People's feel good factor is likely to be a major influence in the polls over the next 6 winter months, especially so as we are braced for higher fuel bills. It is just possible that this may not prove to be the case - between January and March 2013 we experienced a particularly severe and prolonged period of very cold weather, as a result of which I and I'm sure many others saw their monthly direct debits being hiked sharply to fund the additional supply from the energy companies - in my own case I recall this increase being of the order of £15 per month. If, and it's a big if, we were to experience a considerably milder, dare one say "normal" winter, the round of gas and electricity prices currently being introduced might not, as if by magic, actually result in higher bills.
"ALEX Salmond yesterday fired the starting gun on the SNP's independence campaign by warning David Cameron not to interfere with a Holyrood referendum on separation."
This is what the last Labour govt saved Britain from
@JonathanHaynes: Last year adult incontinence pants outsold baby nappies. Absolutely fascinating piece about Japan's odd demographics http://t.co/h00lJ1e74y
Written by a person who has not been to Japan. No one doubts there are more old people than babies in Japan, but to say that young people don't want to have sex is ridiculous. The results show as they do on surveys because Japan has a massive "shame" culture in public, but in private that all goes out of the window. Brazilian waxing in Japan has recently become very popular among the 18-24 demographic, for example, if that's not an indicator then I'm not sure what is...
It's another example of why you should never believe anything you read in newspaper headlines. The headline is "Why have young people in Japan stopped having sex?" but when you read the actual article it says they're having casual sex and "short-term trysts" but not getting married and having babies, which is a different thing.
That said the article was a bit annoying and bullshit-sterotypey, like most foreign press stuff on Japan. The exception is the New York Times, especially Hiroko Tabuchi.
The SNP continues to provide much hilarity. This latest nonsense about debating with Cameron is a particularly amusing combination of Salmond's characteristic arrogant bluster, transparent politicking, and most of all the most absurd contortions of logical inconsistency. This is meant to be a 'referendum made in Scotland', right? Cameron was supposed to keep the hell out of it when the referendum was being proposed. This is supposed to be about Scots, and Scots alone, deciding what they want to do, isn't it?
So why on earth does he now want the No side to be represented by an English politician?
Well, apart from the obvious reason, of course. He wants to be able to portray the No side as comprising out-of-touch English toffs - who'd have thought anyone would fall for that?
Salmond exhibits the SNP cultural cringe. Debating a Scotsman isn't good enough for him , it has to be an Englishman.
Come out of hiding Cameron, grow a pair you big jessie.
More reasoned debate from the SNP......
As sensible as the lies and drivel you post on Scotland. No point in putting intelligent debate on here regarding Scotland , it would be wasted.
Well done for never having done it, then.
A Cameron/Salmond debate would be asymmetrical: Salmond saying independence good for Scotland, Cameron saying bad for the UK. Cameron can't say independence would be bad for Scotland without sounding spiteful and vindictive, whereas a Scot can.
A towering genius joins the debate and gives us the amazing insight that Cameron could not show that Scotland being independent would be bad. Does this colossus perhaps work for Downing Street and it is him who has advised Dave not to do it.
I didn't say he couldn't show it, I said he couldn't show it without coming across as vindictive and spiteful, like every single thing you have ever posted here.
"ALEX Salmond yesterday fired the starting gun on the SNP's independence campaign by warning David Cameron not to interfere with a Holyrood referendum on separation."
People's feel good factor is likely to be a major influence in the polls over the next 6 winter months, especially so as we are braced for higher fuel bills. It is just possible that this may not prove to be the case - between January and March 2013 we experienced a particularly severe and prolonged period of very cold weather, as a result of which I and I'm sure many others saw their monthly direct debits being hiked sharply to fund the additional supply from the energy companies - in my own case I recall this increase being of the order of £15 per month. If, and it's a big if, we were to experience a considerably milder, dare one say "normal" winter, the round of gas and electricity prices currently being introduced might not, as if by magic, actually result in higher bills.
People paying 20-30 a month for smartphones and 50 plus for Sky tv.
Their slave labour was cheaper and better than ours. Mainly captured Picts and Scots - no clothing required and just skirlies for food - haven't changed much in 2000 years.
What's 'skirlies'?
"Skirlie is a Scottish dish, made from oatmeal fried with fat, onions, and seasonings. Most commonly used as the basis of white puddings, it is also served as a side-dish or used as a stuffing for chicken or other fowl. Lard, beef dripping or butter are used"
Source Wiki: but hated it when served it with a roast when working in Scotland - mine was very 'gritty.'
You Richard Head, it is unheard of in Scotland.
Really?
From "Hamlyns of Scotland 100% Healthy 100% Scottish":
Yeah, but it's not and never has been described as 'skirlies'.
TUD , it suits their purpose though , patronising git thought it was witty to use as an insult and the dullard made a hash of it, and pseudo Scot tries to be smart arse as usual and shows themselves up as only being a disney Scot.
"ALEX Salmond yesterday fired the starting gun on the SNP's independence campaign by warning David Cameron not to interfere with a Holyrood referendum on separation."
'Step up to the plate - or step out of the debate'
Translation for Lalala, fingers-in-their-ears Unionists: if you want to send the likes of Hammond, Patterson and Osborne up here to fearmonger, and use taxpayers money to get the UK civil service to issue anti-independence papers, fine, you also have to debate. If you don't want to debate, call off the 'non Scottish' poodles.
Dunno, it's sort of asking the voters to say, "Switching seems a bit pointless, there doesn't seem to be much difference and it's obviously going to end up costing me more whichever one I choose"...
"ALEX Salmond yesterday fired the starting gun on the SNP's independence campaign by warning David Cameron not to interfere with a Holyrood referendum on separation."
"ALEX Salmond yesterday fired the starting gun on the SNP's independence campaign by warning David Cameron not to interfere with a Holyrood referendum on separation."
'Step up to the plate - or step out of the debate'
Translation for Lalala, fingers-in-their-ears Unionists: if you want to send the likes of Hammond, Patterson and Osborne up here to fearmonger, and use taxpayers money to get the UK civil service to issue anti-independence papers, fine, you also have to debate. If you don't want to debate, call off the 'non Scottish' poodles.
Sounds like the whining of someone losing the war..
"ALEX Salmond yesterday fired the starting gun on the SNP's independence campaign by warning David Cameron not to interfere with a Holyrood referendum on separation."
'Step up to the plate - or step out of the debate'
Translation for Lalala, fingers-in-their-ears Unionists: if you want to send the likes of Hammond, Patterson and Osborne up here to fearmonger, and use taxpayers money to get the UK civil service to issue anti-independence papers, fine, you also have to debate. If you don't want to debate, call off the 'non Scottish' poodles.
Sounds like the whining of someone losing the war..
I'm trying to identify when Salmond changed his tune on Cameron from "butt out of the debate" to "join in the debate" - anyone know when this Damascene conversion took place?
I'm trying to identify when Salmond changed his tune on Cameron from "butt out of the debate" to "join in the debate" - anyone know when this Damascene conversion took place?
Err, you do know the 'butt out' phrase was used in the context of an Eck-Cam debate?
'Following the SNP’s majority victory in the last Scottish Parliament election, you made the following comment: “I will campaign to keep our United Kingdom together with every single fibre that I have.” (Daily Telegraph May 7, 2011) You continue to direct your Government, and its taxpayer-funded resources, to make the case against an independent Scotland. That is entirely consistent with your stated intention in the quote above. However your attempt to duck a television debate on the subject is not. Either you stand up and debate or butt out of the debate for good.'
On topic ICM. After Major's election, polling was then shown by ICM/Guardian 08/12/1990 as C 45, Lab 43. At GE92 this became C 42.2 and LAB 30.8. For Labour to have such a small lead at this stage in a known electoral cycle in 2013 is the real shocker.
On topic ICM. After Major's election, polling was then shown by ICM/Guardian 08/12/1990 as C 45, Lab 43. At GE92 this became C 42.2 and LAB 30.8. For Labour to have such a small lead at this stage in a known electoral cycle in 2013 is the real shocker.
No, silly, OCM changed their methodology after 1992 to avoid making the same mistake again, so you can't compare polls before and after the change.
"Better Together also thinks two fundamental points are being missed by Salmond and the press: it is Better Together and Yes Scotland which are going to be the legally designated, official referendum campaigns under the legislation being pushed through Holyrood.
So the broadcasters negotiate with them, and not with St Andrew's House or the SNP (or, indeed Downing Street), about the leaders' debates. And equally, it is up to the respective campaigns to put up their champions. And theirs, insists Better Together, is Alistair Darling."
"......the UK government is also Scotland's government too, and at the 2010 general election, nearly two million voters in Scotland backed the two parties now in coalition at Westminster and the Scottish Labour party. They collectively won 78% of the vote. (1m voted Labour, 465,000 Lib Dem and 413,000 Tory, versus 491,000 for the SNP.)
So why should they be denied the right to have UK government resources used to make the case for keeping the UK intact?
In the 2010 election which brought about the current UK government, a majority of people in Scotland voted for pro-UK parties; therefore it's absolutely right and proper that that government is preparing information for them in this debate."
"ALEX Salmond yesterday fired the starting gun on the SNP's independence campaign by warning David Cameron not to interfere with a Holyrood referendum on separation."
I wonder if Salmond would be so eager to debate with Cameron if the referendum vote was going his way? - somehow I doubt it.
In fact this whole thing reeks of Salmond wanting to point his finger at an English bogeyman to rally his support - He certainly needs something, the YES figures are dire...!
I assume that this wording is used in England only?
- “The Conservatives, Labour, the Liberal Democrats and other parties would fight a new election in your area. If there were a general election tomorrow which party do you think you would vote for?”
It was my understanding, eg. from Anthony Well's UK Polling Report, that in Scotland the SNP are included in the question, and in Wales Plaid Cymru are included. Cannot find a link though.
Sounds like the whining of someone losing the war..
Just for the record, do you think it's fine for non Scottish politicians and the UK civil service to try and influence the independence debate?
I think it's legitimate until six months before the referendum which, as far as I can make out from this http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/41 , is when the "referendum period" begins.
£1.25 ladies and gentlemen. Read that number and weep.
Today Tesco gave me official confirmation that I had saved £1.25 on my shopping. I will hear no more of tory supporters being out of touch, unaware of prices, not connected to the real world, not aware of the cost of everyday items. I have the proof and it is irrefutable. £1.25. Ha!
Rumours that one G Brown was £100bn over in his spending are entirely unconnected.
Sounds like the whining of someone losing the war..
Just for the record, do you think it's fine for non Scottish politicians and the UK civil service to try and influence the independence debate?
I think it's legitimate until six months before the referendum which, as far as I can make out from this http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/41 , is when the "referendum period" begins.
Afaik for the Scottish referendum, it's 16 weeks. That's certainly the only period for which the BBC says it's required to provide 'balanced' coverage.
Bloody weather. Went out with a scarf (for once) as it was overcast and gloomy, and it ended up being blazing sunshine and rather warm.
Still too far off to predict the General Election. Besides, the Scottish referendum will be a game changer. If they choose to separate that would, I suggest, bolster the SNP and Conservatives and severely harm Labour.
Sounds like the whining of someone losing the war..
Just for the record, do you think it's fine for non Scottish politicians and the UK civil service to try and influence the independence debate?
I think it's legitimate until six months before the referendum which, as far as I can make out from this http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/41 , is when the "referendum period" begins.
From that point on it is presumably only Yes Scotland and Better Together who are allowed to campaign - not the Scottish government or Civil Service?
Sounds like the whining of someone losing the war..
Just for the record, do you think it's fine for non Scottish politicians and the UK civil service to try and influence the independence debate?
I think it's legitimate until six months before the referendum which, as far as I can make out from this http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/41 , is when the "referendum period" begins.
Afaik for the Scottish referendum, it's 16 weeks. That's certainly the only period for which the BBC says it is required to provide 'balanced' coverage.
Interesting that the BBC doesn't feel it's required to provide balanced coverage all of the time!
Tuesday is that for September public finances (and why tim is frightened of his own bets) Friday is 3Q GDP first estimates
Do you think Daves 3 month lead in the leader ratings was a blip? Since the Omnishambles he's lagged most months
Weary sigh of ennui, but occasionally I suppose one must indulge. Is this the seventh or eighth occasion where I tell you that neither Leader ratings nor VI polls mean very much, 18 months before the election? I confess to teasing you about the former as a deliberate wind-up when Dave held the lead and you fall for the ploy every time to my amusement. It's your sole remaining comfort blanket as the economy recovers at an increasing pace through 2014 and then into 2015.
You have much to learn about polls and electoral politics, grasshopper, so much that I might set up a free school to help you out.
There speaks a true toff and shows the same arrogance as Cameron, "a leading politician in a small region", you could not make it up. What a stupid arse you are , he has been pushing as you put it that he as the Head of the Scottish Government should debate with the head of the UK government , not an opposition back bencher. You show exactly why Tories are hated the length and breadth of the country, an ignorant pompous arse who believe him and others like him are above the majority of the people in the country solely down to the fact that they were born with a full set of silver spoons in their mouths.
Absolutely he is head of the Scottish government. At the same level as the head of the Welsh government or the NI government. Or even an English government if we had him.
But he is not - or should not - be campaigning as the Head of the Scottish government.
He is acting in his role as a senior member of the Scottish National Party / Scottish independence campaign. It would be quite wrong for him to use his office for a political campaign.
I don't know where you have got this idea about silver spoons from. It's nothing to do with that. It arises from their respective positions, nothing more, nothing less.
Charles , Salmond is the elected head of the Scottish government and the debate is whether the UK is broken up, any sane person would expect the head of the UK to represent the status Quo just as you would expect the head of Scottish Government represent the position of independence. Do you seriously believe that Cameron suggesting that the head of the Scottish government should debate the breaking up of the UK with a non government back bencher is the correct position to take.
I disagree with you, but don't feel the need to question your sanity or otherwise be insulting.
I believe the head of the independence campaign should debate with the head of the union campaign. If you want to nominate Salmond instead of the head of the campaign (I believe it is someone else?) then that's up to you.
Bloody weather. Went out with a scarf (for once) as it was overcast and gloomy, and it ended up being blazing sunshine and rather warm.
Still too far off to predict the General Election. Besides, the Scottish referendum will be a game changer. If they choose to separate that would, I suggest, bolster the SNP and Conservatives and severely harm Labour.
I think that the Scottish Tories are going to do relatively well in 2015 irrespective of whether the referendum result is Yes or No. They only got 17% last time, so it would not be hard for them to increase from that low base. However (and it is a big however), I find it extremely hard to see where on earth they are going to actually manage to gain a seat, even if they get 20% of the vote.
The "low-lying fruit" are Argyll & Bute and West Aberdeenshire & Kincardine, but the former is a 4-way marginal, and the Tories have a horrific track record on the ground in West Aberdeenshire. They just never seem to be able to get their vote out where it counts, when it counts. Can't see that improving in the short-term, even if their vote share rises significantly.
Mr. Divvie, we often read (and some of us write) about BBC bias, but how does that seem from an SNP perspective?
I'm not much of a one for conspiracy theories regarding BBC Scotland but I certainly believe there's an institutional/subconscious bias; how could there not be with an institution intrinsically based on a unified Britain and employees' job security dependent on its continuity? There's quite an entertaining blog by an ex-BBC Scotland presenter, Derek Bateman. He's pro independence but quite insightful about the Byzantine intricacies of the BBC, particularly in relation to Scotland.
Mr. Dickson, cheers for that answer. It's slightly amusing that 17% is seen as horrendous, whereas that's one of the more optimistic forecasts for the Lib Dems (nationwide).
Mr. Divvie, indeed, the same argument applies to a state-sponsored organisation being pro-large state.
Poor Byzantium. Whenever anything's corrupt, incomprehensible or archaic it gets compared to their system.
On topic ICM. After Major's election, polling was then shown by ICM/Guardian 08/12/1990 as C 45, Lab 43. At GE92 this became C 42.2 and LAB 30.8. For Labour to have such a small lead at this stage in a known electoral cycle in 2013 is the real shocker.
No, silly, OCM changed their methodology after 1992 to avoid making the same mistake again, so you can't compare polls before and after the change.
My point is that Labout need a massive lead 10+ points this far out from the GE. During 2013 the gap has actually narrowed.
@tim - Despite your incoherent dribbling (and all over your new chipmunk patterned onesie too), what the heck, I'll accept...and if you lose, I'm happy for the £20 to also be donated to meningitis.uk. It's a very good cause.
I disagree with you, but don't feel the need to question your sanity or otherwise be insulting.
I believe the head of the independence campaign should debate with the head of the union campaign. If you want to nominate Salmond instead of the head of the campaign (I believe it is someone else?) then that's up to you.
Dennis Canavan would be Darling's direct opposite number, and I suspect Alistair wouldn't be up for that. Old 'real' Labour v. Blairite New Labour, fire & brimstone ex comp. teacher v. dithery Edinburgh lawyer.
Bloody weather. Went out with a scarf (for once) as it was overcast and gloomy, and it ended up being blazing sunshine and rather warm.
Still too far off to predict the General Election. Besides, the Scottish referendum will be a game changer. If they choose to separate that would, I suggest, bolster the SNP and Conservatives and severely harm Labour.
I think that the Scottish Tories are going to do relatively well in 2015 irrespective of whether the referendum result is Yes or No. They only got 17% last time, so it would not be hard for them to increase from that low base. However (and it is a big however), I find it extremely hard to see where on earth they are going to actually manage to gain a seat, even if they get 20% of the vote.
The "low-lying fruit" are Argyll & Bute and West Aberdeenshire & Kincardine, but the former is a 4-way marginal, and the Tories have a horrific track record on the ground in West Aberdeenshire. They just never seem to be able to get their vote out where it counts, when it counts. Can't see that improving in the short-term, even if their vote share rises significantly.
I think Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk is a better bet than any of them. The current polling of SLDs is so bad it is almost beyond belief. And Michael Moore was too dull even for the Lib Dems.
It will be interesting to see what happens in NE Fife post Ming. Under normal circumstances a comfortable Lib Dem hold but these are not normal times. With a strong candidate Dumfries & Galloway should really be in sight. My guess is post referendum the SNP will do fine, probably share in the Lib Dem carcase, but on a bad night Angus could be close too.
As usual nearly all of these will disappoint (Aberdeenshire has indeed disappointed for years) but what are going to be ex Lib Dem seats are the best chances for everyone in Scotland.
On topic ICM. After Major's election, polling was then shown by ICM/Guardian 08/12/1990 as C 45, Lab 43. At GE92 this became C 42.2 and LAB 30.8. For Labour to have such a small lead at this stage in a known electoral cycle in 2013 is the real shocker.
No, silly, OCM changed their methodology after 1992 to avoid making the same mistake again, so you can't compare polls before and after the change.
My point is that Labout need a massive lead 10+ points this far out from the GE. During 2013 the gap has actually narrowed.
I know that's your point, and it's wrong. You can't conclude anything about how big a lead you need in the current polls from polling before 1992. You might be able to get something based on the more recent ICMs as their methodology hasn't changed much since then, but it's not obvious what the appropriate amount to discount would be because there's not much data to go on.
The advantage of Rod's swingback thingy is that by-elections have a consistent methodology going back a lot further, so you have a half-decent chance of getting a signal rather than noise.
"ALEX Salmond yesterday fired the starting gun on the SNP's independence campaign by warning David Cameron not to interfere with a Holyrood referendum on separation."
'Step up to the plate - or step out of the debate'
Translation for Lalala, fingers-in-their-ears Unionists: if you want to send the likes of Hammond, Patterson and Osborne up here to fearmonger, and use taxpayers money to get the UK civil service to issue anti-independence papers, fine, you also have to debate. If you don't want to debate, call off the 'non Scottish' poodles.
You can say that, and I can say with exactly equal validity that if you question the views I express on PB you must meet me in a bare-knuckle fight to the death. Furthermore you are not "translating" the story to which you link which has Salmond rejecting any form of "interference", not saying that it is permissible on certain (unreasonable) conditions.
I disagree with you, but don't feel the need to question your sanity or otherwise be insulting.
I believe the head of the independence campaign should debate with the head of the union campaign. If you want to nominate Salmond instead of the head of the campaign (I believe it is someone else?) then that's up to you.
Dennis Canavan would be Darling's direct opposite number, and I suspect Alistair wouldn't be up for that. Old 'real' Labour v. Blairite New Labour, fire & brimstone ex comp. teacher v. dithery Edinburgh lawyer.
In much the same way it's not up to "Yes Scotland" to pick 'Better Together's" spokesman, nor is it up to Better Together to say who they will debate.
Serious question, I get the impression that the SNP/Scottish Government have been making most of the running for "Yes" - when purdah starts 28 days out, how well equipped are they?
The sight of Salmond keeping quiet for 28 days will be worth waiting for!
Furthermore you are not "translating" the story to which you link which has Salmond rejecting any form of "interference", not saying that it is permissible on certain (unreasonable) conditions.
I didn't link to a story, the translation is my own based on the current actualité. To be clear, Cameron won't debate Salmond because he thinks it'll do more harm than good, Salmond will make as much hay as possible with that, and point out a certain inconsistency when coalition ministers come up on UKOK day trips; all that is just politics. Fwiw I don't think Cameron would have been completely terrible in a debate, he can debate (when properly briefed) and I'm sure he could deploy a certain 'I know how to talk to the ghillies' charm. What's more interesting is that he's chosen to duck it. Churchill or Thatcher wouldn't have, no matter how ill-advised in the latter case. Even Blair might not have, though whatever his authentic beliefs are, Unionism isn't one of them.
I disagree with you, but don't feel the need to question your sanity or otherwise be insulting.
I believe the head of the independence campaign should debate with the head of the union campaign. If you want to nominate Salmond instead of the head of the campaign (I believe it is someone else?) then that's up to you.
Dennis Canavan would be Darling's direct opposite number, and I suspect Alistair wouldn't be up for that. Old 'real' Labour v. Blairite New Labour, fire & brimstone ex comp. teacher v. dithery Edinburgh lawyer.
In much the same way it's not up to "Yes Scotland" to pick 'Better Together's" spokesman, nor is it up to Better Together to say who they will debate.
Serious question, I get the impression that the SNP/Scottish Government have been making most of the running for "Yes" - when purdah starts 28 days out, how well equipped are they?
The sight of Salmond keeping quiet for 28 days will be worth waiting for!
The SNP will certainly have been making the running financially, but as much as the term 'grass roots campaign' might make you snigger, Yes is just that. Most of the meetings I've been to have had minimal SNP representation, some none. Mano a mano, I'm happy with Canavan v Darling, and Blair Jenkins may not be the most charismatic speaker but he's head and shoulder above failed New Labour apparatchik McDougall.
Comments
It is just possible that this may not prove to be the case - between January and March 2013 we experienced a particularly severe and prolonged period of very cold weather, as a result of which I and I'm sure many others saw their monthly direct debits being hiked sharply to fund the additional supply from the energy companies - in my own case I recall this increase being of the order of £15 per month.
If, and it's a big if, we were to experience a considerably milder, dare one say "normal" winter, the round of gas and electricity prices currently being introduced might not, as if by magic, actually result in higher bills.
http://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/political-news/salmond-butt-out-cameron.15551868
That said the article was a bit annoying and bullshit-sterotypey, like most foreign press stuff on Japan. The exception is the New York Times, especially Hiroko Tabuchi.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y5PaNsolq4s
Translation for Lalala, fingers-in-their-ears Unionists: if you want to send the likes of Hammond, Patterson and Osborne up here to fearmonger, and use taxpayers money to get the UK civil service to issue anti-independence papers, fine, you also have to debate. If you don't want to debate, call off the 'non Scottish' poodles.
"Salmond: Cameron should 'butt out' of the independence referendum"
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-16503628
http://twitpic.com/di3hl5
'Following the SNP’s majority victory in the last Scottish Parliament election, you made the following comment: “I will campaign to keep our United Kingdom together with every single fibre that I have.” (Daily Telegraph May 7, 2011)
You continue to direct your Government, and its taxpayer-funded resources, to make the case against an independent Scotland.
That is entirely consistent with your stated intention in the quote above. However your attempt to duck a television debate on the subject is not. Either you stand up and debate or butt out of the debate for good.'
After Major's election, polling was then shown by ICM/Guardian 08/12/1990 as C 45, Lab 43. At GE92 this became C 42.2 and LAB 30.8. For Labour to have such a small lead at this stage in a known electoral cycle in 2013 is the real shocker.
So a few comments from Cam seem like small beer.
Tuesday is that for September public finances (and why tim is frightened of his own bets)
Friday is 3Q GDP first estimates
So the broadcasters negotiate with them, and not with St Andrew's House or the SNP (or, indeed Downing Street), about the leaders' debates. And equally, it is up to the respective campaigns to put up their champions. And theirs, insists Better Together, is Alistair Darling."
.http://www.theguardian.com/politics/scottish-independence-blog/2013/oct/03/scottish-independence-salmond-tvdebates
"......the UK government is also Scotland's government too, and at the 2010 general election, nearly two million voters in Scotland backed the two parties now in coalition at Westminster and the Scottish Labour party. They collectively won 78% of the vote. (1m voted Labour, 465,000 Lib Dem and 413,000 Tory, versus 491,000 for the SNP.)
So why should they be denied the right to have UK government resources used to make the case for keeping the UK intact?
In the 2010 election which brought about the current UK government, a majority of people in Scotland voted for pro-UK parties; therefore it's absolutely right and proper that that government is preparing information for them in this debate."
In fact this whole thing reeks of Salmond wanting to point his finger at an English bogeyman to rally his support - He certainly needs something, the YES figures are dire...!
- “The Conservatives, Labour, the Liberal Democrats and other parties would fight a new election in your area. If there were a general election tomorrow which party do you think you would vote for?”
It was my understanding, eg. from Anthony Well's UK Polling Report, that in Scotland the SNP are included in the question, and in Wales Plaid Cymru are included. Cannot find a link though.
Today Tesco gave me official confirmation that I had saved £1.25 on my shopping. I will hear no more of tory supporters being out of touch, unaware of prices, not connected to the real world, not aware of the cost of everyday items. I have the proof and it is irrefutable. £1.25. Ha!
Rumours that one G Brown was £100bn over in his spending are entirely unconnected.
Bloody weather. Went out with a scarf (for once) as it was overcast and gloomy, and it ended up being blazing sunshine and rather warm.
Still too far off to predict the General Election. Besides, the Scottish referendum will be a game changer. If they choose to separate that would, I suggest, bolster the SNP and Conservatives and severely harm Labour.
I'm going to try it over the winter
eg.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/food/recipes/panfriedgrousewithsk_9525
You have much to learn about polls and electoral politics, grasshopper, so much that I might set up a free school to help you out.
I believe the head of the independence campaign should debate with the head of the union campaign. If you want to nominate Salmond instead of the head of the campaign (I believe it is someone else?) then that's up to you.
The "low-lying fruit" are Argyll & Bute and West Aberdeenshire & Kincardine, but the former is a 4-way marginal, and the Tories have a horrific track record on the ground in West Aberdeenshire. They just never seem to be able to get their vote out where it counts, when it counts. Can't see that improving in the short-term, even if their vote share rises significantly.
There's quite an entertaining blog by an ex-BBC Scotland presenter, Derek Bateman. He's pro independence but quite insightful about the Byzantine intricacies of the BBC, particularly in relation to Scotland.
http://tinyurl.com/nprd7pw
Mr. Divvie, indeed, the same argument applies to a state-sponsored organisation being pro-large state.
Poor Byzantium. Whenever anything's corrupt, incomprehensible or archaic it gets compared to their system.
It will be interesting to see what happens in NE Fife post Ming. Under normal circumstances a comfortable Lib Dem hold but these are not normal times. With a strong candidate Dumfries & Galloway should really be in sight. My guess is post referendum the SNP will do fine, probably share in the Lib Dem carcase, but on a bad night Angus could be close too.
As usual nearly all of these will disappoint (Aberdeenshire has indeed disappointed for years) but what are going to be ex Lib Dem seats are the best chances for everyone in Scotland.
The advantage of Rod's swingback thingy is that by-elections have a consistent methodology going back a lot further, so you have a half-decent chance of getting a signal rather than noise.
Serious question, I get the impression that the SNP/Scottish Government have been making most of the running for "Yes" - when purdah starts 28 days out, how well equipped are they?
The sight of Salmond keeping quiet for 28 days will be worth waiting for!
To be clear, Cameron won't debate Salmond because he thinks it'll do more harm than good, Salmond will make as much hay as possible with that, and point out a certain inconsistency when coalition ministers come up on UKOK day trips; all that is just politics.
Fwiw I don't think Cameron would have been completely terrible in a debate, he can debate (when properly briefed) and I'm sure he could deploy a certain 'I know how to talk to the ghillies' charm. What's more interesting is that he's chosen to duck it. Churchill or Thatcher wouldn't have, no matter how ill-advised in the latter case. Even Blair might not have, though whatever his authentic beliefs are, Unionism isn't one of them.