, more around 70%.

    One possible reason for this is that Labour supporters are as unclear as the rest of us about what Labour policy is. Another is that their vote is soft, with some choosing to support Labour simply as an anti tory vote without regard to the details of the alternative.

    All mildly encouraging for the tories but pessimists would say that if Labour can have a lead of 5% without any comprehensible policies, with such inept leadership and such poor presentation of their arguments then their underlying position must be strong indeed. Hodges is being absurd as usual. It is all to play for.
  • JohnOJohnO Posts: 4,291
    edited July 2013
    Jonathan said:

    JackW said:

    Jonathan said:

    JackW said:

    I'm leaning to the view that Coalition supporters should be mindful of the mental health of our PB Labour supporters.

    These poor souls handicapped as they are with blame for the state of the economy, a leader of the most dubious capability and a set of (non) policies and U turns so bewilderingly woeful as to drive them all barking mad or take up farming in Cheshire.

    Accordingly I propose that for an experimental period that OGH adopts "Ed is Crap Tuesday" where the first thread of the day is devoted to this new sport. No other Ed is totally useless thread will then be allowed for the remainder of the week. Thus by lancing the boil and evacuating the poison for one short period only it may be possible for PB lefties to maintain some level of political equilibrium and lead a more fulfilling life.

    Huzzah for "Ed is Crap Tuesday"

    Jack you used to avoid this low-rent partisan crap. What changed?
    Dare I say experience of the economic wasted years of Labour government and frankly the truly awful opposition that Ed is providing.

    Labour has simply lost its way.

    Sad loss to the dwindling band of reasonable posters. EdM has had a bad 2013, after a decent 2012. Not more to it than that. No reason to get excited.
    Can't disagree with that per se, particularly as the election is still some way, but not that far off. And it's the looking ahead that should be causing Labour a certain disquiet. All the signs are that the economy is in genuine, albeit modest, recovery mode: it may not last until 2015, but the odds seem to be that it will. As a result the deficit is also likely to decline (another 'vindication' of the coalition).

    And what if, finally, at last, people's living standards begin to improve; hardly a veritable feel good factor, but maybe a nascent, cautious mood of optimism.

    Meanwhile, Labour are not carving a distinctive political niche for themselves; on the contrary, whether on the economy, education, even the NHS they are conceding the high ground to the government.

    It could all change, of course it could, but you can understand the present spring in the step of us Blues.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    Jonathan said:

    JackW said:

    Jonathan said:

    JackW said:

    I'm leaning to the view that Coalition supporters should be mindful of the mental health of our PB Labour supporters.

    These poor souls handicapped as they are with blame for the state of the economy, a leader of the most dubious capability and a set of (non) policies and U turns so bewilderingly woeful as to drive them all barking mad or take up farming in Cheshire.

    Accordingly I propose that for an experimental period that OGH adopts "Ed is Crap Tuesday" where the first thread of the day is devoted to this new sport. No other Ed is totally useless thread will then be allowed for the remainder of the week. Thus by lancing the boil and evacuating the poison for one short period only it may be possible for PB lefties to maintain some level of political equilibrium and lead a more fulfilling life.

    Huzzah for "Ed is Crap Tuesday"

    Jack you used to avoid this low-rent partisan crap. What changed?
    Dare I say experience of the economic wasted years of Labour government and frankly the truly awful opposition that Ed is providing.

    Labour has simply lost its way.

    EdM has had a bad 2013, after a decent 2012. Not more to it than that. No reason to get excited.
    Did EdM have a decent 2012, or the Tories a crap one?

    However, agree, no reason to get excited.

    It's generally the Tory party that panics in the face of poor polling (and get carried away in the event of good polling) while the PLP holds its nerve.

    Labour will be UNITEd!
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    TGOHF said:

    Jonathan said:

    JackW said:

    Jonathan said:

    JackW said:

    I'm leaning to the view that Coalition supporters should be mindful of the mental health of our PB Labour supporters.

    These poor souls handicapped as they are with blame for the state of the economy, a leader of the most dubious capability and a set of (non) policies and U turns so bewilderingly woeful as to drive them all barking mad or take up farming in Cheshire.

    Accordingly I propose that for an experimental period that OGH adopts "Ed is Crap Tuesday" where the first thread of the day is devoted to this new sport. No other Ed is totally useless thread will then be allowed for the remainder of the week. Thus by lancing the boil and evacuating the poison for one short period only it may be possible for PB lefties to maintain some level of political equilibrium and lead a more fulfilling life.

    Huzzah for "Ed is Crap Tuesday"

    Jack you used to avoid this low-rent partisan crap. What changed?
    Dare I say experience of the economic wasted years of Labour government and frankly the truly awful opposition that Ed is providing.

    Labour has simply lost its way.

    Sad loss to the dwindling band of reasonable posters. EdM has had a bad 2013, after a decent 2012. Not more to it than that. No reason to get excited.
    Apart from jumping on the Leveson bandwagon and get the welfare call wrong, what was good about Eds 2012 - a few polls ?
    That's what I was thinking - the riots IIRC gave him a bump too in 2011, but I can't think of anything in particular that EdM did to boost his ratings by dint of his own speeches/efforts. Can anyone help me here?
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    Jonathan said:

    JackW said:

    Jonathan said:

    JackW said:

    I'm leaning to the view that Coalition supporters should be mindful of the mental health of our PB Labour supporters.

    These poor souls handicapped as they are with blame for the state of the economy, a leader of the most dubious capability and a set of (non) policies and U turns so bewilderingly woeful as to drive them all barking mad or take up farming in Cheshire.

    Accordingly I propose that for an experimental period that OGH adopts "Ed is Crap Tuesday" where the first thread of the day is devoted to this new sport. No other Ed is totally useless thread will then be allowed for the remainder of the week. Thus by lancing the boil and evacuating the poison for one short period only it may be possible for PB lefties to maintain some level of political equilibrium and lead a more fulfilling life.

    Huzzah for "Ed is Crap Tuesday"

    Jack you used to avoid this low-rent partisan crap. What changed?
    Dare I say experience of the economic wasted years of Labour government and frankly the truly awful opposition that Ed is providing.

    Labour has simply lost its way.

    Sad loss to the dwindling band of reasonable posters. EdM has had a bad 2013, after a decent 2012. Not more to it than that. No reason to get excited.
    Being reasonable doesn't mean uncritical.

    In the past I have been hardly a friend of the IDS and Howard years, the appalling leadership of Chat-Show Charlie and the disaster of Gordon Brown. I've also not spared the Coalition at times especially on defence policy.

    However my dander is certainly up with the frankly rotten opposition that Labour is providing. The nation deserves so much better and do you really believe in your heart that Ed and co are a viable government in waiting ?

    For me the Labour report card says "Fail. Must do much better."

  • MonikerDiCanioMonikerDiCanio Posts: 5,792
    edited July 2013

    Jonathan said:

    JackW said:

    Jonathan said:

    JackW said:

    I'm leaning to the view that Coalition supporters should be mindful of the mental health of our PB Labour supporters.

    These poor souls handicapped as they are with blame for the state of the economy, a leader of the most dubious capability and a set of (non) policies and U turns so bewilderingly woeful as to drive them all barking mad or take up farming in Cheshire.

    Accordingly I propose that for an experimental period that OGH adopts "Ed is Crap Tuesday" where the first thread of the day is devoted to this new sport. No other Ed is totally useless thread will then be allowed for the remainder of the week. Thus by lancing the boil and evacuating the poison for one short period only it may be possible for PB lefties to maintain some level of political equilibrium and lead a more fulfilling life.

    Huzzah for "Ed is Crap Tuesday"

    Jack you used to avoid this low-rent partisan crap. What changed?
    Dare I say experience of the economic wasted years of Labour government and frankly the truly awful opposition that Ed is providing.

    Labour has simply lost its way.

    EdM has had a bad 2013, after a decent 2012. Not more to it than that. No reason to get excited.
    Did EdM have a decent 2012, or the Tories a crap one?

    However, agree, no reason to get excited.

    It's generally the Tory party that panics in the face of poor polling (and get carried away in the event of good polling) while the PLP holds its nerve.

    Labour will be UNITEd!

    The real question is can Labour win an election without Blair as their leader. They haven't for four decades. EdM and EdB will forever by be tarred with the Brown brush.

  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    rcs1000 said:

    This is a good time lapse video of a well being drilled and fracced

    Great video - isn't the argument that once the well is in, the visual impact is a lot less than a wind turbine?

  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    DavidL said:

    One of the interesting internals in this poll is how badly Labour seems to do with current UKIP supporters. 0% think they have the best policies on immigration, 4% on law and order, 9% on schools etc. On schools 30% of UKIPers think the tories have the best policy although the average of the others is lower.

    This suggests to me that it remains likely that if UKIP support falls further, which seems likely at least until the euros, the tories are likely to gain disproportionately.

    The other concern for Labour would be the enthusiasm gap. The tories still have very high percentages who think their party has the best policies, Labour not so much, more around 70%.

    One possible reason for this is that Labour supporters are as unclear as the rest of us about what Labour policy is. Another is that their vote is soft, with some choosing to support Labour simply as an anti tory vote without regard to the details of the alternative...

    Michael Heaver makes some valid points re values/language re Kippers, Labour and the EDL in the DT http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/michaelheaver/100224208/why-do-people-listen-to-tommy-robinson-because-labour-has-lost-touch-with-the-working-class/
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 42,971
    rcs1000 said:

    @RichardNabavi

    Re Shale gas drilling in Sussex. As a man from North London, I am particularly keen on gas drilling south of the river.

    However, you do underestimate the disruption from shale gas drilling. Most importantly, because shale gas has very high decline rates (up to 80% in the first year), you need to keep drilling to maintain production.

    And because you need a lot of water and a lot of horsepower to do the 'fracturing', this means there will be a *lot* of trucks on site. This is a good time lapse video of a well being drilled and fracced: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6_j7UkuzJTU

    Thanks for that; truly fascinating to see the stacks of lengths of drill tube disappear.

    However, a safety-related question: it looks as though the wellhead is unprotected above ground and rather prone to collision from the side or below. I'd have expected it to be underground, or well-protected from careless drivers. Are there underground shut-off valves as well?

    And with horizontal directional drilling, can they service several different areas from one drillhead or set of drillheads?
  • SchardsSchards Posts: 210
    I'm wondering, is it too late for Labour to accept they overspent in their last few years in government in an attempt to neutralise their toxicity on the economy?

    At the election, it would be a lot easy to defend why they overspent and assuring the public that lessons had been learned rather than continuing to argue that the level of spending was correct thereby inviting the assumption that they would do the same again in office.

    By the time of the election, those spending decisions will be 6-8 years old and people will have forgotten the circumstances and Labour could say "yes, we got it wrong then but that was then and this is now and it won't happen again". That is an easier sell than "no, we were right to spend at those levels" when all polling shows the public's mind is made up that you got it wrong.

    Labour should have grasped this nettle 2 years ago, is it too late to do so credibly now? I don't think so, and, if I was their strategist, in the face of overwhelming evidence that everything you have said on the economy is looking increasingly wrong (as the economy improves as a result of everything you have opposed) I would do it.

    And sack Balls
  • JohnOJohnO Posts: 4,291
    @tim - What's your view about McCluskey and Unite? You're a hard-right (no folks, tim really is!) Labour man? Are you at all concerned at developments? My take is the impact is slow, not yet a major concern for the leadership, but one they can't ignore for too much longer.
  • tim said:

    "Ed is crap" but has had a lead over Cameron for the last 15 months straight.
    PB Toryworld at its finest.

    So if I was to look at the best PM ratings Ed would have a consistent lead over David Cameron would he?

    Perhaps you meant that Labour have had a lead over the Conservatives. Frankly it would be a miracle if they didn't. The fact that it's down to 5% during mid-term, after further cuts have been announced, on top of already tough decisions taken (to undo the enormous damage your party did to this country, lest we forget), suggests he isn't exactly stellar.





  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    Schards said:

    I'm wondering, is it too late for Labour to accept they overspent in their last few years in government in an attempt to neutralise their toxicity on the economy?

    At the election, it would be a lot easy to defend why they overspent and assuring the public that lessons had been learned rather than continuing to argue that the level of spending was correct thereby inviting the assumption that they would do the same again in office.

    By the time of the election, those spending decisions will be 6-8 years old and people will have forgotten the circumstances and Labour could say "yes, we got it wrong then but that was then and this is now and it won't happen again". That is an easier sell than "no, we were right to spend at those levels" when all polling shows the public's mind is made up that you got it wrong.

    Labour should have grasped this nettle 2 years ago, is it too late to do so credibly now? I don't think so, and, if I was their strategist, in the face of overwhelming evidence that everything you have said on the economy is looking increasingly wrong (as the economy improves as a result of everything you have opposed) I would do it.

    And sack Balls

    they needed sack cloth and ashes in 2010.

    A switch to a frugal spending party focussing on the genuinely poor and all hard working voters.

    Instead they have morphed into the political wing of the public sector unions - trebles all round for the taxpayer funded workers and hell mend the rest.


  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    Right wing blogs in the US have picked up on the US student photographed, finger printed and deported like Brits from the US "anti-Semitic deportation" story....

    http://joshuapundit.blogspot.com/2013/07/lets-kick-that-little-jew-out-of-britain.html
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,939
    Schards said:

    I'm wondering, is it too late for Labour to accept they overspent in their last few years in government in an attempt to neutralise their toxicity on the economy?

    At the election, it would be a lot easy to defend why they overspent and assuring the public that lessons had been learned rather than continuing to argue that the level of spending was correct thereby inviting the assumption that they would do the same again in office.

    By the time of the election, those spending decisions will be 6-8 years old and people will have forgotten the circumstances and Labour could say "yes, we got it wrong then but that was then and this is now and it won't happen again". That is an easier sell than "no, we were right to spend at those levels" when all polling shows the public's mind is made up that you got it wrong.

    Labour should have grasped this nettle 2 years ago, is it too late to do so credibly now? I don't think so, and, if I was their strategist, in the face of overwhelming evidence that everything you have said on the economy is looking increasingly wrong (as the economy improves as a result of everything you have opposed) I would do it.

    And sack Balls

    I agree. It would not be hard. Essential message Brown was an idiot (well, duh) who had persuaded himself that the tax boom from the City was going to go on for ever. That was clearly not the case and we now need to adapt to more uncertain circumstances. Job done. Not hard. Only arrogance and Balls stand in the way.
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    Shares? Is this as unusual as it sounds?

    "Ed Miliband risks being out of touch with Labour voters and losing the election because of Europe, the party’s biggest private donor said last night.

    John Mills told the Times CEO Summit that voters would be more willing to support the party if they thought it offered a choice on Europe. Mr Mills, the veteran businessman who chairs JML, the shopping channel, and gave the party £1.65 million in shares in January, is pushing the party to put a referendum on Britain’s membership in the next election.

    “The Parliamentary Labour Party is pretty Europhile and the party is too,” Mr Mills said. “But the problem for the Labour Party is that the potential Labour voter is more Eurosceptic than the Labour Party itself. That’s a difficult dilemma that the leadership is going to have to wrestle with over the next few months.”

    http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/politics/article3805273.ece
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    Roger said:

    Jessop.

    The story is garbage. Provincial Jewish newspapers live off stories of anti semitism. There's a new line of Jewish jokes which specialize in the genre.

    Perhaps it is rubbish; it smells a little for the reasons I have given before. But surely you think any such allegation should be investigated?

    Or are you saying that it is impossible, and should be ignored?
    Should it be investigated? Yes

    Should that investigation involve anything more than the senior officer on duty speaking to the individuals concerned and perhaps reviewing the paperwork and forming a judgement? No

    Probably a good use of 2 hours of their day to check it out.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    For example - where was rEd yesterday when these huge BBC payoffs were revealed ?

    Nowhere - he should have been out front and centre banging on about what a waste of taxpayers money this was for these fat cats and how this could have meant tax cuts for low paid people.

    But these luvvies are Labour luvvies - and Labour is nowhere.

  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 42,971
    Charles said:

    Roger said:

    Jessop.

    The story is garbage. Provincial Jewish newspapers live off stories of anti semitism. There's a new line of Jewish jokes which specialize in the genre.

    Perhaps it is rubbish; it smells a little for the reasons I have given before. But surely you think any such allegation should be investigated?

    Or are you saying that it is impossible, and should be ignored?
    Should it be investigated? Yes

    Should that investigation involve anything more than the senior officer on duty speaking to the individuals concerned and perhaps reviewing the paperwork and forming a judgement? No

    Probably a good use of 2 hours of their day to check it out.
    Yep, precisely right. *any* complaint received by an organisation should be investigated according to a well-defined process. Most will probably be rejected early with little effort, but some may require more work.

    For one thing, I doubt anyone working within secure areas of Heathrow would be allowed to wear a burka for security reasons.
  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    TGOHF said:

    For example - where was rEd yesterday when these huge BBC payoffs were revealed ?

    Now you're complaining that he isnt jumping on every passing bandwagon?
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    Schards said:

    is it too late to do so credibly now? I don't think so

    Never say never - but their immigration "em, err, maybe we weren't perfect" appears to have had negligible impact - only 45% of their supporters (and 36% 2010 voters) think they are best on the issue.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    UK business confidence at six-year high ;

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-23141396

    Bloody chinless boy fop wonder.

    What happened six years ago? Ah, yes: the global economic meltdown. So six-year-high means not yet reaching pre-crash levels.
    The meltdown didn't happen until 2008 although smart people (sadly not including me!) were positioning themselves from mid 2007 onwards.

    Even if it hasn't reached the heights of 2007, the trend is definitely in the right direction - as I said back in mid January, it appears that there has been a very sudden change in confidence
  • Blue_rogBlue_rog Posts: 2,019
    Plato said:

    DavidL said:

    One of the interesting internals in this poll is how badly Labour seems to do with current UKIP supporters. 0% think they have the best policies on immigration, 4% on law and order, 9% on schools etc. On schools 30% of UKIPers think the tories have the best policy although the average of the others is lower.

    This suggests to me that it remains likely that if UKIP support falls further, which seems likely at least until the euros, the tories are likely to gain disproportionately.

    The other concern for Labour would be the enthusiasm gap. The tories still have very high percentages who think their party has the best policies, Labour not so much, more around 70%.

    One possible reason for this is that Labour supporters are as unclear as the rest of us about what Labour policy is. Another is that their vote is soft, with some choosing to support Labour simply as an anti tory vote without regard to the details of the alternative...

    Michael Heaver makes some valid points re values/language re Kippers, Labour and the EDL in the DT http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/michaelheaver/100224208/why-do-people-listen-to-tommy-robinson-because-labour-has-lost-touch-with-the-working-class/
    A good link and a problem for Labour I think. This has been going on for years - all through the "New Labour" times. Increasingly, the ordinary WWC voter cannot see a party that supports them and their ideals.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    Neil said:

    TGOHF said:

    For example - where was rEd yesterday when these huge BBC payoffs were revealed ?

    Now you're complaining that he isnt jumping on every passing bandwagon?
    Worrying, isn't it - do you think he's poorly?

  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    Neil said:

    TGOHF said:

    For example - where was rEd yesterday when these huge BBC payoffs were revealed ?

    Now you're complaining that he isnt jumping on every passing bandwagon?
    A better cause than sticking up for Hugh Grant and the other luvvies by demanding Leveson implemented in full without even reading it.

    Again he appears to be on the side of the wealthy and powerful lefties - not the ordinary voters.

  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    tim said:

    And on The Day Today.

    @PickardJE: DfT to drop the assumption that business people are unable to work on trains - worth £21bn to HS2 business case http://t.co/Wx4OHPfIz8

    To be fair, until relatively recently (as firms have got more comfortable with tablets from a security perspective) it's been difficult to work on trains as you couldn't read confidential paperwork.

    Just about all you could do is catch up on email.
  • We are where we are not because Labour ‘overspent’ at the end of its time in power but because they spent 13 years deliberately driving structural costs up and borrowing money to do so - as this was for a while in their own electoral interest. We now have a huge structural deficit precisely because of the public sector recruitment drives and pay settlements and welfare bloating. Osborne is not spending so much out of choice but because he inherited a monster. Shrinking the monster will be a slow and painful process.

    Labour must face up to the obvious challenge not that they were incompetent and irresponsible with the money (although true) but that they created this monster out of choice. And that they’d do it again if they could. They ARE the party of the public sector, of the trade unions, of wild spending and debts. To be trustable with the public finances they need to change who they are and who they represent. Labour is no more the party of the working class than it is of the landed gentry. It IS the party of the state, by the state for the state.

    But what the UK desperately needs is for the state to be shrunk. To establish credible management of value for money in the public sector. For good regulation to stop rent seeking abuse at the top and at the bottom. Labour can’t do that. It’d be like asking the Muslim Brotherhood to deliver religious tolerance and freedoms across Egypt. Forget it.
This discussion has been closed.