Howdy, Stranger!

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

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » LAB lead amongst Unite members jumps 14 to 26 percent

2»

Comments

  • Options
    NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    @JohnO

    How dare you! I will reveal the true story of what you got up to in Bournemouth in revenge. My excuse for not remembering that one is that I was very young. Can you fill me in on how things went for Shirley, Roy, Bill and David ;)
  • Options
    JonCJonC Posts: 67
    I am amazed by this poll, I assumed the large majority of union members were Labour supporters, and that tories among them would be virtually non-existent.

    Mind you i think I only know 1 person who is in a union and she is a full time activist, paid by the union, so perhaps not representative. There is no union where I work.

    Once again i conclude I should get out more...
  • Options
    PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    edited July 2013

    Neil said:

    @CarlottaVance

    You havent convinced me that it was a stupid decision.

    You think the timing is smart?


    I can sorta understand why EdM has kicked this into the tall grass and opted for a conference. But why wait so long? It's been already rumbling on for a month and Spring 2014 is what - 8 or 9 months away?

    How long does it take Ray Collins as a former Gen Sec to do the maths and work up the options? Not 9 months. The sooner this is put to bed the better - letting it bleed all over the GE2015 campaign is bizarre.

    I don't want Labour to win so let them do it - but I think it's self-destructive for them. The Tories will be all over this for months in the run up and even if EdM gets a good story out of it - it doesn't shift votes with normal people vs the economy, jobs, education et al.
  • Options
    NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    JonC said:

    I assumed the large majority of union members were Labour supporters, and that tories among them would be virtually non-existent.

    I suspect that Cameron thinks something similar and this is why he continues to attack trade unions as if there is no potential downside for him.
  • Options
    AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    tim said:

    Balls replaced by Boy in the Bubble

    Jeremy Vine ‏@theJeremyVine
    Change of plan @BBCRadio2: we are dropping the testicle story. Instead - is the help-to-buy scheme stoking a housing bubble?

    Auntie Beeb unsettled by Tory poll advances. Ditches balls for Balls.

  • Options
    JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    edited July 2013

    @JackW

    Edward VI, Jane, Mary? 1553?

    A correct answer but we've already had it Sunil.

    Further clue. This will be the second list that one monarch has appeared on.

  • Options
    JohnOJohnO Posts: 4,215
    Neil said:

    @JohnO

    How dare you! I will reveal the true story of what you got up to in Bournemouth in revenge. My excuse for not remembering that one is that I was very young. Can you fill me in on how things went for Shirley, Roy, Bill and David ;)

    I was canvassing, canvassing I tell you....albeit the nice young policewoman didn't seem entirely convinced. Ahem.
  • Options
    PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    edited July 2013
    Neil said:

    JonC said:

    I assumed the large majority of union members were Labour supporters, and that tories among them would be virtually non-existent.

    I suspect that Cameron thinks something similar and this is why he continues to attack trade unions as if there is no potential downside for him.
    There is plenty of scope for Tories to attack the union leaders like McCluskey - they've got the data to prove that most members aren't of his ilk - and most don't vote Labour, but that Unite is buying Labour MPs in his image [as leader] where they can.

    It's a win-win for the Tories. Even Unite's members don't agree with McCluskey. The sooner McCluskey put away his megaphone the better for Labour as most voters will assume that he speaks for his members.
  • Options
    NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    Plato said:

    Neil said:

    JonC said:

    I assumed the large majority of union members were Labour supporters, and that tories among them would be virtually non-existent.

    I suspect that Cameron thinks something similar and this is why he continues to attack trade unions as if there is no potential downside for him.
    There is plenty of scope for Tories to attack the union leaders like McCluskey - they've got the data to prove that most members aren't of his ilk.
    I think the data shows most people havent a clue who he is. But I wasnt talking about Tory attacks on trade union leaders. I was talking about Tory attacks on trade unions.
  • Options
    JonnyJimmyJonnyJimmy Posts: 2,548
    1558 - Mary, Philip, Elizabeth?
  • Options
    PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    edited July 2013
    And here is UKIP's doorstep message... I can see it being quite seductive on several levels.

    "There are some interesting findings in Lord Ashcroft's poll of Unite members. For instance, only seven per cent plan to vote for the do-gooder Liberal Democrats while 12 per cent plan to vote for the supposedly Thatcherite Ukip.

    One thing is clear in the study though: the working people within Unite have had enough of being taxed to the hilt in order to pay for the bone-idle underclass that Labour created. A huge 86 per cent of Unite members agree that the Government is right to introduce a benefit cap on each household.

    Despite Labour's hysterical shrieking, the workers don't want to be popular with people who claim every benefit going in order to enjoy a lifestyle that they couldn't fund themselves. It is a stark contrast: those in Unite who get up and work versus their neighbours, friends and even family members who chose not to. Those who contribute to the system have clearly had enough of unlimited welfare payments. Rightly so.

    Other findings in the poll show Unite's members to be far more Right-wing than the likes of Ed Miliband: 71 per cent of them don't think councils should have to provide sites for travellers and 59 per cent don't want to see the top rate of tax raised to 75p. Socialism isn't very popular amongst Britain's working class.

    Sadly, 49 per cent of Unite members still say they'll vote Labour, but that will largely be either out of public-sector self-interest or tribal voting handed down from generation to generation fuelled by a hatred of the Tories. It isn't, tellingly, because they actually agree with the party's social or economic stances. In the long term, Labour's traditional base will increasingly migrate away from it as Labour stands up for welfare and not the working man..." http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/michaelheaver/100227716/unites-workers-have-had-enough-of-funding-the-underclass/
  • Options
    Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 49,460
    JackW said:

    @JackW

    Edward VI, Jane, Mary? 1553?

    A correct answer but we've already had it Sunil.

    Further clue. This will be the second list that one monarch has appeared on.

    1558 - Mary, Philip, Elizabeth?


    Looks like JonnyJimmy beat me to it!
  • Options
    CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,230

    JackW said:

    FPT

    On names for Baby Cambridge.

    I doubt the first Christian name will feature any name of the immediate male family. So not William, Henry, Charles, Edward, Andrew or Philip.

    George is presently favourite but there is some informed speculation that the Prince of Wales may take George VII as his regnal name and number and perhaps the couple may wish to avoid confusion.

    James has become second favourite and moved in considerably. Alexander next in line. David might be a handy outsider.

    What we probably will not see as happened centuries ago is for a female tribute name as one of the other names. Prince Charles Edward Stuart had Maria in his long list of names.

    Francis might feature as a subsidiary name as it occurs in both families.

    Alexander, James and David are all notable in that their choice (if subsequently used as the regnal name) would mean it would be the first time that the Scottish numbering would be used for a British monarch, being potentially Alexander IV, James VIII (yes Jack - sorry!), or David III.
    I rather hope that the name will be one of Philip, Stephen or Francis. Thought Arthur might be nice as well. Enough with the Henrys, Charles, and Edwards and I can't abide David (sorry to all the wonderful Davids on here!!)
  • Options
    TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 40,288
    JackW said:

    @JackW

    Edward VI, Jane, Mary? 1553?

    A correct answer but we've already had it Sunil.

    Further clue. This will be the second list that one monarch has appeared on.

    Philip, Mary & Elizabeth?

  • Options
    david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,422

    1558 - Mary, Philip, Elizabeth?

    That shouldn't count. Although Philip was King Consort, this was in reference to his position as king of Spain, not of England: Mary reigned alone rather than there being joint monarchs.
  • Options
    JackWJackW Posts: 14,787

    1558 - Mary, Philip, Elizabeth?

    Top marks.

    1558 - Mary I, Philip and Elizabeth I of England.

    Under the terms of the 1554 Marriage Act Philip was joint monarch and King but only in the lifetime of his wife. Acts of Parliament were issued in their joint name as was coinage and all other formal proceedings of the realm were enacted in both names.

    When Mary died in 1558 Philip ceased to be King of England and Elizabeth succeeded.

  • Options
    PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    I wonder who it will be...

    "Labour is currently advertising for a new deputy director of communications to oversee the party’s campaign in the build-up to the 2015 election.

    In what appears to be an implicit criticism of the current Labour Shadow Cabinet and front bench teams, the job description for the post says that the successful applicant will need to “improve language” and “ensure message discipline”.

    Ed Miliband, the Labour leader, and Ed Balls, the Shadow Chancellor, received criticism earlier this year for their mixed messages on the issue of a European Union referendum.

    In January Mr Miliband opposed an EU referendum, saying: “My position is no - we don't want an in/out referendum.”

    Two weeks later Mr Balls said that Labour would be stupid to rule out an EU referendum..." http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/ed-miliband/10196676/Labour-suggests-it-must-improve-messaging-from-shadow-ministers.html
  • Options
    AndreaParma_82AndreaParma_82 Posts: 4,714
    I suspect things like this happened lots of time. The "he/she got the membership list before the rest" is a classic accusation in many selections.

    But let's investigate...

    The article implies the candidate has not been selected yet.
    It's not clear if the selection has begun since the email was sent to members or if it's one of the selections still not started....

    open selection in "106 battleground" seats (I doubt well connected people want to be parachuted into Chippenham or even South Thanet) taking place now

    Amber Valley
    Blackpool North & Cleveleys
    Broxtowe
    Leeds North West
    Edinburgh West
    Pendle
    Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale & Tweeddale
    Rossendale & Darwen
    East Dunbartonshire
    Pudsey

    Open selection in target seats not started yet

    Brent Central
    Brentford & Isleworth
    Dundee East
    Keighley
    Carmarthen East & Dinefwr
    Cleethorpes
    Ilford North
    Greenwich and Woolwich
    Scott_P said:

    Ed's swift and decisive action...

    @LabourList: Only weeks after Falkirk, another selection row is underway http://labli.st/12IJnbd

  • Options
    PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    YEAH

    Cllr Charles Fifield @charlesfifield
    Bentley to create 1,000 jobs across UK with £800m investment to develop new SUV #UKconfidence insidermedia.com/insider/north-…
  • Options
    david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,422
    JackW said:

    1558 - Mary, Philip, Elizabeth?

    Top marks.

    1558 - Mary I, Philip and Elizabeth I of England.

    Under the terms of the 1554 Marriage Act Philip was joint monarch and King but only in the lifetime of his wife. Acts of Parliament were issued in their joint name as was coinage and all other formal proceedings of the realm were enacted in both names.

    When Mary died in 1558 Philip ceased to be King of England and Elizabeth succeeded.

    I defer.
  • Options
    JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    Full house of dates is :

    1016 .. 1066 .. 1483 .. 1553 .. 1558 .. 1689 .. 1936
  • Options
    JackWJackW Posts: 14,787

    JackW said:

    1558 - Mary, Philip, Elizabeth?

    Top marks.

    1558 - Mary I, Philip and Elizabeth I of England.

    Under the terms of the 1554 Marriage Act Philip was joint monarch and King but only in the lifetime of his wife. Acts of Parliament were issued in their joint name as was coinage and all other formal proceedings of the realm were enacted in both names.

    When Mary died in 1558 Philip ceased to be King of England and Elizabeth succeeded.

    I defer.
    Generous as always Herders.

  • Options
    edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,151
    edited July 2013

    open selection in "106 battleground" seats (I doubt well connected people want to be parachuted into Chippenham or even South Thanet) taking place now

    I know this isn't your main point but on paper South Thanet actually looks like a possible opportunity for Labour, especially if Farage runs there, as he may well:

    2010:
    Conservative Laura Sandys 22,043 48.0 +6.8
    Labour Stephen Ladyman 14,426 31.4 -8.1
    Liberal Democrat Peter Bucklitsch 6,935 15.1 +2.9
    UKIP Trevor Shonk 2,529 5.5 +0.7
    Start by squeezing the leftish LibDems and you can get up to maybe 18,000. So now you just need UKIP to take 4,000 off Con, plus one more for each one they take off you.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,002
    I think they'll go for George, but the odds are too short for me to wade in now. Victoria and Elizabeth my former bets are obviously shot.

    Louis I notice is at 171-10 on betfair. Why is this name even in there. Are the French betting ?
  • Options
    PongPong Posts: 4,693
    I think i may have a gambling problem...

    I'm back in the baby name betting market. I've laid George heavily at 9/4

    Net position:

    if george = +-£0
    Edward = +£3k
    not George or Edward =+ £1.5k



  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,002
    Pong said:

    I think i may have a gambling problem...

    I'm back in the baby name betting market. I've laid George heavily at 9/4

    Net position:

    if george = +-£0
    Edward = +£3k
    not George or Edward =+ £1.5k



    Looks fin to me, change the +s to -s and you'd have a problem.
  • Options
    NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    Pong said:

    I think i may have a gambling problem...

    You've come to the right place.
  • Options
    edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,151
    Pong said:

    I think i may have a gambling problem...

    I'm back in the baby name betting market. I've laid George heavily at 9/4

    Net position:

    if george = +-£0
    Edward = +£3k
    not George or Edward =+ £1.5k

    I think whoever is on the other side of your bets may have a gambling problem...
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,013
    Mr. Pong, I wish I had your sort of 'problem'.

    After waking up in bed with Jennifer Morrison and Olivia Wilde, Pong sighed, shook his head and thought to himself, "I really must do something about my problem with the ladies."
  • Options
    PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    Interesting little factoid

    James Chapman (Mail) @jameschappers
    86% support among Unite members for £26k benefit cap in @LordAshcroft poll higher than general population. YouGov had it at 74% in Jan
  • Options
    JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    Pulpstar said:

    I think they'll go for George, but the odds are too short for me to wade in now. Victoria and Elizabeth my former bets are obviously shot.

    Louis I notice is at 171-10 on betfair. Why is this name even in there. Are the French betting ?

    Louis probably reflects the Prince of Wales high regard for Earl Mountbatten.

  • Options
    PongPong Posts: 4,693

    Mr. Pong, I wish I had your sort of 'problem'.

    After waking up in bed with Jennifer Morrison and Olivia Wilde, Pong sighed, shook his head and thought to himself, "I really must do something about my problem with the ladies."

    Lol

  • Options
    JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    Gird your loins and gather your skirts folks, I'll have another royal quiz a little latter.
  • Options
    david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,422
    Pong said:

    I think i may have a gambling problem...

    I'm back in the baby name betting market. I've laid George heavily at 9/4

    Net position:

    if george = +-£0
    Edward = +£3k
    not George or Edward =+ £1.5k

    Just to say, in the piece I wrote a month ago, I tipped George at 12/1, Edward at 40/1 and Alexander and Henry at 50s.

    I appreciate it's not quite Mike's Obamabet but I'm still fairly happy with those.
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,789
    @tim?

    "..... foreign buyers with no history of property owning in the UK, buyers of second homes and buy-to-let landlords will be excluded, Mr Osborne confirmed ahead of the meeting."

    foreign buyers
    second homes
    buy to let


    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-23412585

    You must be thrilled - since these seemed to preoccupy you so!

  • Options
    JackWJackW Posts: 14,787

    Pong said:

    I think i may have a gambling problem...

    I'm back in the baby name betting market. I've laid George heavily at 9/4

    Net position:

    if george = +-£0
    Edward = +£3k
    not George or Edward =+ £1.5k

    Just to say, in the piece I wrote a month ago, I tipped George at 12/1, Edward at 40/1 and Alexander and Henry at 50s.

    I appreciate it's not quite Mike's Obamabet but I'm still fairly happy with those.
    Well done Herders. Did you have a few bob ?

  • Options
    david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,422
    JackW said:

    Pong said:

    I think i may have a gambling problem...

    I'm back in the baby name betting market. I've laid George heavily at 9/4

    Net position:

    if george = +-£0
    Edward = +£3k
    not George or Edward =+ £1.5k

    Just to say, in the piece I wrote a month ago, I tipped George at 12/1, Edward at 40/1 and Alexander and Henry at 50s.

    I appreciate it's not quite Mike's Obamabet but I'm still fairly happy with those.
    Well done Herders. Did you have a few bob ?

    Sadly not. I've withdrawn all the funds from my betting accounts to help pay for the house we've just bought.
  • Options
    Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 27,011
    Why has Peter gone out of fashion as a name?
  • Options
    Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 27,011
    edited July 2013
    Labour are unlikely to win Thanet South because I think an unusually large percentage of the Labour vote is susceptible to UKIP due to demographics, ie. older people. So if UKIP do well there it probably won't be a case of Labour slipping through the middle as a big swing from Tory to UKIP takes place; UKIP would be taking votes from both parties.
  • Options
    PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    Indeedee

    "Alan Johnson’s interview with Total Politics highlights one of Ed Miliband’s two big problems for 2015. One is the influence of trade unions over policy, or at least the perceived influence. The second, which Johnson expounds on, is whether it is too much to ask voters to trust Labour again when its top team contains so many familiar faces from the last government. Johnson tells Sam Macrory:

    ‘Everything is focused on what the chancellor is doing, not what the shadow chancellor is doing, and it’s a tough call. He’s also got to turn round this defeat, where for a long time the myth was created that it was because we overspent – and he was part of that, so he’s got to overcome that as well, so it’s a tough job for him.’

    He adds:

    ‘To try and turn it round in one five-year Parliament is really tough, and you’re kind of not helped by the same team or loads of the same team being on the frontbench.’

    There is another problem that Johnson doesn’t mention: keeping the old guard around you might not be a bad thing if only the old guard fancied changing their spots. They don’t, and it is quotes like the one below that make it so easy for the Tories to attack Labour:

    ‘Do I think the last Labour government was profligate, spent too much, had too much national debt? No I don’t think there’s any evidence for that.’ http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2013/07/labours-problem-is-that-its-old-leopards-dont-want-to-change-their-spots/
  • Options
    NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,369
    edited July 2013
    JonC said:

    I am amazed by this poll, I assumed the large majority of union members were Labour supporters, and that tories among them would be virtually non-existent.

    Mind you i think I only know 1 person who is in a union and she is a full time activist, paid by the union, so perhaps not representative. There is no union where I work.

    Once again i conclude I should get out more...

    Jon, generally workplaces are either almost entirely unionised or hardly at all. If it's almost entirely, it generally makes sense to join regardless of your political views, since they're clearly a significant factor in negotiating for you, and may call you out on strike if things go wrong. Workplaces that are mostly unionised tend to be either big private companies with factories or public sector, both of which tend to be more pro-Labour than small private businesses, and I think that accounts for nearly all the difference. A few people join or don't join for political reasons (e.g. I've been a union member all my adult life for solidarity reasons, but I've never worked anywhere where it made a positive difference to my job) but it's really an exception.

    Icarus - I'm quite sure Miliband will get his reforms through, after some haggles on the details.

    Meanwhile, the Clarke/Alexander/Mandelson team have produced this:

    http://www.britishinfluence.org/

    I support them but it's mildly entertaining that if you click on "About British Influence", you get "Nothing here"!

  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,763
    Plato said:

    Indeedee

    "Alan Johnson’s interview with Total Politics highlights one of Ed Miliband’s two big problems for 2015. One is the influence of trade unions over policy, or at least the perceived influence. The second, which Johnson expounds on, is whether it is too much to ask voters to trust Labour again when its top team contains so many familiar faces from the last government. Johnson tells Sam Macrory:

    ‘Everything is focused on what the chancellor is doing, not what the shadow chancellor is doing, and it’s a tough call. He’s also got to turn round this defeat, where for a long time the myth was created that it was because we overspent – and he was part of that, so he’s got to overcome that as well, so it’s a tough job for him.’

    He adds:

    ‘To try and turn it round in one five-year Parliament is really tough, and you’re kind of not helped by the same team or loads of the same team being on the frontbench.’

    There is another problem that Johnson doesn’t mention: keeping the old guard around you might not be a bad thing if only the old guard fancied changing their spots. They don’t, and it is quotes like the one below that make it so easy for the Tories to attack Labour:

    ‘Do I think the last Labour government was profligate, spent too much, had too much national debt? No I don’t think there’s any evidence for that.’ http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2013/07/labours-problem-is-that-its-old-leopards-dont-want-to-change-their-spots/

    Labour still refuse to accept the biggest screw up in UK economic history had anything to do with them: until they face up to the truth they will be forever on the back foot economically.
  • Options
    SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,978
    tim said:
    Whoever would have thought this could happen?

    Also earlier this week:

    http://www.uk.emb-japan.go.jp/en/japanUK/governmental/130711_UKEU.html

    Looks to me like ground is being prepared.

    Dave negotiates away job security, then campaigns to stay in.



  • Options
    JackWJackW Posts: 14,787

    JackW said:

    Pong said:

    I think i may have a gambling problem...

    I'm back in the baby name betting market. I've laid George heavily at 9/4

    Net position:

    if george = +-£0
    Edward = +£3k
    not George or Edward =+ £1.5k

    Just to say, in the piece I wrote a month ago, I tipped George at 12/1, Edward at 40/1 and Alexander and Henry at 50s.

    I appreciate it's not quite Mike's Obamabet but I'm still fairly happy with those.
    Well done Herders. Did you have a few bob ?

    Sadly not. I've withdrawn all the funds from my betting accounts to help pay for the house we've just bought.
    Very best wishes in your new home.

  • Options
    SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,978
    What odds on James being part of the name of the king whose reign I will never see?
  • Options
    PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    Healey and the IMF was a watershed

    And Healey was a Bilderberger chappy - great quotes re BBC and C4.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nuq0AJW4XxY

    Plato said:

    Indeedee

    "Alan Johnson’s interview with Total Politics highlights one of Ed Miliband’s two big problems for 2015. One is the influence of trade unions over policy, or at least the perceived influence. The second, which Johnson expounds on, is whether it is too much to ask voters to trust Labour again when its top team contains so many familiar faces from the last government. Johnson tells Sam Macrory:

    ‘Everything is focused on what the chancellor is doing, not what the shadow chancellor is doing, and it’s a tough call. He’s also got to turn round this defeat, where for a long time the myth was created that it was because we overspent – and he was part of that, so he’s got to overcome that as well, so it’s a tough job for him.’

    He adds:

    ‘To try and turn it round in one five-year Parliament is really tough, and you’re kind of not helped by the same team or loads of the same team being on the frontbench.’

    There is another problem that Johnson doesn’t mention: keeping the old guard around you might not be a bad thing if only the old guard fancied changing their spots. They don’t, and it is quotes like the one below that make it so easy for the Tories to attack Labour:

    ‘Do I think the last Labour government was profligate, spent too much, had too much national debt? No I don’t think there’s any evidence for that.’ http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2013/07/labours-problem-is-that-its-old-leopards-dont-want-to-change-their-spots/

    Labour still refuse to accept the biggest screw up in UK economic history had anything to do with them: until they face up to the truth they will be forever on the back foot economically.
  • Options
    PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    And Callaghan's Crisis What Crisis

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dX06xqN6710
  • Options
    PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    Cameron is turning up the heat

    Carole Walker @carolewalkercw
    PM says consent for EU in Britain is wafer thin. Says putting head in sand would create more uncertainty than a referendum
  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,763
    Plato said:

    Healey and the IMF was a watershed

    And Healey was a Bilderberger chappy - great quotes re BBC and C4.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nuq0AJW4XxY

    Plato said:

    Indeedee

    "Alan Johnson’s interview with Total Politics highlights one of Ed Miliband’s two big problems for 2015. One is the influence of trade unions over policy, or at least the perceived influence. The second, which Johnson expounds on, is whether it is too much to ask voters to trust Labour again when its top team contains so many familiar faces from the last government. Johnson tells Sam Macrory:

    ‘Everything is focused on what the chancellor is doing, not what the shadow chancellor is doing, and it’s a tough call. He’s also got to turn round this defeat, where for a long time the myth was created that it was because we overspent – and he was part of that, so he’s got to overcome that as well, so it’s a tough job for him.’

    He adds:

    ‘To try and turn it round in one five-year Parliament is really tough, and you’re kind of not helped by the same team or loads of the same team being on the frontbench.’

    There is another problem that Johnson doesn’t mention: keeping the old guard around you might not be a bad thing if only the old guard fancied changing their spots. They don’t, and it is quotes like the one below that make it so easy for the Tories to attack Labour:

    ‘Do I think the last Labour government was profligate, spent too much, had too much national debt? No I don’t think there’s any evidence for that.’ http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2013/07/labours-problem-is-that-its-old-leopards-dont-want-to-change-their-spots/

    Labour still refuse to accept the biggest screw up in UK economic history had anything to do with them: until they face up to the truth they will be forever on the back foot economically.
    Imagine the fun if the new prince is named Bilderberg :-)
  • Options
    SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,978
    tim said:

    @NickPalmer

    That level of ignorance isn't limited to the PB Tories

    Shane Greer ‏@shanegreer 2m
    Incredible poll of Unite members from @LordAshcroft. Party support results are mind-blowing (23% would vote Tory): http://ow.ly/nef3z

    What country have these people been living in all their lives?

    No wonder they haven't got a majority since Thatcher and Major were winning C1s and C2s.

    But it's almost as if they are dealing with an alien species.No wonder they all support Dave's red faced rants about trades unions.

    Surely there'll be something from Toby Young on this sooner rather than later.

    In other extraordinary news, peope who work in the private sector can and do vote Labour.

    Also interesting to see how many UNITE members have opted out of paying the political levy. I thought no-one did because of the cruel intimidaitn that they might suffer.

  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    James would be a bad choice of name for the royal baby. It would be quite inappropriate to have an heir to the throne where the Pavlovian reaction of a generation to the name would be "Sit Down".
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 41,005
    Andy_JS said:

    Why has Peter gone out of fashion as a name?

    I don't know... It was Kate's Grandfathers name and she delayed the engagement when he died so my thinking was it could be a runner at 250s.... Would appear not although the fact that no one seems to have backed the 2/1 it's a boy makes me think the inside info is not all that

  • Options
    PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    Well this is an all out assault

    norman smith @BBCNormanS
    PM warns that the EU is " holding back sometimes British businesses and the British economy."
  • Options
    MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053
    Good morning. On Thread:
    Interesting that Ashcroft polls UKIP at 12% among Unite members. I have a feeling that its a lot more but members reluctant to say.
  • Options
    JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,913
    Plato said:

    Well this is an all out assault

    norman smith @BBCNormanS
    PM warns that the EU is " holding back sometimes British businesses and the British economy."

    Cameron = Don Quixote and I claim my £5

    Hague is a very good Sancho Panza
  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    @isam The BBC breaking news ticker is currently running the following item:

    "LATEST:Prince Charles says it is not yet clear what the royal baby's name will be, on walkabout in Yorkshire"

    If he doesn't know, you can be fairly sure that a lot of the speculation is just that.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,013
    Peter, James, sticking with disciples, why not Thaddeus?

    Prince Thaddeus - you heard it here first!
  • Options
    JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,913
    edited July 2013
    antifrank said:

    @isam The BBC breaking news ticker is currently running the following item:

    "LATEST:Prince Charles says it is not yet clear what the royal baby's name will be, on walkabout in Yorkshire"

    If he doesn't know, you can be fairly sure that a lot of the speculation is just that.

    There are some great jokes floating around. The tweet mentioned on the Today programme, really sums up our age.

    "BREAKING: Royal baby to be named Qatar Airways after landmark sponsorship deal http://bit.ly/12GITSV #RoyalBaby"

    When a colleague mentioned "Boris", I had to smile.
  • Options
    PongPong Posts: 4,693

    Pong said:

    I think i may have a gambling problem...

    I'm back in the baby name betting market. I've laid George heavily at 9/4

    Net position:

    if george = +-£0
    Edward = +£3k
    not George or Edward =+ £1.5k

    Just to say, in the piece I wrote a month ago, I tipped George at 12/1, Edward at 40/1 and Alexander and Henry at 50s.

    I appreciate it's not quite Mike's Obamabet but I'm still fairly happy with those.
    Yes, thanks David - You're a decent tipster & I confess I looked up your post this very morning!

    Talking of Mike's Obama bet, is Morus still posting on here?
  • Options
    PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    UK TV Ratings @TVRatingsUK
    RT @mediaguardian: News channel ratings: Sky News peak 533k/2.4% (half hour from 8.30pm), BBC News peak 527k/4.5% (half hour from 5pm).
  • Options
    CD13CD13 Posts: 6,351

    I'm surprised that people are surprised about the Unite polling. People join trade unions primarily for protection, very few refuse to join on political grounds and only a few join because of the politics. (I'm talking about a non-affiliated union). Those who opt out usually do it because they think they'll save a few bob on the subscriptions.

    The branch council had a couple of SWPers but even they were pragmatic. Even if you're a Cameron supporter, you want the best (and most enthusiastic) person to look after your interests. Even an Owen Jones!

    At least you know they have the"workers' interests at heart. Why do you think Bob Crow gets re-elected? It's because he's effective.
  • Options
    SlackbladderSlackbladder Posts: 9,713
    antifrank said:

    James would be a bad choice of name for the royal baby. It would be quite inappropriate to have an heir to the throne where the Pavlovian reaction of a generation to the name would be "Sit Down".

    Born of Frustation would be worse!
  • Options
    NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    CD13 said:


    I'm surprised that people are surprised about the Unite polling.

    I think it shows a significant disconnect between some people and the reality of work for millions of people out there. I think the top of the Tory party suffers from it particularly and is potentially handling trade union issues badly as a result.
  • Options
    PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    edited July 2013
    I wish for more like her - her logic is flawless.

    "I think over the last couple of years, we've been to that McDonald's at least half a dozen times on the horses.

    "Minnie likes McFlurry's. Whenever we've got them, we've ended up having to get two spoons - one for her and one for Emily. We've genuinely been served several times before and I didn't think using he drive-through would be a problem.

    "The manager said there was a health and safety risk because there were cars all around us but horses are classed as carriages under the Highway Code and we obviously travelled on the roads quite legally to get there.

    "When she said: 'You can't go through the drive through but you can come into the store', I thought 'okay, we will'."

    Minnie stood in the queue with Olivia for several minutes during the Saturday evening incident. But police were called when the animal relieved itself on the floor.

    An officer issued Christine with a £90 fine for to customers and managers have also banned the mum from returning. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/10196869/Ive-taken-her-for-a-McFlurry-loads-of-times-says-horse-rider-who-took-pony-into-McDonalds.htmlcausing "alarm and distress"
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,789
    New Thread
This discussion has been closed.