Mr. L, assuming the unionists defeat the separatists in the referendum that'd leave a tiny window of time to replace Miliband with Darling. After the election, if Darling wanted it and Miliband lost, it could be another matter.
Looking through Doddy's list.....Burnham Balls Cooper Abbott the Eagles etc......I think it's time for Labour desist from leadership discussion altogether. David was the man and he's in New York.
So instead of fiddling while Rome burns the time has come to devise a strategy for making Ed popular. Labour have always had the celeb vote so I'd start with some heavyweight celebrity endorsement at the Party conference. It ALWAYS works and use them on PPB's right up to the election. Ed needs beefing up and there's no quicker way to do it
If you do not understand the very simple correction I was making to your original assertion I can't see the point in wasting any time with further explanation.
It is about ten years since I left the party, and I will not be joining again (though am considering joining the LibDems).
Balls would be scary as leader, Yvette I quite like (apart from her taste in men!); but I suspect that he would get the unions support in any battle, and I would not be surprised that son of McCavity is being quiet for a reason.
Foxinsox,,Being a member of the Labour Party does not seem to allow you to choose its leader.. save your contribution. Burnham is a disaster for Labour..ranks alongside Balls.These deadheads have to go.
Ed needs to carry out the unthinkable, if he did so then even I would vote for him... He needs a night of the Long Knives... He is still a geek but he has to get rid of all that lead sttached to his shoes..Does he have the courage that would need?, I doubt it.
the time has come to devise a strategy for making Ed popular
Roger, I would welcome your professional views on how, in the name of God, you could make Ed Miliband popular. I think you'd stand a better chance with a campaign making chlamydia sexy....
One uncommented on point from last nights polls is the UKIP figure. It appears to have followed the pattern of the last year and risen as Conservative voters get more bothered by immigration. The MORI index showed a 10 point rise in that figure and so UKIP strengthen. When immigration fell as an issue in July the Tories then clawed back support from UKIP.
Lynton Crosby's determination to stoke fears about immigration is a gift to Farage.
It's where the Tories are most comfortable, though; so it does unite the party around a simple message and that has to be a good thing given where they were a few months ago. The problem, of course, is that in swinging to the right, the Tories reinforce their toxicity among Labour and LD leaners. So if the UKIPers do not end up voting Tory it gets very problematical and may turn Labour getting most seats into Labour winning an overall majority.
One comment on the Yougov poll . One of the questions asks whether the respondents have a job . 40% did not , this seems astonishingly high compared to the national unemployment figures . I know that they will poll many retired people but 16% of 25-39 year olds and 26% of 40-59 year olds do not have a job .
Re Lib Dem lost deposits at the next GE , less than 50 is pretty much nailed on . The 5 % deposit threshold is very low . In 1979 the Liberals would have lost just 6 deposits with an overall vote share of under 14%
SO.. If youthink Len was not in charge of the Leaders selection ,even tho he had not yet been voted in as boss of Unite, 2 months after Ed's coronation, then you are more naive than even I give you credit for. McClusky was leader in the wings and was actually running Unite, as his boss was taking retirement...It's the way unions work. no vacuums in the leadership. Good attempt to try and close down the debat tho.
"Where IDS lost it was that his MPs panicked when he was trounced weekly at PMQs. IDS did quite well at the ballot box and there is no evidence Howard did better on polling day. We vote for parties, not presidents."
Clearly it's a "what if" but I consider that Howard did an excellent job of shoring up the Conservative position, restoring morale in the party and gaining seats to the extent that it put the Conservatives back in the game for 2010.
IMO if IDS had carried through to the 2005 GE then it's likely that the Conservatives would have lost further seats down to 140-150. They were sleep walking to disaster with IDS but fortunately for them they have an almost instinctive self preservation mode that trumps loyalty to a poor leader - Labour would do well to note but they will not which is especially fortunate for the nation.
SO.. If youthink Len was not in charge of the Leaders selection ,even tho he had not yet been voted in as boss of Unite, 2 months after Ed's coronation, then you are more naive than even I give you credit for. McClusky was leader in the wings and was actually running Unite, as his boss was taking retirement...It's the way unions work. no vacuums in the leadership. Good attempt to try and close down the debat tho.
McCluskey was not actually elected leader of Unite until after EdM was elected Labour leader. There is no debate to close down. You are factually incorrect.
SO.. If youthink Len was not in charge of the Leaders selection ,even tho he had not yet been voted in as boss of Unite, 2 months after Ed's coronation, then you are more naive than even I give you credit for. McClusky was leader in the wings and was actually running Unite, as his boss was taking retirement...It's the way unions work. no vacuums in the leadership. Good attempt to try and close down the debat tho.
McCluskey was not actually elected leader of Unite until after EdM was elected Labour leader. There is no debate to close down. You are factually incorrect.
Facts are not richardDodds's strong point . He believes Boris Johnson was born in the UK .
Had I not already wagered the maximum amount they would allow me, I'd be rushing off to Paddy Power on this news to top up on the number of lost LibDem deposits at the next General Election being fewer than 50. The words "rope", "money" and "old" spring to mind!
I'm not sure that's where the value is in that market. In 2011 the Lib Dems lost 25 deposits in Scotland and 16 in Wales. That's equivalent to at least 35 lost deposits in those two countries alone. With the Lib Dems concentrating on the small minority of seats they have a chance in there must be a very good chance of more than 50 lost deposits.
OK. What's your 2015 LD vote share? 12%? 15%?
If we assume they go from 23% to 15%, then that means the LDs have lost 35% of their vote. Let's be conservative... lets's look at all the seats where the LDs had less than 8.5% share in 2010 - i.e. assuming an approximately 40% drop in vote share (equivalent to 13-14% nationwide), then you get a mere 9 lost deposits.
This may - of course - be completely wrong. But it seems the value is on the 4/1 on fewer that 50.
The 4/1 on fewer than 50 has long gone (I suspect Richard Nabavi got most of it). I wonder how many lost deposits would have been implied by applying the actual Scottish Parliament and Welsh Assembly swings in 2011 to the 2007 results. I suspect fewer than the 25 / 16 that actually occurred because of the Lib Dem focus on seats that are winnable. It's been a thought-provoking market!
One comment on the Yougov poll . One of the questions asks whether the respondents have a job . 40% did not , this seems astonishingly high compared to the national unemployment figures . I know that they will poll many retired people but 16% of 25-39 year olds and 26% of 40-59 year olds do not have a job .
Wow. How effectively do they correct for that amount of skewing?
Had I not already wagered the maximum amount they would allow me, I'd be rushing off to Paddy Power on this news to top up on the number of lost LibDem deposits at the next General Election being fewer than 50. The words "rope", "money" and "old" spring to mind!
I'm not sure that's where the value is in that market. In 2011 the Lib Dems lost 25 deposits in Scotland and 16 in Wales. That's equivalent to at least 35 lost deposits in those two countries alone. With the Lib Dems concentrating on the small minority of seats they have a chance in there must be a very good chance of more than 50 lost deposits.
OK. What's your 2015 LD vote share? 12%? 15%?
If we assume they go from 23% to 15%, then that means the LDs have lost 35% of their vote. Let's be conservative... lets's look at all the seats where the LDs had less than 8.5% share in 2010 - i.e. assuming an approximately 40% drop in vote share (equivalent to 13-14% nationwide), then you get a mere 9 lost deposits.
This may - of course - be completely wrong. But it seems the value is on the 4/1 on fewer that 50.
The 4/1 on fewer than 50 has long gone (I suspect Richard Nabavi got most of it). I wonder how many lost deposits would have been implied by applying the actual Scottish Parliament and Welsh Assembly swings in 2011 to the 2007 results. I suspect fewer than the 25 / 16 that actually occurred because of the Lib Dem focus on seats that are winnable. It's been a thought-provoking market!
When the threshold is as low as 5% , a very small improvement in the Lib Dem share would lift the Lib Dems above 5% in most of those seats where they came below 5% in the Holyrood and Welsh Assembly elections .
Good morning all, wouldn't a better bet rest on whether a certain wine salesman of this parish posts his 10,000th, thrilling diatribe before or after the Tories achieve a lead in any of the polls?
"Has Ed Moribund beaten Michael Foot's (un)popularity rating yet?"
I think it's important to see why a leader is unpopular before deciding it's terminal.
Michael Foot walked with a limp. He wanted to do away with our nuclear deterrent and was considered a crypto-communist. The public weren't ready for him.
IDS was so bumbling and inarticulate the public thought him a bufoon. I think he still could have won if his party wasn't so unpopular though he could do nothing about appearing stupid
Brown was seen as a Chancellor not a PM. Super-inarticulate and geekish but could and would have won easily if he hadn't shown himself to be so useless when in office.
Ed is quite simply unproven. Apart from personal prejudices there is no reason for his ratings to be so low. In my opinion with some good advice they could easily rise as quickly as they fell
There's a lack of charisma at the core of the problem, but beyond that the leadership ratings tend to be self-reinforcing. If you hear he's not very popular, you give him low ratings when asked, because the job of a leader of the opposition is to win, which sounds like it needs you to be popular. In theory you could get a positive self-reinforcing cycle instead, but I think that's hard to see unless he starts looking like a dead cert for PM, which is pretty unlikely of, as looks likely, the Con ratings are getting gradually better (but not enough for Con to actually win).
What the PB Tories are forgetting is that Miliband has had a lead over Cameron in the MORI leader ratings for fiteen out of the last eighteen months. Hague and IDS never came close to Blair, but Cameron, by their own definition must be extraordinarily second rate to have trailed Ed in 15 out of the last 18 polls.
If you plot the MORI ratings from election as leader (as OGH has done for us from time to time) you'll see that Ed was better than IDS. But not as good as Cameron.
One comment on the Yougov poll . One of the questions asks whether the respondents have a job . 40% did not , this seems astonishingly high compared to the national unemployment figures . I know that they will poll many retired people but 16% of 25-39 year olds and 26% of 40-59 year olds do not have a job .
Wow. How effectively do they correct for that amount of skewing?
It makes you wonder how representative the respondents to online pollsters are of the population as a whole .
"Not only sunburn on holiday in Cornwall turns David Cameron red. Someone who knows tells me that he "loses his temper easily": he flushes, and storms out of meetings if they do not go his way."
"I am told that he has recently had a lot of "quite angry" meetings with Nick Clegg. Where once civil servants liked to compare the polite and mutually respectful dealings of the coalition leaders with the storms of Tony Blair and Gordon Brown's dysfunctional "coalition", insiders now say that there are similarities after all."
"Immigration has been a running grievance between Cameron and Clegg."
"I should also record that civil servants who work with the Prime Minister are generous in their praise for his equanimity, calmness and work rate. That is what civil servants are supposed to say, but they didn't about Gordon Brown."
"It is easy to think that everyone dislikes Blair– although Cameron seems conflicted about his predecessor, known in No 10 as "The Master" – but prime ministers past and present should treat each other with a modicum of respect. To score a party point, Cameron undermined the dignity of his office. I gather he regretted it straight away."
There are betting implications in all of this, if you choose to believe it. By and large, I do. I'm not sure I agree with any of John Rentoul's conclusions, mind.
Had I not already wagered the maximum amount they would allow me, I'd be rushing off to Paddy Power on this news to top up on the number of lost LibDem deposits at the next General Election being fewer than 50. The words "rope", "money" and "old" spring to mind!
I'm not sure that's where the value is in that market. In 2011 the Lib Dems lost 25 deposits in Scotland and 16 in Wales. That's equivalent to at least 35 lost deposits in those two countries alone. With the Lib Dems concentrating on the small minority of seats they have a chance in there must be a very good chance of more than 50 lost deposits.
OK. What's your 2015 LD vote share? 12%? 15%?
If we assume they go from 23% to 15%, then that means the LDs have lost 35% of their vote. Let's be conservative... lets's look at all the seats where the LDs had less than 8.5% share in 2010 - i.e. assuming an approximately 40% drop in vote share (equivalent to 13-14% nationwide), then you get a mere 9 lost deposits.
This may - of course - be completely wrong. But it seems the value is on the 4/1 on fewer that 50.
The 4/1 on fewer than 50 has long gone (I suspect Richard Nabavi got most of it). I wonder how many lost deposits would have been implied by applying the actual Scottish Parliament and Welsh Assembly swings in 2011 to the 2007 results. I suspect fewer than the 25 / 16 that actually occurred because of the Lib Dem focus on seats that are winnable. It's been a thought-provoking market!
When the threshold is as low as 5% , a very small improvement in the Lib Dem share would lift the Lib Dems above 5% in most of those seats where they came below 5% in the Holyrood and Welsh Assembly elections .
Yeah, I accept it's one of those things that has an enormous cliff-edge. I suppose my argument is that if the Lib Dems do as badly as 2011 then they should lose many, many deposits. But will any improvement in vote share be concentrated on the small number of seats they are working in rather than the seats they have abandoned?
One comment on the Yougov poll . One of the questions asks whether the respondents have a job . 40% did not , this seems astonishingly high compared to the national unemployment figures . I know that they will poll many retired people but 16% of 25-39 year olds and 26% of 40-59 year olds do not have a job .
Wow. How effectively do they correct for that amount of skewing?
It makes you wonder how representative the respondents to online pollsters are of the population as a whole .
And therefore possibly how they so often get it wrong. I'm retired and hence have the time to fill in the often boring YG surveys. I doubt if i'd have the time if I was in meaningful employment.
Good morning all, wouldn't a better bet rest on whether a certain wine salesman of this parish posts his 10,000th, thrilling diatribe before or after the Tories achieve a lead in any of the polls?
That is an interesting one. Bad news for Labour leads to long periods (up to an hour) of silence before the new line emerges, so the rate of posting could diminish right around the time the polls converge, but it would still be close.
Good morning all, wouldn't a better bet rest on whether a certain wine salesman of this parish posts his 10,000th, thrilling diatribe before or after the Tories achieve a lead in any of the polls?
Er. Good Morning, M'lord. The small problem is that a lead in the poll is not enough for your lot. Remember, you did get 7% last time and you are now sharing a bed with Clegg.
7% last time = 8% this time. Even more Tory reasonably safe seats have become marginals. The ethnic minority votes are spreading and your recent "Illegal Immigrants Go Home" may have cheered up PBTories and their sort no end, it pisses off many others who do not like to see such toxicity.
"Not only sunburn on holiday in Cornwall turns David Cameron red. Someone who knows tells me that he "loses his temper easily": he flushes, and storms out of meetings if they do not go his way."
"I am told that he has recently had a lot of "quite angry" meetings with Nick Clegg. Where once civil servants liked to compare the polite and mutually respectful dealings of the coalition leaders with the storms of Tony Blair and Gordon Brown's dysfunctional "coalition", insiders now say that there are similarities after all."
"Immigration has been a running grievance between Cameron and Clegg."
"I should also record that civil servants who work with the Prime Minister are generous in their praise for his equanimity, calmness and work rate. That is what civil servants are supposed to say, but they didn't about Gordon Brown."
"It is easy to think that everyone dislikes Blair– although Cameron seems conflicted about his predecessor, known in No 10 as "The Master" – but prime ministers past and present should treat each other with a modicum of respect. To score a party point, Cameron undermined the dignity of his office. I gather he regretted it straight away."
There are betting implications in all of this, if you choose to believe it. By and large, I do. I'm not sure I agree with any of John Rentoul's conclusions, mind.
Dave's temper has never been a secret, has it? Looks to me like Rentoul's been spun a line here - it's not as if Dave would want it kept secret that he is having heated arguments with Clegg over immigration. That line suits him very nicely indeed.
"Not only sunburn on holiday in Cornwall turns David Cameron red. Someone who knows tells me that he "loses his temper easily": he flushes, and storms out of meetings if they do not go his way."
"I am told that he has recently had a lot of "quite angry" meetings with Nick Clegg. Where once civil servants liked to compare the polite and mutually respectful dealings of the coalition leaders with the storms of Tony Blair and Gordon Brown's dysfunctional "coalition", insiders now say that there are similarities after all."
"Immigration has been a running grievance between Cameron and Clegg."
"I should also record that civil servants who work with the Prime Minister are generous in their praise for his equanimity, calmness and work rate. That is what civil servants are supposed to say, but they didn't about Gordon Brown."
"It is easy to think that everyone dislikes Blair– although Cameron seems conflicted about his predecessor, known in No 10 as "The Master" – but prime ministers past and present should treat each other with a modicum of respect. To score a party point, Cameron undermined the dignity of his office. I gather he regretted it straight away."
There are betting implications in all of this, if you choose to believe it. By and large, I do. I'm not sure I agree with any of John Rentoul's conclusions, mind.
Only the Nokia bit is missing. But now-a-days it would be a Samsung.
Good morning all, wouldn't a better bet rest on whether a certain wine salesman of this parish posts his 10,000th, thrilling diatribe before or after the Tories achieve a lead in any of the polls?
That is an interesting one. Bad news for Labour leads to long periods (up to an hour) of silence before the new line emerges, so the rate of posting could diminish right around the time the polls converge, but it would still be close.
£10 says yes.
Do we have a bet prediction?
Can we also open a book on how many posts this site's various tim obsessives will contribute on him? It's bound to be a five figure number; but just how high can it go?
@SouthamObserver I haven't heard of him storming out of meetings, and to date we have been told that one constant of the coalition has been the warm personal relations at the top. So yes, I think this is new.
You may be right about John Rentoul being spun a line, but he's put his own take on it which has not helped the spinner.
NB Civil servants praising David Cameron's work rate. That also doesn't fit with the previous gossip about Fruit Ninja.
Come to that, this government has had far less personal gossip than the last. So it's a novelty to get some. Are the curtains starting to open?
So a wisdom poll in the which the Tories lost support was what got the PB Tories excited last night...Hmm Since the Times reports that even Cameron is preparing for coalition,isn`t it better for Tory supporters to realise that a hung Parliament is the *BEST* they can hope for?
"Not only sunburn on holiday in Cornwall turns David Cameron red. Someone who knows tells me that he "loses his temper easily": he flushes, and storms out of meetings if they do not go his way."
"I am told that he has recently had a lot of "quite angry" meetings with Nick Clegg. Where once civil servants liked to compare the polite and mutually respectful dealings of the coalition leaders with the storms of Tony Blair and Gordon Brown's dysfunctional "coalition", insiders now say that there are similarities after all."
"Immigration has been a running grievance between Cameron and Clegg."
"I should also record that civil servants who work with the Prime Minister are generous in their praise for his equanimity, calmness and work rate. That is what civil servants are supposed to say, but they didn't about Gordon Brown."
"It is easy to think that everyone dislikes Blair– although Cameron seems conflicted about his predecessor, known in No 10 as "The Master" – but prime ministers past and present should treat each other with a modicum of respect. To score a party point, Cameron undermined the dignity of his office. I gather he regretted it straight away."
There are betting implications in all of this, if you choose to believe it. By and large, I do. I'm not sure I agree with any of John Rentoul's conclusions, mind.
Dave's temper has never been a secret, has it? Looks to me like Rentoul's been spun a line here - it's not as if Dave would want it kept secret that he is having heated arguments with Clegg over immigration. That line suits him very nicely indeed.
This is a double-edged sword for the Tories. It does limit the defection to UKIP but equally reinforces the toxicity of the brand. No one expressed it better than Theresa May's "nasty party". The one party conference speech for which she will never be PM no matter how tough she is seen on immigrants today.
Good morning all, wouldn't a better bet rest on whether a certain wine salesman of this parish posts his 10,000th, thrilling diatribe before or after the Tories achieve a lead in any of the polls?
That is an interesting one. Bad news for Labour leads to long periods (up to an hour) of silence before the new line emerges, so the rate of posting could diminish right around the time the polls converge, but it would still be close.
£10 says yes.
Do we have a bet prediction?
Can we also open a book on how many posts this site's various tim obsessives will contribute on him? It's bound to be a five figure number; but just how high can it go?
God forbid, if Tim does not contribute for a few days. Some here will begin to show withdrawl symptoms. They wouldn't know what to do.
@SouthamObserver I haven't heard of him storming out of meetings, and to date we have been told that one constant of the coalition has been the warm personal relations at the top. So yes, I think this is new.
You may be right about John Rentoul being spun a line, but he's put his own take on it which has not helped the spinner.
NB Civil servants praising David Cameron's work rate. That also doesn't fit with the previous gossip about Fruit Ninja.
Come to that, this government has had far less personal gossip than the last. So it's a novelty to get some. Are the curtains starting to open?
Fair enough. His bad temper has never really been hidden - he gets quite easily riled in the Commons when he's not on top of his brief; so it's not a huge leap to imagine him storming out of meetings - though that can take many forms (it's not half as bad if you storm out at the end). As differentiation is going to help both sides of the coalition over the next 18 months or so we're bound to get a few more of these kinds of story. They will only be really damaging if they involve ministers in the same party. That's what made the Blair/Brown stuff so compelling and, ultimately, so destructive.
Have just finished an analysis of the 2010GE in England.
Have found that in 2010 there are 49 Labour constituencies that increased their majority in number of votes (not by %age share or %age majority but by votes e.g. from 3251 to 5976). This includes boundary changes but not seats gained.
To make it easier for you to determine the constituencies, there are 22 in the combined SW,SE & London regions; 9 in the Eastern, East Midlands and West Midlands regions and 18 in the North East, North West and Yorks & Humber regions. But two of those regions did not contain any constituencies where Labour increased their majority. (All regions as defined in UK Polling Report).
I will email the answers to TSE as I may be out later.
I'm not talking about bets, I'm talking about your deluded predictions in the headers
You mean bets. I placed bets. The bets were in the public domain. As my creepy stalker you seem to have kept a record.
I have placed a bet on made a prediction of the outcome of the Belgian Grand Prix
I won't post it here in case a loss gets reposted every day for 5 years (or more)
Scott, don't try to wriggle out now. You are indeed infamous for predicting the Tory "surge" in Scotland. Fitalass and Easterross were not too far behind, if I may add.
Whilst in principle I like the PCC idea - this really doesn't help when it comes to holding coppers to account - these are two *independents*
Two of Britain’s controversial crime tsars face being stripped of their titles after being investigated for electoral fraud, which could trigger by-elections costing taxpayers as much as £3.6 million.
The Mail on Sunday can reveal that the police watchdog mounted covert operations after being tipped off that the Police and Crime Commissioners for North Wales and Hampshire allegedly lied about where they lived.
The two PCCs could face prosecution for election fraud offences if the Independent Police Complaints Commission decides they were not based inside their force area on polling day, as the law required.
Winston Roddick is accused of listing his brother’s house in Caernarfon as his address when he really lives on the other side of Wales in Cardiff, and Simon Hayes is said to spend time in a Northamptonshire village with his vicar wife while having claimed he lived just outside Southampton.
SO ..McClusky was the leader in waiting, he was officially selected, by a massive majority ,two months after Ed was. Are you really saying he had no influence over the selection process of ED ....Really..how sweet
Mark Senior.. another dimbo who fell into the rather obvious bear trap re Boris's birthplace.
Dave's temper has never been a secret, has it? Looks to me like Rentoul's been spun a line here - it's not as if Dave would want it kept secret that he is having heated arguments with Clegg over immigration. That line suits him very nicely indeed.
It suits Clegg too. Let's not forget that the reason the Tories didn't win the Majority in 2010 was because of the Cleggasm. Now there's no way in hell the LibDems will get the same score in 2015, but expect a big fall out with 6 to 9 months before the election on some issue that would get your typical socks and sandals wearer apopleptic. Tories minority adminstration on confidence and supply with Lib Dems only agreeing to pass budgetary measures. Boosts the Libdems on the left but not quite enough. Alternatively they could end up dropping Clegg for Cable and the shift to the left could cause a leftwing split in the vote...though not to 1983 levels.
"...Privately, Miliband’s allies are dismissive of such intemperance. To a degree under-appreciated in Westminster, the Labour leader’s strategy has been shaped by the constitutional novelty of a fixed-term parliament. As one shadow cabinet member put it to me, “We know the date of the next election. There’s no danger of the government cutting and running . . . So we can work backwards. We know when we need our pledge cards by, our manifesto by and our party candidates selected by.” The reasons given for Labour not showing its hand too early are both familiar and persuasive: that the best policies are stolen and the party is lumbered with the worst. In addition, Ed Balls, who is charged with restoring Labour’s economic credibility, is determined to postpone major spending commitments until the state of the public finances is clearer.
That the opposition’s MPs know and understand all of this does little to assuage their disquiet. One comparison made with increasing frequency is with Miliband’s erstwhile mentor Gordon Brown, who similarly offered periodic hints of a social-democratic master plan, only for the cupboard to prove bare when he arrived in Downing Street.
To this, those close to the Labour leader reply: “Watch this space.” The first phase of the party’s policy review has been completed and the fruits will begin to emerge at this autumn’s conference. Labour has spent the summer charting how the “cost of living” has surged under the coalition, but if the party is to win in 2015 it won’t be enough to convince voters that they’re worse off under the Tories. It will also need to convince them they’d be better off under Labour. The aim of Miliband’s speech will be to bridge this gap, with energy and housing two of the candidates for major policy announcements..." http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2013/08/labour-and-tories-face-same-dilemma-break-deadlock-they-need-big-idea
went on about "Jason Rust MP" for weeks on end.Even claiming there were no Labour posters up in Darlings seat.
And now we get to the crux of the myth. I "predicted" Alistair Darling would lose his seat. I was wrong, but only an idiot would equate 1 seat gain to "a surge" (How is the Respect "surge" working out for you?)
I placed some bets. They were in the public domain. Had I known a creepy stalker would use those bets to post about me for years to come I might have been more circumspect.
the Labour leader’s strategy has been shaped by the constitutional novelty of a fixed-term parliament.
That's a good point actually. Why would you use up all your energy and ideas when you know an election is 18 months away? governments used to control the time they went to the country - the opposition had to be constantly on a war footing.
The voting intention (VI) position is very stable and has been for a long time. What could shake it up? I suggest there is a fairly short but important list: 1. The party conferences. Two of them left (plus Labour's spring one). Generally they give a short-term boost to each party in turn which then evaporates. Occasionally one goes horribly wrong. 2. Edited 3. The economy. If it got much better and people started to feel it personally, or it slumped back and people felt the strategy had flopped, it could affect VI. So far people think it's got a bit better but it's not affected VI. Today's YouGov findings confirm the current view that things are a bit better but the Government hasn't especially helped. 4. The Scottish referendum. A No vote (which seems the more probable outcome) will probably benefit Cameron in England - presiding over the non-dissolution - and Labour in Scotland - as the SNP argue over what to do next. 5. The Euros. UKIP have high expectations to meet. If they do, it should help 2015 publicity, if they don't it will seriously damage coverage thereafter. 6. Labour's union link. The spring conference is likely to be organised to succeed, with UNITE onside. It could unravel, or it could give Ed a boost. 7. The election campaign. Occasionally this makes a big difference, but usually the frenetic efforts largely cancel out. 8. Black swans. By definition we have no idea. They aren't as frequent in terms of what affects VI as one might think, though.
And that's about it, isn't it? The Labour lead of 6-7% is tight enough to make these events/issues potential game-changers, but Cameron probably needs a Tory lead of 3+ to have a reasonable chance of staying on. It should be fairly clear by next autumn, since 1,2,4,5,and 6 will all be out of the way.
A by-election, or rather UKIP winning a by-election. That might have an effect. They seem to run around 6 per year.
If some of the ol'-timers on here stopped spewing the same bullshyte they have being depositing since June 2010; if some of the more challenged amongst us realised that repetition is not a sign of intellect but more and indicator of primitive recollection; if only more space was allowed to encourage new posters to offer new insights and thoughts! No, too much to ask it seems.
And so what is the point. Same tits and bigger asses....
SO ..McClusky was the leader in waiting, he was officially selected, by a massive majority ,two months after Ed was. Are you really saying he had no influence over the selection process of ED ....Really..how sweet
Mark Senior.. another dimbo who fell into the rather obvious bear trap re Boris's birthplace.
I am saying that you and facts are not the closest of chums. But you must believe what you want to believe. And if that means thinking Boris was born in the UK and McCluskey chose EdM to be Labour leader, so be it. Who am I to argue?
went on about "Jason Rust MP" for weeks on end.Even claiming there were no Labour posters up in Darlings seat.
And now we get to the crux of the myth. I "predicted" Alistair Darling would lose his seat. I was wrong, but only an idiot would equate 1 seat gain to "a surge" (How is the Respect "surge" working out for you?)
I placed some bets. They were in the public domain. Had I known a creepy stalker would use those bets to post about me for years to come I might have been more circumspect.
Placing a bet on a 15% swing is not a rational bet. It is a effectively a wish.
How misled were you ? Did the propaganda catch you out ?
Placing a bet on a 15% swing is not a rational bet. It is a effectively a wish.
How rational was the 250/1 some got on Galloway?
Thus is the nature of betting. Some people understand that.
Most of the "predictions" that my creepy stalker is now claiming fall firmly into the wish category. My mistake was thinking it would be fun to share with others.
"Where IDS lost it was that his MPs panicked when he was trounced weekly at PMQs. IDS did quite well at the ballot box and there is no evidence Howard did better on polling day. We vote for parties, not presidents."
Clearly it's a "what if" but I consider that Howard did an excellent job of shoring up the Conservative position, restoring morale in the party and gaining seats to the extent that it put the Conservatives back in the game for 2010.
IMO if IDS had carried through to the 2005 GE then it's likely that the Conservatives would have lost further seats down to 140-150. They were sleep walking to disaster with IDS but fortunately for them they have an almost instinctive self preservation mode that trumps loyalty to a poor leader - Labour would do well to note but they will not which is especially fortunate for the nation.
I doubt if seats would have been lost under IDS, but the gains would have been far fewer. I agree Howard did a very good job. As important as gaining seats was seeing Labour marginals in the South having majorities cut from several thousand, in 2001, to several hundred, in 2005. Howard should have stayed on as leader, as he's very young for his age.
This reminds me of a colleague who got very weary of pointing out that a financial forecast wasn't a prediction a la Mystic Meg. They are very different things for the hard of understanding.
I remember one poll just before IDS left office with an IDS-led party on 34% and a Howard led-party on 33%, ie the total they got in 2005 (and the likes of May, Davis, Portillo, Letwin below Howard). Only Ken Clarke did better than IDS, taking the Tory total to about 35%.
Whilst in principle I like the PCC idea - this really doesn't help when it comes to holding coppers to account - these are two *independents*
Two of Britain’s controversial crime tsars face being stripped of their titles after being investigated for electoral fraud, which could trigger by-elections costing taxpayers as much as £3.6 million.
The Mail on Sunday can reveal that the police watchdog mounted covert operations after being tipped off that the Police and Crime Commissioners for North Wales and Hampshire allegedly lied about where they lived.
The two PCCs could face prosecution for election fraud offences if the Independent Police Complaints Commission decides they were not based inside their force area on polling day, as the law required.
Winston Roddick is accused of listing his brother’s house in Caernarfon as his address when he really lives on the other side of Wales in Cardiff, and Simon Hayes is said to spend time in a Northamptonshire village with his vicar wife while having claimed he lived just outside Southampton.
SO.. Given up then..Were you another one to fall into the Boris Birthplace bear pit or were you off having your possesions nicked in crime central. Never get embroiled with those Union boys, they will eat you for breakfast and not notice . Most new Union leaders are picked before the names go on the Ballot sheet, but you believe what you want to believe. The importnt question today is...Has Ed got the much needed courage to slice off all of the deadwood and drift wood that are pulling him under..He has very little chance if he does not.
For James Hunt fans - review of Rush £100m Ron Howard flick.
" The Seventies. The hirsute decade, all Brut aftershave, unbuttoned shirts and medallions. A decade when men could be men and racing drivers could be bonking, boozing racing drivers. And the king of them all was James Hunt, the last great playboy world champion. His reputation as a hothead, an oaf, a serial womaniser preceded him. He punched officious race-track officials, he urinated in restaurants and, I'm sorry to remind those of you with a weak disposition, he sometimes wore flip-flops to black-tie dinners. He ate like a pig, drank like a fish, and then he drove a racing car.
Here was a man who could hand his pint, his fag and whichever pit girl he'd just deflowered to his mechanic, before staggering into the cockpit to win the day. In the week of the 1976 Japanese Grand Prix, the biggest race of Hunt's career, he was holed up in a five-star hotel in Tokyo with world motorcycle champion Bary Sheene, working his way through a bevy of British Airways stewardesses, four at a time. Somehow, he still managed third place at Mount Fuji, earning enough points to clinch the championship. He flew home with a trophy and 32 new notches in his bedpost. By the time he died, there were 5,000..." http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/Magazine/article1302507.ece
For James Hunt fans - review of Rush £100m Ron Howard flick.
" The Seventies. The hirsute decade, all Brut aftershave, unbuttoned shirts and medallions. A decade when men could be men and racing drivers could be bonking, boozing racing drivers. And the king of them all was James Hunt, the last great playboy world champion. His reputation as a hothead, an oaf, a serial womaniser preceded him. He punched officious race-track officials, he urinated in restaurants and, I'm sorry to remind those of you with a weak disposition, he sometimes wore flip-flops to black-tie dinners. He ate like a pig, drank like a fish, and then he drove a racing car.
Here was a man who could hand his pint, his fag and whichever pit girl he'd just deflowered to his mechanic, before staggering into the cockpit to win the day. In the week of the 1976 Japanese Grand Prix, the biggest race of Hunt's career, he was holed up in a five-star hotel in Tokyo with world motorcycle champion Bary Sheene, working his way through a bevy of British Airways stewardesses, four at a time. Somehow, he still managed third place at Mount Fuji, earning enough points to clinch the championship. He flew home with a trophy and 32 new notches in his bedpost. By the time he died, there were 5,000..." http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/Magazine/article1302507.ece
To show how tame things are nowadays, the biggest personal controversies in F1 seem to be if Hamilton's split up with Scherzinger, and whether has has taken his bling-pooch Roscoe to a race.
I am really looking forward to watching Rush. Not as much as the film 'Senna', but that was much more my era and featured interviews with the Prof. ;-)
Because having more GPs work part-time in PCTs wouldn't have achieved the same thing as sacking everyone, then re-employing them as "CCGs". CCGs who can't legally use patient data to make decisions.
For James Hunt fans - review of Rush £100m Ron Howard flick.
" The Seventies. The hirsute decade, all Brut aftershave, unbuttoned shirts and medallions. A decade when men could be men and racing drivers could be bonking, boozing racing drivers. And the king of them all was James Hunt, the last great playboy world champion. His reputation as a hothead, an oaf, a serial womaniser preceded him. He punched officious race-track officials, he urinated in restaurants and, I'm sorry to remind those of you with a weak disposition, he sometimes wore flip-flops to black-tie dinners. He ate like a pig, drank like a fish, and then he drove a racing car.
Here was a man who could hand his pint, his fag and whichever pit girl he'd just deflowered to his mechanic, before staggering into the cockpit to win the day. In the week of the 1976 Japanese Grand Prix, the biggest race of Hunt's career, he was holed up in a five-star hotel in Tokyo with world motorcycle champion Bary Sheene, working his way through a bevy of British Airways stewardesses, four at a time. Somehow, he still managed third place at Mount Fuji, earning enough points to clinch the championship. He flew home with a trophy and 32 new notches in his bedpost. By the time he died, there were 5,000..." http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/Magazine/article1302507.ece
To show how tame things are nowadays, the biggest personal controversies in F1 seem to be if Hamilton's split up with Scherzinger, and whether has has taken his bling-pooch Roscoe to a race.
I am really looking forward to watching Rush. Not as much as the film 'Senna', but that was much more my era and featured interviews with the Prof. ;-)
I didn't think much of Senna myself - I reckon Rush could be really great. Apparently Hunt is portrayed as uber lush and Lauda as Mr Serious but of course its a bit of both for them all back then. The chap who played Thor is Hunt - brilliant casting.
For James Hunt fans - review of Rush £100m Ron Howard flick.
" The Seventies. The hirsute decade, all Brut aftershave, unbuttoned shirts and medallions. A decade when men could be men and racing drivers could be bonking, boozing racing drivers. And the king of them all was James Hunt, the last great playboy world champion. His reputation as a hothead, an oaf, a serial womaniser preceded him. He punched officious race-track officials, he urinated in restaurants and, I'm sorry to remind those of you with a weak disposition, he sometimes wore flip-flops to black-tie dinners. He ate like a pig, drank like a fish, and then he drove a racing car.
Here was a man who could hand his pint, his fag and whichever pit girl he'd just deflowered to his mechanic, before staggering into the cockpit to win the day. In the week of the 1976 Japanese Grand Prix, the biggest race of Hunt's career, he was holed up in a five-star hotel in Tokyo with world motorcycle champion Bary Sheene, working his way through a bevy of British Airways stewardesses, four at a time. Somehow, he still managed third place at Mount Fuji, earning enough points to clinch the championship. He flew home with a trophy and 32 new notches in his bedpost. By the time he died, there were 5,000..." http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/Magazine/article1302507.ece
To show how tame things are nowadays, the biggest personal controversies in F1 seem to be if Hamilton's split up with Scherzinger, and whether has has taken his bling-pooch Roscoe to a race.
I am really looking forward to watching Rush. Not as much as the film 'Senna', but that was much more my era and featured interviews with the Prof. ;-)
Agreed. Having watched the brilliant ITV documentary 'When Playboys Ruled the World' a few years ago I am really looking forward to this film.
Freggles..Do nurses not qualify for redundancy pay offs?..
I'm not sure of your point - yes they do?
The point is many PCT staff now work in CCGs after having been made redundant at massive cost. And CCGs in some places are clustering together to fit roughly the same areas as the old PCTs did.
Unsurprising given the example society is set by its leaders and power brokers, which is pertinent to the current disengagement with politics. Maybe when trust is gone voters will need to rely on faith as they tussle over poisoned carrion.
SO.. Given up then..Were you another one to fall into the Boris Birthplace bear pit or were you off having your possesions nicked in crime central. Never get embroiled with those Union boys, they will eat you for breakfast and not notice . Most new Union leaders are picked before the names go on the Ballot sheet, but you believe what you want to believe. The importnt question today is...Has Ed got the much needed courage to slice off all of the deadwood and drift wood that are pulling him under..He has very little chance if he does not.
@JosiasJessop - I never knew James Hunt shared a flat with Lauder when they were both penniless but driven or that his dad told him to bugger off when he wanted financing. It's a great article - worth buying the STimes just for it IMO.
" Formula 1 in 1974 was nothing like it is now. Today, you have 600 people in a team. It takes 50 of them with laptops just to start the car. Back then, everything was manual. The car was a machine, not a computer. “It was dangerous and difficult,” explains Tiff Needell, who inherited his first F1 drive after Clay Regazzoni broke his back at Long Beach in 1980. “It was only when carbon fibre came in that racing became safer. And driving was far harder. These days, you’ve got just two pedals — go with the right, stop with the left. You flap your paddles to change gear and you’ve got power steering. The G forces are higher but everything else is much easier.”
“Hunt took his racing very seriously,” says Sir Stirling Moss, who had been forced into early retirement a decade earlier, but became friends with Hunt. “You had to in those days. It was much more dangerous.” Of course Lauda, scarred for life after his crash at the Nürburgring, agrees. “Today, drivers hit each other because they know nothing will happen. It is so much safer. When we were racing, we saw every two months somebody dead.”
Freggles..the point is..the article linked to stated that Managers got 100k pay offs and nurses got P45's..
And the point of the article is that the reorganisation needlessly wasted money shuffling the structures around, money that could have been spent on front line care (or IT, or buildings, well, anything really)
Freggles.. I assume that pay offs for managers and redundancy pay offs for Nurses are somehow linked to Salary and length of service and should be strictly controlled by the various HR departments..unlike the BBC.
@JosiasJessop - I never knew James Hunt shared a flat with Lauder when they were both penniless but driven or that his dad told him to bugger off when he wanted financing. It's a great article - worth buying the STimes just for it IMO.
" Formula 1 in 1974 was nothing like it is now. Today, you have 600 people in a team. It takes 50 of them with laptops just to start the car. Back then, everything was manual. The car was a machine, not a computer. “It was dangerous and difficult,” explains Tiff Needell, who inherited his first F1 drive after Clay Regazzoni broke his back at Long Beach in 1980. “It was only when carbon fibre came in that racing became safer. And driving was far harder. These days, you’ve got just two pedals — go with the right, stop with the left. You flap your paddles to change gear and you’ve got power steering. The G forces are higher but everything else is much easier.”
“Hunt took his racing very seriously,” says Sir Stirling Moss, who had been forced into early retirement a decade earlier, but became friends with Hunt. “You had to in those days. It was much more dangerous.” Of course Lauda, scarred for life after his crash at the Nürburgring, agrees. “Today, drivers hit each other because they know nothing will happen. It is so much safer. When we were racing, we saw every two months somebody dead.”
I didn't know that either, but it's hardly surprising.
From what I've heard, there are lots of these friendly inter-personal relationships between the drivers going back years. After all, many of them drove in the same races as youngsters, sometimes as far back as karting.
A lot of the dislike and distrust between drivers is apparently just media-talk - drivers get annoyed during or after a race, make comments, and the media blow them out of proportion. In the meantime the drivers concerned go out drinking together.
After all, it does no-one any good to burn bridges - they may have to be teammates some day, or need favours.
There are apparently some honourable exceptions, however ...
Anyway, for anyone waiting for the Belgian GP, the BTCC is on ITV4 now.
This is a genuine query from a Jewish pal of mine and not meant to be offensive in any way.. How many Jews in the Shadow Cabinet?
I don't know, and I'm not sure anyone has surveyed their religious views or background. Not taking offence at the enquiry, but it's not a question that nowadays evokes great interest - no doubt there are a variety of beliefs, backgrounds and (probably more than average) non-beliefs, but it doesn't seem to have any practical impact on their policies, so we don't really care. For instance, I know Andy Burnham quite well, but I've no idea what his faith (if any) or background is and it would seem intrusive to ask.
The story here is also how many people got paid off and then re-employed or brought back in as consultants.
"The Department for Health said last night that the costs of the redundancy programme will be outstripped by the savings of the Government reforms to the NHS. A spokeswoman said: “Last year we started changes that put doctors and nurses in the driving seat as they are best placed to take decisions about care for their patients. “The changes made as a result of the reforms mean a huge net gain for the taxpayer. They will save £5.5 billion during this Parliament and £1.5 billion every year thereafter, to be reinvested back into patient care.” However, a National Audit Office (NAO) report last month found that more one in five of NHS staff made redundant as part of the Government’s reforms had been re-employed by the health service."
The one in five figure probably doesn't include management consultants paid on a daily rate.
This is a genuine query from a Jewish pal of mine and not meant to be offensive in any way.. How many Jews in the Shadow Cabinet?
I don't know, and I'm not sure anyone has surveyed their religious views or background. Not taking offence at the enquiry, but it's not a question that nowadays evokes great interest - no doubt there are a variety of beliefs, backgrounds and (probably more than average) non-beliefs, but it doesn't seem to have any practical impact on their policies, so we don't really care. For instance, I know Andy Burnham quite well, but I've no idea what his faith (if any) or background is and it would seem intrusive to ask.
How many Jews in the Shadow Cabinet? Search on Wikipedia says two
It is sad that Labout do not understand the concept of cutting recurring annual costs of circa £1.5bn by taking a £1.5bn hit. But many voters will not understand that either. Smart politics, but bad for the National interest.
Good to see Norman Lamb back it on Sky. Labour are just not serious about tackling the recurring level of Govt spending. Why am I not surprised?
"About 60 percent of Americans surveyed said the United States should not intervene in Syria's civil war, while just 9 percent thought President Barack Obama should act."
I'm starting to get a wee bit concerned that 21 months from the GE that poor old Ed's polling is so crap that he might politically become an IDS lookalike !!
Where IDS lost it was that his MPs panicked when he was trounced weekly at PMQs. IDS did quite well at the ballot box and there is no evidence Howard did better on polling day. We vote for parties, not presidents.
This is why Labour's lead is holding up, and why none of the prompted alternatives shift polling. There is no plausible rival at the moment. Burnham and Byrne are risible when interviewed, and no-one likes Ed Balls. Ed is safe.
Until, that is, Alistair Darling reappears after the Scottish referendum, garlanded with red roses having saved the union. Then Labour's worst Chancellor since Snowden might pose a real threat to Ed.
I tend to agree. If the 'No' side wins then Darling will be like Caesar parading back to the imperial capital after paggering a rebellious northern province. Ed will be filling his breeks, and rightly so.
Plato that article from the new statesman about Ed (Brown) Milliband is interesting, that a fairly rabid left wing journal says these things.
The ICM expert quoted below seems to be expecting a dip in Labour's VI when the Ed effect really kicks in. I did place a couple of quid on Ed going this year on tasty odds just for the fun of it.
It is sad that Labout do not understand the concept of cutting recurring annual costs of circa £1.5bn by taking a £1.5bn hit. But many voters will not understand that either. Smart politics, but bad for the National interest.
Good to see Norman Lamb back it on Sky. Labour are just not serious about tackling the recurring level of Govt spending. Why am I not surprised?
TBH, X thing I don't understand costs Ybns has bugger all PR cut through. To make it work:
X = something I can imagine or have direct experience of Y = believable number of £££s - anything over several tens of million sounds made up Z = are the people saying this credible given their own track record
Here Dr Death claiming XYZ has no traction. It may make Labourites cheer but it butters no electoral parsnips.
This is a genuine query from a Jewish pal of mine and not meant to be offensive in any way.. How many Jews in the Shadow Cabinet?
I don't know, and I'm not sure anyone has surveyed their religious views or background. Not taking offence at the enquiry, but it's not a question that nowadays evokes great interest - no doubt there are a variety of beliefs, backgrounds and (probably more than average) non-beliefs, but it doesn't seem to have any practical impact on their policies, so we don't really care. For instance, I know Andy Burnham quite well, but I've no idea what his faith (if any) or background is and it would seem intrusive to ask.
Tories may wish Ollie Letwin was in the Shadow Cabinet, but he isn't.
Ooops - sorry I read that as the cabinet (blush). And I was just trying to be helpful as my good deed of the day. Mind you Letwin especially, is more use to the shadow cabinet in the main cabinet. Shapps less so as he only has half the job.
It is sad that Labout do not understand the concept of cutting recurring annual costs of circa £1.5bn by taking a £1.5bn hit. But many voters will not understand that either.
Hee-he-he! Trying to explain to a leftoid the principle of the "Marginal unit of Production" would get them scanning every other YouGov poll. Economics, defence, equality and freedom: Words misunerstood by those "progressive" clowns!
Comments
Also, Brown was miles worse than Darling.
So instead of fiddling while Rome burns the time has come to devise a strategy for making Ed popular. Labour have always had the celeb vote so I'd start with some heavyweight celebrity endorsement at the Party conference. It ALWAYS works and use them on PPB's right up to the election. Ed needs beefing up and there's no quicker way to do it
Balls would be scary as leader, Yvette I quite like (apart from her taste in men!); but I suspect that he would get the unions support in any battle, and I would not be surprised that son of McCavity is being quiet for a reason.
It used to be "lead for 15 out of the last 17 months"
On the day of the election it will be "lead for 15 out of the last 38 months"
Ed for PM, nailed on...
I think Eddie Izzard is painting his nails that day too...
He needs a night of the Long Knives...
He is still a geek but he has to get rid of all that lead sttached to his shoes..Does he have the courage that would need?, I doubt it.
"Wodger..I assume you agree with the awfulness of the current Labour hot favourites then?."
Yes. All unsuitable.
One comment on the Yougov poll . One of the questions asks whether the respondents have a job . 40% did not , this seems astonishingly high compared to the national unemployment figures . I know that they will poll many retired people but 16% of 25-39 year olds and 26% of 40-59 year olds do not have a job .
Re Lib Dem lost deposits at the next GE , less than 50 is pretty much nailed on . The 5 % deposit threshold is very low . In 1979 the Liberals would have lost just 6 deposits with an overall vote share of under 14%
McClusky was leader in the wings and was actually running Unite, as his boss was taking retirement...It's the way unions work. no vacuums in the leadership.
Good attempt to try and close down the debat tho.
Your understanding of the nature of gambling is the sort of insight people read this blog for...
When will Osborne crying at a funeral show up in the polls?
Is "smart tim" EVER coming back?
"Where IDS lost it was that his MPs panicked when he was trounced weekly at PMQs. IDS did quite well at the ballot box and there is no evidence Howard did better on polling day. We vote for parties, not presidents."
Clearly it's a "what if" but I consider that Howard did an excellent job of shoring up the Conservative position, restoring morale in the party and gaining seats to the extent that it put the Conservatives back in the game for 2010.
IMO if IDS had carried through to the 2005 GE then it's likely that the Conservatives would have lost further seats down to 140-150. They were sleep walking to disaster with IDS but fortunately for them they have an almost instinctive self preservation mode that trumps loyalty to a poor leader - Labour would do well to note but they will not which is especially fortunate for the nation.
Times
Telegraph
Daily Mail
Express
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/aug/25/coalition-leaders-change-tune-rawnsley
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/david-cameron-shows-even-true-blues-turn-red-8783594.html
"Not only sunburn on holiday in Cornwall turns David Cameron red. Someone who knows tells me that he "loses his temper easily": he flushes, and storms out of meetings if they do not go his way."
"I am told that he has recently had a lot of "quite angry" meetings with Nick Clegg. Where once civil servants liked to compare the polite and mutually respectful dealings of the coalition leaders with the storms of Tony Blair and Gordon Brown's dysfunctional "coalition", insiders now say that there are similarities after all."
"Immigration has been a running grievance between Cameron and Clegg."
"I should also record that civil servants who work with the Prime Minister are generous in their praise for his equanimity, calmness and work rate. That is what civil servants are supposed to say, but they didn't about Gordon Brown."
"It is easy to think that everyone dislikes Blair– although Cameron seems conflicted about his predecessor, known in No 10 as "The Master" – but prime ministers past and present should treat each other with a modicum of respect. To score a party point, Cameron undermined the dignity of his office. I gather he regretted it straight away."
There are betting implications in all of this, if you choose to believe it. By and large, I do. I'm not sure I agree with any of John Rentoul's conclusions, mind.
£10 says yes.
Do we have a bet prediction?
7% last time = 8% this time. Even more Tory reasonably safe seats have become marginals. The ethnic minority votes are spreading and your recent "Illegal Immigrants Go Home" may have cheered up PBTories and their sort no end, it pisses off many others who do not like to see such toxicity.
You may be right about John Rentoul being spun a line, but he's put his own take on it which has not helped the spinner.
NB Civil servants praising David Cameron's work rate. That also doesn't fit with the previous gossip about Fruit Ninja.
Come to that, this government has had far less personal gossip than the last. So it's a novelty to get some. Are the curtains starting to open?
Since the Times reports that even Cameron is preparing for coalition,isn`t it better for Tory supporters to realise that a hung Parliament is the *BEST* they can hope for?
I have placed a bet on made a prediction of the outcome of the Belgian Grand Prix
I won't post it here in case a loss gets reposted every day for 5 years (or more)
Have just finished an analysis of the 2010GE in England.
Have found that in 2010 there are 49 Labour constituencies that increased their majority in number of votes (not by %age share or %age majority but by votes e.g. from 3251 to 5976). This includes boundary changes but not seats gained.
To make it easier for you to determine the constituencies, there are 22 in the combined SW,SE & London regions; 9 in the Eastern, East Midlands and West Midlands regions and 18 in the North East, North West and Yorks & Humber regions. But two of those regions did not contain any constituencies where Labour increased their majority. (All regions as defined in UK Polling Report).
I will email the answers to TSE as I may be out later.
We all get things wrong. There were posters who were acting as though leveson was going to bring down cameron.
That was just as fatuous a prediction.
I placed some bets. Those bets were posted here. I thought betting was supposed to be fun, win or lose. That was apparently a huge mistake.
Two of Britain’s controversial crime tsars face being stripped of their titles after being investigated for electoral fraud, which could trigger by-elections costing taxpayers as much as £3.6 million.
The Mail on Sunday can reveal that the police watchdog mounted covert operations after being tipped off that the Police and Crime Commissioners for North Wales and Hampshire allegedly lied about where they lived.
The two PCCs could face prosecution for election fraud offences if the Independent Police Complaints Commission decides they were not based inside their force area on polling day, as the law required.
Winston Roddick is accused of listing his brother’s house in Caernarfon as his address when he really lives on the other side of Wales in Cardiff, and Simon Hayes is said to spend time in a Northamptonshire village with his vicar wife while having claimed he lived just outside Southampton.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2401486/Two-crime-tsars-face-sack-lying-live-police-undercover-sting--new-elections-cost-taxpayers-3-6million.html#ixzz2cyF25HON
Are you really saying he had no influence over the selection process of ED ....Really..how sweet
Mark Senior.. another dimbo who fell into the rather obvious bear trap re Boris's birthplace.
"...Privately, Miliband’s allies are dismissive of such intemperance. To a degree under-appreciated in Westminster, the Labour leader’s strategy has been shaped by the constitutional novelty of a fixed-term parliament. As one shadow cabinet member put it to me, “We know the date of the next election. There’s no danger of the government cutting and running . . . So we can work backwards. We know when we need our pledge cards by, our manifesto by and our party candidates selected by.” The reasons given for Labour not showing its hand too early are both familiar and persuasive: that the best policies are stolen and the party is lumbered with the worst. In addition, Ed Balls, who is charged with restoring Labour’s economic credibility, is determined to postpone major spending commitments until the state of the public finances is clearer.
That the opposition’s MPs know and understand all of this does little to assuage their disquiet. One comparison made with increasing frequency is with Miliband’s erstwhile mentor Gordon Brown, who similarly offered periodic hints of a social-democratic master plan, only for the cupboard to prove bare when he arrived in Downing Street.
To this, those close to the Labour leader reply: “Watch this space.” The first phase of the party’s policy review has been completed and the fruits will begin to emerge at this autumn’s conference. Labour has spent the summer charting how the “cost of living” has surged under the coalition, but if the party is to win in 2015 it won’t be enough to convince voters that they’re worse off under the Tories. It will also need to convince them they’d be better off under Labour. The aim of Miliband’s speech will be to bridge this gap, with energy and housing two of the candidates for major policy announcements..." http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2013/08/labour-and-tories-face-same-dilemma-break-deadlock-they-need-big-idea
I placed some bets. They were in the public domain. Had I known a creepy stalker would use those bets to post about me for years to come I might have been more circumspect.
That's a good point actually. Why would you use up all your energy and ideas when you know an election is 18 months away? governments used to control the time they went to the country - the opposition had to be constantly on a war footing.
These days, they don't.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_Kingdom_by-elections_(1979–present)#Present_Parliament
If some of the ol'-timers on here stopped spewing the same bullshyte they have being depositing since June 2010; if some of the more challenged amongst us realised that repetition is not a sign of intellect but more and indicator of primitive recollection; if only more space was allowed to encourage new posters to offer new insights and thoughts! No, too much to ask it seems.
And so what is the point. Same tits and bigger asses....
How misled were you ? Did the propaganda catch you out ?
Thus is the nature of betting. Some people understand that.
Most of the "predictions" that my creepy stalker is now claiming fall firmly into the wish category. My mistake was thinking it would be fun to share with others.
This reminds me of a colleague who got very weary of pointing out that a financial forecast wasn't a prediction a la Mystic Meg. They are very different things for the hard of understanding.
I can not even recall the referendum on these PCC elections which allowed them in the first place on a different electoral system.
Never get embroiled with those Union boys, they will eat you for breakfast and not notice . Most new Union leaders are picked before the names go on the Ballot sheet, but you believe what you want to believe.
The importnt question today is...Has Ed got the much needed courage to slice off all of the deadwood and drift wood that are pulling him under..He has very little chance
if he does not.
" The Seventies. The hirsute decade, all Brut aftershave, unbuttoned shirts and medallions. A decade when men could be men and racing drivers could be bonking, boozing racing drivers. And the king of them all was James Hunt, the last great playboy world champion. His reputation as a hothead, an oaf, a serial womaniser preceded him. He punched officious race-track officials, he urinated in restaurants and, I'm sorry to remind those of you with a weak disposition, he sometimes wore flip-flops to black-tie dinners. He ate like a pig, drank like a fish, and then he drove a racing car.
Here was a man who could hand his pint, his fag and whichever pit girl he'd just deflowered to his mechanic, before staggering into the cockpit to win the day. In the week of the 1976 Japanese Grand Prix, the biggest race of Hunt's career, he was holed up in a five-star hotel in Tokyo with world motorcycle champion Bary Sheene, working his way through a bevy of British Airways stewardesses, four at a time. Somehow, he still managed third place at Mount Fuji, earning enough points to clinch the championship. He flew home with a trophy and 32 new notches in his bedpost. By the time he died, there were 5,000..." http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/Magazine/article1302507.ece
How many Jews in the Shadow Cabinet?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/10264129/NHS-spends-more-than-1-billion-on-redundancy-payouts.html
ITV:
http://www.itv.com/news/story/2013-08-25/nhs-spend-1-4bn-on-axing-staff/
Twitter:
I am really looking forward to watching Rush. Not as much as the film 'Senna', but that was much more my era and featured interviews with the Prof. ;-)
CCGs who can't legally use patient data to make decisions.
The point is many PCT staff now work in CCGs after having been made redundant at massive cost. And CCGs in some places are clustering together to fit roughly the same areas as the old PCTs did.
" Formula 1 in 1974 was nothing like it is now. Today, you have 600 people in a team. It takes 50 of them with laptops just to start the car. Back then, everything was manual. The car was a machine, not a computer. “It was dangerous and difficult,” explains Tiff Needell, who inherited his first F1 drive after Clay Regazzoni broke his back at Long Beach in 1980. “It was only when carbon fibre came in that racing became safer. And driving was far harder. These days, you’ve got just two pedals — go with the right, stop with the left. You flap your paddles to change gear and you’ve got power steering. The G forces are higher but everything else is much easier.”
“Hunt took his racing very seriously,” says Sir Stirling Moss, who had been forced into early retirement a decade earlier, but became friends with Hunt. “You had to in those days. It was much more dangerous.” Of course Lauda, scarred for life after his crash at the Nürburgring, agrees. “Today, drivers hit each other because they know nothing will happen. It is so much safer. When we were racing, we saw every two months somebody dead.”
From what I've heard, there are lots of these friendly inter-personal relationships between the drivers going back years. After all, many of them drove in the same races as youngsters, sometimes as far back as karting.
A lot of the dislike and distrust between drivers is apparently just media-talk - drivers get annoyed during or after a race, make comments, and the media blow them out of proportion. In the meantime the drivers concerned go out drinking together.
After all, it does no-one any good to burn bridges - they may have to be teammates some day, or need favours.
There are apparently some honourable exceptions, however ...
Anyway, for anyone waiting for the Belgian GP, the BTCC is on ITV4 now.
http://onthewight.com/2013/08/23/daily-telegraph-apology-ukip-richard-wilkins-hoax-quotes/
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BSgbn-pIUAAGEGH.jpg:large
A spokeswoman said: “Last year we started changes that put doctors and nurses in the driving seat as they are best placed to take decisions about care for their patients.
“The changes made as a result of the reforms mean a huge net gain for the taxpayer. They will save £5.5 billion during this Parliament and £1.5 billion every year thereafter, to be reinvested back into patient care.”
However, a National Audit Office (NAO) report last month found that more one in five of NHS staff made redundant as part of the Government’s reforms had been re-employed by the health service."
The one in five figure probably doesn't include management consultants paid on a daily rate.
.
Is there a market for the following bet?
Woakes to score more runs in his one innings then Johnnie Bairstow scored in four tests (total, 2013 Ashes).
Surely more likely than "laying-the-draw"....
Oliver Letwin , Grant Shapps
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_British_Jewish_politicians
3 if Clegg promotes Lynne Featherstone.
Good to see Norman Lamb back it on Sky. Labour are just not serious about tackling the recurring level of Govt spending. Why am I not surprised?
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/08/25/us-syria-crisis-usa-poll-idUSBRE97O00E20130825
The ICM expert quoted below seems to be expecting a dip in Labour's VI when the Ed effect really kicks in. I did place a couple of quid on Ed going this year on tasty odds just for the fun of it.
X = something I can imagine or have direct experience of
Y = believable number of £££s - anything over several tens of million sounds made up
Z = are the people saying this credible given their own track record
Here Dr Death claiming XYZ has no traction. It may make Labourites cheer but it butters no electoral parsnips.