There is a general problem that the British political class, especially comment writers, don't understand the mechanics of electoral politics. Hence why so many people over estimated David Cameron and under estimated Gordon Brown.
Miliband now has another make-or-break conference speech ahead of him, but he also needs to work out how to turn up the volume in a useful rather than panicked fashion. There are various cost-of-living pushes planned for the next week, but chances are they won’t tell us anything we don’t already knows about what Labour thinks. In the absence of any big husky-hugging-style stunt, it’s difficult to see how the party can turn up the volume on its priorities, while keeping the growing band of internal critics quiet.
Very difficult for a leader who is constantly in lead in the polls to be under to much pressure. I know you want to ramp - and the press wants a story - but if 2010 has taught us anything it is to ignore the excitable hyperbole of some of the press and the desperate ramping of those on PB.
You should read some of your posts from April 2010. Most amusing.
The "well/badly" findings can be very misleading and give, I'd argue, an in built advantage to the incumbent.
You could say that Miliband was doing badly but also have a favourable view of him or that you were satisfied. In terms of electoral forecasting the YouGov approach is far less informative.
What affects the narrative is one thing. What is best for forecasting is another.
Regardless of psephological theory about how best to assess different leaders, the YouGov and ICM ratings are politically significant. When shadow Cabinet members are making statements on the presupposition that the public don't rate Ed Miliband, they are doing so on the basis of such ratings. They are also reinforcing public perceptions in line with those ratings.
Even on pb just this week, people have been calling for the government to override any local reservations about fracking.
The book just looks like partisan political abuse: all virtues belong to my party; all vices to the opposition -- even if we agreed with the author what constitutes vice and virtue. At least so far as I can tell from its table of contents, Goldberg does not discuss Republican belief in big government: George W Bush its most recent exemplar.
You are probably right about corporatism, especially with the recent tendency for regulatory and taxation arbitrage to lead to very little of either.
In the past week or two, on the recommendation of pb, I have bought Lord Levy's autobiography and Hedge Hogs; I shall not be buying this book.
He does refer to "compassionate conservatism" (which I think was a Bush term) as being an equivalent trend within the GOP. He equates it to Christian Socialism (which I think is wrong) - but the book is not about the right, but about the lines between Progressivism and Fascism.
It's also (btw) an academic book rather than a a piece of party hackery (my wife buys plenty of those for me to read so I know how to spot them).
Main story on Sky News is actually Gibraltar, closely followed by Egypt, closely followed by Dignitas, and then the Sainted People's Princess, and has been for all of the afternoon, while I've had it on in the background, while browning my white bits in the garden. The PB tribals claiming it's "Ed is crap" or "HS2" are just projecting their own fantasies.
"Ed is crap" hardly counts as "news" does it?
In breaking news from Westminster we bring you the shocking news that Ed is crap! Labour was left reeling by this devastating revelation when up to now the unanimous opinion had been "Ed is Brilliant"!
Main story on Sky News is actually Gibraltar, closely followed by Egypt, closely followed by Dignitas, and then the Sainted People's Princess, and has been for all of the afternoon, while I've had it on in the background, while browning my white bits in the garden. The PB tribals claiming it's "Ed is crap" or "HS2" are just projecting their own fantasies.
"Ed is crap" hardly counts as "news" does it?
In breaking news from Westminster we bring you the shocking news that Ed is crap! Labour was left reeling by this devastating revelation when up to now the unanimous opinion had been "Ed is Brilliant"!
Even on pb just this week, people have been calling for the government to override any local reservations about fracking.
The book just looks like partisan political abuse: all virtues belong to my party; all vices to the opposition -- even if we agreed with the author what constitutes vice and virtue. At least so far as I can tell from its table of contents, Goldberg does not discuss Republican belief in big government: George W Bush its most recent exemplar.
You are probably right about corporatism, especially with the recent tendency for regulatory and taxation arbitrage to lead to very little of either.
In the past week or two, on the recommendation of pb, I have bought Lord Levy's autobiography and Hedge Hogs; I shall not be buying this book.
He does refer to "compassionate conservatism" (which I think was a Bush term) as being an equivalent trend within the GOP. He equates it to Christian Socialism (which I think is wrong) - but the book is not about the right, but about the lines between Progressivism and Fascism.
I expect the next book to make waves here will be the Iain Martin tome on RBS due out next month, which will doubtless be raked over for anti-Scots/English/Brown propaganda as well as economic and business history.
There has been growing disquiet among left leaning political commentators on the issue of Ed Miliband's Leadership and the direction of the Labour Leadership for months. A couple of weeks ago a little known back bencher waded into the political debate with a stinging criticism of the direction of his party under Ed Miliband. This has since been followed by equally hard hitting criticism from Andy Burnham, Tom Watson, and now Lord Prescott today. The debate has moved up a notch from Ed Miliband needing a new Chancellor to the possibility that the Labour party needs a new Leader. Surely that is a relevant point to raise on a political betting site, and not one that deserves a 'sling your hook' if you don't like it response?
There has been growing disquiet among left leaning political commentators on the issue of Ed Miliband's Leadership and the direction of the Labour Leadership for months. A couple of weeks ago a little known back bencher waded into the political debate with a stinging criticism of the direction of his party under Ed Miliband. This has since been followed by equally hard hitting criticism from Andy Burnham, Tom Watson, and now Lord Prescott today. The debate has moved up a notch from Ed Miliband needing a new Chancellor to the possibility that the Labour party needs a new Leader. Surely that is a relevant point to raise on a political betting site, and not one that deserves a 'sling your hook' if you don't like it response?
Also I featured the ComRes leader ratings in the previous thread and the Ipsos-MORI ones on Thursday.
The former had EdM at minus-28 - one point worse than Dave on minus 27.
That's two threads in four days with leader ratings highlighted.
If people don't like it they can go elsewhere.
It would appear quite a lot is happening during this particular ‘silly season’ worth mentioning.
Lord Glasman:- “You made me a Lord, Ed, but even I think it's time you grew up and became a REAL leader:” Daily Mail.
John Prescott: “Ed Miliband is Labour's Alex Ferguson and he needs to give any slacking ministers the hairdryer treatment” Daily Mirror.
“Ed Miliband's leadership under further attack from senior Labour figures” The Guardian.
“Ed Miliband Under Fire As Personal Ratings Dive” Sky News.
“Labour's woes mean the bar is being set ever higher for Miliband's conference speech” New Statesman.
Chris Bryant and his ‘Rivers of Blunder’ – multiple news sources.
Chris Bryant admits “Labour 'made mistakes' by opening borders to influx of EU workers” - multiple news sources.
“LABOUR was forced into a humiliating u-turn last night after bungling frontbencher Chris Bryant finally admitted the opening the floodgates to Eastern Europe. Daily Express.
“Chris Bryant forced to back down over claim Tesco and Next use cheap migrant workers” The Independent.
“Andy Burnham attacks Miliband brothers in Labour leadership battle” Telegraph.
There has been growing disquiet among left leaning political commentators on the issue of Ed Miliband's Leadership and the direction of the Labour Leadership for months. A couple of weeks ago a little known back bencher waded into the political debate with a stinging criticism of the direction of his party under Ed Miliband. This has since been followed by equally hard hitting criticism from Andy Burnham, Tom Watson, and now Lord Prescott today. The debate has moved up a notch from Ed Miliband needing a new Chancellor to the possibility that the Labour party needs a new Leader. Surely that is a relevant point to raise on a political betting site, and not one that deserves a 'sling your hook' if you don't like it response?
There has been growing disquiet among left leaning political commentators on the issue of Ed Miliband's Leadership and the direction of the Labour Leadership for months. A couple of weeks ago a little known back bencher waded into the political debate with a stinging criticism of the direction of his party under Ed Miliband. This has since been followed by equally hard hitting criticism from Andy Burnham, Tom Watson, and now Lord Prescott today. The debate has moved up a notch from Ed Miliband needing a new Chancellor to the possibility that the Labour party needs a new Leader. Surely that is a relevant point to raise on a political betting site, and not one that deserves a 'sling your hook' if you don't like it response?
He does refer to "compassionate conservatism" (which I think was a Bush term) as being an equivalent trend within the GOP. He equates it to Christian Socialism (which I think is wrong) - but the book is not about the right, but about the lines between Progressivism and Fascism.
I expect the next book to make waves here will be the Iain Martin tome on RBS due out next month, which will doubtless be raked over for anti-Scots/English/Brown propaganda as well as economic and business history.
I think Bush originated it, and Cameron copied it (from memory, so may be wrong).
The RBS thing looks interesting. I know quite a bit of the story from different participants, but hope Martin does a serious job rather than just a bit of hatchetry. Will add it to my list though. Thanks.
One striking thing from today's YouGov - virtual unanimity between Con & Lab on:
Do you think the Labour party would have been better off or worse off it had chosen David Miliband as leader, or would it have made no difference? Better off: Con: 51 Lab: 49 LibD: 43 UKIP: 44
There has been growing disquiet among left leaning political commentators on the issue of Ed Miliband's Leadership and the direction of the Labour Leadership for months. A couple of weeks ago a little known back bencher waded into the political debate with a stinging criticism of the direction of his party under Ed Miliband. This has since been followed by equally hard hitting criticism from Andy Burnham, Tom Watson, and now Lord Prescott today. The debate has moved up a notch from Ed Miliband needing a new Chancellor to the possibility that the Labour party needs a new Leader. Surely that is a relevant point to raise on a political betting site, and not one that deserves a 'sling your hook' if you don't like it response?
Also I featured the ComRes leader ratings in the previous thread and the Ipsos-MORI ones on Thursday.
The former had EdM at minus-28 - one point worse than Dave on minus 27.
That's two threads in four days with leader ratings highlighted.
If people don't like it they can go elsewhere.
Could you inform us of the last political bet you placed.?
None of your business I should think.
I think we're supposed to pretend that fitalass bets on her political views rather than simply being part of a pseudo religious Dave cult with no roots in reality, go along with it will you.
I think the debate would be better on the site without the personalised insults that pepper it from time to time.
Every LOTO has his/her leadership credentials scrutinised, often unfairly. Replace Ed is crap with A.N.Other is crap - part of the territory.
Agree with Mike that "Ed is crap" is getting rather tedious. Yes, the biased right-wing press will push this agenda but do we all have to follow this right-wing vitriol?
My message for the PB Tories / PB Burleys is get your own house in order first. Push for change within your beloved party to dilute the toxicity of the Tory brand espcially in places like Scotland, Wales and London (and within the ethnic minority communities).
The "well/badly" findings can be very misleading and give, I'd argue, an in built advantage to the incumbent.
You could say that Miliband was doing badly but also have a favourable view of him or that you were satisfied. In terms of electoral forecasting the YouGov approach is far less informative.
What affects the narrative is one thing. What is best for forecasting is another.
Regardless of psephological theory about how best to assess different leaders, the YouGov and ICM ratings are politically significant. When shadow Cabinet members are making statements on the presupposition that the public don't rate Ed Miliband, they are doing so on the basis of such ratings. They are also reinforcing public perceptions in line with those ratings.
I'd agree with all of that. But the narrative is one of the components of what will make the forecast.
By far the most surprising piece of polling for me recently was the MORI poll that found that 63% of those polled disliked Ed Miliband. I can understand not warming to him, not rating him or not thinking he was a good leader. But disliking him? He seems perfectly pleasant to me. David Cameron seems much more inherently capable of producing dislike as a reaction.
There has been growing disquiet among left leaning political commentators on the issue of Ed Miliband's Leadership and the direction of the Labour Leadership for months. A couple of weeks ago a little known back bencher waded into the political debate with a stinging criticism of the direction of his party under Ed Miliband. This has since been followed by equally hard hitting criticism from Andy Burnham, Tom Watson, and now Lord Prescott today. The debate has moved up a notch from Ed Miliband needing a new Chancellor to the possibility that the Labour party needs a new Leader. Surely that is a relevant point to raise on a political betting site, and not one that deserves a 'sling your hook' if you don't like it response?
Good to meet Sunil at North Weald this afternoon - the Epping-Ongar railway is a superb attraction and well worth a visit. Mrs Stodge thoroughly enjoyed it as did her folks.
I also discovered via the excellent bookshop at Ongar that we had a Crossrail in London between the wars. From 1910 to 1939 it was possible to travel on a direct service from Ealing Broadway to Southend. It was electric from Ealing to Whitechapel and then steam the rest of the way.
Now, we're lashing out billions of pounds to replace what we once had - remarkable !!
On Ed Miliband, it's fair to say that in August, we either have a huge crisis (invasion of Kuwait, Eurozone crisis) or nothing happens at all. This is a "nothing happens" year but the 24-hour news cycle beast must be fed so it's "let's have a go at the Labour leader".
As I've said before, Miliband's huge advantages are a) the apparent solidity of the Labour vote comprising 2010 Labour vote plus 40-50% of the 2010 LD vote and b) he knows when the election is going to be and can plan accordingly. Everyone else is aware of b) and so there's no value fighting an election campaign this early.
Every LOTO has his/her leadership credentials scrutinised, often unfairly. Replace Ed is crap with A.N.Other is crap - part of the territory.
Agree with Mike that "Ed is crap" is getting rather tedious. Yes, the biased right-wing press will push this agenda but do we all have to follow this right-wing vitriol?
My message for the PB Tories / PB Burleys is get your own house in order first. Push for change within your beloved party to dilute the toxicity of the Tory brand espcially in places like Scotland, Wales and London (and within the ethnic minority communities).
Most of what I've read has been in the Guardian and the Daily Mirror.
There has been growing disquiet among left leaning political commentators on the issue of Ed Miliband's Leadership and the direction of the Labour Leadership for months. A couple of weeks ago a little known back bencher waded into the political debate with a stinging criticism of the direction of his party under Ed Miliband. This has since been followed by equally hard hitting criticism from Andy Burnham, Tom Watson, and now Lord Prescott today. The debate has moved up a notch from Ed Miliband needing a new Chancellor to the possibility that the Labour party needs a new Leader. Surely that is a relevant point to raise on a political betting site, and not one that deserves a 'sling your hook' if you don't like it response?
There has been growing disquiet among left leaning political commentators on the issue of Ed Miliband's Leadership and the direction of the Labour Leadership for months. A couple of weeks ago a little known back bencher waded into the political debate with a stinging criticism of the direction of his party under Ed Miliband. This has since been followed by equally hard hitting criticism from Andy Burnham, Tom Watson, and now Lord Prescott today. The debate has moved up a notch from Ed Miliband needing a new Chancellor to the possibility that the Labour party needs a new Leader. Surely that is a relevant point to raise on a political betting site, and not one that deserves a 'sling your hook' if you don't like it response?
It would appear quite a lot is happening during this particular ‘silly season’ worth mentioning.
Lord Glasman:- “You made me a Lord, Ed, but even I think it's time you grew up and became a REAL leader:” Daily Mail.
John Prescott: “Ed Miliband is Labour's Alex Ferguson and he needs to give any slacking ministers the hairdryer treatment” Daily Mirror.
“Ed Miliband's leadership under further attack from senior Labour figures” The Guardian.
“Ed Miliband Under Fire As Personal Ratings Dive” Sky News.
“Labour's woes mean the bar is being set ever higher for Miliband's conference speech” New Statesman.
Chris Bryant and his ‘Rivers of Blunder’ – multiple news sources.
Chris Bryant admits “Labour 'made mistakes' by opening borders to influx of EU workers” - multiple news sources.
“LABOUR was forced into a humiliating u-turn last night after bungling frontbencher Chris Bryant finally admitted the opening the floodgates to Eastern Europe. Daily Express.
“Chris Bryant forced to back down over claim Tesco and Next use cheap migrant workers” The Independent.
“Andy Burnham attacks Miliband brothers in Labour leadership battle” Telegraph.
The list goes on and on…!
This is a bit like stamp-collecting as I did in my youth (does anyone still do it?) - you reckon you've got an impressive set, and then you wonder whether it matters. What is your explanation for the lack of effect on voting intention of all these real or alleged events? That the voters haven't noticed, or disagree with your interpretation, or don't care?
The YouGov UK question is not good for reasons we've gone over many times, basically it's a "from what you have heard" question rather than the approval ratings they use in the US.
It all rather depends on what you want to use the question results for.
Sir Roderick's mates, Lebo and Norpoth, use PM approval as their chosen predictor in addition to a cyclical analsyis of past election results. L&N explain their reasoning:
Since the cyclical dynamic of our model already consumes the equivalent of two predictors, we decided to put our faith in just a single explanatory factor that makes theoretical sense, is measurable and is available enough time ahead of the event. Our choice: prime ministerial approval.
The actual source has changed over time and now involves some reworking of polling data from multiple polling sources:
The question typically asks: ‘Are you satisfied or dissatisfied with [name] as Prime Minister?’ For elections from 1945 to 1997 we relied on Gallup polls. See Anthony King, ed., British Political Opinion 1937–2000: The Gallup Polls (London: Politico, 2001). With that source no longer available, we have turned to MORI, ICM and YouGov polls since then. See www.mori.com/polls/trends/ and pollingreport.co.uk. Whenever possible, we formed the average from surveys two and three months prior to the date of a general election.
L&N are less concerned about the actual question respondents are asked than the proportions of support for the incumbent PM amongst voters for the two leading parties. This suggests, that in the use the 'approval question results' are put to in L&N's predictive model, the actual wording of the question is not significant to the accuracy of the model's output.
Elsewhere in their paper L&N make a strong case for using Prime Ministerial approval as a proxy and composite of other factors driving electability, e.g. economic performance.
There has been growing disquiet among left leaning political commentators on the issue of Ed Miliband's Leadership and the direction of the Labour Leadership for months. A couple of weeks ago a little known back bencher waded into the political debate with a stinging criticism of the direction of his party under Ed Miliband. This has since been followed by equally hard hitting criticism from Andy Burnham, Tom Watson, and now Lord Prescott today. The debate has moved up a notch from Ed Miliband needing a new Chancellor to the possibility that the Labour party needs a new Leader. Surely that is a relevant point to raise on a political betting site, and not one that deserves a 'sling your hook' if you don't like it response?
Also I featured the ComRes leader ratings in the previous thread and the Ipsos-MORI ones on Thursday.
The former had EdM at minus-28 - one point worse than Dave on minus 27.
That's two threads in four days with leader ratings highlighted.
If people don't like it they can go elsewhere.
Could you inform us of the last political bet you placed.?
None of your business I should think.
"Surely that is a relevant point to raise on a political betting site"
Not unless the site is officially closed to those who don't bet.
The quote in speech marks was from fitlass , I though you would realise that.
I did - just think you are making a dig at her, rather than addressing the issue. At the end of the day Ed 's bad press at the moment is largely the result of comments from within the party and it's a fair point to raise on a site such as this.
There has been growing disquiet among left leaning political commentators on the issue of Ed Miliband's Leadership and the direction of the Labour Leadership for months. A couple of weeks ago a little known back bencher waded into the political debate with a stinging criticism of the direction of his party under Ed Miliband. This has since been followed by equally hard hitting criticism from Andy Burnham, Tom Watson, and now Lord Prescott today. The debate has moved up a notch from Ed Miliband needing a new Chancellor to the possibility that the Labour party needs a new Leader. Surely that is a relevant point to raise on a political betting site, and not one that deserves a 'sling your hook' if you don't like it response?
Also I featured the ComRes leader ratings in the previous thread and the Ipsos-MORI ones on Thursday.
The former had EdM at minus-28 - one point worse than Dave on minus 27.
That's two threads in four days with leader ratings highlighted.
If people don't like it they can go elsewhere.
Could you inform us of the last political bet you placed.?
None of your business I should think.
I think we're supposed to pretend that fitalass bets on her political views rather than simply being part of a pseudo religious Dave cult with no roots in reality, go along with it will you.
So tim, you have tried to call me imbecilic , you have used Fitalass to try and divert the thread onto anything but "the current topic" despite others pointing out to you that no one gives a monkeys fuck about HS2 and that SKY are running on Egypt and anything but HS2, and then you insult Fitalass personally. Why do you always resort to personal insults?
There has been growing disquiet among left leaning political commentators on the issue of Ed Miliband's Leadership and the direction of the Labour Leadership for months. A couple of weeks ago a little known back bencher waded into the political debate with a stinging criticism of the direction of his party under Ed Miliband. This has since been followed by equally hard hitting criticism from Andy Burnham, Tom Watson, and now Lord Prescott today. The debate has moved up a notch from Ed Miliband needing a new Chancellor to the possibility that the Labour party needs a new Leader. Surely that is a relevant point to raise on a political betting site, and not one that deserves a 'sling your hook' if you don't like it response?
Could you inform us of the last political bet you placed.?
None of your business I should think.
I think we're supposed to pretend that fitalass bets on her political views rather than simply being part of a pseudo religious Dave cult with no roots in reality, go along with it will you.
So tim, you have tried to call me imbecilic , you have used Fitalass to try and divert the thread onto anything but "the current topic" despite others pointing out to you that no one gives a monkeys fuck about HS2 and that SKY are running on Egypt and anything but HS2, and then you insult Fitalass personally. Why do you always resort to personal insults?
I quite care about HS2. Then again, I'm an enthusiast for all things engineering ("We'd never have guessed!" I hear you all cry).
The scale of the HS2 project means that its importance at the 2015 election will dwarf the effect Heathrow expansion had in the 2010 election. Therefore it's probably worthy of debate on a political betting website.
How the parties line up for or against HS2 in 2015 will say a great deal about their future vision for the country.
Agree with Mike that "Ed is crap" is getting rather tedious. Yes, the biased right-wing press will push this agenda but do we all have to follow this right-wing vitriol?
Did Mike say that? If so, I don't recall it bothering him with attack after attack on Gordon Brown, and quite deservedly as it turned out.
EdM is pretty rubbish, so it's a perfectly reasonable discussion. Labour should be romping it at the moment and they aren't.
Perhaps he will surprise us in the GE campaign, but I doubt it. I remember watching his acceptance speech and whilst wanting him to be great, my heart began to sink and sink.
He's the IDS of Labour. Perfectly reasonable chap. Bugger all good as candidate for PM.
despite others pointing out to you that no one gives a monkeys fuck about HS2
Anyone who thinks nobody cares about HS2 is a gold plated fool. If the cap fits.
Tim, people who care about HS2 fall into two camps. The first are those along the route and for all the storm they are a tiny tiny minority of a minority. Yep they're not happy, but they are relatively inconsequential on the grand scale. For everyone else it's a case of NIMBY.
The other camp are tax payers, and you could be right that people 'ought' to care on that score but until today's report I don't think most people considered HS2 to be anything to do with them. If somehow HS2 can be made to stick on people as mattering financially, and for it to be partisan (how I don't know since all three parties are culpable) then you may be right.
This is a genuine question, I'm not trying to break any moderation policy.
Three weeks tomorrow the Brooks/Coulson et al trial starts, will there be a blackout on here, I understand why you've done it in the lead up but have you given any thought as to whether to continue once the trial starts?
Tim, no we will not allow comments on the trials once the phone hacking trials begins.
This is for the following reasons
1) This is the first trial on this topic, there will be subsequent trials, we do not want anything posted that maybe prejudicial to the later the trials held after this first trial
2) As you have noted there is a blackout, unfortunately, you and other posters have been repeatedly unable/unwilling to adhere to this blackout and violated the spirit and wording of this blackout, we aren't going to take the risk of putting the site owner at risk, as other news organisations, such as the Guardian or the Telegraph don't allow comments on their phone hacking related articles.
This ends the discussion on phone hacking on the site.
" Ed Miliband faces his most dismal week yet after two Labour heavyweights today mauled his leadership and polls suggested that increasing numbers of voters think he is doing a poor job. Lord Prescott said that Labour had “massively failed” to hold the Conservatives to account or make its own case, and Lord Glasman, a guru to Mr Miliband, said that the Labour leader needed to prove that he was a “grown-up politician” capable of leading the country.
A YouGov poll for the Sunday Times claimed that 69 per cent of voters felt that Mr Miliband was failing to provide an effective opposition to the government, a rise of three points since the same question was asked early last month. A total of 62 per cent thought he was not up to the job of prime minister, a rise of five per cent.
A ComRes poll for The Independent on Sunday and Sunday Mirror showed that 22 per cent thought Mr Miliband was doing a good job compared with 50 per cent who did not.
Main story on Sky News is actually Gibraltar, closely followed by Egypt, closely followed by Dignitas, and then the Sainted People's Princess, and has been for all of the afternoon, while I've had it on in the background, while browning my white bits in the garden. The PB tribals claiming it's "Ed is crap" or "HS2" are just projecting their own fantasies.
"Ed is crap" hardly counts as "news" does it?
In breaking news from Westminster we bring you the shocking news that Ed is crap! Labour was left reeling by this devastating revelation when up to now the unanimous opinion had been "Ed is Brilliant"!
Labour should scrap HS2 ,build the 3rd runway at Heathrow, and build hundreds of thousands of new houses. Then end the vat on extensions and repairs for 2 years.
"Surely that is a relevant point to raise on a political betting site, and not one that deserves a 'sling your hook' if you don't like it response? "
I asked her not you, the last political bet she had placed. Can`t see what was wrong with that.
We're clearly not going to agree on this. I think the question was personal and unrelated to the issue of Ed 's problems with his party at the moment. You've aired your views and I've aired mine. Time for me at least to call it a day.
Good to meet Sunil at North Weald this afternoon - the Epping-Ongar railway is a superb attraction and well worth a visit. Mrs Stodge thoroughly enjoyed it as did her folks.
I also discovered via the excellent bookshop at Ongar that we had a Crossrail in London between the wars. From 1910 to 1939 it was possible to travel on a direct service from Ealing Broadway to Southend. It was electric from Ealing to Whitechapel and then steam the rest of the way.
Now, we're lashing out billions of pounds to replace what we once had - remarkable !!
Good to meet you too, Mr. Stodge! Glad you and your family enjoyed it!
Don't forget the Met also ran services effectively from Barking right through to Aylesbury and beyond.
Tory members certainty care about HS2. It's one of the main reasons why Tory membership will be sub 90,000 by 2014.
The idea that nobody cares about HS2 is one of the most stupid comments I've ever read on here.
Perhaps I should rephrase it that right now noone gives a f*ck about it. You were trying to use it to deflect the thread onto something else anything but the current topic, in fact anything that you thought you could attack right of centre posters about, one of your favourite tactics. The point is that you try to deflect threads that don't suit your purpose.
I quite care about HS2. Then again, I'm an enthusiast for all things engineering ("We'd never have guessed!" I hear you all cry).
The scale of the HS2 project means that its importance at the 2015 election will dwarf the effect Heathrow expansion had in the 2010 election. Therefore it's probably worthy of debate on a political betting website.
How the parties line up for or against HS2 in 2015 will say a great deal about their future vision for the country.
Assuming the government is not winding up the cost estimates in order to provide political cover for dropping HS2 completely, I imagine its main use -- as an expensive "jam tomorrow" infrastructure project with no fixed timescale -- will be to defend against the usual facile charges (from all sides against all opponents) of unfunded spending commitments. Now it will be that the Lab/Con/LD proposal for the reintroduction of free school milk will be paid for by deferring work on the Haltemprice extension for a year or two.
Tory members certainty care about HS2. It's one of the main reasons why Tory membership will be sub 90,000 by 2014.
The idea that nobody cares about HS2 is one of the most stupid comments I've ever read on here.
Perhaps people should care, but it won't be high on the MORI list of issues.
That said, the people who do care are concentrated in a bunch of seats - many of which (I assume) are safe Tory, but a lot of which are marginals. So the political importance is likely greater than the number of people who care.
Good to meet Sunil at North Weald this afternoon - the Epping-Ongar railway is a superb attraction and well worth a visit. Mrs Stodge thoroughly enjoyed it as did her folks.
I also discovered via the excellent bookshop at Ongar that we had a Crossrail in London between the wars. From 1910 to 1939 it was possible to travel on a direct service from Ealing Broadway to Southend. It was electric from Ealing to Whitechapel and then steam the rest of the way.
Now, we're lashing out billions of pounds to replace what we once had - remarkable !!
Good to meet you too, Mr. Stodge! Glad you and your family enjoyed it!
Don't forget the Met also ran services effectively from Barking right through to Aylesbury and beyond.
Why can't that Met line be restored without too much fuss ! The land still exists. May need modernisation, that's all.
Good to meet Sunil at North Weald this afternoon - the Epping-Ongar railway is a superb attraction and well worth a visit. Mrs Stodge thoroughly enjoyed it as did her folks.
I also discovered via the excellent bookshop at Ongar that we had a Crossrail in London between the wars. From 1910 to 1939 it was possible to travel on a direct service from Ealing Broadway to Southend. It was electric from Ealing to Whitechapel and then steam the rest of the way.
Now, we're lashing out billions of pounds to replace what we once had - remarkable !!
Good to meet you too, Mr. Stodge! Glad you and your family enjoyed it!
Don't forget the Met also ran services effectively from Barking right through to Aylesbury and beyond.
Cynics used to say that the top left of the Met Line existed mainly to serve tube bosses and top civil servants who commuted from Buckinghamshire.
OT -- those cat videos you posted: how come mum changed colour between videos 1 and 3, or was the black one dad?
Mike taking a bit of uncalled for stick from his guests. I can only assume that certain PBTories spend so much time talking amongst themselves, only digesting news and comment from Tory-friendly sources like Guido, Telegraph blogs etc, that they genuinely convince themselves that certain "stories" are more significant than they actually are.
As others have noted, this tittle-tattle about Ed has barely moved public opinion. Which is entirely unsurprising, as it's largely, erm, tittle-tattle.
With all the talk of Ed Miliband's problems, I have concluded that out of the 5 candidates who stood for Labour leader, the one Labour should have picked was Dianne Abbott:
- Not tainted by the last Government as wasn't a minister - A good communicator (certainly better than either Miliband) - Popular with the base - Black, a woman and working class so would provide a big contrast with "the fops" - Not seen to be in the pocket of the unions
Ed Miliband obviously isn't crap yet the 'media' seem determined to prove that he is. Labour are still ahead in the polls and the Conservatives have a hell of a lot to do to win the most seats, let alone dream of a majority, so the focus on Miliband's failings do appear odd.
Miliband must be feeling slightly bewildered. The Falkirk story was - and is - a big problem because it diverted the narrative away from Cameron's problems to Miliband's. But the media group-think that emerges from blogs/twitter/editorials these days takes on such a life of its own that any leading politician can be excused for feeling hard-done-by when the hot, probing eye fixes on them.
George Osborne had the gaze on him for a long time and I fear perceptions of him are now rooted; as a cold, right-wing, charmless Tory who cuts for ideological reasons. None of those perceptions are entirely fair, and the superb relationship Osborne has with Danny Alexander is an example of how collegiate he is compared to the public perception of him as an uber-right winger.
Miliband needs to be careful that the 'weak' or 'Ed is crap' memes don't stick. His lack of publicly stated policies are a problem because it allows the Labour-bashing to be focussed on him as opposed to focussed on policies. Pretty soon he will need to demonstrate his strength by formulating a group of policies that sit well with his party and appeal to the electorate. It won't be easy; it waits to seen if he can pull if off.
But the most worrying aspect of the anti-Miliband narrative - to anyone who supports Labour - should be Miliband's obvious lack of ability to control or - at least - manipulate the news. Alastair Campbell did a brilliant, omnipotent job of controlling communications for Blair and Mandelson actually did a very good job for Gordon Brown (I still believe Brown would've been removed if Mandelson hadn't returned) and Miliband desperately needs someone to do the same for him. Otherwise he will be eaten alive by the likes of Crosby during an election campaign.
The groupthink media narrative and the need for a backroom master of the dark political arts are sad by-products of modern political life, so challenging is the 24hr media landscape, but they are also vital aspects for any party leader hoping to be succesful. Miliband and Labour supporters should be worried at how, despite being way ahead in the polls, the media focus is currently on Milibands failings as a leader.
Европейский комиссар @MoodySlayerUK The Tories are going to launch an attack on Ed Miliband next week. This is a mistake, at least wait until his own party has finished.
Anyway, Miliband doesn't need to worry. Labout really wanted to stab Brown in the back and completely buggered it up. Even Brown, with unrivalled power as Chancellor and status as heir apparent, took 10 bloody years and Blair cocking up by pre-announcing his departure to oust him.
"The choice of questions for the weekly Sunday Times YouGov poll is a good indication of what’s been going on in the previous week and today a large part of the poll is devoted to beards – sparked off by Jeremy Paxman. "
Well, the article suggests that the sale will enable development (business park and hotels) on the site. Although I've never been, and doubt I ever will, Silverstone is apparently a pain to get into, so on-site hotels could help ease this.
The UK has a long-term contract, unusual in F1, to 2027 and is a critical race for so many reasons. In addition to many drivers, engineers and so forth being British, more than half of the teams are based in the UK and many are a short distance from the track itself. It's the best attended race on the calendar (I think Montreal comes close) despite high ticket prices, which is obviously good for paying the fees. Presumably the new owners won't be stupid or greedy enough to cock things up and overcharge or suchlike, but we'll have to wait and see.
With all the talk of Ed Miliband's problems, I have concluded that out of the 5 candidates who stood for Labour leader, the one Labour should have picked was Dianne Abbott:
- Not tainted by the last Government as wasn't a minister - A good communicator (certainly better than either Miliband) - Popular with the base - Black, a woman and working class so would provide a big contrast with "the fops" - Not seen to be in the pocket of the unions
Any thoughts?
It's only a guess, but you'd probably find that very few people in the Labour party take Diane Abbott seriously.
Surveys show that Ed Miliband is viewed as the new Nick Clegg, but without the gravitas and charisma. Fred Goodwin enjoys greater public trust on the economy than his Treasury team.
Labour’s Summer of Discontent continues. This weekend, Ed Miliband’s enemies were again making hay at the embattled leader’s expense. Miliband is too “Buddha-like”. He needs to “grow up”. Labour has “massively failed” to make its case. Actually, that wasn’t his enemies, but his friends: Tom Watson, senior backbencher and former campaign coordinator; Lord Glasman, Ed’s guru of choice; and Lord Prescott, the former deputy prime minister. Caroline Flint, the shadow environment secretary, also chipped in, adding helpfully that though her leader may be unpopular, the voters may not notice come polling day.
The People’s Party is scattering its marbles to the winds. Its poll lead is crumbling. Surveys show that Ed Miliband is viewed as the new Nick Clegg, but without the gravitas and charisma. Fred Goodwin enjoys greater public trust on the economy than his Treasury team. Some Labour activists and commentators seem stunned by all this panic. They point out that we are still two years from an election, that the cuts are biting and that the Tory brand remains contaminated. But for seasoned Labourologists, there is nothing surprising here. We are just witnessing another of the party’s regular collisions with the British people.
Seriously, what did Labour think was going to happen? That Ed Miliband’s brand of metropolitan liberalism would take the working people of England by storm? That pubs and supermarkets would echo to the excited chatter of people debating the merits of “The New Politics” and “One Nation Britain”? That in the midst of a recession caused by excess borrowing and debt, the voters yearned for a champion who would safeguard the livelihoods of those on benefits by whacking even more borrowing and debt on to the credit card? It’s time for Labour to face an unpalatable fact. All those people who told the pollsters they couldn’t see Miliband as prime minister were telling the truth.... >> http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100231544/its-time-for-a-new-labour-guru-coco-chanel/
One of Miliband's great strengths to me is that he doesn't seem overly concerned with the dark arts of the dead tree press. In the modern age with their influence possibly on the slide, and after - erm - "certain events", he might just be onto something too.
Arguments, ground game, strategy over news cycles and dark arts might be naive, but it's also refreshing and possibly now effective.
With all the talk of Ed Miliband's problems, I have concluded that out of the 5 candidates who stood for Labour leader, the one Labour should have picked was Dianne Abbott:
- Not tainted by the last Government as wasn't a minister - A good communicator (certainly better than either Miliband) - Popular with the base - Black, a woman and working class so would provide a big contrast with "the fops" - Not seen to be in the pocket of the unions
Any thoughts?
It's only a guess, but you'd probably find that very few people in the Labour party take Diane Abbott seriously.
Why do we still think Ed is crap? Ed is most definitely not crap! He is merely misunderstood, and I put it to you that is the chief reason why he is so maligned and ridiculed by the evil right-wing media.
I am certain you will agree with me that Ed is magnificently charismatic and eloquent. He is an inspiring and refreshing standard bearer for the social democratic tradition in our great nation. Yes, indeed: One Nation. Nay, his performance at Conference last year must surely have been amongst the greatest (if not the greatest) ever given by a leader of the Labour Party, or indeed of any party leader! Such magnificence, such poise, such alacrity. Wow! And his wonderful repertoire of jokes would put even Harry Hill to shame!
He is articulate, passionate, an accomplished orator, and I think a real progressive alternative to the smarmy posh boy Cameron.
With all the talk of Ed Miliband's problems, I have concluded that out of the 5 candidates who stood for Labour leader, the one Labour should have picked was Dianne Abbott:
- Not tainted by the last Government as wasn't a minister - A good communicator (certainly better than either Miliband) - Popular with the base - Black, a woman and working class so would provide a big contrast with "the fops" - Not seen to be in the pocket of the unions
Any thoughts?
It's only a guess, but you'd probably find that very few people in the Labour party take Diane Abbott seriously.
Is it cos she is black?
Lol, put it like this, if Miliband could tape her mouth up and get away with it, he probably would. I fancy her as a bit of a walking gaffe-zone. A not so bright Labour version of Oliver Letwin or Alan Duncan, likely to say something monumentally counter-productive at any moment.
I can only assume that certain PBTories spend so much time talking amongst themselves, only digesting news and comment from Tory-friendly sources like Guido, Telegraph blogs etc, that they genuinely convince themselves that certain "stories" are more significant than they actually are.
With all the talk of Ed Miliband's problems, I have concluded that out of the 5 candidates who stood for Labour leader, the one Labour should have picked was Dianne Abbott:
- Not tainted by the last Government as wasn't a minister - A good communicator (certainly better than either Miliband) - Popular with the base - Black, a woman and working class so would provide a big contrast with "the fops" - Not seen to be in the pocket of the unions
Any thoughts?
It's only a guess, but you'd probably find that very few people in the Labour party take Diane Abbott seriously.
Is it cos she is black?
Lol, put it like this, if Miliband could tape her mouth up and get away with it, he probably would. I fancy her as a bit of a walking gaffe-zone. A not so bright Labour version of Oliver Letwin or Alan Duncan, likely to say something monumentally counter-productive at any moment.
IIRC Ms Abbott is an Oxbridger but she hides it well most of the time.
Abbott is a prime example of someone having a degree from Oxbridge without displaying any signs of intelligence.. Knowledge garnering and regurgitation of same at exam time is no guarantee of intlellect.. just a good memory.. I have met some real thickos with firsts from both Cambridge and Oxford...
Mike taking a bit of uncalled for stick from his guests. I can only assume that certain PBTories spend so much time talking amongst themselves, only digesting news and comment from Tory-friendly sources like Guido, Telegraph blogs etc, that they genuinely convince themselves that certain "stories" are more significant than they actually are.
As others have noted, this tittle-tattle about Ed has barely moved public opinion. Which is entirely unsurprising, as it's largely, erm, tittle-tattle.
That's a little short sighted.
In my view, leadership "tittle tattle" rarely has a direct impact on the polls (even something like 'bigotgate' which was perhaps the most extreme leadership issue had only a limited effect, IIRC). That said it can be significant if: it distracts the leadership team from more important things; if it destabilises the leadership and forces them to take defensive steps e.g. an unplanned reshuffle; if the perception of a divided party spreads beyond the bubble.
The other point (thinking about it don't think it has been tested in a real election) is whether the "weak" motif takes hold with the general population. I don't recall any polling (would be interesting if anyone does), but would assume that "strong leader" is fairly high up the list of desirable characteristics in a PM. It's possible this could be the deciding issue for a lot of waverers, but would probably not show up until the ballot box. That said, it's speculation - the only recent candidate I can think of where "weak" was the defining characteristic was Major '97, but there was too much of a general flow against the Tories to be certain how significant the personal view of the leader was in determining the result.
Ed Miliband should appoint one of the party’s veteran MPs to his Shadow Cabinet to end Labour’s directionless approach to welfare, one of his senior allies has said.
Lord Glasman, who was ennobled by the Labour leader, told The Times that the appointment of the former welfare minister Frank Field would show that Labour was finally “serious” about reforming Britain’s welfare system.
Mr Field, who said his appointment would be a “good idea” yesterday, became the latest senior Labour figure to urge Mr Miliband to set a clearer direction. He also said the Labour leader needed to resist the temptation to retreat to the party’s comfort zone.
Comments
There is a general problem that the British political class, especially comment writers, don't understand the mechanics of electoral politics. Hence why so many people over estimated David Cameron and under estimated Gordon Brown.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/aug/18/miliband-leadership-attack-labour-figures
Very difficult for a leader who is constantly in lead in the polls to be under to much pressure. I know you want to ramp - and the press wants a story - but if 2010 has taught us anything it is to ignore the excitable hyperbole of some of the press and the desperate ramping of those on PB.
You should read some of your posts from April 2010. Most amusing.
You could say that Miliband was doing badly but also have a favourable view of him or that you were satisfied. In terms of electoral forecasting the YouGov approach is far less informative.
What affects the narrative is one thing. What is best for forecasting is another.
It's also (btw) an academic book rather than a a piece of party hackery (my wife buys plenty of those for me to read so I know how to spot them).
In breaking news from Westminster we bring you the shocking news that Ed is crap! Labour was left reeling by this devastating revelation when up to now the unanimous opinion had been "Ed is Brilliant"!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compassionate_conservatism
I expect the next book to make waves here will be the Iain Martin tome on RBS due out next month, which will doubtless be raked over for anti-Scots/English/Brown propaganda as well as economic and business history.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Making-Happen-Goodwin-British-Economy/dp/147111354X
Have I coined a new word in "Crapness", and is it better with a double p?
Lord Glasman:- “You made me a Lord, Ed, but even I think it's time you grew up and became a REAL leader:” Daily Mail.
John Prescott: “Ed Miliband is Labour's Alex Ferguson and he needs to give any slacking ministers the hairdryer treatment” Daily Mirror.
“Ed Miliband's leadership under further attack from senior Labour figures” The Guardian.
“Ed Miliband Under Fire As Personal Ratings Dive” Sky News.
“Labour's woes mean the bar is being set ever higher for Miliband's conference speech” New Statesman.
Chris Bryant and his ‘Rivers of Blunder’ – multiple news sources.
Chris Bryant admits “Labour 'made mistakes' by opening borders to influx of EU workers” - multiple news sources.
“LABOUR was forced into a humiliating u-turn last night after bungling frontbencher Chris Bryant finally admitted the opening the floodgates to Eastern Europe. Daily Express.
“Chris Bryant forced to back down over claim Tesco and Next use cheap migrant workers” The Independent.
“Andy Burnham attacks Miliband brothers in Labour leadership battle” Telegraph.
The list goes on and on…!
Could you inform us of the last political bet you placed.?
The RBS thing looks interesting. I know quite a bit of the story from different participants, but hope Martin does a serious job rather than just a bit of hatchetry. Will add it to my list though. Thanks.
Do you think the Labour party would have been better off or worse off it had chosen David Miliband as leader, or would it have made no difference?
Better off:
Con: 51
Lab: 49
LibD: 43
UKIP: 44
Of the 2010 vote the most convinced are Labour!
Agree with Mike that "Ed is crap" is getting rather tedious. Yes, the biased right-wing press will push this agenda but do we all have to follow this right-wing vitriol?
My message for the PB Tories / PB Burleys is get your own house in order first. Push for change within your beloved party to dilute the toxicity of the Tory brand espcially in places like Scotland, Wales and London (and within the ethnic minority communities).
By far the most surprising piece of polling for me recently was the MORI poll that found that 63% of those polled disliked Ed Miliband. I can understand not warming to him, not rating him or not thinking he was a good leader. But disliking him? He seems perfectly pleasant to me. David Cameron seems much more inherently capable of producing dislike as a reaction.
Good to meet Sunil at North Weald this afternoon - the Epping-Ongar railway is a superb attraction and well worth a visit. Mrs Stodge thoroughly enjoyed it as did her folks.
I also discovered via the excellent bookshop at Ongar that we had a Crossrail in London between the wars. From 1910 to 1939 it was possible to travel on a direct service from Ealing Broadway to Southend. It was electric from Ealing to Whitechapel and then steam the rest of the way.
Now, we're lashing out billions of pounds to replace what we once had - remarkable !!
On Ed Miliband, it's fair to say that in August, we either have a huge crisis (invasion of Kuwait, Eurozone crisis) or nothing happens at all. This is a "nothing happens" year but the 24-hour news cycle beast must be fed so it's "let's have a go at the Labour leader".
As I've said before, Miliband's huge advantages are a) the apparent solidity of the Labour vote comprising 2010 Labour vote plus 40-50% of the 2010 LD vote and b) he knows when the election is going to be and can plan accordingly. Everyone else is aware of b) and so there's no value fighting an election campaign this early.
The YouGov UK question is not good for reasons we've gone over many times, basically it's a "from what you have heard" question rather than the approval ratings they use in the US.
It all rather depends on what you want to use the question results for.
Sir Roderick's mates, Lebo and Norpoth, use PM approval as their chosen predictor in addition to a cyclical analsyis of past election results. L&N explain their reasoning:
Since the cyclical dynamic of our model already consumes the equivalent of two predictors, we decided to put our faith in just a single explanatory factor that makes theoretical sense, is measurable and is available enough time ahead of the event. Our choice: prime ministerial approval.
The actual source has changed over time and now involves some reworking of polling data from multiple polling sources:
The question typically asks: ‘Are you satisfied or dissatisfied with [name] as Prime Minister?’ For elections from 1945 to 1997 we relied on Gallup polls. See Anthony King, ed., British Political Opinion 1937–2000: The Gallup Polls (London: Politico, 2001). With that source no longer available, we have turned to MORI, ICM and YouGov polls since then. See www.mori.com/polls/trends/ and pollingreport.co.uk. Whenever possible, we formed the average from surveys two and three months prior to the date of a general election.
L&N are less concerned about the actual question respondents are asked than the proportions of support for the incumbent PM amongst voters for the two leading parties. This suggests, that in the use the 'approval question results' are put to in L&N's predictive model, the actual wording of the question is not significant to the accuracy of the model's output.
Elsewhere in their paper L&N make a strong case for using Prime Ministerial approval as a proxy and composite of other factors driving electability, e.g. economic performance.
tim has a strange obsession with trying to prove his own superiority. Against people who post on an internet site.
Way to go, tim, way to go.
So tim, you have tried to call me imbecilic , you have used Fitalass to try and divert the thread onto anything but "the current topic" despite others pointing out to you that no one gives a monkeys fuck about HS2 and that SKY are running on Egypt and anything but HS2, and then you insult Fitalass personally. Why do you always resort to personal insults?
This is called political betting.
Fitalass said this to mike.
"Surely that is a relevant point to raise on a political betting site, and not one that deserves a 'sling your hook' if you don't like it response? "
I asked her not you, the last political bet she had placed.
Can`t see what was wrong with that.
The scale of the HS2 project means that its importance at the 2015 election will dwarf the effect Heathrow expansion had in the 2010 election. Therefore it's probably worthy of debate on a political betting website.
How the parties line up for or against HS2 in 2015 will say a great deal about their future vision for the country.
EdM is pretty rubbish, so it's a perfectly reasonable discussion. Labour should be romping it at the moment and they aren't.
Perhaps he will surprise us in the GE campaign, but I doubt it. I remember watching his acceptance speech and whilst wanting him to be great, my heart began to sink and sink.
He's the IDS of Labour. Perfectly reasonable chap. Bugger all good as candidate for PM.
Tory members certainty care about HS2. It's one of the main reasons why Tory membership will be sub 90,000 by 2014.
The other camp are tax payers, and you could be right that people 'ought' to care on that score but until today's report I don't think most people considered HS2 to be anything to do with them. If somehow HS2 can be made to stick on people as mattering financially, and for it to be partisan (how I don't know since all three parties are culpable) then you may be right.
For now, you aren't.
This is for the following reasons
1) This is the first trial on this topic, there will be subsequent trials, we do not want anything posted that maybe prejudicial to the later the trials held after this first trial
2) As you have noted there is a blackout, unfortunately, you and other posters have been repeatedly unable/unwilling to adhere to this blackout and violated the spirit and wording of this blackout, we aren't going to take the risk of putting the site owner at risk, as other news organisations, such as the Guardian or the Telegraph don't allow comments on their phone hacking related articles.
This ends the discussion on phone hacking on the site.
More anti HS2 posters than ukip/tory ones in the farmers fields
Right wing Luddites very amusing. Only too happy to Frack the desolate NE/NW
" Ed Miliband faces his most dismal week yet after two Labour heavyweights today mauled his leadership and polls suggested that increasing numbers of voters think he is doing a poor job. Lord Prescott said that Labour had “massively failed” to hold the Conservatives to account or make its own case, and Lord Glasman, a guru to Mr Miliband, said that the Labour leader needed to prove that he was a “grown-up politician” capable of leading the country.
A YouGov poll for the Sunday Times claimed that 69 per cent of voters felt that Mr Miliband was failing to provide an effective opposition to the government, a rise of three points since the same question was asked early last month. A total of 62 per cent thought he was not up to the job of prime minister, a rise of five per cent.
A ComRes poll for The Independent on Sunday and Sunday Mirror showed that 22 per cent thought Mr Miliband was doing a good job compared with 50 per cent who did not.
Then end the vat on extensions and repairs for 2 years.
Don't forget the Met also ran services effectively from Barking right through to Aylesbury and beyond.
The point is that you try to deflect threads that don't suit your purpose.
Perhaps I should try it...
Do you wear lifts in your shoes?
That said, the people who do care are concentrated in a bunch of seats - many of which (I assume) are safe Tory, but a lot of which are marginals. So the political importance is likely greater than the number of people who care.
OT -- those cat videos you posted: how come mum changed colour between videos 1 and 3, or was the black one dad?
As others have noted, this tittle-tattle about Ed has barely moved public opinion. Which is entirely unsurprising, as it's largely, erm, tittle-tattle.
- Not tainted by the last Government as wasn't a minister
- A good communicator (certainly better than either Miliband)
- Popular with the base
- Black, a woman and working class so would provide a big contrast with "the fops"
- Not seen to be in the pocket of the unions
Any thoughts?
If only the Prime Minister had the influence to arrange such an award, eh?
Miliband must be feeling slightly bewildered. The Falkirk story was - and is - a big problem because it diverted the narrative away from Cameron's problems to Miliband's. But the media group-think that emerges from blogs/twitter/editorials these days takes on such a life of its own that any leading politician can be excused for feeling hard-done-by when the hot, probing eye fixes on them.
George Osborne had the gaze on him for a long time and I fear perceptions of him are now rooted; as a cold, right-wing, charmless Tory who cuts for ideological reasons. None of those perceptions are entirely fair, and the superb relationship Osborne has with Danny Alexander is an example of how collegiate he is compared to the public perception of him as an uber-right winger.
Miliband needs to be careful that the 'weak' or 'Ed is crap' memes don't stick. His lack of publicly stated policies are a problem because it allows the Labour-bashing to be focussed on him as opposed to focussed on policies. Pretty soon he will need to demonstrate his strength by formulating a group of policies that sit well with his party and appeal to the electorate. It won't be easy; it waits to seen if he can pull if off.
But the most worrying aspect of the anti-Miliband narrative - to anyone who supports Labour - should be Miliband's obvious lack of ability to control or - at least - manipulate the news. Alastair Campbell did a brilliant, omnipotent job of controlling communications for Blair and Mandelson actually did a very good job for Gordon Brown (I still believe Brown would've been removed if Mandelson hadn't returned) and Miliband desperately needs someone to do the same for him. Otherwise he will be eaten alive by the likes of Crosby during an election campaign.
The groupthink media narrative and the need for a backroom master of the dark political arts are sad by-products of modern political life, so challenging is the 24hr media landscape, but they are also vital aspects for any party leader hoping to be succesful. Miliband and Labour supporters should be worried at how, despite being way ahead in the polls, the media focus is currently on Milibands failings as a leader.
Structural engineers are cautioning onlookers to stand well clear.
F1: Silverstone has been sold, it is said:
http://www.espn.co.uk/f1/motorsport/story/120661.html
He may be in severe danger of violating the spirit of the discussion about beards.
Who can say?
*tears of laughter etc.*
The Tories are going to launch an attack on Ed Miliband next week. This is a mistake, at least wait until his own party has finished.
On topic.
http://bit.ly/iRqoHb
Is this a good thing?
On topic.
http://conservativehome.blogs.com/.a/6a00d83451b31c69e2015436ddced7970c-pi
Well, the article suggests that the sale will enable development (business park and hotels) on the site. Although I've never been, and doubt I ever will, Silverstone is apparently a pain to get into, so on-site hotels could help ease this.
The UK has a long-term contract, unusual in F1, to 2027 and is a critical race for so many reasons. In addition to many drivers, engineers and so forth being British, more than half of the teams are based in the UK and many are a short distance from the track itself. It's the best attended race on the calendar (I think Montreal comes close) despite high ticket prices, which is obviously good for paying the fees. Presumably the new owners won't be stupid or greedy enough to cock things up and overcharge or suchlike, but we'll have to wait and see.
The People’s Party is scattering its marbles to the winds. Its poll lead is crumbling. Surveys show that Ed Miliband is viewed as the new Nick Clegg, but without the gravitas and charisma. Fred Goodwin enjoys greater public trust on the economy than his Treasury team. Some Labour activists and commentators seem stunned by all this panic. They point out that we are still two years from an election, that the cuts are biting and that the Tory brand remains contaminated. But for seasoned Labourologists, there is nothing surprising here. We are just witnessing another of the party’s regular collisions with the British people.
Seriously, what did Labour think was going to happen? That Ed Miliband’s brand of metropolitan liberalism would take the working people of England by storm? That pubs and supermarkets would echo to the excited chatter of people debating the merits of “The New Politics” and “One Nation Britain”? That in the midst of a recession caused by excess borrowing and debt, the voters yearned for a champion who would safeguard the livelihoods of those on benefits by whacking even more borrowing and debt on to the credit card? It’s time for Labour to face an unpalatable fact. All those people who told the pollsters they couldn’t see Miliband as prime minister were telling the truth.... >> http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100231544/its-time-for-a-new-labour-guru-coco-chanel/
Good analysis, though I don't agree entirely.
One of Miliband's great strengths to me is that he doesn't seem overly concerned with the dark arts of the dead tree press. In the modern age with their influence possibly on the slide, and after - erm - "certain events", he might just be onto something too.
Arguments, ground game, strategy over news cycles and dark arts might be naive, but it's also refreshing and possibly now effective.
Nick, don’t be so puerile – If you cannot distinguish between hobbies and headlines, god help you.
I am certain you will agree with me that Ed is magnificently charismatic and eloquent. He is an inspiring and refreshing standard bearer for the social democratic tradition in our great nation. Yes, indeed: One Nation. Nay, his performance at Conference last year must surely have been amongst the greatest (if not the greatest) ever given by a leader of the Labour Party, or indeed of any party leader! Such magnificence, such poise, such alacrity. Wow! And his wonderful repertoire of jokes would put even Harry Hill to shame!
He is articulate, passionate, an accomplished orator, and I think a real progressive alternative to the smarmy posh boy Cameron.
I can only assume that certain PBTories spend so much time talking amongst themselves, only digesting news and comment from Tory-friendly sources like Guido, Telegraph blogs etc, that they genuinely convince themselves that certain "stories" are more significant than they actually are.
...now back to cheering on the USA in the Solheim Cup.
Plato Hodges is a great name.
Scott and Plato enjoy geeing each other up. Which is why they hate elections. As it ruins their pretend world views.
In my view, leadership "tittle tattle" rarely has a direct impact on the polls (even something like 'bigotgate' which was perhaps the most extreme leadership issue had only a limited effect, IIRC). That said it can be significant if: it distracts the leadership team from more important things; if it destabilises the leadership and forces them to take defensive steps e.g. an unplanned reshuffle; if the perception of a divided party spreads beyond the bubble.
The other point (thinking about it don't think it has been tested in a real election) is whether the "weak" motif takes hold with the general population. I don't recall any polling (would be interesting if anyone does), but would assume that "strong leader" is fairly high up the list of desirable characteristics in a PM. It's possible this could be the deciding issue for a lot of waverers, but would probably not show up until the ballot box. That said, it's speculation - the only recent candidate I can think of where "weak" was the defining characteristic was Major '97, but there was too much of a general flow against the Tories to be certain how significant the personal view of the leader was in determining the result.
Elections are great. Gorge Galloway's win was one of the funniest events in years.
http://www.theguardian.com/profile/richard-chartres
LOL
Navel-gazing not as damaging for an opposition, and always a slow burner.
I think they just enjoy having a fantasy world they can live in to escape their own. It's like they need it for their own validation as well.