It makes the Conservatives look backward-looking, cruel and obsessed by trivia. Theresa May should never have gone near the subject.
Completely agree. It is not going to come close to changing my vote but the key to the success of David Cameron and now Theresa May was the detoxification of the Tory image from where the party was in the sad days of that well known rapper, IDS. This is a backward step which, although not decisive, will make many think, do I really have something in common with that party? Do they reflect my values?
Stupid mistake and getting the Countryside Alliance to deliver leaflets for you in ultra safe seats (post the demise of UKIP) is no compensation at all.
Whereas in the real world, Cameron said exactly the same thing before the 2015 GE, and for exactly the same reasons.
It makes the Conservatives look backward-looking, cruel and obsessed by trivia. Theresa May should never have gone near the subject.
Completely agree. It is not going to come close to changing my vote but the key to the success of David Cameron and now Theresa May was the detoxification of the Tory image from where the party was in the sad days of that well known rapper, IDS. This is a backward step which, although not decisive, will make many think, do I really have something in common with that party? Do they reflect my values?
Stupid mistake and getting the Countryside Alliance to deliver leaflets for you in ultra safe seats (post the demise of UKIP) is no compensation at all.
Correct. All those thinking she's a different type of Tory will be having a rethink.
All of them? I doubt many even heard it.. People seem to think voters listen to minutiae.. they don't
As an aside, Labour's draft manifesto says it will end driver-only operation on trains. This means that all trains (presumably they mean passenger trains only) will have to have guards. This will put up costs, make strikes much more effective, and do nothing for safety.
They also appear to commit to extending HS2 to Scotland. Chortle.
Oh, and it also fails to mention freight (though to be fair they're not the only party to 'forget' rail freight).
No Crossrail then.
I take it if Corbyn was PM, he would oppose the full automation of the London Underground?
Neither is Thornberry. Brexit taught us that you only need two or three spokespeople so as long as he hides Abbott and McDonnell this could yet be an unexpected election.
And Rayner. And Burgon. And Long-Bailey. And Smith...
Frankly I'm not sure I do agree he isn't talking rubbish either. Although his saying he isn't a pacifist confirms what we all knew, that will not only upset his remaining core vote but opens up a number of potential attack lines given in war or terrorism he has always supported the national enemy, or said he would not stop them in the case of a hypothetical Paris-style attack.
Neither Tory nor Labour has much depth in their top teams, it seems to me. And let's hope we do at last get a few answers from the Tories when they eventually come up with some policies for the next five years. I rather fear they are drafting and redrafting to remove all meaning from whatever they finally publish.
Politicians have to be careful when dealing with values. People are not always rational about it. Of course Brexit, management of the economy, defence, security, education, the NHS etc etc are all way more important to 99.9% of the population but people want decisions on these complicated matters being made by people they can trust to reflect the concerns of people like them.
In this election May starts with a huge advantage since the vast majority would not trust Corbyn to run the proverbial whelk stall but it would be a mistake to fritter away that advantage by allowing her to seem out of step with the views of the vast majority. This is not productive territory for the Tories and neither are grammar schools. Arguing the merits of the proposal is really missing the point. She needs to stick to areas where the majority are going to feel comfortable with what she is talking about.
One of my biggest gripes is that first class is no longer sufficiently swish to justify the price they charge.
You used to get your own cosy compartment on the slam doors with huge cosy armchair seats, and a styled seat head cover protector.
Outside the rush hour you can often get a first class seat for £2 or £3 extra on a two hour journey. That's not such a bad deal for a carriage that is invariably quiet and sometimes almost empty.
As an aside, Labour's draft manifesto says it will end driver-only operation on trains. This means that all trains (presumably they mean passenger trains only) will have to have guards. This will put up costs, make strikes much more effective, and do nothing for safety.
They also appear to commit to extending HS2 to Scotland. Chortle.
Oh, and it also fails to mention freight (though to be fair they're not the only party to 'forget' rail freight).
No Crossrail then.
I take it if Corbyn was PM, he would oppose the full automation of the London Underground?
He would allow whatever the Unions wanted. As far as he's concerned, they can do no wrong.
It makes the Conservatives look backward-looking, cruel and obsessed by trivia. Theresa May should never have gone near the subject.
Completely agree. It is not going to come close to changing my vote but the key to the success of David Cameron and now Theresa May was the detoxification of the Tory image from where the party was in the sad days of that well known rapper, IDS. This is a backward step which, although not decisive, will make many think, do I really have something in common with that party? Do they reflect my values?
Stupid mistake and getting the Countryside Alliance to deliver leaflets for you in ultra safe seats (post the demise of UKIP) is no compensation at all.
Correct. All those thinking she's a different type of Tory will be having a rethink.
All of them? I doubt many even heard it.. People seem to think voters listen to minutiae.. they don't
She should have followed Dave's lead on this topic.
Kept it low key and not expressed her own view.
The Conservatives will hold a parliamentary vote on repealing the fox hunting ban if they win the next election, David Cameron has said.
The Prime Minister, who has previously ridden with the Heythrop Hunt in Oxfordshire, said he believed in the “freedom to hunt” and wanted fox hunting legalised.
She should have followed Dave's lead on this topic.
Kept it low key and not expressed her own view.
The Conservatives will hold a parliamentary vote on repealing the fox hunting ban if they win the next election, David Cameron has said.
The Prime Minister, who has previously ridden with the Heythrop Hunt in Oxfordshire, said he believed in the “freedom to hunt” and wanted fox hunting legalised.
In this election May starts with a huge advantage since the vast majority would not trust Corbyn to run the proverbial whelk stall but it would be a mistake to fritter away that advantage by allowing her to seem out of step with the views of the vast majority. This is not productive territory for the Tories and neither are grammar schools. Arguing the merits of the proposal is really missing the point. She needs to stick to areas where the majority are going to feel comfortable with what she is talking about.
What do you suggest May does?
- Not give direct answers to direct questions? - Dissemble? - Lie?
As an aside, Labour's draft manifesto says it will end driver-only operation on trains. This means that all trains (presumably they mean passenger trains only) will have to have guards. This will put up costs, make strikes much more effective, and do nothing for safety.
They also appear to commit to extending HS2 to Scotland. Chortle.
Oh, and it also fails to mention freight (though to be fair they're not the only party to 'forget' rail freight).
No Crossrail then.
I take it if Corbyn was PM, he would oppose the full automation of the London Underground?
He would allow whatever the Unions wanted. As far as he's concerned, they can do no wrong.
This is about as close to commercial reality as Corbyn and Labour gets. Yesterday we had the Unions writing the cheque for what the party had delivered to them. Bought and sold. Whether it proves to be a good buy for the Unions is another matter...
Politicians have to be careful when dealing with values. People are not always rational about it. Of course Brexit, management of the economy, defence, security, education, the NHS etc etc are all way more important to 99.9% of the population but people want decisions on these complicated matters being made by people they can trust to reflect the concerns of people like them.
In this election May starts with a huge advantage since the vast majority would not trust Corbyn to run the proverbial whelk stall but it would be a mistake to fritter away that advantage by allowing her to seem out of step with the views of the vast majority. This is not productive territory for the Tories and neither are grammar schools. Arguing the merits of the proposal is really missing the point. She needs to stick to areas where the majority are going to feel comfortable with what she is talking about.
Grammar schools certainly have salience.
I think the number of votes that would be influenced by a pledge for a vote on foxhunting is vanishingly small, but boy oh boy will they be noisy about it.
It makes the Conservatives look backward-looking, cruel and obsessed by trivia. Theresa May should never have gone near the subject.
QED.
1) I'm not a Lib Dem. 2) I'm pretty agnostic about the ban on fox hunting.
Otherwise, you're spot on.
Do you always describe things you are agnostic about as "backward-looking, cruel" ?
1) it's the ban I'm agnostic about, not the activity. 2) it's how it makes the Conservatives appear that I'm voicing an opinion on (indirectly supported by the polling), not the activity.
You're not having a very good morning of it so far.
Politicians have to be careful when dealing with values. People are not always rational about it. Of course Brexit, management of the economy, defence, security, education, the NHS etc etc are all way more important to 99.9% of the population but people want decisions on these complicated matters being made by people they can trust to reflect the concerns of people like them.
In this election May starts with a huge advantage since the vast majority would not trust Corbyn to run the proverbial whelk stall but it would be a mistake to fritter away that advantage by allowing her to seem out of step with the views of the vast majority. This is not productive territory for the Tories and neither are grammar schools. Arguing the merits of the proposal is really missing the point. She needs to stick to areas where the majority are going to feel comfortable with what she is talking about.
I think the Polling on Grammar schools supports May.
Politicians have to be careful when dealing with values. People are not always rational about it. Of course Brexit, management of the economy, defence, security, education, the NHS etc etc are all way more important to 99.9% of the population but people want decisions on these complicated matters being made by people they can trust to reflect the concerns of people like them.
In this election May starts with a huge advantage since the vast majority would not trust Corbyn to run the proverbial whelk stall but it would be a mistake to fritter away that advantage by allowing her to seem out of step with the views of the vast majority. This is not productive territory for the Tories and neither are grammar schools. Arguing the merits of the proposal is really missing the point. She needs to stick to areas where the majority are going to feel comfortable with what she is talking about.
Grammar schools certainly have salience.
I think the number of votes that would be influenced by a pledge for a vote on foxhunting is vanishingly small, but boy oh boy will they be noisy about it.
It wasn't a complete disaster when Cameron proposed it, but is now May has suggested it, apparently.....
Neither Tory nor Labour has much depth in their top teams, it seems to me. And let's hope we do at last get a few answers from the Tories when they eventually come up with some policies for the next five years. I rather fear they are drafting and redrafting to remove all meaning from whatever they finally publish.
My suspicion is they think Labour's manifesto will do them considerable damage if left to its own devices for 10 days and they don't want to distract attention from it by launching their own.
I asked for £400 @ 10-1 on Lib Dem 10-19 seats but got knocked back to 50.
I've laid this bet personally to a 800/100 on Betfair actually.
He should have come to this forum, between a few of us I'm sure we could have accommodated this bet - and at better odds than 12-1 too
That LibDem price was awesome! What is it now? Should be about 2/1.
Incidentally my Eurovision tip Bulgaria is now 4/1 3rd fav from 12s.
Some classics to look out for on Saturday.
Moldova, Croatia, Romania Hungary have all gone for bizzare fusions of incompatible genres. Romania combines yodeling and rap, and should score well. Bulgaria is a good tip.
In this election May starts with a huge advantage since the vast majority would not trust Corbyn to run the proverbial whelk stall but it would be a mistake to fritter away that advantage by allowing her to seem out of step with the views of the vast majority. This is not productive territory for the Tories and neither are grammar schools. Arguing the merits of the proposal is really missing the point. She needs to stick to areas where the majority are going to feel comfortable with what she is talking about.
What do you suggest May does?
- Not give direct answers to direct questions? - Dissemble? - Lie?
She could say that the next Parliament is going to be extremely busy with the legislative consequences of Brexit but if time allows the Conservatives favour a free vote on the issue of addressing the deficiencies of the current legislation. (nothing to do with me guv).
Politicians have to be careful when dealing with values. People are not always rational about it. Of course Brexit, management of the economy, defence, security, education, the NHS etc etc are all way more important to 99.9% of the population but people want decisions on these complicated matters being made by people they can trust to reflect the concerns of people like them.
In this election May starts with a huge advantage since the vast majority would not trust Corbyn to run the proverbial whelk stall but it would be a mistake to fritter away that advantage by allowing her to seem out of step with the views of the vast majority. This is not productive territory for the Tories and neither are grammar schools. Arguing the merits of the proposal is really missing the point. She needs to stick to areas where the majority are going to feel comfortable with what she is talking about.
I think the Polling on Grammar schools supports May.
The voters are stupid.
Yes the public support more grammar schools but the public also support renationalisation of the railways and we know that's a bad idea.
I live in the countryside..Foxes in the field behind. I have never hunted - I would fall off the horse.. And don't follow it..
The League Against Cruel Sports say "“Are we really going to turn the clock back to a time when killing animals for fun was legal?"
Which is utter nonsense..considering all the other animals you can legally kill..and in the case of rats you SHOULD kill..
So frankly I - and many others - don't give a damn about the issue.
| Many City dwellers have not got a clue about the countryside..
There is a difference between killing an animal for a perceived necessity like pest control and torturing one to death as part of a pissed up laugh.
Hunted foxes are killed at least as painlessly as those killed in any other way.
It's small-time snobs like you that are the most depressing feature of the UK. The more vociferous Remainers clearly revel in Brexit because whatever its drawbacks, it legitimises their saying out loud what they've always thought, how stupid and horrible the proles are. Now you've found something to hate "toffs" about too (and of the people I hunt with, I would guess only about 20% are higher-rate taxpayers). Well done you.
"...the unspeakable in full pursuit of the uneatable,"
I have always dreamed of seeing a post of yours which did not contain serious errors of fact and logic; I would have thought even you could manage it with a partial quotation lifted off the internet. But no: "the unspeakable in pursuit of the uneatable" is what Wilde wrote. Incidentally, he didn't say it directly, he put it in the mouth of a character in a play who turns out to be a twat.
But please, regale us with the views of other convicted paedophiles. What did Jimmy think about it? Gary?
I post facts to the best of my ability, if I have inserted a superfluous 'full' then I apologise (although I never claimed it was a quote). You seem to specialise in personal abuse.
In this election May starts with a huge advantage since the vast majority would not trust Corbyn to run the proverbial whelk stall but it would be a mistake to fritter away that advantage by allowing her to seem out of step with the views of the vast majority. This is not productive territory for the Tories and neither are grammar schools. Arguing the merits of the proposal is really missing the point. She needs to stick to areas where the majority are going to feel comfortable with what she is talking about.
What do you suggest May does?
- Not give direct answers to direct questions? - Dissemble? - Lie?
She should say that - just as is the case with all other olde English sports that involved harming animals for fun - that this is now a settled issue and it would not be appropriate to keep revisiting it.
Politicians have to be careful when dealing with values. People are not always rational about it. Of course Brexit, management of the economy, defence, security, education, the NHS etc etc are all way more important to 99.9% of the population but people want decisions on these complicated matters being made by people they can trust to reflect the concerns of people like them.
In this election May starts with a huge advantage since the vast majority would not trust Corbyn to run the proverbial whelk stall but it would be a mistake to fritter away that advantage by allowing her to seem out of step with the views of the vast majority. This is not productive territory for the Tories and neither are grammar schools. Arguing the merits of the proposal is really missing the point. She needs to stick to areas where the majority are going to feel comfortable with what she is talking about.
I think the Polling on Grammar schools supports May.
The voters are stupid.
Yes the public support more grammar schools but the public also support renationalisation of the railways and we know that's a bad idea.
In an Enoch Powell sense, it may not be. The current system is a poor one, much as the docks were in the 1940s. Powell suggested that the only way to sort the complex mess of dock ownership and management out was to nationalise and then denationalise along more rational lines.
However, if it were left to me my solution would be to break up Network Rail, which is a disaster on all levels.
Barry Gardiner on R4 now. For a Corbynite, I find his pomposity rather strange. His tone reminds me of the Patrician wing of the pre-Cameron Tory party.
Politicians have to be careful when dealing with values. People are not always rational about it. Of course Brexit, management of the economy, defence, security, education, the NHS etc etc are all way more important to 99.9% of the population but people want decisions on these complicated matters being made by people they can trust to reflect the concerns of people like them.
In this election May starts with a huge advantage since the vast majority would not trust Corbyn to run the proverbial whelk stall but it would be a mistake to fritter away that advantage by allowing her to seem out of step with the views of the vast majority. This is not productive territory for the Tories and neither are grammar schools. Arguing the merits of the proposal is really missing the point. She needs to stick to areas where the majority are going to feel comfortable with what she is talking about.
I think the Polling on Grammar schools supports May.
The voters are stupid.
Yes the public support more grammar schools but the public also support renationalisation of the railways and we know that's a bad idea.
Says the public school posh boy. The voters get to choose and the posh boys must suck it up.
Politicians have to be careful when dealing with values. People are not always rational about it. Of course Brexit, management of the economy, defence, security, education, the NHS etc etc are all way more important to 99.9% of the population but people want decisions on these complicated matters being made by people they can trust to reflect the concerns of people like them.
In this election May starts with a huge advantage since the vast majority would not trust Corbyn to run the proverbial whelk stall but it would be a mistake to fritter away that advantage by allowing her to seem out of step with the views of the vast majority. This is not productive territory for the Tories and neither are grammar schools. Arguing the merits of the proposal is really missing the point. She needs to stick to areas where the majority are going to feel comfortable with what she is talking about.
I think the Polling on Grammar schools supports May.
The voters are stupid.
Yes the public support more grammar schools but the public also support renationalisation of the railways and we know that's a bad idea.
The polling question should be whether secondary modern schools should be brought back
In this election May starts with a huge advantage since the vast majority would not trust Corbyn to run the proverbial whelk stall but it would be a mistake to fritter away that advantage by allowing her to seem out of step with the views of the vast majority. This is not productive territory for the Tories and neither are grammar schools. Arguing the merits of the proposal is really missing the point. She needs to stick to areas where the majority are going to feel comfortable with what she is talking about.
What do you suggest May does?
- Not give direct answers to direct questions? - Dissemble? - Lie?
She should say that - just as is the case with all other olde English sports that involved harming animals for fun - that this is now a settled issue and it would not be appropriate to keep revisiting it.
How to get the Countryside Alliance out knocking on doors for UKIP
It makes the Conservatives look backward-looking, cruel and obsessed by trivia. Theresa May should never have gone near the subject.
Completely agree. It is not going to come close to changing my vote but the key to the success of David Cameron and now Theresa May was the detoxification of the Tory image from where the party was in the sad days of that well known rapper, IDS. This is a backward step which, although not decisive, will make many think, do I really have something in common with that party? Do they reflect my values?
Stupid mistake and getting the Countryside Alliance to deliver leaflets for you in ultra safe seats (post the demise of UKIP) is no compensation at all.
Yep. The Nasty party is back.
Politicians should be in politics to do what they believe is right, not what they think will get votes. Otherwise they suffer the fate of the LDs, where people look at them and ask: what are they actually for?
Interesting thought. I've always seen their job at election time as selling ideas but the ideas of the collective not their own.
Would educated American US Presidents support the death penalty if they weren't just giving the mob what they want?
In this election May starts with a huge advantage since the vast majority would not trust Corbyn to run the proverbial whelk stall but it would be a mistake to fritter away that advantage by allowing her to seem out of step with the views of the vast majority. This is not productive territory for the Tories and neither are grammar schools. Arguing the merits of the proposal is really missing the point. She needs to stick to areas where the majority are going to feel comfortable with what she is talking about.
What do you suggest May does?
- Not give direct answers to direct questions? - Dissemble? - Lie?
She should say that - just as is the case with all other olde English sports that involved harming animals for fun - that this is now a settled issue and it would not be appropriate to keep revisiting it.
How to get the Countryside Alliance out knocking on doors for UKIP
Did we ever get a definitive answer to how many seats UKIP are standing in?
Not seen a comprehensive list so far, just the odd regional report from the local rag. @isam mentioned yesterday there may be as many as 400 UKiP candidates standing, although there has been no confirmation afaik.
Politicians have to be careful when dealing with values. People are not always rational about it. Of course Brexit, management of the economy, defence, security, education, the NHS etc etc are all way more important to 99.9% of the population but people want decisions on these complicated matters being made by people they can trust to reflect the concerns of people like them.
In this election May starts with a huge advantage since the vast majority would not trust Corbyn to run the proverbial whelk stall but it would be a mistake to fritter away that advantage by allowing her to seem out of step with the views of the vast majority. This is not productive territory for the Tories and neither are grammar schools. Arguing the merits of the proposal is really missing the point. She needs to stick to areas where the majority are going to feel comfortable with what she is talking about.
I think the Polling on Grammar schools supports May.
The voters are stupid.
Yes the public support more grammar schools but the public also support renationalisation of the railways and we know that's a bad idea.
Says the public school posh boy. The voters get to choose and the posh boys must suck it up.
Well, if you attack me personally, it means you have not a single political argument left.
Did we ever get a definitive answer to how many seats UKIP are standing in?
Not seen a comprehensive list so far, just the odd regional report from the local rag. @isam mentioned yesterday there may be as many as 400 UKiP candidates standing, although there has been no confirmation afaik.
Once we have a figure (and I suspect that it will turn out to be less than that, the figure I saw yesterday was 11 out of 59 in Scotland, for example) the pollsters will have to try to work out what to do about it. Reporting 10% for UKIP doesn't make much sense if only half the country has the option.
One of my biggest gripes is that first class is no longer sufficiently swish to justify the price they charge.
You used to get your own cosy compartment on the slam doors with huge cosy armchair seats, and a styled seat head cover protector.
East Coast Mainline still makes you feel like royalty (disclaimer haven't travelled since Virgin took it over and probably ruined it like they did West coast first class)
I asked for £400 @ 10-1 on Lib Dem 10-19 seats but got knocked back to 50.
I've laid this bet personally to a 800/100 on Betfair actually.
He should have come to this forum, between a few of us I'm sure we could have accommodated this bet - and at better odds than 12-1 too
That LibDem price was awesome! What is it now? Should be about 2/1.
Incidentally my Eurovision tip Bulgaria is now 4/1 3rd fav from 12s.
Some classics to look out for on Saturday.
Moldova, Croatia, Romania Hungary have all gone for bizzare fusions of incompatible genres. Romania combines yodeling and rap, and should score well. Bulgaria is a good tip.
Yep I'm on Moldova too. Bonkers so could be top 4 or bottom.
Can someone explain how proxy voting occurs? Does the person I nominate have to go to my local polling station to cast my vote (I don't have a postal vote)?
Having only heard insults from Labour and the Lib Dems since the referendum, many of those that voted Leave are being pushed – as much as pulled – towards Team Theresa.
Almost every day for the past twelve months, the sort of posh left-wing voices that get to go on the BBC have sounded as if they are seeking to delegitimise what the people decided. “The demos was duped”, arrogant opinion-formers imply. Gina Miller’s efforts to frustrate Brexit were reported with great glee. Millions of voters have noticed. Eurocrats in Brussels have issued what sound like carefully choreographed threats, designed to cajole and intimidate. “Brexit cannot be a success” Jean Claude Juncker insisted.
For many voters, June 8th is a chance to answer back. Giving Mrs May a massive mandate would cut through all that nonsense.
Politicians have to be careful when dealing with values. People are not always rational about it. Of course Brexit, management of the economy, defence, security, education, the NHS etc etc are all way more important to 99.9% of the population but people want decisions on these complicated matters being made by people they can trust to reflect the concerns of people like them.
In this election May starts with a huge advantage since the vast majority would not trust Corbyn to run the proverbial whelk stall but it would be a mistake to fritter away that advantage by allowing her to seem out of step with the views of the vast majority. This is not productive territory for the Tories and neither are grammar schools. Arguing the merits of the proposal is really missing the point. She needs to stick to areas where the majority are going to feel comfortable with what she is talking about.
I think the Polling on Grammar schools supports May.
The voters are stupid.
Yes the public support more grammar schools but the public also support renationalisation of the railways and we know that's a bad idea.
Why? This gets quoted as a truism, but the private sector has has no magic means of running things better. The argument for privatisation is partly investment, though that runs a bit thin given the DfT role in tracks and rail, and partly risk management. Mostly the latter. We've concluded we'd rather that a company and its shareholders take the risk, and be rewarded for doing so.
But there's a legitimate political argument for seeing it the other way. In practice the Gvt bails out that risk and so the balance of risk and reward is all wrong.
Can someone explain how proxy voting occurs? Does the person I nominate have to go to my local polling station to cast my vote (I don't have a postal vote)?
Can someone explain how proxy voting occurs? Does the person I nominate have to go to my local polling station to cast my vote (I don't have a postal vote)?
I believe that is the case, although there is still time to apply for a postal ballot.
Can't see a mention anywhere but Hartlepool doesn't have a UKIP candidate...
Phillip Broughton, surely? Or has he messed up his nomination papers?
EDIT He's listed as standing on the council website.
I remember him on a 5Live hustings for the Kipper leadership (the one Diane James won under duress). Probably the best leader that the kippers never had, though the rate that UKIP get through leaders would suggest that we may see him yet.
Politicians have to be careful when dealing with values. People are not always rational about it. Of course Brexit, management of the economy, defence, security, education, the NHS etc etc are all way more important to 99.9% of the population but people want decisions on these complicated matters being made by people they can trust to reflect the concerns of people like them.
In this election May starts with a huge advantage since the vast majority would not trust Corbyn to run the proverbial whelk stall but it would be a mistake to fritter away that advantage by allowing her to seem out of step with the views of the vast majority. This is not productive territory for the Tories and neither are grammar schools. Arguing the merits of the proposal is really missing the point. She needs to stick to areas where the majority are going to feel comfortable with what she is talking about.
I think the Polling on Grammar schools supports May.
The voters are stupid.
Yes the public support more grammar schools but the public also support renationalisation of the railways and we know that's a bad idea.
Says the public school posh boy. The voters get to choose and the posh boys must suck it up.
Well, if you attack me personally, it means you have not a single political argument left.
When you impugn the intelligence of voters you reveal an unpleasant arrogance and a paucity of argument.
Can someone explain how proxy voting occurs? Does the person I nominate have to go to my local polling station to cast my vote (I don't have a postal vote)?
I had a proxy vote for someone for the Brexit referendum. Take the letter along to the persons polling station and cast the vote.
Did we ever get a definitive answer to how many seats UKIP are standing in?
Not seen a comprehensive list so far, just the odd regional report from the local rag. @isam mentioned yesterday there may be as many as 400 UKiP candidates standing, although there has been no confirmation afaik.
Once we have a figure (and I suspect that it will turn out to be less than that, the figure I saw yesterday was 11 out of 59 in Scotland, for example) the pollsters will have to try to work out what to do about it. Reporting 10% for UKIP doesn't make much sense if only half the country has the option.
This applies to the Greens somewhat too:
Sum through the votes in all the consituencies UKIP is standing in and divide through by the 2015 baseline.
That'll give a multiplication factor which can be applied to the calculated score - the rest of the UKIP votes can then be redistributed as the original UKIP movement has in the poll.
That should be a reasonably quick method.
Mind you we have pollsters like ORB still pumping out fake news regarding Labour and the Tories getting 6 to 8% in Northern Ireland...
Did we ever get a definitive answer to how many seats UKIP are standing in?
Not seen a comprehensive list so far, just the odd regional report from the local rag. @isam mentioned yesterday there may be as many as 400 UKiP candidates standing, although there has been no confirmation afaik.
Once we have a figure (and I suspect that it will turn out to be less than that, the figure I saw yesterday was 11 out of 59 in Scotland, for example) the pollsters will have to try to work out what to do about it. Reporting 10% for UKIP doesn't make much sense if only half the country has the option.
This applies to the Greens somewhat too:
Sum through the votes in all the consituencies UKIP is standing in and divide through by the 2015 baseline.
That'll give a multiplication factor which can be applied to the calculated score - the rest of the UKIP votes can then be redistributed as the original UKIP movement has in the poll.
That should be a reasonably quick method.
Mind you we have pollsters like ORB still pumping out fake news regarding Labour and the Tories getting 6 to 8% in Northern Ireland...
I am not so convinced that kipper voters can simply be reassigned to the Tories in all areas. It probably is accurate across the shires, as we saw last week. Will the same happen in urban areas in the North and Midlands? probably true for many, but I expect many more to go to DNV or to other parties including Labour.
Did we ever get a definitive answer to how many seats UKIP are standing in?
Not seen a comprehensive list so far, just the odd regional report from the local rag. @isam mentioned yesterday there may be as many as 400 UKiP candidates standing, although there has been no confirmation afaik.
Once we have a figure (and I suspect that it will turn out to be less than that, the figure I saw yesterday was 11 out of 59 in Scotland, for example) the pollsters will have to try to work out what to do about it. Reporting 10% for UKIP doesn't make much sense if only half the country has the option.
This applies to the Greens somewhat too:
Sum through the votes in all the consituencies UKIP is standing in and divide through by the 2015 baseline.
That'll give a multiplication factor which can be applied to the calculated score - the rest of the UKIP votes can then be redistributed as the original UKIP movement has in the poll.
That should be a reasonably quick method.
Mind you we have pollsters like ORB still pumping out fake news regarding Labour and the Tories getting 6 to 8% in Northern Ireland...
I am not so convinced that kipper voters can simply be reassigned to the Tories in all areas. It probably is accurate across the shires, as we saw last week. Will the same happen in urban areas in the North and Midlands? probably true for many, but I expect many more to go to DNV or to other parties including Labour.
Did I say they should all be reassigned to the Tories ?
the rest of the UKIP votes can then be redistributed as the original UKIP movement has in the poll
Your method proposes guessing "Oh that UKIP voter phoned from Manchester so they'll probably head back to Labour"
Most people do not put keeping the fox hunting ban as a major factor in how they vote apart from animal rights radicals who will already be voting Labour or LD or SNP or Green anyway. However supporters of foxhunting do put it at the top of their list and they do campaign and leaflet hard if required which would help the Tories in rural marginals, especially in Scotland. Many of them will be far from riffs, indeed in country areas a lot of working class people too are involved in fox hunting
Did we ever get a definitive answer to how many seats UKIP are standing in?
Not seen a comprehensive list so far, just the odd regional report from the local rag. @isam mentioned yesterday there may be as many as 400 UKiP candidates standing, although there has been no confirmation afaik.
Once we have a figure (and I suspect that it will turn out to be less than that, the figure I saw yesterday was 11 out of 59 in Scotland, for example) the pollsters will have to try to work out what to do about it. Reporting 10% for UKIP doesn't make much sense if only half the country has the option.
This applies to the Greens somewhat too:
Sum through the votes in all the consituencies UKIP is standing in and divide through by the 2015 baseline.
That'll give a multiplication factor which can be applied to the calculated score - the rest of the UKIP votes can then be redistributed as the original UKIP movement has in the poll.
That should be a reasonably quick method.
Mind you we have pollsters like ORB still pumping out fake news regarding Labour and the Tories getting 6 to 8% in Northern Ireland...
I am not so convinced that kipper voters can simply be reassigned to the Tories in all areas. It probably is accurate across the shires, as we saw last week. Will the same happen in urban areas in the North and Midlands? probably true for many, but I expect many more to go to DNV or to other parties including Labour.
Did I say they should all be reassigned to the Tories ?
the rest of the UKIP votes can then be redistributed as the original UKIP movement has in the poll
Your method proposes guessing "Oh that UKIP voter phoned from Manchester so they'll probably head back to Labour"
Sorry but that is completely arbitrary.
It also has the effect of being a comfort blanket for people hoping against all hope that there won't be a Tory landslide.
Politicians have to be careful when dealing with values. People are not always rational about it. Of course Brexit, management of the economy, defence, security, education, the NHS etc etc are all way more important to 99.9% of the population but people want decisions on these complicated matters being made by people they can trust to reflect the concerns of people like them.
In this election May starts with a huge advantage since the vast majority would not trust Corbyn to run the proverbial whelk stall but it would be a mistake to fritter away that advantage by allowing her to seem out of step with the views of the vast majority. This is not productive territory for the Tories and neither are grammar schools. Arguing the merits of the proposal is really missing the point. She needs to stick to areas where the majority are going to feel comfortable with what she is talking about.
I think the Polling on Grammar schools supports May.
The voters are stupid.
Yes the public support more grammar schools but the public also support renationalisation of the railways and we know that's a bad idea.
Why? This gets quoted as a truism, but the private sector has has no magic means of running things better. The argument for privatisation is partly investment, though that runs a bit thin given the DfT role in tracks and rail, and partly risk management. Mostly the latter. We've concluded we'd rather that a company and its shareholders take the risk, and be rewarded for doing so.
But there's a legitimate political argument for seeing it the other way. In practice the Gvt bails out that risk and so the balance of risk and reward is all wrong.
Other problems associated with being in the public sector include to fold to unreasonable demands from trade unions to save bad press, the unability to pay attractive salaries to exceptional people because of civil service paygrades and maintaining differentials, and the inbuilt incentive to bureacratise and empire build because of the inbuilt implication that cash will be found, rather than the threat of going out of business if you piss money against the wall. None of this is unsurmountable, but the track record is not good.
Priti Patel, the international development secretary, paid her husband tens of thousands of pounds to run her office while he had two other jobs, including a previously undisclosed role in the City. - The Times
I live in the countryside..Foxes in the field behind. I have never hunted - I would fall off the horse.. And don't follow it..
The League Against Cruel Sports say "“Are we really going to turn the clock back to a time when killing animals for fun was legal?"
Which is utter nonsense..considering all the other animals you can legally kill..and in the case of rats you SHOULD kill..
So frankly I - and many others - don't give a damn about the issue.
| Many City dwellers have not got a clue about the countryside..
There is a difference between killing an animal for a perceived necessity like pest control and torturing one to death as part of a pissed up laugh.
Hunted foxes are killed at least as painlessly as those killed in any other way.
It's small-time snobs like you that are the most depressing feature of the UK. The more vociferous Remainers clearly revel in Brexit because whatever its drawbacks, it legitimises their saying out loud what they've always thought, how stupid and horrible the proles are. Now you've found something to hate "toffs" about too (and of the people I hunt with, I would guess only about 20% are higher-rate taxpayers). Well done you.
"...the unspeakable in full pursuit of the uneatable,"
I have always dreamed of seeing a post of yours which did not contain serious errors of fact and logic; I would have thought even you could manage it with a partial quotation lifted off the internet. But no: "the unspeakable in pursuit of the uneatable" is what Wilde wrote. Incidentally, he didn't say it directly, he put it in the mouth of a character in a play who turns out to be a twat.
But please, regale us with the views of other convicted paedophiles. What did Jimmy think about it? Gary?
I post facts to the best of my ability, if I have inserted a superfluous 'full' then I apologise (although I never claimed it was a quote). You seem to specialise in personal abuse.
Just glancing through the English seats I've bet on and I see Ukip are standing in most. The ones they are not standing in of note are North Norfolk and, annoyingly from my point of view, Bath and Wirral South.
Politicians have to be careful when dealing with values. People are not always rational about it. Of course Brexit, management of the economy, defence, security, education, the NHS etc etc are all way more important to 99.9% of the population but people want decisions on these complicated matters being made by people they can trust to reflect the concerns of people like them.
In this election May starts with a huge advantage since the vast majority would not trust Corbyn to run the proverbial whelk stall but it would be a mistake to fritter away that advantage by allowing her to seem out of step with the views of the vast majority. This is not productive territory for the Tories and neither are grammar schools. Arguing the merits of the proposal is really missing the point. She needs to stick to areas where the majority are going to feel comfortable with what she is talking about.
I think the Polling on Grammar schools supports May.
The voters are stupid.
Yes the public support more grammar schools but the public also support renationalisation of the railways and we know that's a bad idea.
The polling question should be whether secondary modern schools should be brought back
Priti Patel, the international development secretary, paid her husband tens of thousands of pounds to run her office while he had two other jobs, including a previously undisclosed role in the City. - The Times
Sorry not sure I understand here - I could pay my other half £5,000 a year. It wouldn't change anything as the money is ours anyway. Whats the problem with her paying her husband money ?
Priti Patel, the international development secretary, paid her husband tens of thousands of pounds to run her office while he had two other jobs, including a previously undisclosed role in the City. - The Times
Sorry not sure I understand here - I could pay my other half £5,000 a year. It wouldn't change anything as the money is ours anyway. Whats the problem with her paying her husband money ?
Politicians have to be careful when dealing with values. People are not always rational about it. Of course Brexit, management of the economy, defence, security, education, the NHS etc etc are all way more important to 99.9% of the population but people want decisions on these complicated matters being made by people they can trust to reflect the concerns of people like them.
In this election May starts with a huge advantage since the vast majority would not trust Corbyn to run the proverbial whelk stall but it would be a mistake to fritter away that advantage by allowing her to seem out of step with the views of the vast majority. This is not productive territory for the Tories and neither are grammar schools. Arguing the merits of the proposal is really missing the point. She needs to stick to areas where the majority are going to feel comfortable with what she is talking about.
I think the Polling on Grammar schools supports May.
The voters are stupid.
Yes the public support more grammar schools but the public also support renationalisation of the railways and we know that's a bad idea.
The polling question should be whether secondary modern schools should be brought back
Priti Patel, the international development secretary, paid her husband tens of thousands of pounds to run her office while he had two other jobs, including a previously undisclosed role in the City. - The Times
Priti is married to George Osborne? When did this happen?
Just glancing through the English seats I've bet on and I see Ukip are standing in most. The ones they are not standing in of note are North Norfolk and, annoyingly from my point of view, Bath and Wirral South.
Priti Patel, the international development secretary, paid her husband tens of thousands of pounds to run her office while he had two other jobs, including a previously undisclosed role in the City. - The Times
Sorry not sure I understand here - I could pay my other half £5,000 a year. It wouldn't change anything as the money is ours anyway. Whats the problem with her paying her husband money ?
It's not her money that she is spending. She is spending a parliamentary allowance...
Priti Patel, the international development secretary, paid her husband tens of thousands of pounds to run her office while he had two other jobs, including a previously undisclosed role in the City. - The Times
Sorry not sure I understand here - I could pay my other half £5,000 a year. It wouldn't change anything as the money is ours anyway. Whats the problem with her paying her husband money ?
Using the staff allowance I guess, the money wouldn't be spent without it. Similar to Fillon's scandal just on a lesser scale.
Priti Patel, the international development secretary, paid her husband tens of thousands of pounds to run her office while he had two other jobs, including a previously undisclosed role in the City. - The Times
Good news for the country. Priti Patel is spectacularly mediocre, at best, and should be nowhere near the cabinet. Though, to be fair, that applies to just about every current member of it. Yesterday, there was some serious speculation that Amber Rudd might replace Philip Hammond as Chancellor!! :-D
Hopefully, the Tories are going to dig up some talent among their new arrivals. What they have right now is very poor fare indeed - from the PM down.
Did we ever get a definitive answer to how many seats UKIP are standing in?
Not seen a comprehensive list so far, just the odd regional report from the local rag. @isam mentioned yesterday there may be as many as 400 UKiP candidates standing, although there has been no confirmation afaik.
Once we have a figure (and I suspect that it will turn out to be less than that, the figure I saw yesterday was 11 out of 59 in Scotland, for example) the pollsters will have to try to work out what to do about it. Reporting 10% for UKIP doesn't make much sense if only half the country has the option.
This applies to the Greens somewhat too:
Sum through the votes in all the consituencies UKIP is standing in and divide through by the 2015 baseline.
That'll give a multiplication factor which can be applied to the calculated score - the rest of the UKIP votes can then be redistributed as the original UKIP movement has in the poll.
That should be a reasonably quick method.
Mind you we have pollsters like ORB still pumping out fake news regarding Labour and the Tories getting 6 to 8% in Northern Ireland...
I am not so convinced that kipper voters can simply be reassigned to the Tories in all areas. It probably is accurate across the shires, as we saw last week. Will the same happen in urban areas in the North and Midlands? probably true for many, but I expect many more to go to DNV or to other parties including Labour.
Did I say they should all be reassigned to the Tories ?
the rest of the UKIP votes can then be redistributed as the original UKIP movement has in the poll
Your method proposes guessing "Oh that UKIP voter phoned from Manchester so they'll probably head back to Labour"
Sorry but that is completely arbitrary.
No, but I think that UKIP voters in Rutland are rather different to those in Leicester West. The same is true for all parties to a degree, but with the disintegration of UKIP more significant.
I am now thinking that Lab will be getting about 175 seats,
Comments
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/david-cameron-says-he-wants-to-repeal-the-fox-hunting-ban-10091571.html
You used to get your own cosy compartment on the slam doors with huge cosy armchair seats, and a styled seat head cover protector.
Politicians have to be careful when dealing with values. People are not always rational about it. Of course Brexit, management of the economy, defence, security, education, the NHS etc etc are all way more important to 99.9% of the population but people want decisions on these complicated matters being made by people they can trust to reflect the concerns of people like them.
In this election May starts with a huge advantage since the vast majority would not trust Corbyn to run the proverbial whelk stall but it would be a mistake to fritter away that advantage by allowing her to seem out of step with the views of the vast majority. This is not productive territory for the Tories and neither are grammar schools. Arguing the merits of the proposal is really missing the point. She needs to stick to areas where the majority are going to feel comfortable with what she is talking about.
Incidentally my Eurovision tip Bulgaria is now 4/1 3rd fav from 12s.
https://i0.wp.com/voxpoliticalonline.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/161227-Rowson-hunting-cartoon.jpg
Meanwhile, in the 2015 Conservative manifesto:
A Conservative Government will give Parliament the opportunity to repeal the Hunting Act on a free vote, with a government bill in government time.
- Not give direct answers to direct questions?
- Dissemble?
- Lie?
I think the number of votes that would be influenced by a pledge for a vote on foxhunting is vanishingly small, but boy oh boy will they be noisy about it.
2) it's how it makes the Conservatives appear that I'm voicing an opinion on (indirectly supported by the polling), not the activity.
You're not having a very good morning of it so far.
Moldova, Croatia, Romania Hungary have all gone for bizzare fusions of incompatible genres. Romania combines yodeling and rap, and should score well. Bulgaria is a good tip.
The PM has certainly shot someones fox ....
Will the Kimblewick MoFH allow her to wear kitten print jodhpur(r)s whilst riding side saddle at Chequers.
There's a Jilly Cooper steamy pot boiler there somewhere ....
EDIT He's listed as standing on the council website.
Yes the public support more grammar schools but the public also support renationalisation of the railways and we know that's a bad idea.
https://twitter.com/MichaelLCrick/status/862921042288934913
You seem to specialise in personal abuse.
However, if it were left to me my solution would be to break up Network Rail, which is a disaster on all levels.
https://www.hartlepool.gov.uk/download/downloads/id/3127/notice_of_poll_statement_of_persons_nominated_and_situation_of_polling_stations.pdf
Voters simply have to choose the least worst or very best of them to form a government.
Would educated American US Presidents support the death penalty if they weren't just giving the mob what they want?
https://twitter.com/DPJHodges/status/862922879083720705
Titter ....
A fie on Mrs May for deciding to target the fragrant Mr Burgon.
Then steel in 1980 would be the Third, coal in '85 the fourth, and have we had a fifth yet?
Having only heard insults from Labour and the Lib Dems since the referendum, many of those that voted Leave are being pushed – as much as pulled – towards Team Theresa.
Almost every day for the past twelve months, the sort of posh left-wing voices that get to go on the BBC have sounded as if they are seeking to delegitimise what the people decided. “The demos was duped”, arrogant opinion-formers imply. Gina Miller’s efforts to frustrate Brexit were reported with great glee. Millions of voters have noticed. Eurocrats in Brussels have issued what sound like carefully choreographed threats, designed to cajole and intimidate. “Brexit cannot be a success” Jean Claude Juncker insisted.
For many voters, June 8th is a chance to answer back. Giving Mrs May a massive mandate would cut through all that nonsense.
http://www.conservativehome.com/thecolumnists/2017/05/douglas-carswell-those-posh-left-wing-people-who-get-on-the-bbc-have-helped-drive-ukip-voters-to-the-conservatives.html
But there's a legitimate political argument for seeing it the other way. In practice the Gvt bails out that risk and so the balance of risk and reward is all wrong.
Didn't she reply to a question, rather than raise it herself?
https://twitter.com/DenisMacShane/status/862923288544149505
Take the letter along to the persons polling station and cast the vote.
Sum through the votes in all the consituencies UKIP is standing in and divide through by the 2015 baseline.
That'll give a multiplication factor which can be applied to the calculated score - the rest of the UKIP votes can then be redistributed as the original UKIP movement has in the poll.
That should be a reasonably quick method.
Mind you we have pollsters like ORB still pumping out fake news regarding Labour and the Tories getting 6 to 8% in Northern Ireland...
https://twitter.com/ProfTimBale/status/862926883754782720
the rest of the UKIP votes can then be redistributed as the original UKIP movement has in the poll
Your method proposes guessing "Oh that UKIP voter phoned from Manchester so they'll probably head back to Labour"
Sorry but that is completely arbitrary.
Priti Patel, the international development secretary, paid her husband tens of thousands of pounds to run her office while he had two other jobs, including a previously undisclosed role in the City. - The Times
I could pay my other half £5,000 a year. It wouldn't change anything as the money is ours anyway.
Whats the problem with her paying her husband money ?
Hopefully, the Tories are going to dig up some talent among their new arrivals. What they have right now is very poor fare indeed - from the PM down.
I am now thinking that Lab will be getting about 175 seats,
Here's hoping for a PB Nojam.