Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » It is 16-1 that this man will win South Shields and become

SystemSystem Posts: 12,059
edited April 2013 in General

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » It is 16-1 that this man will win South Shields and become Ukip’s first elected MP

A poster for UKIP’s Richard Elvin from Middlesbrough by election.He’s tobe candidate in #SouthShields twitter.com/MSmithsonPB/st…

Read the full story here


«13

Comments

  • FregglesFreggles Posts: 3,486
    LAB hold
  • richardDoddrichardDodd Posts: 5,472
    Why do you post as a Cheshire Farmer..
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,557
    Indeed, Mr. Freggles. A Labour hold with UKIP probably second looks like the boringly predictable outcome.
  • RichardNabaviRichardNabavi Posts: 3,413
    Smart move.

    They can re-use posters from Middlesbrough.
  • mosesmoses Posts: 45
    edited April 2013
    Hope so. Anyone.... absolutely anyone but Labour.

    Meanwhile the military wing of the Labour Party are stirring again.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-22057721
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    Surely it's all about the size of the voteshare for second place?
  • Stark_DawningStark_Dawning Posts: 9,608
    'A Labour hold with UKIP probably second looks like the boringly predictable outcome.'

    A Labour loss would be a political earthquake and would certainly spell the end of Balls's career, though Chuka, who's being groomed to take over the Shadow Chancellorship should Balls fail his probation, might not be too upset. However, I can't envisage it happening. What's curious is that most of the voters in these Labour strongholds don't particularly adore the party. The one's I've met view all politicians with a weary contempt. The thought is that if you must vote it may as well be for the Labour bloke vote out of respect for tradition. A bit depressing really.
  • GrandioseGrandiose Posts: 2,323
    Plato said:

    The UK produces 51.8% of what we eat and imports the rest.

    Is that net? As I understand, we export quite a lot of the things we also import.

    "He’s Richard Elvin who lives just 14 miles away so is not too far off being a local."

    Round here live a mile away and you might as well be from another planet.
  • Stark_DawningStark_Dawning Posts: 9,608
    FPT: 'Blimey, I do a bit of gardening and when I finally check the news I discover that Labour has done the most humongous U-turn on welfare.'

    It's a nightmare, an absolute nightmare! I blame Balls for this. Going around, apparently claiming that Mick Philpott should be exempt from criticism, was always going to be a high-risk strategy. Now Harman is left clearing up Balls's mess in a desperate attempt to shift the media narrative. I feel so sorry for her, I really do!
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,246

    FPT: 'Blimey, I do a bit of gardening and when I finally check the news I discover that Labour has done the most humongous U-turn on welfare.'

    It's a nightmare, an absolute nightmare! I blame Balls for this. Going around, apparently claiming that Mick Philpott should be exempt from criticism, was always going to be a high-risk strategy. Now Harman is left clearing up Balls's mess in a desperate attempt to shift the media narrative. I feel so sorry for her, I really do!

    "Clearing up Balls' mess" - It's probably the first time Harriet's done housework.
  • I blame Balls for this. Going around, apparently claiming that Mick Philpott should be exempt from criticism, was always going to be a high-risk strategy.

    Nobody, not even the Labour Party, is arguing that Mr Philpott ought to be exempt from criticism. There has been no political dissent at all from the sentence of the Crown Court at Nottingham.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 95,037
    Grandiose said:

    Plato said:

    The UK produces 51.8% of what we eat and imports the rest.

    Is that net? As I understand, we export quite a lot of the things we also import.

    "He’s Richard Elvin who lives just 14 miles away so is not too far off being a local."

    Round here live a mile away and you might as well be from another planet.
    Harsh. Easier in a rural seat I imagine, as in my constituency one end has to be at least 20 miles from the other end, so such a distance outside the boundaries would probably overlooked.

    I hope they make an issue of it though, it'd be great to see one of those leaflets pointing out just how far away he lives, which in general terms would be right next door.

  • kle4kle4 Posts: 95,037
    Even in the current climate, it is pretty embarrasing everyone already seems to have written off the Tories off for second place. Obviously a UKIP win is spectacularly unlikely, but I don't think they'd even be concerned about percentage and maintaining momentum from Eastleigh, given they didn't even stand last time.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,380
    Presumably this is just some sort of holding position for Labour: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-22056212

    I mean, we cannot afford the current system so how on earth do we ensure that those who have paid in get more out? Have they applied their mind as to how this pyramid scheme works at all? Unless the vast majority pay in more than they get out there is no money for the disabled (remember them, so cruelly done to by the "bedroom tax"?) the long term unemployed; the unemployable, the young, those with young familes, those in education, I mean where do you start?

    Maybe they are planning to abolish income support, that might help. Or let a lot of people starve. Or are just telling even more ridiculous lies than usual. I know which one I am on.
  • mosesmoses Posts: 45
    But it’s too late. Much too late. The welfare debate is over. And Labour has lost it.

    http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100210874/labour-is-panicking-over-welfare-its-flying-by-the-seat-of-ed-milibands-pants-except-ed-isnt-wearing-any/

    Precisely.......the blank sheet of paper ain't going to win the election. Labour are in turmoil and utter panic. Have to pin their hopes on the military wings general strike then I suppose.

  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,380
    Labour's solution to the unaffordability of welfare: "we need to pay out more". On reflection, why I am I not surprised?
  • @DavidL
    True. But that is HM Chancellor of the Exchequer's solution as well.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 95,037
    moses said:

    But it’s too late. Much too late. The welfare debate is over. And Labour has lost it.

    http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100210874/labour-is-panicking-over-welfare-its-flying-by-the-seat-of-ed-milibands-pants-except-ed-isnt-wearing-any/

    Precisely.......the blank sheet of paper ain't going to win the election. Labour are in turmoil and utter panic. Have to pin their hopes on the military wings general strike then I suppose.

    Insert obligatory comment about Dan Hodges and Ed M here.
  • Can anyone tell me why the time shows as 7.03PM (reading on an iPad)?
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 10,515
    @moses

    Labour have lost the debate, you're quite right. However noone has told the masses.

    There is a really big political problem in communication. The vast bulk of the electorate simply doesn't interest itself in news, much less political news. I think that matters would be helped slightly, but perhaps significantly if from time-to-time politicians did say that they had been won round by their opponents views. I doubt that there is a politician so thick that he fails to see some merit in this.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 51,189
    Good moaning! I brung you a massage: The Kong's Spooch is on Chunnel Fear at Noon O'Clock.
  • GrandioseGrandiose Posts: 2,323
    edited April 2013

    Can anyone tell me why the time shows as 7.03PM (reading on an iPad)?

    I've tried changing my local settings to test this and they have no effect.

    I think you're set to UTC (co-ordinated universal time) which doesn't observe DST.

    Edit: Not sure because there doesn't seem to be a preference for it either.
  • mosesmoses Posts: 45
    kle4 said:

    moses said:

    But it’s too late. Much too late. The welfare debate is over. And Labour has lost it.

    http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100210874/labour-is-panicking-over-welfare-its-flying-by-the-seat-of-ed-milibands-pants-except-ed-isnt-wearing-any/

    Precisely.......the blank sheet of paper ain't going to win the election. Labour are in turmoil and utter panic. Have to pin their hopes on the military wings general strike then I suppose.

    Insert obligatory comment about Dan Hodges and Ed M here.
    Cant shoot the messenger

    . Meanwhile the most accurate part is here

    "It’s a joke. Labour doesn’t have a plan or a strategy. It’s flying by the seat of its leader’s pants. Except its leader isn’t wearing any pants. Labour’s Emperor doesn’t have a stitch on. And yet his activists and his MPs and even some commentators catch a glimpse of a 10-point opinion poll lead and gush, “My, my, isn’t young master Miliband fashionably attired.”

    Indeed ...indeed.
  • IOSIOS Posts: 1,450
    Dave is a genius. Talking about UKIP issues only boosts the UKIP vote.

    Hopefully the Lib Dems will make gain off the Tories. What chance the Lib Dems over taking the Tories and pushing them into third party status.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 95,037
    IOS said:

    Dave is a genius. Talking about UKIP issues only boosts the UKIP vote..

    I suppose his desperation comes from the fact they used to be Con issues.

    And I don't think you really want Conservatives as a third party. The left needs a bogeyman, and lacking a viable and powerful one on the right, you'll just start splitting into various factions and going left vs left, and the hatred would only be more intense because of the 'betrayal' from those you'd expect to toe the line.

  • carlcarl Posts: 750
    Good grief.

    Don't you Tories get it?

    This welfare nastiness isn't helping your electoral prospects. It's doing the opposite.
  • RightChuckRightChuck Posts: 110
    carl said:

    Good grief.

    Don't you Tories get it?

    This welfare nastiness isn't helping your electoral prospects. It's doing the opposite.

    The polling would suggest you're out of touch.
  • nigel4englandnigel4england Posts: 4,800
    carl said:

    Good grief.

    Don't you Tories get it?

    This welfare nastiness isn't helping your electoral prospects. It's doing the opposite.

    Do you think it's helping Labour?

  • kle4kle4 Posts: 95,037
    edited April 2013
    tim said:

    Why do the PB Tories believe Osborne is cutting the welfare bill?

    Because opponents of the Tories, or at least the loudest ones in the media, constantly complain about the cuts. They're blamed for them regardless if they happen or not.
  • RightChuckRightChuck Posts: 110

    FPT: IOS said:

    "The reason why UKIP is growing is because the Tories keep on banging on about Europe/Immigration/Welfare!

    All it does is confirm to those UKIP inclined people they are right and the world is going to hell in a handcart. The Tories won't change this fact so why vote Tory. And all the time they lose the center ground.

    The Tories should focus on cost of living issues and low wages. But they won't cos Osborne and Crosby are idiots."


    You may be right re Europe, but the reason the Tories bang on about immigration and welfare is because they know there are Labour votes to be lost in those areas.

    Basing a strategy on the belief that this is idiotic might not be entirely productive.
  • IOSIOS Posts: 1,450
    RightChuck


    But the Tories can't stop immigration and the Mail will always have its odd examples.

    All it does is make right wing voters realise the Tories are in effectual. So they vote UKIP.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    tim said:

    Why do the PB Tories believe Osborne is cutting the welfare bill?

    Why do PB Lefties believe the Welfare changes are 'overwhelmingly unpopular' and this is backed by polling evidence?

    In your own time....
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    edited April 2013
    kle4 said:

    you'll just start splitting into various factions and going left vs left, and the hatred would only be more intense because of the 'betrayal' from those you'd expect to toe the line.

    That's theoretical, the gaping chasm over Europe in the tory party, Cammie papered over with his cast iron referendum plan, is not. The idea that there can be endless harmony in a party split so fiercely on staying IN or OUT is a fantasy. As Cammie will find out If his EU referendum plans keep unravelling. It won't just be the kippers he has to worry about then.

  • IOSIOS Posts: 1,450
    KLE4

    If the Tories become the third placed party then there will be no issue. They will probably fold and just join UKIP.

    At least UKIP might be able to win a majority. Unlike the Tories.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 95,037
    edited April 2013
    Mick_Pork said:

    kle4 said:

    you'll just start splitting into various factions and going left vs left, and the hatred would only be more intense because of the 'betrayal' from those you'd expect to toe the line.

    That's theoretical, the gaping chasm over Europe in the tory party Cammie papered over with his cast iron referendum plan is not. The idea that there can be harmony in a party split so fiercely on staying IN or OUT is a fantasy. As Cammie will find out If his EU referendum plans keep unravelling. It won't just be the kippers he has to worry about then.

    I know it's theoretical, and I never said the Tories would be at harmony. I was saying that people who despise the Tories far beyond what is reasonable for what is just a political party (even if one fears it is a party which has devastating consequences), would miss having them as a convenient opponent, and that if the Tories fell and only parties of the left remained, those types of people would miss them and turn with even more viciousness on others of the left, as the hysterical 'betrayal' comments when the LDs went into Coalition showed all too clearly, among other obvious signs.

    When's there's such irrational hatred for a political party (and hatred at the level we often see, is irrational, even if some level of it is not) , I think it very likely if the focus of that hatred goes, some new force would become the focus of that ire.

    Yes, I'm just speculating again. The reason I didn't delve into the Tories' problems originally was because that was not my focus on that post, not because I was ignoring it. Not every post has to be about the horrors facing the or inflicted by the Tories.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    Toxic?

    @JohnRentoul: I agree with George Osborne that the welfare system in Britain is broken: 66% ComRes http://www.comres.co.uk/polls/The_People_Bedroom_Tax_Poll_April_2013.pdf Even if Chancellor's name used

    Oh, wait...
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    IOS said:

    At least UKIP might be able to win a majority. Unlike the Tories.

    Maybe a small one next time?



  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    In the Daily Mail Guardian:

    The unease in the Labour ranks over the party's tactics was highlighted by the MP Simon Danczuk who said the Tories were playing his party "like a fiddle". He tweeted: "It's as though the Tories are playing Labour like a fiddle in this welfare reform debate. Need to acknowledge some people choose not to." He also tweeted: "Simply complaining about cuts to benefits is easy, comfy, cosy politics which doesn't help anyone. Need to be much smarter, more challenging"

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2013/apr/07/osborne-philpott-welfare-benefits-reform
  • TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 7,362
    IOS said:

    KLE4

    If the Tories become the third placed party then there will be no issue. They will probably fold and just join UKIP.

    At least UKIP might be able to win a majority. Unlike the Tories.


    If you hate the tories IoS,your going to have real problems with ukip - lol

  • IOSIOS Posts: 1,450
    Carlotta

    you will have more chance winning a majority if you can admit yourself that under the current approach the Tories can not win a majority.
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    kle4 said:

    When's there's such hatred for a political party, I think it very likely if the focus of that hatred goes, some new force would become the focus of that ire.

    Yes, I'm just speculating again.

    Reasonably so. I didn't say there would be harmony for the other parties should there be a realignment of politics following the kind of intense split and infighting that UKIP and Europe could provoke in the tory party.

    What you would likely see is an uber-Blairite labour party with the lib dems reacting against the coalition and returning to a more left of centre position. That process would be messy.

  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548


    FPT: IOS said:

    "The reason why UKIP is growing is because the Tories keep on banging on about Europe/Immigration/Welfare!

    All it does is confirm to those UKIP inclined people they are right and the world is going to hell in a handcart. The Tories won't change this fact so why vote Tory. And all the time they lose the center ground.

    The Tories should focus on cost of living issues and low wages. But they won't cos Osborne and Crosby are idiots."


    You may be right re Europe, but the reason the Tories bang on about immigration and welfare is because they know there are Labour votes to be lost in those areas.

    Basing a strategy on the belief that this is idiotic might not be entirely productive.

    Not only will Labour lose the votes, they will lose the argument. The next Labour government will not only keep the Coalition welfare reforms, they will tighten them further (remember it was Labour who outsourced the disability testing to ATOS).

    While some ego's will be bruised, the policies will live on, with wailing and gnashing of teeth from the PB Lefties.

  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    Scott_P said:

    Toxic?
    @JohnRentoul: I agree with George Osborne that the welfare system in Britain is broken: 66%

    It gets better...

    Net 'agree':
    Con: +84
    Lab: +12
    LibD: +58
    Other: +48

    Even including the 'toxic' Osborne name still has Labour voters agreeing with the proposition.....
  • IOSIOS Posts: 1,450
    Fox

    Very funny. If the Tories keep on going the way they are the Lib Dems could really over take the Tories as UKIP move on up to 20%.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 95,037

    IOS said:

    KLE4

    If the Tories become the third placed party then there will be no issue. They will probably fold and just join UKIP.

    At least UKIP might be able to win a majority. Unlike the Tories.


    If you hate the tories IoS,your going to have real problems with ukip - lol

    Actually that makes a great deal of sense to me now. The Cameroons have tried at times, with varying success, to tack to the centre, which given Labour have also tacked to the centre, may have been a bit uncomfortable as the two 'foes' bunch up against each other a bit on certain issues. Gets in the way of the hate.

    If the Tories revert to or merge with UKIP, who are perceived to be ToryHard (where LDs are Labour-lite), the distinctions will be greater and the hatred less beset by complications.
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    edited April 2013
    kle4 said:

    When's there's such irrational hatred for a political party

    Whether you think it's irrational or not we don't actually have to speculate much to see what happens if the tory party returns to being the nasty party. Cameron can merely ask IDS and Hague how fruitful their leaderships were when that last occurred.

  • carlcarl Posts: 750

    carl said:

    Good grief.

    Don't you Tories get it?

    This welfare nastiness isn't helping your electoral prospects. It's doing the opposite.

    The polling would suggest you're out of touch.
    Wrong.

    The polling suggests the Tories are getting no thanks, and indeed retoxifying, because they look like they are enjoying cutting benefits of those who genuinely need help.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 95,037
    Mick_Pork said:

    kle4 said:

    When's there's such hatred for a political party, I think it very likely if the focus of that hatred goes, some new force would become the focus of that ire.

    Yes, I'm just speculating again.

    What you would likely see is an uber-Blairite labour party with the lib dems reacting against the coalition and returning to a more left of centre position. That process would be messy.

    Probably. Then again, the Tories have been essentially extinguished up your way, so it's pretty much just lefty parties up in scotland I presume, and things aren't too vicious except where independence is concerned, would that be a reasonable view? (I really don't know Scottish politics)
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530

    Even including the 'toxic' Osborne name still has Labour voters agreeing with the proposition.....

    Fine. Then get him front and centre every day hammering on that message.

    We'll see in the May locals just how wise a master strategy that is.

  • carlcarl Posts: 750

    Scott_P said:

    Toxic?
    @JohnRentoul: I agree with George Osborne that the welfare system in Britain is broken: 66%

    It gets better...

    Net 'agree':
    Con: +84
    Lab: +12
    LibD: +58
    Other: +48

    Even including the 'toxic' Osborne name still has Labour voters agreeing with the proposition.....
    It gets better.

    The Bedroom Tax shows how out of touch the Government are with the lives of real people
    Agree 55%
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    IOS said:

    Fox

    Very funny. If the Tories keep on going the way they are the Lib Dems could really over take the Tories as UKIP move on up to 20%.

    It matters not who is top of the table, these are not football teams.

    What matters is the policy, and Labour are becoming increasingly like the Tories on their line on immigration, Europe and now Welfare.

    After all, no-one on the Labour side has pledged to reverse any of the coalition welfare policies, signalling that they will indeed continue them.

    He who laughs last, laughs longest
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    edited April 2013
    kle4 said:

    and things aren't too vicious except where independence is concerned, would that be a reasonable view? (I really don't know Scottish politics)

    Au contraire.*chuckles* Scottish Labour have a blazing hatred of the SNP that was there long before independence took centre stage. It is understandably reciprocated for the most part.

    I could see precisely the same kind of thing between labour and the lib dems should there be a realignment. Think back to the kind of vehement hatred between New Labour and the lib dems over Iraq and multiply it. That would likely have consequences for tactical voting.


  • Scottish polling news from the ScotsGreens. Scots (they say) dont mind getting poorer as long as everyone is poorer! Is that a "let them all eat stale bread" strategy?

    "The survey of 1,002 people in Scotland shows that around three-fifths (58%) agree that consideration of a fairer and more equal society is more important than whether they will be slightly richer or poorer."

    http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/home-news/fairer-society-more-important-than-personal-wealth-indyref-poll-finds.1365321991
  • TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 7,362
    LABOUR high-flier Chuka Umunna was last night under pressure for using multiple online identities.

    http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/politics/article4877069.ece


    Mirror,mirror on the wall,who am I this week,the man is a walking laugh a minute.
  • LABOUR high-flier Chuka Umunna was last night under pressure for using multiple online identities.

    http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/politics/article4877069.ece


    Mirror,mirror on the wall,who am I this week,the man is a walking laugh a minute.

    First, Michael Green, now, Harrison socialdemocrat Umunna. What the feck sort of people are we letting rule us?

  • nigel4englandnigel4england Posts: 4,800

    LABOUR high-flier Chuka Umunna was last night under pressure for using multiple online identities.

    http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/politics/article4877069.ece


    Mirror,mirror on the wall,who am I this week,the man is a walking laugh a minute.

    An absolute laughing stock, an utter slime ball. Can't wait to see Labour try to get elected with smarmy hypocrites like him to the fore.

    It's all beginning to come unstuck for little Ed, the real fun will start when he has to address the electorate in the debates.


  • TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 7,362
    IainDale Would David Davis have made a better PM than David Cameron?... — We shall never know, shall we? But I think yes. ask.fm/a/3bqccgoj
  • Stark_DawningStark_Dawning Posts: 9,608
    'Amid criticisms that Labour has ceded the welfare debate to the Tories, the shadow work and pensions secretary, Liam Byrne, called for a return to the "old principle of contribution", pioneered by William Beveridge in 1942. This would start by allocating social housing to people who work and contribute to the community.'

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2013/apr/07/osborne-philpott-welfare-benefits-reform

    Sounds as if Labour are drawing up an 'approved vocation' list for which people will allowed a council house. 'People who work and contribute to the community'? I take it that's code for council employee. Councils will be putting their own at the top of the housing lists, and those who work for the private sector will be stuffed. This will be cronyism on a massive scale.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    carl said:

    The Bedroom Tax shows how out of touch the Government are with the lives of real people
    Agree 55%

    The neutrally worded YouGov showed net +7% in support of :

    "Reducing the amount of housing benefit people in social housing receive if they are considered to have more bedrooms than they need (e.g. a couple are regarded as needing one bedroom, a couple with a child two bedrooms)?"



  • nigel4englandnigel4england Posts: 4,800

    'Amid criticisms that Labour has ceded the welfare debate to the Tories, the shadow work and pensions secretary, Liam Byrne, called for a return to the "old principle of contribution", pioneered by William Beveridge in 1942. This would start by allocating social housing to people who work and contribute to the community.'

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2013/apr/07/osborne-philpott-welfare-benefits-reform

    Sounds as if Labour are drawing up an 'approved vocation' list for which people will allowed a council house. 'People who work and contribute to the community'? I take it that's code for council employee. Councils will be putting their own at the top of the housing lists, and those who work for the private sector will be stuffed. This will be cronyism on a massive scale.

    'Amid criticisms that Labour has ceded the welfare debate to the Tories, the shadow work and pensions secretary, Liam Byrne, called for a return to the "old principle of contribution", pioneered by William Beveridge in 1942. This would start by allocating social housing to people who work and contribute to the community.'

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2013/apr/07/osborne-philpott-welfare-benefits-reform

    Sounds as if Labour are drawing up an 'approved vocation' list for which people will allowed a council house. 'People who work and contribute to the community'? I take it that's code for council employee. Councils will be putting their own at the top of the housing lists, and those who work for the private sector will be stuffed. This will be cronyism on a massive scale.

    'Amid criticisms that Labour has ceded the welfare debate to the Tories, the shadow work and pensions secretary, Liam Byrne, called for a return to the "old principle of contribution", pioneered by William Beveridge in 1942. This would start by allocating social housing to people who work and contribute to the community.'

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2013/apr/07/osborne-philpott-welfare-benefits-reform

    Sounds as if Labour are drawing up an 'approved vocation' list for which people will allowed a council house. 'People who work and contribute to the community'? I take it that's code for council employee. Councils will be putting their own at the top of the housing lists, and those who work for the private sector will be stuffed. This will be cronyism on a massive scale.

    Another nail.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340

    LABOUR high-flier Chuka Umunna was last night under pressure for using multiple online identities.

    http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/politics/article4877069.ece


    Mirror,mirror on the wall,who am I this week,the man is a walking laugh a minute.

    First, Michael Green, now, Harrison socialdemocrat Umunna. What the feck sort of people are we letting rule us?

    Lots of people mess around with their own wikipedia entries.

    The interesting question is why so much is emerging about Chuka Umunna right now? Who has most interest in damaging him?
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453

    LABOUR high-flier Chuka Umunna was last night under pressure for using multiple online identities.

    http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/politics/article4877069.ece


    Mirror,mirror on the wall,who am I this week,the man is a walking laugh a minute.

    Not me, guv'...

    @MrHarryCole: Chuka dumps on a mythical aide over wiki changes: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/wikipedia/9977305/Labour-star-Chuka-Umunna-admits-his-aides-probably-set-up-and-edited-his-own-Wikipedia-page.html So he he had staff before was selected eh? Course guv.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 95,037
    antifrank said:

    LABOUR high-flier Chuka Umunna was last night under pressure for using multiple online identities.

    http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/politics/article4877069.ece


    Mirror,mirror on the wall,who am I this week,the man is a walking laugh a minute.

    First, Michael Green, now, Harrison socialdemocrat Umunna. What the feck sort of people are we letting rule us?

    Lots of people mess around with their own wikipedia entries.

    The interesting question is why so much is emerging about Chuka Umunna right now? Who has most interest in damaging him?
    Good point. Maybe it's self inflicted. Get the minor stuff out in the open early on, before his profile is very high so it doesn't have far to fall, comparitively, and so there's less to come out as the GE approaches and he really ramps up his efforts for a major position in the next government.

    Otherwise I'm actually stumped why anyone would go after him like this at this moment.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    tim said:

    @Kle4

    I don't know what's happened to all those posters who spent weeks claiming Labour needed to do well in Eastleigh.

    I'm happy to go on the record with the view that the fact that the Tories are uncompetitive in large parts of the urban north is a problem with them.

    In exactly the same way as it is bad for Labour that they are uncompetitive in large parts of the South ex London.

    If you don't have MPs from an area, whether you are in government or opposition, it is a lot harder to understand the local/regional concerns that the voters have.
  • Stark_DawningStark_Dawning Posts: 9,608
    'The interesting question is why so much is emerging about Chuka Umunna right now? Who has most interest in damaging him?'

    Probably Balls or his acolytes. Rumour has it that Miliband was furious will Balls's abysmal response to the Autumn Statement and told him to up his game or be sacked. Chuka meanwhile is being groomed for the post should Balls fail again. It sounds as if the 'dogs of hell' are out to damage Chuka. (Remember how jealous Balls was of Darling when he got the economics brief. And where did the rumour that ended Alan Johnson's tenure originate?)

  • TCPoliticalBettingTCPoliticalBetting Posts: 10,819
    edited April 2013

    'The interesting question is why so much is emerging about Chuka Umunna right now? Who has most interest in damaging him?'
    Probably Balls or his acolytes.

    Balls is the most likely suspect. Carrying on with Brown's activities.
    The question is what will Ed Milliband and Chuka do about it? Probably nothing. After all there are more supporters of Balls than Milliband in Milliband's cabinet. Chance or planning?

  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    edited April 2013
    The bland complaceny some are displaying over the possiblity that the tories finish behind a party that doesn't have any MPs yet again is most instructive.

    That they are unlikely to have any MPs after 2015 either is not the point. The tory voteshare getting happily eaten into by the kippers is. Particularly in marginals as some tory MPs will be all too keenly aware. They will not stay silent for very much longer should this continue.
  • MrJonesMrJones Posts: 3,523
    FPT Scary stories
    The H.P Lovecraft stories got to me when i was younger. The one about demons coming through sharp corners had me sanding down the corners in my room.

    I'd have needed to learn grammar etc to finish them but i started writing scary stories twice in the past and went with trying to write whatever scared the crap out of me and it worked so i had to stop writing it. I still don't like even thinking about them.

    So maybe that's the trick - writing something that scares the crap out of you personally but carrying on regardless.

    Drink might help - or make it worse, dunno.
  • nigel4englandnigel4england Posts: 4,800

    'The interesting question is why so much is emerging about Chuka Umunna right now? Who has most interest in damaging him?'

    Probably Balls or his acolytes. Rumour has it that Miliband was furious will Balls's abysmal response to the Autumn Statement and told him to up his game or be sacked. Chuka meanwhile is being groomed for the post should Balls fail again. It sounds as if the 'dogs of hell' are out to damage Chuka. (Remember how jealous Balls was of Darling when he got the economics brief. And where did the rumour that ended Alan Johnson's tenure originate?)

    'The interesting question is why so much is emerging about Chuka Umunna right now? Who has most interest in damaging him?'

    Probably Balls or his acolytes. Rumour has it that Miliband was furious will Balls's abysmal response to the Autumn Statement and told him to up his game or be sacked. Chuka meanwhile is being groomed for the post should Balls fail again. It sounds as if the 'dogs of hell' are out to damage Chuka. (Remember how jealous Balls was of Darling when he got the economics brief. And where did the rumour that ended Alan Johnson's tenure originate?)

    So the choices for Labour chancellor are toxic (sorry Tim) Balls ans slime all Chuka. Good luck with that.

  • TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 7,362
    @Scott_P,cowardice of politics,blame someone else ;-)

    A good point on our chukka/harrison

    Conservative MP Nigel Adams said: “Comrade Chuka’s not doing his credibility much good this week. Like most champagne socialists, they talk a good game about standing up for the working man but are as transparent as a Gucci shop window.”
  • TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 7,362
    edited April 2013

    'The interesting question is why so much is emerging about Chuka Umunna right now? Who has most interest in damaging him?'

    Probably Balls or his acolytes. Rumour has it that Miliband was furious will Balls's abysmal response to the Autumn Statement and told him to up his game or be sacked. Chuka meanwhile is being groomed for the post should Balls fail again. It sounds as if the 'dogs of hell' are out to damage Chuka. (Remember how jealous Balls was of Darling when he got the economics brief. And where did the rumour that ended Alan Johnson's tenure originate?)

    Maybe he's just crap.

  • MonkeysMonkeys Posts: 756

    Scottish polling news from the ScotsGreens. Scots (they say) dont mind getting poorer as long as everyone is poorer! Is that a "let them all eat stale bread" strategy?

    "The survey of 1,002 people in Scotland shows that around three-fifths (58%) agree that consideration of a fairer and more equal society is more important than whether they will be slightly richer or poorer."

    http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/home-news/fairer-society-more-important-than-personal-wealth-indyref-poll-finds.1365321991


    Why do you think "fairer and more equal society," means everyone would be poorer?
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    Monkeys said:

    Why do you think "fairer and more equal society," means everyone would be poorer?

    It's an article of faith for the more right wing posters.
  • GrandioseGrandiose Posts: 2,323
    Since the story's come up again, I'll repost my earlier point since it didn't get much of an airing on the last thread.

    Chuka’s Wiki’d act
    LABOUR high-flier Chuka Umunna was last night under pressure for using multiple online identities. Wikipedia records reveal the party-loving Streatham MP used a pseudonym to create his own flattering profile page in 2007.
    Since this one's hit The Sun, as a Wikipedia editor, I think I should explain. The Sun is wrong to talk of "posing as one of the online encyclopaedia’s editors" since the term "editor" is purely descriptive. Anyone can edit Wikipedia (though practically speaking you'd need to have a basic understanding of how to), so if he's edited it then he is an editor, rather than posing as one. Similarly it says "the fake name Socialdemocrat" but there's nothing wrong about a pseudonym, like mine. The only point is about editing under a conflict of interest (editing the article about yourself or something connected with you) below.

    Politicians, if you're reading, we'd love you to contribute to your own articles (since only about five are even close to good enough) but in the right way. I'd say the biggest things to remember is that Wikipedia is there to host encyclopedic content, not magazine-esque interviews. I find it helpful to think about what they might write about the subject in fifty or a hundred years. The second is to manage the fact you are writing about yourself and you probably take a different view of yourself to history.

    If you can, be open about who you are and I recommend using the talk page (you can find this by clicking the "Talk" tab). If you're not prepared to be open about who you are (whether your username is your real name or not), then definitely stick to the talk page. There are probably lots of good things you can point out are wrong or missing (although you'd still need to point to a source confirming they are wrong, but a constituency page would be good enough mostly and I'm guessing current politicians can get that sort of thing uploaded).

    Lastly realise that ensuring neutrality is likely to be your biggest hurdle and it's best if you can talk the talk on that. Neutrality is, in short, ensuring that the article has the same balance of pro and anti- views on a given topic as the material in the public domain on a given topic, particularly academic or reflective writing. Obviously I can't say every possible thing about editing, not least actually how to. I can be contacted here.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    Hey guys, don't worry, Labour don't need to spell out any policy on welfare for another two years...

    @SkyNews: DAILY TELEGRAPH FRONT PAGE: "Labour split puts Miliband on back foot over benefits" #skypapers http://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/321001178517352448/photo/1

    PB Leftards, don't you just love 'em
  • RightChuckRightChuck Posts: 110
    carl said:

    carl said:

    Good grief.

    Don't you Tories get it?

    This welfare nastiness isn't helping your electoral prospects. It's doing the opposite.

    The polling would suggest you're out of touch.
    Wrong.

    The polling suggests the Tories are getting no thanks, and indeed retoxifying, because they look like they are enjoying cutting benefits of those who genuinely need help.
    No, it's too soon to say that.

    The polling suggests the Tories are on the right lines in identifying issues that hurt Labour.

    Issues that set Labour in opposition to the resident working classes.

    If the Tories are sensible, they'll hit Labour hard as the party that deliberately fuelled immigration and deliberately created a mad benefits system.

    If Labour are smart, they'll shimmy out of it by u-turning in a credible but also aggressive fashion. I think Byrne has the right idea, though it all sounds too back-of-the-envelope to add to the Labour poll lead at this stage.

    Behind both of them, UKIP; fishing in precisely the same waters, and with the advantage of novelty.

    This is not the time for narrow-minded tribalism.

  • MrJonesMrJones Posts: 3,523
    kle4 said:

    Even in the current climate, it is pretty embarrasing everyone already seems to have written off the Tories off for second place. Obviously a UKIP win is spectacularly unlikely, but I don't think they'd even be concerned about percentage and maintaining momentum from Eastleigh, given they didn't even stand last time.

    I don't know if they are concerned but the reason is there's people who might vote for them in theory but wouldn't if they weren't already getting 5%+ and another lot who wouldn't unless they were already getting 10%+ and another lot who wouldn't unless they were already getting 15%+ etc i.e. they don't see the point of voting for a small party unless it's already big enough (by their reckoning) to make a dent.

    So if they want to maximize the 20% (?) or so of the electorate who have already seceded from the political class then they want to keep getting 20-ish% in all different seats. It might not even take that much effort to get that.
  • GrandioseGrandiose Posts: 2,323
    edited April 2013
    We've checked before and found that, across a couple of different studies, about 25% or so of edits made to politicians' entries on Wikipedia are made from IP addresses belong to the Houses of Parliaments or central government. Obviously that's based on a few shots in the dark and whatnot so take with a pinch of salt.

    "An analysis conducted by the Bureau of Investigative Journalism has found evidence of thousands of edits to Wikipedia originating from within the British Houses of Parliament. The edits were found through tracking the contributions of two IP addresses, 194.60.38.198 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) and 194.60.38.10 (talk · contribs · WHOIS), which route the traffic from users of the Parliamentary network. Among the findings were that the articles on almost one out of every six Members of Parliament (MPs) had been edited by users of the network, and that in many cases, these changes were attempts at ameliorating negative biographical content concerning the 2009 United Kingdom parliamentary expenses scandal. The Bureau singled out the entry on Joan Ryan (a parliamentarian who resigned in the wake of the affair) as having been successfully scrubbed of any mention of expenses-related wrongdoing; Wikipedians have since updated it with details of both the scandal and the attempted cover-up. The Bureau also found plenty of innocuous edits, including the listing of a sitting MP as a notable DJ, finessing of a passage discussing the relative merits of characterising Pringles as crisps or cakes, and the correction of a misstatement of the full name of a former Mayor of London as "Kenneth Robert Livingstone Twatface". "(Source|CC-BY-SA)

    See also:
    British politicians accused of WP cover-ups
    The 2010 “Editing Wikipedia From Inside Parliament” Awards
    Wikipedia Edits from Parliament Airbrush Dorries Sex Abuse Row
    ... ad nauseam.
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    edited April 2013
    A timely reminder for Scott_P & the other amusing tea party tories about what happened the last time they were foaming at the mouth over an issue they thought was a sure fire winner.
    Mike Smithson ‏@MSmithsonPB

    Could welfare be like Dave's January EU referendum pledge that was the magic bullet that'd change the CON fortunes? pic.twitter.com/xLJEa94L
    image
  • Monkeys said:


    Why do you think "fairer and more equal society," means everyone would be poorer?

    The survey indicates that Scots do not mind being a bit poorer if that is the outcome. I made no political point about my beliefs as to what would happen if they went independent. I hope they do vote Yes.

  • Mick_Pork your graph shows a few % narrowing of the Labour lead after the EU speech. Is that the message you were trying to convey?
  • MonkeysMonkeys Posts: 756

    Monkeys said:


    Why do you think "fairer and more equal society," means everyone would be poorer?

    The survey indicates that Scots do not mind being a bit poorer if that is the outcome. I made no political point about my beliefs as to what would happen if they went independent. I hope they do vote Yes.

    Where do you get the idea they're answering the question as meaning that everyone would be poorer, rather than just the person being asked being poorer?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 95,037
    edited April 2013

    'The interesting question is why so much is emerging about Chuka Umunna right now? Who has most interest in damaging him?'

    Probably Balls or his acolytes. Rumour has it that Miliband was furious will Balls's abysmal response to the Autumn Statement and told him to up his game or be sacked. Chuka meanwhile is being groomed for the post should Balls fail again. It sounds as if the 'dogs of hell' are out to damage Chuka. (Remember how jealous Balls was of Darling when he got the economics brief. And where did the rumour that ended Alan Johnson's tenure originate?)

    Maybe he's just crap.

    Oh, surely not. He looks good in a suit, and...er...he attacks the government using the standard talking points while looking good in a suit, and....um...someone help me out here.

    In all seriousness, opposition front benchers would not typically have that large a profile with the public anyway, but for political wonks like ourselves I've still yet to see evidence of him being particularly able apart from being reasonably slick in style, which any number of MPs are (although not as many as people think, funnily enough)
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    edited April 2013

    Mick_Pork your graph shows a few % narrowing of the Labour lead after the EU speech. Is that the message you were trying to convey?

    It shows the immediate afermath with a small bouncelet and nothing remotely seismic.

    If you didn't understand the longer term polling implications then I'm only to happy to help you. There has been no significant narrowing.

    image



  • RichardNabaviRichardNabavi Posts: 3,413
    edited April 2013
    It's very amusing to see that the usual Labour trolls haven't noticed Labour's U-turn on welfare.

    Guys, you're off-message. Since this morning, Labour's policy is that the needy should be shoved into the dirt and that ex-bankers, who will have put more in, should get more out. All that Brownian stuff about ending 'child poverty', is dead. If the unmarried teenage mothers haven't paid anything in, that's tough; they and their kids (unless, presumably the kids are of independent means and so have put something in themselves) get nothing.

    Of course, it might well be that this policy won't last till the morning, I imagine the Guardian will be incandescent with rage at the idea that benefits should depend on the premium you've paid.

  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,796
    edited April 2013
    Having just seen Kent's new 17 year old police commissioner Paris Brown I feel confident that the thin blue line will remain firm and resolute for many years to come

    "Worst part about being single is coming from a party/night out horny as f*** and having to sleep alone." said Paris from her new desk at Kent CID.


  • perdixperdix Posts: 1,806
    @IOS - ukip is a classic protest party, harvesting votes from whatever bandwagon turns up. The Coalition is making progress on the reduction in immigration but the only way to stop EU immigration is to leave the EU or to have fundamental change of the freedom of movement. And here they have not said how they would negotiate the UK's exit - do they want to be like Switzerland where 40% of legislation results from EU rules? They will never form a majority government (LOL). Farage thinks women of child bearing age should not be in work (they are a burden to employers) and his remarks about "people of colour" makes him unfit to be a national leader.


    But the Tories can't stop immigration and the Mail will always have its odd examples.

    All it does is make right wing voters realise the Tories are in effectual. So they vote UKIP.
    IOS said:

    RightChuck


    But the Tories can't stop immigration and the Mail will always have its odd examples.

    All it does is make right wing voters realise the Tories are in effectual. So they vote UKIP.

  • perdixperdix Posts: 1,806
    Can someone put vanilla on BST?
  • TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 7,362
    Telegraph front page - labour split puts miliband on back foot over benefits.


    http://www.politicshome.com/uk/article/75906/the_daily_telegraph_monday_8th_april_2013.html
  • TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 7,362
    Mail front page - Thousands in rush to avoid new benefit test.


    http://www.politicshome.com/uk/article/75907/the_daily_mail_monday_8th_april_2013.html
  • MrJonesMrJones Posts: 3,523
    "ukip is a classic protest party, harvesting votes from whatever bandwagon turns up"

    Immigration has been number two on the list for years while the political class ignored it and hoped it would go away. Leaving the EU, among all the other benefits, or at least scrapping the free movement of labour part or at least restricting the free movement of labour to say that Lab/Lib/Con MPs have to be Bulgarian is one very obvious way of reducing the problem.

    That pool of voters has been there for years waiting for someone to get past the first tipping point.
  • TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 7,362
    How true @MrJones
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 77,481
    The Daily Mail front page is very Daily Mail !
  • RichardNabaviRichardNabavi Posts: 3,413
    Oh dear, Monsieur Hollande's little local difficulty might be getting worse:

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/apr/07/jerome-cahuzac-swiss-bank-account

    Of course the anger is misplaced. The French should worry more about what the socialists are doing to their economy, not a routine bit of hypocrisy of the left.
  • asjohnstoneasjohnstone Posts: 1,276
    The 10% direct transference on that graph from LD to Lab is very clear. It was largely complete by Feb 2011. The labour vote hasn't shifted since then. It's been fixed for over 2 years.

    Last 6 months has a transfer from Tory to UKIP of 10%; it's dramatic but not that significant in election terms; it may pad out Ed majority by 20 - 30, but as long as Labour is tracking above 40% it wins big anyway
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530

    Oh dear, Monsieur Hollande's little local difficulty might be getting worse:

    As is Cammie's.
    Germany and France 'will block David Cameron's plan for a new EU treaty'

    Heavyweight nations snub PM's plans to defuse the Conservative party's civil war over Europe

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/apr/07/germany-france-cameron-eu-treaty


  • TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 7,362
    @RichardNabavi


    How Miliband's French fancy lost its appeal

    AT first the two men formed a warm bond but of late a certain froideur has crept into the ­political kinship between Ed Miliband and Francois ­ Hollande. When they met just over a year ago the Labour leader declared his socialist colleague would “tilt” Europe away from austerity and “create a Europe of growth and jobs”.

    http://www.express.co.uk/comment/expresscomment/389944/How-Miliband-s-French-fancy-lost-its-appeal
  • RichardNabaviRichardNabavi Posts: 3,413
    edited April 2013
    Mick_Pork said:



    As is Cammie's.

    Germany and France 'will block David Cameron's plan for a new EU treaty'

    Heavyweight nations snub PM's plans to defuse the Conservative party's civil war over Europe

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/apr/07/germany-france-cameron-eu-treaty


    It's unclear what relevance that has to the point I was making, but, since you raise it, so what? If our EU friends don't want to address the problems, that's fine. Cameron will give British voters an opportunity to vote on whether we should take the hint and leave.

    As with any negotiation, if the terms aren't favourable, we might choose to walk away.

    Do you have a problem with this?
  • IainDale Would David Davis have made a better PM than David Cameron?... — We shall never know, shall we? But I think yes. ask.fm/a/3bqccgoj

    We shall never know because some plonker ballsed-up his leadership campaign in 2005, of course. Who was the bloke's campaign manager? Maybe Mr Dale knows?

This discussion has been closed.