The Normans are the only ones who spring to mind. [Wasn't William of Orange invited and welcomed?]
Norman Davis in one of his books counts William of Orange as a conqueror, but I'd rule him out as well. I was thinking of Knut - I don't know how he took control exactly, but he his territories across the North sea make him a foreign oppressor on the English I'd say (though he may have been a very decent and positive influence for all I know)
The Normans are the only ones who spring to mind. [Wasn't William of Orange invited and welcomed?]
Norman Davis in one of his books counts William of Orange as a conqueror, but I'd rule him out as well. I was thinking of Knut - I don't know how he took control exactly, but he his territories across the North sea make him a foreign oppressor on the English I'd say (though he may have been a very decent and positive influence for all I know)
Wiki also call it an "invasion". There were a few very minor skirmishes in England but the harder fighting was in Scotland and harder still in Ireland (the effects still with us as we saw last night!).
but what the public perception of someone is, including my own perception, probably bears little reference to the reality
It's almost like some kind of glorified popularity contest isn't it? Good luck changing that during an election.
Oh no chance of that. Gove will need to be kept out of site, and if his reforms do prove to have worked, his toxicity might reverse then, but even so is not guaranteed, And that's if they are an improvement.
I'm continually amazed at how low the LD figures drop. Sure, they will likely get much more in an actual election, but you'd think they'd hit the floor eventually, and they barely seem to pick up in the polls consistently even when they get out of the news.
The funny thing about the Lib Dems is that their core vote is absolutely miniscule. In Scotland, I would guesstimate that the respective core votes are approximately:
Labour 30% SNP 20% Con 15% LD 5%
Bearing that in mind, it just emphasises how well Charlie Kennedy managed during his time as leader. He effectively managed to attract 4 times more voters to the SLDs than their core vote. Surely some kind of record?
The Normans are the only ones who spring to mind. [Wasn't William of Orange invited and welcomed?]
Norman Davis in one of his books counts William of Orange as a conqueror, but I'd rule him out as well. I was thinking of Knut - I don't know how he took control exactly, but he his territories across the North sea make him a foreign oppressor on the English I'd say (though he may have been a very decent and positive influence for all I know)
Wiki also call it an "invasion". There were a few very minor skirmishes in England but the harder fighting was in Scotland and harder still in Ireland (the effects still with us as we saw last night!).
I'll concede that theere was plenty of fighting, but since Parliament was essentially declaring itself sovereign (or having the right to decide who was in effect) and have sat permanently ever since and so were the ones in charge (even if the monarchy retained power for some time thereafter) and their side won the war, their choice for king can not in my view be seen as the conqueror of the realm, as there was continuity of power.
He was invited by those who ruled the realm thereafter. Ok, he had to use his forces to crush dissent, but it's not the same as outright conquest I think. Semantic distinctions.
Gove gets very bad press and his name is poison among a significant amount of the education establishment (though not universally), so it figures he would be rated so badly. Personally I like that he at least seems to have some idea of how to achieve things and make an impact. Hopefully that impact will prove positive overall.
I'm continually amazed at how low the LD figures drop. Sure, they will likely get much more in an actual election, but you'd think they'd hit the floor eventually, and they barely seem to pick up in the polls consistently even when they get out of the news.
Gove gets a lot of positive media coverage.
Many teachers are on side - despite the constant slagging off he dishes out - when it comes to rigour and a move away from skills to knowledge. We're still waiting for those promises re giving us some power back in the classroom... instead he's giving it to managers who, for the most part in my experience, are the substantial chunk of the problem.
Most people aren't thick enough to assume that all teachers are like those who go to union conferences or that they support all the union leader guff (or what gets reported anyway).
Most of the relevant polling, as I recall, show that teachers are trusted and that parents with school-age children are positive about education (stand to be corrected on that as I can't be bothered to source...).
I suspect the underlying issue is that most people aren't thick enough, also, not to realise that the long game is to flog education off.
Gove is a centraliser using localist language. End of story really, there's little more to say about him the rhetoric inspires, the practice disappoints.
But he's the only Messiah the Tories have left since IDS' big flagship got launched in Ashton under Lyme and will take three years to reach Stalybridge.
'Gove is a centraliser using localist language.'
Indeed. And there's more on that to come out before long.
Some of Scotland's finest writers are to be asked by the SNP to apply a dash of literary magic to its much-anticipated white paper on independence in November. Senior party figures have already put the novelist William McIlvanney at the top of their list.
I'm continually amazed at how low the LD figures drop. Sure, they will likely get much more in an actual election, but you'd think they'd hit the floor eventually, and they barely seem to pick up in the polls consistently even when they get out of the news.
The funny thing about the Lib Dems is that their core vote is absolutely miniscule. In Scotland, I would guesstimate that the respective core votes are approximately:
Labour 30% SNP 20% Con 15% LD 5%
Bearing that in mind, it just emphasises how well Charlie Kennedy managed during his time as leader. He effectively managed to attract 4 times more voters to the SLDs than their core vote. Surely some kind of record?
Very impressive, although of course not all the attracting of those voters was down to his leadership, as the precipitous drop is more to do with a current circumstance which he never had to confront or suffer consequences for.
I agree that Gove is toxic outside the party. From what I see though he is quite popular within, which is what matters for a leadership bid.
He has a clear policy direction and is articulate and unafraid of expounding it, even if this draws a lot of opposition from his political enemies. He has awhiff of Thatcher about him.
So we've learned that there was no bounce from Cameron's union ranting, and we've learned that Michael Gove is utterly toxic.
Is any of that really news? Surely it's just proof of the PB Golden Rule
The PB Tories are always wrong, the PB Tories never learn.
And we learned that the smart punters got on Theresa May last year. Agin, not really news.
It has been obvious to anybody with half a brain from Day 1 of Michael Gove's political career that he is utterly toxic. How on earth he managed to rise to a cabinet role is an utter mystery. Are there really no better MPs in the entire parliamentary Tory and Liberal parties?
I'm continually amazed at how low the LD figures drop. Sure, they will likely get much more in an actual election, but you'd think they'd hit the floor eventually, and they barely seem to pick up in the polls consistently even when they get out of the news.
The funny thing about the Lib Dems is that their core vote is absolutely miniscule. In Scotland, I would guesstimate that the respective core votes are approximately:
Labour 30% SNP 20% Con 15% LD 5%
Bearing that in mind, it just emphasises how well Charlie Kennedy managed during his time as leader. He effectively managed to attract 4 times more voters to the SLDs than their core vote. Surely some kind of record?
Very impressive, although of course not all the attracting of those voters was down to his leadership, as the precipitous drop is more to do with a current circumstance which he never had to confront or suffer consequences for.
But Charlie Kennedy would never have been as daft as Nick Clegg in the first place.
Even through the haze of alcohol he had ten times better political judgement than wally Clegg.
Some of Scotland's finest writers are to be asked by the SNP to apply a dash of literary magic to its much-anticipated white paper on independence
Do Better Together want SeanT's phone number?
While a fine line in entertainingly vicious invectives might be useful at times, I think the Better Together campaign should try and focus on a positive message at this time perhaps.
I agree that Gove is toxic outside the party. From what I see though he is quite popular within, which is what matters for a leadership bid.
He has a clear policy direction and is articulate and unafraid of expounding it, even if this draws a lot of opposition from his political enemies. He has awhiff of Thatcher about him.
So we've learned that there was no bounce from Cameron's union ranting, and we've learned that Michael Gove is utterly toxic.
Is any of that really news? Surely it's just proof of the PB Golden Rule
The PB Tories are always wrong, the PB Tories never learn.
And we learned that the smart punters got on Theresa May last year. Agin, not really news.
It has been obvious to anybody with half a brain from Day 1 of Michael Gove's political career that he is utterly toxic. How on earth he managed to rise to a cabinet role is an utter mystery. Are there really no better MPs in the entire parliamentary Tory and Liberal parties?
I'm continually amazed at how low the LD figures drop. Sure, they will likely get much more in an actual election, but you'd think they'd hit the floor eventually, and they barely seem to pick up in the polls consistently even when they get out of the news.
The funny thing about the Lib Dems is that their core vote is absolutely miniscule. In Scotland, I would guesstimate that the respective core votes are approximately:
Labour 30% SNP 20% Con 15% LD 5%
Bearing that in mind, it just emphasises how well Charlie Kennedy managed during his time as leader. He effectively managed to attract 4 times more voters to the SLDs than their core vote. Surely some kind of record?
Very impressive, although of course not all the attracting of those voters was down to his leadership, as the precipitous drop is more to do with a current circumstance which he never had to confront or suffer consequences for.
But Charlie Kennedy would never have been as daft as Nick Clegg in the first place.
Even through the haze of alcohol he had ten times better political judgement than wally Clegg.
Probably. But even so, not all of Clegg's and LD's problems are of their own making. Just most of them.
Depressing thought before bed and a futile attempt to sleep in the heat: Why is Northern Ireland* so shit?
correction from Island to Ireland. I've never been to North Island, it's probably nice.
Cameron faces calls from senior Liberal Democrats to sack his controversial election strategist Lynton Crosby over his links with the tobacco industry, as the coalition descended into open warfare over public health policy.
I agree that Gove is toxic outside the party. From what I see though he is quite popular within, which is what matters for a leadership bid.
He has a clear policy direction and is articulate and unafraid of expounding it, even if this draws a lot of opposition from his political enemies. He has awhiff of Thatcher about him.
So we've learned that there was no bounce from Cameron's union ranting, and we've learned that Michael Gove is utterly toxic.
Is any of that really news? Surely it's just proof of the PB Golden Rule
The PB Tories are always wrong, the PB Tories never learn.
And we learned that the smart punters got on Theresa May last year. Agin, not really news.
It has been obvious to anybody with half a brain from Day 1 of Michael Gove's political career that he is utterly toxic. How on earth he managed to rise to a cabinet role is an utter mystery. Are there really no better MPs in the entire parliamentary Tory and Liberal parties?
I hope that you are right. It would precipitate a Tory collapse of Canadian proportions.
But Gove is 10/1 to be next Con Leader, so nobody is holding their breath.
tim could have written that, "open warfare" is a ludicrous overstatement of the facts. Is the Guardian morphing into the Daily Mail to try and halt its flagging sales.
Cricket is far more interesting. The polls at this time are irrelevant.
I am completely baffled by this posting set of affairs.
I tried to respond to our Leicester GP, Mr Fox, about Gove. The point I was going to make is....I completely get Gove. He is clearly a man with a brain, a sense of purpose, a strategy, and a fundamental set of convictions. Labour's education policy has been truly appalling.
I just wish we had a few more Gove types sitting on the shadow bench.
Late to the party, but I prefer Labour's leadership election structure to the other major parties. It provides a balance between different groups of people that need to be represented by a Labour leader (ordinary working people, Labour members, Labour MPs) without overrepresenting any of them.
I don't think there's any ideal way to conduct a leadership election. Party membership is dwindling, MPs deciding amongst themselves seems wrong, and completely open primaries seem ripe for abuse.
Probably hit post too soon. I've done that a few times before, quite embarrassing.
No the answer is a little more "Innocent" than that - I replied to one of tim's posts that's seemed to have been moderated into the ether! Then I hurriedly edited by replacing my text with "b" (and later "test")
I get Gove too. He has a clarity of thought and ideology that is rare in modern politics. I may not agree with it, but it is clear what you get when he is in power.
I think May will not win for much the same reasons that tim and roger like her. That is not how tory MPs and members think. Gove knows his market.
I am not saying that he would be a better leader, but all parties have long track records of apoointing people that are popular with their members and less popular with wider voters.
I am completely baffled by this posting set of affairs.
I tried to respond to our Leicester GP, Mr Fox, about Gove. The point I was going to make is....I completely get Gove. He is clearly a man with a brain, a sense of purpose, a strategy, and a fundamental set of convictions. Labour's education policy has been truly appalling.
I just wish we had a few more Gove types sitting on the shadow bench.
Alex Salmond: 'independence will come on a tide of rising expectations'
Scotland's first minister tells Kevin McKenna about the social ties that will always bind the countries of the British Isles – and that saltire he waved at Wimbledon
Roger and tim don't like May. They simply support her for 'next leader' as a means of undermining the Conservative party and its current leadership.
The problem with promoting May for leader is that it will never happen. Tories are like overgrown schoolchildren. The prospect of May as leader is as inviting to a child as being sent to stay with a maiden aunt for their summer holidays.
The child would undoubtedly be safe but the holiday would go down as the most boring endured in a lifetime.
I am completely baffled by this posting set of affairs.
I tried to respond to our Leicester GP, Mr Fox, about Gove. The point I was going to make is....I completely get Gove. He is clearly a man with a brain, a sense of purpose, a strategy, and a fundamental set of convictions. Labour's education policy has been truly appalling.
I just wish we had a few more Gove types sitting on the shadow bench.
The Tories in recent times have got a record of choosing duds - Hague and IDS being two examples.
How the party ended up with IDS rather than Portillo is one of the great mysteries of modern politics. If he'd have got it in 2001 I think that the Tories might have won in 2005.
I get Gove too. He has a clarity of thought and ideology that is rare in modern politics. I may not agree with it, but it is clear what you get when he is in power.
I think May will not win for much the same reasons that tim and roger like her. That is not how tory MPs and members think. Gove knows his market.
I am not saying that he would be a better leader, but all parties have long track records of apoointing people that are popular with their members and less popular with wider voters.
I am completely baffled by this posting set of affairs.
I tried to respond to our Leicester GP, Mr Fox, about Gove. The point I was going to make is....I completely get Gove. He is clearly a man with a brain, a sense of purpose, a strategy, and a fundamental set of convictions. Labour's education policy has been truly appalling.
I just wish we had a few more Gove types sitting on the shadow bench.
The Tories in recent times have got a record of choosing duds - Hague and IDS being two examples.
How the party ended up with IDS rather than Portillo is one of the great mysteries of modern politics. If he'd have got it in 2001 I think that the Tories migh habe won in 2005.
I get Gove too. He has a clarity of thought and ideology that is rare in modern politics. I may not agree with it, but it is clear what you get when he is in power.
I think May will not win for much the same reasons that tim and roger like her. That is not how tory MPs and members think. Gove knows his market.
I am not saying that he would be a better leader, but all parties have long track records of apoointing people that are popular with their members and less popular with wider voters.
I am completely baffled by this posting set of affairs.
I tried to respond to our Leicester GP, Mr Fox, about Gove. The point I was going to make is....I completely get Gove. He is clearly a man with a brain, a sense of purpose, a strategy, and a fundamental set of convictions. Labour's education policy has been truly appalling.
I just wish we had a few more Gove types sitting on the shadow bench.
The great mystery of 2001 was that we choose IDS ahead of Ken Clarke, which IMHO was the greatest mistake in British politics since I've been following politics.
Ken Clarke would/did have opposed the Iraq War, which may have brought Blair down in 2003
I agree but but it is not just the Tories. Who picked Foot over Healey? Brown over anyone? Ed over David? Or Campbell over Kennedy? Or who came very close to Huhne as leader?
The Tories in recent times have got a record of choosing duds - Hague and IDS being two examples.
How the party ended up with IDS rather than Portillo is one of the great mysteries of modern politics. If he'd have got it in 2001 I think that the Tories might have won in 2005.
I get Gove too. He has a clarity of thought and ideology that is rare in modern politics. I may not agree with it, but it is clear what you get when he is in power.
I think May will not win for much the same reasons that tim and roger like her. That is not how tory MPs and members think. Gove knows his market.
I am not saying that he would be a better leader, but all parties have long track records of apoointing people that are popular with their members and less popular with wider voters.
I am completely baffled by this posting set of affairs.
I tried to respond to our Leicester GP, Mr Fox, about Gove. The point I was going to make is....I completely get Gove. He is clearly a man with a brain, a sense of purpose, a strategy, and a fundamental set of convictions. Labour's education policy has been truly appalling.
I just wish we had a few more Gove types sitting on the shadow bench.
Roger and tim don't like May. They simply support her for 'next leader' as a means of undermining the Conservative party and its current leadership.
The problem with promoting May for leader is that it will never happen. Tories are like overgrown schoolchildren. The prospect of May as leader is as inviting to a child as being sent to stay with a maiden aunt for their summer holidays.
The child would undoubtedly be safe but the holiday would go down as the most boring endured in a lifetime.
I am completely baffled by this posting set of affairs.
I tried to respond to our Leicester GP, Mr Fox, about Gove. The point I was going to make is....I completely get Gove. He is clearly a man with a brain, a sense of purpose, a strategy, and a fundamental set of convictions. Labour's education policy has been truly appalling.
I just wish we had a few more Gove types sitting on the shadow bench.
Roger and tim don't like May. They simply support her for 'next leader' as a means of undermining the Conservative party and its current leadership.
The problem with promoting May for leader is that it will never happen. Tories are like overgrown schoolchildren. The prospect of May as leader is as inviting to a child as being sent to stay with a maiden aunt for their summer holidays.
The child would undoubtedly be safe but the holiday would go down as the most boring endured in a lifetime.
I am completely baffled by this posting set of affairs.
I tried to respond to our Leicester GP, Mr Fox, about Gove. The point I was going to make is....I completely get Gove. He is clearly a man with a brain, a sense of purpose, a strategy, and a fundamental set of convictions. Labour's education policy has been truly appalling.
I just wish we had a few more Gove types sitting on the shadow bench.
Late to the party, but I prefer Labour's leadership election structure to the other major parties. It provides a balance between different groups of people that need to be represented by a Labour leader (ordinary working people, Labour members, Labour MPs) without overrepresenting any of them.
I don't think there's any ideal way to conduct a leadership election. Party membership is dwindling, MPs deciding amongst themselves seems wrong, and completely open primaries seem ripe for abuse.
It might provide balance but it is very slow in a crisis.
When John Smith died Labour were in opposition and 3 years away from an election.
However in a fast changing environment you would need to be like the Australian Labor Party if need be,so close to an election.
Hague might have been a good choice as leader in the past few years or so. The mistake was choosing him as leader in 1997 as a geeky-looking 36 year-old.
Roger and tim don't like May. They simply support her for 'next leader' as a means of undermining the Conservative party and its current leadership.
The problem with promoting May for leader is that it will never happen. Tories are like overgrown schoolchildren. The prospect of May as leader is as inviting to a child as being sent to stay with a maiden aunt for their summer holidays.
The child would undoubtedly be safe but the holiday would go down as the most boring endured in a lifetime.
I am completely baffled by this posting set of affairs.
I tried to respond to our Leicester GP, Mr Fox, about Gove. The point I was going to make is....I completely get Gove. He is clearly a man with a brain, a sense of purpose, a strategy, and a fundamental set of convictions. Labour's education policy has been truly appalling.
I just wish we had a few more Gove types sitting on the shadow bench.
There is no one in the Cabinet whom I would prefer as leader. Instinctively I prefer Hague - and he is the obvious 'under the bus' successor - but I see why it would not be right to plan for Hague to replace Cameron in the ordinary course of succession.
My hope is that Cameron serves through to say 2022 and a 2010 intake candidate will have risen to succeed him. Too early to say whom as we need to see the candidates in the 2015-2010 cabinet.
Roger and tim don't like May. They simply support her for 'next leader' as a means of undermining the Conservative party and its current leadership.
The problem with promoting May for leader is that it will never happen. Tories are like overgrown schoolchildren. The prospect of May as leader is as inviting to a child as being sent to stay with a maiden aunt for their summer holidays.
The child would undoubtedly be safe but the holiday would go down as the most boring endured in a lifetime.
I am completely baffled by this posting set of affairs.
I tried to respond to our Leicester GP, Mr Fox, about Gove. The point I was going to make is....I completely get Gove. He is clearly a man with a brain, a sense of purpose, a strategy, and a fundamental set of convictions. Labour's education policy has been truly appalling.
I just wish we had a few more Gove types sitting on the shadow bench.
Roger and tim don't like May. They simply support her for 'next leader' as a means of undermining the Conservative party and its current leadership.
The problem with promoting May for leader is that it will never happen. Tories are like overgrown schoolchildren. The prospect of May as leader is as inviting to a child as being sent to stay with a maiden aunt for their summer holidays.
The child would undoubtedly be safe but the holiday would go down as the most boring endured in a lifetime.
I am completely baffled by this posting set of affairs.
I tried to respond to our Leicester GP, Mr Fox, about Gove. The point I was going to make is....I completely get Gove. He is clearly a man with a brain, a sense of purpose, a strategy, and a fundamental set of convictions. Labour's education policy has been truly appalling.
I just wish we had a few more Gove types sitting on the shadow bench.
The Tories in recent times have got a record of choosing duds - Hague and IDS being two examples.
How the party ended up with IDS rather than Portillo is one of the great mysteries of modern politics. If he'd have got it in 2001 I think that the Tories migh habe won in 2005.
I get Gove too. He has a clarity of thought and ideology that is rare in modern politics. I may not agree with it, but it is clear what you get when he is in power.
I think May will not win for much the same reasons that tim and roger like her. That is not how tory MPs and members think. Gove knows his market.
I am not saying that he would be a better leader, but all parties have long track records of apoointing people that are popular with their members and less popular with wider voters.
I am completely baffled by this posting set of affairs.
I tried to respond to our Leicester GP, Mr Fox, about Gove. The point I was going to make is....I completely get Gove. He is clearly a man with a brain, a sense of purpose, a strategy, and a fundamental set of convictions. Labour's education policy has been truly appalling.
I just wish we had a few more Gove types sitting on the shadow bench.
The great mystery of 2001 was that we choose IDS ahead of Ken Clarke, which IMHO was the greatest mistake in British politics since I've been following politics.
Ken Clarke would/did have opposed the Iraq War, which may have brought Blair down in 2003
Ken Clarke and Charlie Kennedy could well have been an unstoppable combination.
Roger and tim don't like May. They simply support her for 'next leader' as a means of undermining the Conservative party and its current leadership.
The problem with promoting May for leader is that it will never happen. Tories are like overgrown schoolchildren. The prospect of May as leader is as inviting to a child as being sent to stay with a maiden aunt for their summer holidays.
The child would undoubtedly be safe but the holiday would go down as the most boring endured in a lifetime.
I am completely baffled by this posting set of affairs.
I tried to respond to our Leicester GP, Mr Fox, about Gove. The point I was going to make is....I completely get Gove. He is clearly a man with a brain, a sense of purpose, a strategy, and a fundamental set of convictions. Labour's education policy has been truly appalling.
I just wish we had a few more Gove types sitting on the shadow bench.
AB: LAB 38% CON 33% UKIP 11% LD 11% C1: LAB 33% CON 30% UKIP 19% LD 9% C2: LAB 32% CON 29% UKIP 27% LD 7% DE: LAB 42% CON 17% UKIP 25% LD 7%
combined lib/lab vs con/ukip
AB: 49 vs 44 C1: 42 vs 49 C2: 39 vs 52 DE: 49 vs 42
UKIP hurting the Tories badly !
Well, the Tories are down 8% on their GE total and UKIP are on 20%. One way or another it's not great for the Tories or Labour. If there are a whole load of would-be Tories wrapped up in UKIP, then if - and I think most people would say when - UKIP win less than 20% the Tories would be positive. I however would suggest that UKIP's rise has not impacted the Tory votes as much as others would say, and so the Tories have less reason to believe there are lots of votes to be won back.
Roger and tim don't like May. They simply support her for 'next leader' as a means of undermining the Conservative party and its current leadership.
The problem with promoting May for leader is that it will never happen. Tories are like overgrown schoolchildren. The prospect of May as leader is as inviting to a child as being sent to stay with a maiden aunt for their summer holidays.
The child would undoubtedly be safe but the holiday would go down as the most boring endured in a lifetime.
I am completely baffled by this posting set of affairs.
I tried to respond to our Leicester GP, Mr Fox, about Gove. The point I was going to make is....I completely get Gove. He is clearly a man with a brain, a sense of purpose, a strategy, and a fundamental set of convictions. Labour's education policy has been truly appalling.
I just wish we had a few more Gove types sitting on the shadow bench.
Amongst 2010 CON voters in ComRes poll just 28% say Gove's doing well against 31% saying badly
Among LD's -44.
Killer polling for the Messiah.
It's unlikely that the next leader of the Tory Party will be a Bullingdon Boy, it's equally unlikely that the next leader of the Tory Party will be the only politician who polls worse than either of the Bullingdon Boys who think they can become leader.
Roger and tim don't like May. They simply support her for 'next leader' as a means of undermining the Conservative party and its current leadership.
The problem with promoting May for leader is that it will never happen. Tories are like overgrown schoolchildren. The prospect of May as leader is as inviting to a child as being sent to stay with a maiden aunt for their summer holidays.
The child would undoubtedly be safe but the holiday would go down as the most boring endured in a lifetime.
I am completely baffled by this posting set of affairs.
I tried to respond to our Leicester GP, Mr Fox, about Gove. The point I was going to make is....I completely get Gove. He is clearly a man with a brain, a sense of purpose, a strategy, and a fundamental set of convictions. Labour's education policy has been truly appalling.
I just wish we had a few more Gove types sitting on the shadow bench.
Comments
Mr. kle4, ah, Cnut. Silly me, forgetting him.
Lynton Crosby must go, urges former Lib Dem health minister, as cross-party anger grows over U-turn on cigarettes
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2013/jul/13/david-cameron-lynton-crosby-tobacco?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter
Wiki also call it an "invasion". There were a few very minor skirmishes in England but the harder fighting was in Scotland and harder still in Ireland (the effects still with us as we saw last night!).
LAB 36
CON 28
LD 9
UKIP 20
There's a methodology change so compairsons with previous polls less valid
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O2ITuIMYfz8
Labour 30%
SNP 20%
Con 15%
LD 5%
Bearing that in mind, it just emphasises how well Charlie Kennedy managed during his time as leader. He effectively managed to attract 4 times more voters to the SLDs than their core vote. Surely some kind of record?
We should rectify this.
He was invited by those who ruled the realm thereafter. Ok, he had to use his forces to crush dissent, but it's not the same as outright conquest I think. Semantic distinctions.
Indeed. And there's more on that to come out before long.
Some of Scotland's finest writers are to be asked by the SNP to apply a dash of literary magic to its much-anticipated white paper on independence in November. Senior party figures have already put the novelist William McIlvanney at the top of their list.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2013/jul/13/alex-salmond-white-paper-william-mcilvanney
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2013/jul/13/alexsalmond-scottish-independence
Conservative Strategist Lynton Crosby’s “Get The Barnacles Off The Boat” Strategy Needed To Win Back C2DE Voters – The SEG Cross-Breaks Tell The Story
http://survation.com/2013/07/lynton-crosbys-barnacles/
He has a clear policy direction and is articulate and unafraid of expounding it, even if this draws a lot of opposition from his political enemies. He has awhiff of Thatcher about him.
I can see him as next leader.
Even through the haze of alcohol he had ten times better political judgement than wally Clegg.
Amused that Mike says UKIP are just 'doing ok' on 18/19 and 20 %. Would've thought that was pretty stonking for them.
LD's sinking through the floor.
No sign of Labour suffering from union malarkey.
Cons in dire straits.
Night all.
Though I'd like to see him write a piece about How the prospect of Scotland voting to remain inside the UK gives him the horn.
Depressing thought before bed and a futile attempt to sleep in the heat: Why is Northern Ireland* so shit?
correction from Island to Ireland. I've never been to North Island, it's probably nice.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2013/jul/13/david-cameron-lynton-crosby-tobacco
Anyway, time to try and find somewhere cooler. Night all.
But Gove is 10/1 to be next Con Leader, so nobody is holding their breath.
tim could have written that, "open warfare" is a ludicrous overstatement of the facts. Is the Guardian morphing into the Daily Mail to try and halt its flagging sales.
Cricket is far more interesting. The polls at this time are irrelevant.
I tried to respond to our Leicester GP, Mr Fox, about Gove. The point I was going to make is....I completely get Gove. He is clearly a man with a brain, a sense of purpose, a strategy, and a fundamental set of convictions. Labour's education policy has been truly appalling.
I just wish we had a few more Gove types sitting on the shadow bench.
Either that or the warm weather had brought on a fearsome bee attack and that was all poor Sunnill had time to post.
I don't think there's any ideal way to conduct a leadership election. Party membership is dwindling, MPs deciding amongst themselves seems wrong, and completely open primaries seem ripe for abuse.
All: LAB 36% CON 28% UKIP 20% LD 9%
AB: LAB 38% CON 33% UKIP 11% LD 11%
C1: LAB 33% CON 30% UKIP 19% LD 9%
C2: LAB 32% CON 29% UKIP 27% LD 7%
DE: LAB 42% CON 17% UKIP 25% LD 7%
That's the big message from tonight's polling.
Coailition 33%
Labour 38 %
Before you tel me Sunil.
@MSmithsonPB
Polls still to come tonight - the regular YouGov for S Times and Survation.
I bet YouGov has the bigger CON share & smaller UKIP one
I've got a three figure bet on at 8/1 that UKIP will get more than one seat at GE2015.
My best general election outcome is for UKIP to get 2 or more seats and for there to be no overall majority but no coaition. I've got 12/1 on that
I'll be several thousand pounds up if those two things happen.
I think May will not win for much the same reasons that tim and roger like her. That is not how tory MPs and members think. Gove knows his market.
I am not saying that he would be a better leader, but all parties have long track records of apoointing people that are popular with their members and less popular with wider voters.
It does seem overblown.
The Guardian is on a guilt trip ever since the GE of 2010.
Scotland's first minister tells Kevin McKenna about the social ties that will always bind the countries of the British Isles – and that saltire he waved at Wimbledon
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2013/jul/13/alexsalmond-scottish-independence?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter
AB: 49 vs 44
C1: 42 vs 49
C2: 39 vs 52
DE: 49 vs 42
The party thrives on a feeling of annoyance and irritation, and getting 20% and no seats would be the perfect way to keep that going.
The problem with promoting May for leader is that it will never happen. Tories are like overgrown schoolchildren. The prospect of May as leader is as inviting to a child as being sent to stay with a maiden aunt for their summer holidays.
The child would undoubtedly be safe but the holiday would go down as the most boring endured in a lifetime.
How the party ended up with IDS rather than Portillo is one of the great mysteries of modern politics. If he'd have got it in 2001 I think that the Tories might have won in 2005.
Ken Clarke would/did have opposed the Iraq War, which may have brought Blair down in 2003
A: Higher managerial, administrative or professional
B: Intermediate managerial, administrative or professional
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NRS_social_grade
https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/356155220662837248/photo/1
Activists do not often choose well!
When John Smith died Labour were in opposition and 3 years away from an election.
However in a fast changing environment you would need to be like the Australian Labor Party if need be,so close to an election.
The numbers that add up to trouble for all political parties
Labour, the Tories and the Lib Dems must reinvent themselves as mass-membership organisations
Star Wars: more popular than the Tories
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jul/13/political-party-membership-coalition-labour
Less than 10% for the LibDems looks pretty grim.
Saatchi is not a gentleman.
There is no one in the Cabinet whom I would prefer as leader. Instinctively I prefer Hague - and he is the obvious 'under the bus' successor - but I see why it would not be right to plan for Hague to replace Cameron in the ordinary course of succession.
My hope is that Cameron serves through to say 2022 and a 2010 intake candidate will have risen to succeed him. Too early to say whom as we need to see the candidates in the 2015-2010 cabinet.
Tonight's polls so far:
LDs Opinium 6%
LDs Comres 8%
LDs Survation 9%
His line that the Ministry of Defence could sustain additional cuts as it had "more horses than tanks" outdid even Thatcher at her greatest.
I suggest you rethink that last line.
Our troops continue to prepare for the last war. The forces like tanks, artillery, and pointy nosed ships and planes.
Does anyone know when the Lib Dems last polled 6%.
They will not be tying that yellow ribon around the conservative old oak tree, to much longer if they have any sense.