And if you look at YouGov, EdM is doing very poorly on almost every aspect. I've bolded the VI % as evidence of my other post just in case anyone missed this fascinating article.
They should have chosen his brother.
"(How can I be sure that Ed would have lost a fair contest? Because YouGov also polled individual party members, and found only a 2% shift from David to Ed between July and September. Had trade unionists swung by 2% from David to Ed, David would have won the overall contest comfortably. David would also have been the victor had union members swung by 4% or even 8% to his younger brother. Union leaders needed a campaign swing well into double figures to make Ed leader. They set about their task with single-minded determination and got their way. Not only did they violate the principles of fairness; they also ignored the fact that in the 2010 election, 49% of union members voted for one of the two coalition parties and only 38% for Labour.)http://yougov.co.uk/news/2013/07/09/ed-milibands-route-victory/
In my view .... perchance I may have noted this declaration previously but :
Ed Miliband will never be Prime Minister
I sincerely hope so - and given his leadership ratings, he doesn't have a cat in Hell's chance. Even his own party voters think he's a poor performer. Given he's now 3yrs into the job, he's not making much of an impact as a leader of anything.
Syria: Stories have it that Israel has struck Syrian military stores last weekend in the port town of Lattakia.
Russia will be upset as the stores hit are believed to have contained advanced missile gear that they shipped. Previously they had warned Israel not to intervene against such shipments.
If the gear blown up is ever verified it would be no use whatsoever in the current death match being fought in the country but very useful when it comes to threatening neighbors.
It's very difficult to remain objective in assessing the chances of the parties during the election. One's surroundings inevitably have an influence.
Living in Surrey I sense labour don;t have a chance. Then I picked one of my kids up from Uni. in Nottingham took one look around and thought blimey, labour are nailed on.
In my view .... perchance I may have noted this declaration previously but :
Ed Miliband will never be Prime Minister
I sincerely hope so - and given his leadership ratings, he doesn't have a cat in Hell's chance. Even his own party voters think he's a poor performer. Given he's now 3yrs into the job, he's not making much of an impact as a leader of anything.
@tim Cameron has shown himself to be their stooge by his actions, whether through lobbying, fear of UKIP or Crosby's electoral tactics/lobbying links he's certainly bent to tobacco companies wishes and reversed his previous position.
Being a member of a union is surely one of the most trivial aspects of one's life unless its your personal greasy pole.
I'm not sure about that Plato. I'm sure unions do a lot of good work sorting out employees' problems, representing them individually in disputes, making sure they aren't bullied etc. More than once in my working life I wish I;d had a union rep to go to with a grievance!!
Trouble is, unions don;t stick to doing what it says on the tin. Len doesn;t want to represent his members, he wants to rule the country and is trying to do it by the back door.
That is Cameron's point surely. It isn;t about unions. It's about union influence. And its about unions straying from what they are supposed to do.
What he is objecting to is the involuntary confiscation of salary by Unions from their members for the purpose of funding a political party.
The rules of every trade union's political fund must be put to a ballot of all members, Avery. Recent results have been showing c. 90% + yes votes. For those who are outvoted in these ballots and unhappy with the rules of the fund there is always the option to opt out.
But more importantly my point is that wider than the spat over funding Cameron and his top team are managing to give the impression that it is the wider trade union movement that is a problem. I do not think this is great politics.
Para 1. It is inertia selling and, ipso facto, wrong. Not necessarily evil, nor even impossible to justify, just simply wrong. It is an abuse of negotiating power.
Para 2. Would Cameron recognise a union negotiator if confronted with a glass of warm beer and sandwich filled with a Cathedral cheddar slice? I doubt it.
He benefits by quietly ignoring the unions rather than actively trying to recruit their members. Due respect in the back room negotiations, but no public acknowledgement whether positive or negative.
Amusing that he's managed to link himself to big tobacco companies then isn't it.
....in your opinion
There's a marvellous meme in the series Boston Legal where one judge is a total stickler for lawyers not making claims without evidence, every one before her fails unless they preface statements with 'in my opinion'.
It isn;t about unions. It's about union influence. And its about unions straying from what they are supposed to do.
Trade unions were invented in order to exert influence. In turn they invented the Labour party as their political vehicle. They are doing exactly what they are meant to be doing.
The Coalition is restricting the ability of workers to take unfair dismissal claims. The only way to represent workers' interests on that issue is to exert political influence where possible. It is an entirely legitimate activity for trade unions (they would be remiss if they did nothing about it).
Due respect in the back room negotiations, but no public acknowledgement whether positive or negative.
And all I'm arguing is that's where he is going wrong. To me he is giving a clear impression of a negative attitude towards institutions that millions of people pay lots of money to belong to. I think that's bad politics.
Guido has discovered that the Labour party investigates the effects of measures on ordinary people before deciding its opinion on them. Where would we be without this colossus of investigative journalism.
Don't unions have to do this only once a decade? I caught the tail-end of a R4 intv where it was mentioned and I was very surprised that it was so infrequent.
Can you confirm if this is the case - of course a union could ballot its members more frequently if they suspected members weren't happy about it.
What he is objecting to is the involuntary confiscation of salary by Unions from their members for the purpose of funding a political party.
The rules of every trade union's political fund must be put to a ballot of all members, Avery. Recent results have been showing c. 90% + yes votes. For those who are outvoted in these ballots and unhappy with the rules of the fund there is always the option to opt out.
But more importantly my point is that wider than the spat over funding Cameron and his top team are managing to give the impression that it is the wider trade union movement that is a problem. I do not think this is great politics.
In my view .... perchance I may have noted this declaration previously but :
Ed Miliband will never be Prime Minister
I sincerely hope so - and given his leadership ratings, he doesn't have a cat in Hell's chance. Even his own party voters think he's a poor performer. Given he's now 3yrs into the job, he's not making much of an impact as a leader of anything.
More to the point, Plato's original post referred to Miliband's *own party voters. IIRC (haven't got a source to hand) Cameron does very well among Tory supporters, while Miliband's support is much more lukewarm.
Of course you can argue that Cameron needs to do better in non-Tory supporters to stand a chance of winning...or that Miliband's limited support suggests Labour's lead is soft...
Sometimes I feel like a barrister...argue any case... ;-)
And its not 1979. And frankly EdM is no Margaret Thatcher either.
I think EdM is a dud along with the majority of the population - he occasionally pulls something out of the hat that perks up his ratings for a week or three and then he declines again.
Two months ago 25% of YouGovers thought he was PM material - now its 20%, I assume he'll get an impact re the union funding which will boost him a speck. That isn't going to change long term opinions of him that have been forming for 3yrs.
In my view .... perchance I may have noted this declaration previously but :
Ed Miliband will never be Prime Minister
I sincerely hope so - and given his leadership ratings, he doesn't have a cat in Hell's chance. Even his own party voters think he's a poor performer. Given he's now 3yrs into the job, he's not making much of an impact as a leader of anything.
More to the point, Plato's original post referred to Miliband's *own party voters. IIRC (haven't got a source to hand) Cameron does very well among Tory supporters, while Miliband's support is much more lukewarm.
Of course you can argue that Cameron needs to do better in non-Tory supporters to stand a chance of winning...or that Miliband's limited support suggests Labour's lead is soft...
Sometimes I feel like a barrister...argue any case... ;-)
Due respect in the back room negotiations, but no public acknowledgement whether positive or negative.
And all I'm arguing is that's where he is going wrong. To me he is giving a clear impression of a negative attitude towards institutions that millions of people pay lots of money to belong to. I think that's bad politics.
Yes, you have a point.
I am not sure though whether it is deliberate policy. More collateral damage from attacking Labour.
Unlike the Tories attacks on benefit scroungers, the language used is not intentional and needs either softening to neutrality or, where Labour are the target, compensated for with assurances to union members predisposed to the Tory line.
If only tim were to argue with your nuanced elegance ....
In my view .... perchance I may have noted this declaration previously but :
Ed Miliband will never be Prime Minister
I sincerely hope so - and given his leadership ratings, he doesn't have a cat in Hell's chance. Even his own party voters think he's a poor performer. Given he's now 3yrs into the job, he's not making much of an impact as a leader of anything.
MOE in the last month 14 months on the trot before that Miliband has led Cameron. You've been in denial all that time
And before that? Miliband started on +19 - are we simply returning to the status quo ante when Miliband had a poorer rating than Cameron? Miliband's recent satisfaction rating was his lowest ever...
Cameron was on +20 two years out from the GE - Miliband is on -21
Brown was on -48 two years out, Cameron is on -24
Two years before 2010 the LotO led the PM by +68, today he leads by +3.
In my view .... perchance I may have noted this declaration previously but :
Ed Miliband will never be Prime Minister
I sincerely hope so - and given his leadership ratings, he doesn't have a cat in Hell's chance. Even his own party voters think he's a poor performer. Given he's now 3yrs into the job, he's not making much of an impact as a leader of anything.
More to the point, Plato's original post referred to Miliband's *own party voters. IIRC (haven't got a source to hand) Cameron does very well among Tory supporters, while Miliband's support is much more lukewarm.
Of course you can argue that Cameron needs to do better in non-Tory supporters to stand a chance of winning...or that Miliband's limited support suggests Labour's lead is soft...
Sometimes I feel like a barrister...argue any case... ;-)
So will you admit that, despite your sharp reply, Plato was actually right?
I find it slightly odd that some people who are in favour of drugs legalisation wish to be less liberal with tobacco.
Thats because you don't understand the issues as no one is arguing tobacco should be criminalised or that ecstasy advertising should be allowed on CBBC.
Which is not what I claimed; it's a stupid strawman attack.
Besides, tobacco usage is becoming increasingly criminalised, as can be seen by the various rules and regulations to do with where smokers can smoke, where tobacco can be advertised, and how it is sold in shops. (*)
How will you feel when alcohol can only be sold in clear glasses or bottles with no advertising, the only image on the label being of a drunken Liverpudlian vomiting in a gutter?
There is something just so appalling about bombs filled with ball bearings or nails - I just can't imagine the mindset of anyone tipping pounds of them into a pipe and thinking 'oh that'll really be effective at ripping some poor sod to pieces.'
In my view .... perchance I may have noted this declaration previously but :
Ed Miliband will never be Prime Minister
I sincerely hope so - and given his leadership ratings, he doesn't have a cat in Hell's chance. Even his own party voters think he's a poor performer. Given he's now 3yrs into the job, he's not making much of an impact as a leader of anything.
More to the point, Plato's original post referred to Miliband's *own party voters. IIRC (haven't got a source to hand) Cameron does very well among Tory supporters, while Miliband's support is much more lukewarm.
Of course you can argue that Cameron needs to do better in non-Tory supporters to stand a chance of winning...or that Miliband's limited support suggests Labour's lead is soft...
Sometimes I feel like a barrister...argue any case... ;-)
So will you admit that, despite your sharp reply, Plato was actually right?
The fact that reducing your party to it's core means you poll better among that core is not normally regarded as a positive.
He's been doing well among Tories for a long time, even when the support was significantly higher than today
I cant find the bet on the website (who can find anything on their website) but if it is on Crowe to lose a deposit then it is a mug bet because you'll be tying money up only to get it back without interest in 2 years' time. He wont stand himself.
There is something just so appalling about bombs filled with ball bearings or nails - I just can't imagine the mindset of anyone tipping pounds of them into a pipe and thinking 'oh that'll really be effective at ripping some poor sod to pieces.'
Sadly, due to the other events yesterday afternoon the Tipton event is not getting as much media attention as it deserves. It will be interesting to see who planted the bomb and their reasons.
@DanHannanMEP A roman walks into bar and asks for a martinus. Barman says 'a martini'?No, says roman, if I'd wanted a double I'd have asked.
Ha! There are some great ones today - I liked
John Rentoul @JohnRentoul Two scientists go into a bar; 1st says: “A glass of H2O”. Other says: “I’ll have a glass of H2O too.” They drink, & 2nd scientist drops dead
There is something just so appalling about bombs filled with ball bearings or nails - I just can't imagine the mindset of anyone tipping pounds of them into a pipe and thinking 'oh that'll really be effective at ripping some poor sod to pieces.'
Yes kicking No's ass in the Cyberwars, and that's in spite of the SNP.
'Why the online chat is pro-independence...but not because of SNP
Three-quarters of those chatting about independence online plan to vote Yes, but not because of the SNP, a new analysis of millions of internet sources shows. Research by social media monitoring firm Branchwatch found most supporters were keen to distance themselves from politicians. Gareth Ham, head of political analysis at the company, said: "Campaigners in favour of independence are quick to note that their decision to vote for independence is in spite of the SNP or that the SNP is irrelevant to their choice." Yes Scotland, the pro-independence campaign group, reflected the need being seen online for a "non-party political campaign", he said. Brandwatch, which also monitored the online conversations during the last US presidential election said its research could not predict how people would vote but could reveal what was being discussed online.'
Must have been predators and predistribution that killed Ed's date nights.
Did anyone ever adequately explain what *predistribution* was?
It's such a wonky intellectual phrase like neo-classical thingy theory or post-bureaucratic age that either causes people to nod sagely or rub their chins in the hope they look like they understand when they haven't a clue.
H&S going a bit far? A life jacket when fishing? Herts Fire Control @HertsFRSControl 52s Always wear a buoyancy aid or lifejacket for activities on the water or at the water’s edge (such as when boating or fishing). #watersafety
'The problem with Dave going on about trade unions as if they are evil is that it may not play very well with the millions of trade union members whose votes he needs.'
Is Dave going on about trade unions though? he's surely going on about a very small select band of trade union leaders.
Presumably those members of Red Len's union who vote tory don't like Len much either.
And if the end result is that union members have to opt into the Labour party, surely that option can be widened to include a choice of political parties?
Must have been predators and predistribution that killed Ed's date nights.
Did anyone ever adequately explain what *predistribution* was?
It's such a wonky intellectual phrase like neo-classical thingy theory or post-bureaucratic age that either causes people to nod sagely or rub their chins in the hope they look like they understand when they haven't a clue.
From what I understand it means employers will pay people a non-productivity based pay increase. This will then take people out of certain benefit entitlements and allegedly cut government spending. By a happy coincidence this would also mean people pay more tax and there's no inkling that the benefit savings would be given back, so the politicos end up getting loads more pork in the barrel at everybody else's expense.
It's a con. As we have seen this week the LD policy of just taking the low paid out of tax is more effective, as inequality has narrowed for the first time in quite a while.
Must have been predators and predistribution that killed Ed's date nights.
Did anyone ever adequately explain what *predistribution* was?
It's such a wonky intellectual phrase like neo-classical thingy theory or post-bureaucratic age that either causes people to nod sagely or rub their chins in the hope they look like they understand when they haven't a clue.
Low-paid job, but the government tops your income up with in-work benefits: Redistribution. Government does something to make your job less low-paid in the first place, like only giving government contracts to companies that pay more: Predistribution.
Why is HMG getting in the way in the first place? Surely just tax the lowest paid less and we don't need any of this messing about with HMG intervention re gov contracts.
It sounds like tax credits dressed up in another guise as HMG paying more at source for public sector employees and their subcontracted employers. What about everyone not on the State's payroll? that's most of the workforce.
Must have been predators and predistribution that killed Ed's date nights.
Did anyone ever adequately explain what *predistribution* was?
It's such a wonky intellectual phrase like neo-classical thingy theory or post-bureaucratic age that either causes people to nod sagely or rub their chins in the hope they look like they understand when they haven't a clue.
Low-paid job, but the government tops your income up with in-work benefits: Redistribution. Government does something to make your job less low-paid in the first place, like only giving government contracts to companies that pay more: Predistribution.
' "only giving contracts to companies that pay more" How any one could not see the problem with that one beats me..How much do we pay them to come up wiyth this stuff.So a company that pays more is to be preferred to a company that does not but might make a better product at a cheaper price and could possibly employ more people, over a company that could be set up almost overnight, pay silly money get the contract and then collapse because its prices in the open market are totally distorted .. yep .. that should work..In my view.
On the I Never Knew That stakes - this about Alan Whicker is rather good.
" During the Second World War he joined the Army and was commissioned into the Devonshire Regiment. Later transferred to the Film and Photo Section with the 8th Army, he filmed assault landings in North Africa, Sicily and mainland Italy. Before demob in 1946 he reached the rank of major and was mentioned in dispatches.
In 2004 Whicker relived this time in a television series, Whicker’s War. He recalled how driving into Milan he stumbled on the offices of the German SS. The Germans were only willing to sur- render to an Allied officer, and Whicker took the men into custody along with a large trunk full of banknotes, the war chest of the SS in Italy. He also tracked down the British spy, John Amery, who was in a Milan jail, and handed him over to the military police. He filmed the corpses of the deposed Italian dictator, Benito Mussolini, and his mistress, Clara Petacci, hanging upside down outside a petrol station.
...In 1967 he was a member of the consortium that set up Yorkshire Television and made a successful bid during the ITV franchise round. He was the company’s largest shareholder...he was offered the role in Around the World that was taken on finally by Michael Palin..." http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/opinion/obituaries/article3815147.ece
I cant find the bet on the website (who can find anything on their website) but if it is on Crowe to lose a deposit then it is a mug bet because you'll be tying money up only to get it back without interest in 2 years' time. He wont stand himself.
In my view .... perchance I may have noted this declaration previously but :
Ed Miliband will never be Prime Minister
I sincerely hope so - and given his leadership ratings, he doesn't have a cat in Hell's chance. Even his own party voters think he's a poor performer. Given he's now 3yrs into the job, he's not making much of an impact as a leader of anything.
More to the point, Plato's original post referred to Miliband's *own party voters. IIRC (haven't got a source to hand) Cameron does very well among Tory supporters, while Miliband's support is much more lukewarm.
Of course you can argue that Cameron needs to do better in non-Tory supporters to stand a chance of winning...or that Miliband's limited support suggests Labour's lead is soft...
Sometimes I feel like a barrister...argue any case... ;-)
So will you admit that, despite your sharp reply, Plato was actually right?
The fact that reducing your party to it's core means you poll better among that core is not normally regarded as a positive.
He's been doing well among Tories for a long time, even when the support was significantly higher than today
Farage is doing 20% better among UKIP voters than Cameron is among Tories, so what?
Farage on 112% among UKIP voters?
I thought creative electioneering was Labour's speciality?
Must have been predators and predistribution that killed Ed's date nights.
Did anyone ever adequately explain what *predistribution* was?
It's such a wonky intellectual phrase like neo-classical thingy theory or post-bureaucratic age that either causes people to nod sagely or rub their chins in the hope they look like they understand when they haven't a clue.
Low-paid job, but the government tops your income up with in-work benefits: Redistribution. Government does something to make your job less low-paid in the first place, like only giving government contracts to companies that pay more: Predistribution.
Assuming, though, that the companies will want the same absolute return (for simplicity), then they will charge more in order to offset the cost of the higher wages + highers NICs.
So the government pays more - and ends up giving away all the saving.
But has to spend a bunch on administration and, presumably, makes said companies less competitive when bidding for contracts from other people who are not prepared to pay more to ensure higher wages.
H&S going a bit far? A life jacket when fishing? Herts Fire Control @HertsFRSControl 52s Always wear a buoyancy aid or lifejacket for activities on the water or at the water’s edge (such as when boating or fishing). #watersafety
lots of anglers fall in and drown , so seems sensible
"I've done it - admittedly in the most cowardly way, leaping out of the encierro as soon as the first steer came in sight (most injuries not caused by the bulls destined for the ring but by the steers that go first and which they follow). It is life affirming and terrifying. It is brilliant that it is allowed to continue (it wouldn't be in Britain where we've cancelled the not quite so scary running down a hill after a cheese). You can call them morons, you can call them thrill-seekers, you can call them brave (there's a bit of truth in all), but leave them to it. The last thing the world needs is more nanny know-it-alls."
Comments
They should have chosen his brother.
"(How can I be sure that Ed would have lost a fair contest? Because YouGov also polled individual party members, and found only a 2% shift from David to Ed between July and September. Had trade unionists swung by 2% from David to Ed, David would have won the overall contest comfortably. David would also have been the victor had union members swung by 4% or even 8% to his younger brother. Union leaders needed a campaign swing well into double figures to make Ed leader. They set about their task with single-minded determination and got their way. Not only did they violate the principles of fairness; they also ignored the fact that in the 2010 election, 49% of union members voted for one of the two coalition parties and only 38% for Labour.) http://yougov.co.uk/news/2013/07/09/ed-milibands-route-victory/
Russia will be upset as the stores hit are believed to have contained advanced missile gear that they shipped. Previously they had warned Israel not to intervene against such shipments.
If the gear blown up is ever verified it would be no use whatsoever in the current death match being fought in the country but very useful when it comes to threatening neighbors.
They do in the US
Living in Surrey I sense labour don;t have a chance. Then I picked one of my kids up from Uni. in Nottingham took one look around and thought blimey, labour are nailed on.
I was always amazed me how Blair managed to get away with that. Remember his "I'm an ordinary guy" quote when questioned on the linkage.
Cameron: -1
Miliband: -9
Miliband's lead has gone from "clearly ahead" to "Margin of Error"
Tony Blair eased rules on tobacco sponsorship after he pocketed a huge donation from a party with an interest in it.
Cameron has made a political decision - he wasnt bought.
You may think the latter is more objectionable, I think you're in a minority on that.
From the same source as cited above - only 20% of voters think he's up to being PM, 33% of GE2010 Labour voters don't think he's up to it either.
That you prefer MORI is fine, but I cite another perfectly legitimate source regarding Being PM - which was @JackW's point.
..in your opinion
I'm not sure about that Plato. I'm sure unions do a lot of good work sorting out employees' problems, representing them individually in disputes, making sure they aren't bullied etc. More than once in my working life I wish I;d had a union rep to go to with a grievance!!
Trouble is, unions don;t stick to doing what it says on the tin. Len doesn;t want to represent his members, he wants to rule the country and is trying to do it by the back door.
That is Cameron's point surely. It isn;t about unions. It's about union influence. And its about unions straying from what they are supposed to do.
Para 2. Would Cameron recognise a union negotiator if confronted with a glass of warm beer and sandwich filled with a Cathedral cheddar slice? I doubt it.
He benefits by quietly ignoring the unions rather than actively trying to recruit their members. Due respect in the back room negotiations, but no public acknowledgement whether positive or negative.
http://order-order.com/2011/11/08/sadiq-khan-let-donor-decide-labour-vote/
The Coalition is restricting the ability of workers to take unfair dismissal claims. The only way to represent workers' interests on that issue is to exert political influence where possible. It is an entirely legitimate activity for trade unions (they would be remiss if they did nothing about it).
25/1 to win seat
1/2 to lose deposit
500/1 him being EdM's successor
bit.ly/c5gpH6
A one-hour delay to traditional Friday prayers saved hundreds of people from a nail bomb blast at a Black Country mosque.
http://www.expressandstar.com/news/crime/2013/07/13/tipton-nail-bomb-could-have-hit-hundreds/
Can you confirm if this is the case - of course a union could ballot its members more frequently if they suspected members weren't happy about it.
Of course you can argue that Cameron needs to do better in non-Tory supporters to stand a chance of winning...or that Miliband's limited support suggests Labour's lead is soft...
Sometimes I feel like a barrister...argue any case... ;-)
I think EdM is a dud along with the majority of the population - he occasionally pulls something out of the hat that perks up his ratings for a week or three and then he declines again.
Two months ago 25% of YouGovers thought he was PM material - now its 20%, I assume he'll get an impact re the union funding which will boost him a speck. That isn't going to change long term opinions of him that have been forming for 3yrs.
2 years, 50% return, tax free. Doesn't seem too bad? What would happen if he doesn't stand anywhere - assume bet void, or does that count as a loser?
Yet he is doing much better with 2010 LD voters who will have a huge impact on the GE2015 outcome.
I am not sure though whether it is deliberate policy. More collateral damage from attacking Labour.
Unlike the Tories attacks on benefit scroungers, the language used is not intentional and needs either softening to neutrality or, where Labour are the target, compensated for with assurances to union members predisposed to the Tory line.
If only tim were to argue with your nuanced elegance ....
Cameron was on +20 two years out from the GE - Miliband is on -21
Brown was on -48 two years out, Cameron is on -24
Two years before 2010 the LotO led the PM by +68, today he leads by +3.
Besides, tobacco usage is becoming increasingly criminalised, as can be seen by the various rules and regulations to do with where smokers can smoke, where tobacco can be advertised, and how it is sold in shops. (*)
How will you feel when alcohol can only be sold in clear glasses or bottles with no advertising, the only image on the label being of a drunken Liverpudlian vomiting in a gutter?
(*) Note, I am not necessarily against these.
There is something just so appalling about bombs filled with ball bearings or nails - I just can't imagine the mindset of anyone tipping pounds of them into a pipe and thinking 'oh that'll really be effective at ripping some poor sod to pieces.'
Interestingly, this post was initially 50 characters too short. I don't think I've had that message from Vanilla before.
And EdM on 58 with his.
Clegg is on 54 with his.
http://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/8bycu00q7d/YG-Archive-Pol-Sunday-Times-results-050713.pdf
@DanHannanMEP A roman walks into bar and asks for a martinus. Barman says 'a martini'?No, says roman, if I'd wanted a double I'd have asked.
Fortunately, whoever was behind it appears to have been as incompetent as this lot:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22344054
An increase in tensions is the last thing we need ...
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2362450/Miliband-Balls-BOTH-romanced-Beebs-brainy-beauty-Labour-leaders-gallant-confession-love-life.html
The photo of young ed is special. ;-)
John Rentoul @JohnRentoul
Two scientists go into a bar; 1st says: “A glass of H2O”. Other says: “I’ll have a glass of H2O too.” They drink, & 2nd scientist drops dead
And I'm not so fond of having to needlessly add 44 characters to register this.
I can't just reply LOL - its 23 characters too short < when I checked at this point...
What a very strange posting rule to force a minimum length at this random character number.
'Why the online chat is pro-independence...but not because of SNP
Three-quarters of those chatting about independence online plan to vote Yes, but not because of the SNP, a new analysis of millions of internet sources shows.
Research by social media monitoring firm Branchwatch found most supporters were keen to distance themselves from politicians.
Gareth Ham, head of political analysis at the company, said: "Campaigners in favour of independence are quick to note that their decision to vote for independence is in spite of the SNP or that the SNP is irrelevant to their choice."
Yes Scotland, the pro-independence campaign group, reflected the need being seen online for a "non-party political campaign", he said.
Brandwatch, which also monitored the online conversations during the last US presidential election said its research could not predict how people would vote but could reveal what was being discussed online.'
http://tinyurl.com/nm7d9hl
http://www.brandwatch.com/scottishindependencereferendum/
Must have been predators and predistribution that killed Ed's date nights.
It's such a wonky intellectual phrase like neo-classical thingy theory or post-bureaucratic age that either causes people to nod sagely or rub their chins in the hope they look like they understand when they haven't a clue.
Herts Fire Control @HertsFRSControl 52s
Always wear a buoyancy aid or lifejacket for activities on the water or at the water’s edge (such as when boating or fishing). #watersafety
It's a con. As we have seen this week the LD policy of just taking the low paid out of tax is more effective, as inequality has narrowed for the first time in quite a while.
Government does something to make your job less low-paid in the first place, like only giving government contracts to companies that pay more: Predistribution.
It sounds like tax credits dressed up in another guise as HMG paying more at source for public sector employees and their subcontracted employers. What about everyone not on the State's payroll? that's most of the workforce.
"only giving contracts to companies that pay more" How any one could not see the problem with that one beats me..How much do we pay them to come up wiyth this stuff.So a company that pays more is to be preferred to a company that does not but might make a better product at a cheaper price and could possibly employ more people, over a company that could be set up almost overnight, pay silly money get the contract and then collapse because its prices in the open market are totally distorted .. yep .. that should work..In my view.
" During the Second World War he joined the Army and was commissioned into the Devonshire Regiment. Later transferred to the Film and Photo Section with the 8th Army, he filmed assault landings in North Africa, Sicily and mainland Italy. Before demob in 1946 he reached the rank of major and was mentioned in dispatches.
In 2004 Whicker relived this time in a television series, Whicker’s War. He recalled how driving into Milan he stumbled on the offices of the German SS. The Germans were only willing to sur- render to an Allied officer, and Whicker took the men into custody along with a large trunk full of banknotes, the war chest of the SS in Italy. He also tracked down the British spy, John Amery, who was in a Milan jail, and handed him over to the military police. He filmed the corpses of the deposed Italian dictator, Benito Mussolini, and his mistress, Clara Petacci, hanging upside down outside a petrol station.
...In 1967 he was a member of the consortium that set up Yorkshire Television and made a successful bid during the ITV franchise round. He was the company’s largest shareholder...he was offered the role in Around the World that was taken on finally by Michael Palin..." http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/opinion/obituaries/article3815147.ece
I thought creative electioneering was Labour's speciality?
So the government pays more - and ends up giving away all the saving.
But has to spend a bunch on administration and, presumably, makes said companies less competitive when bidding for contracts from other people who are not prepared to pay more to ensure higher wages.
Overall, therefore, the country is worse off
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BPDxBoCCMAEqxO3.jpg:large
Drivel, mostly, I'm sure but I'm sure EdM would prefer not to attack anyone on his political left.
"I've done it - admittedly in the most cowardly way, leaping out of the encierro as soon as the first steer came in sight (most injuries not caused by the bulls destined for the ring but by the steers that go first and which they follow). It is life affirming and terrifying. It is brilliant that it is allowed to continue (it wouldn't be in Britain where we've cancelled the not quite so scary running down a hill after a cheese). You can call them morons, you can call them thrill-seekers, you can call them brave (there's a bit of truth in all), but leave them to it. The last thing the world needs is more nanny know-it-alls."
@JohnRentoul Three Freudians go into a bar and the barman says "Can I see some id?"
We need to do more than wish Mr. Crow well. We need to actively support his New Workers Party.
If established, it would be a good place to park the votes of those pesky 2010 Lib Dem deserters.
We could then return to making sound predictions of a Tory majority without rude, evidence based interventions from Mr. Smithson and tim.
http://orderorder.files.wordpress.com/2013/07/mps-v-ave-wages.jpg