Can Hollande chose to resign before the end of his term, or simple step down at the end without running for re-election?
I presume he can resign before the end of his term, but I don't think it has ever happened since the current system was set up. For the next election, he'll have to be reselected by the Parti Socialiste if he wants to stand again as their candidate; that's usually a formality for a sitting president, but there's no guarantee, and certainly if he remains this unpopular he'd face a serious challenge.
However - there are two sides to this coin, and the other side of the coin is that the centre-right are in even more disarray than the left at the moment. As things stand, it would likely be an Hollande/Le Pen second round, and Hollande would win that.
Of course, it's early days - the next election's not due until 2017.
Can Hollande chose to resign before the end of his term, or simple step down at the end without running for re-election?
I presume he can resign before the end of his term, but I don't think it has ever happened since the current system was set up. For the next election, he'll have to be reselected by the Parti Socialiste if he wants to stand again; that's usually a formality for a sitting president, but there's no guarantee, and certainly if he remains this unpopular he'd face a serious challenge.
However - there are two sides to this coin, and the other side of the coin is that the centre-right are in even more disarray than the left at the moment. As things stand, it would likely be an Hollande/Le Pen second round, and Hollande would win that.
Of course, it's early days - the next election's not due until 2017.
DeGaulle resigned in 1969. And Pompidou died in 1974.
Did anyone else read Owen Jones' piece in i today?
I would like to submit it as evidence that he is (1) functionally innumerate, and has no idea how business works, plus (2) he is happy to scapegoat those of whom his disapproves.
(1) He looked at the accounts of Grangemouth, commenting that the gross margin was below 20% and then said that since labour costs were only 17% of the total costs of the business it was ridiculous to focus on them
- Assuming that cost of inputs is outwith the company's control, then a cost item that reduces gross margin from 19% to a EBIT of 2% before considering all other costs is clearly a huge area to focus on
(2) "With suggestions that Ineos had saddled external debts on the plant for tax purposes, there was clearly an overwhelming case for the plants books to be laid open and independently scrutinised as well as for an HMRC investigation into the company's tax affairs"
- Just how does a "suggestion" (i.e. allegation from a presumably not-disinterested party) become an "overwhelming case" without further evdience... unless via a scapegoating process?
One observation: It seems to me that the Lib Dem vote in the past few months have hardened by a 2/3 points. We no longer see the LD numbers at 6% - 9% which were quite common even a few months back. I am a bit surprised that neither Mike Smithson nor Mark Senior et al have commented on this.
Labour tactical vote coming home. Clegg's work on smashing the boundaries gerrymandering plan lay the groundwork and there have been regular hits from there on in.
Ah yes, of course - I was a little young to be tearing up the paving stones, but I should have remembered that!
From recollection, the paving stones were the year before, but the General sulked off to Colombey-Les-Deux-Eglises having staked his future on a ridiculous referendum on reforming local government!
Notice a couple of comments previous thread about the 5 blokies lifted in Scotland on terrorism charges.
It is a Scottish policing matter but people in the North West of England may also want to breathe easier as some of those scooped were seen around a couple of potential targets in that region.
One observation: It seems to me that the Lib Dem vote in the past few months have hardened by a 2/3 points. We no longer see the LD numbers at 6% - 9% which were quite common even a few months back. I am a bit surprised that neither Mike Smithson nor Mark Senior et al have commented on this.
Labour tactical vote coming home. Clegg's work on smashing the boundaries gerrymandering plan lay the groundwork and there have been regular hits from there on in.
It's hard to discern any shift back to the LibDems in the polls as a whole:
There's a slight rise in the Conservative numbers since the low point of around May (which might possibly have stalled or gone into reverse slightly in the last few weeks), but otherwise not much change in recent months.
It wasn't meant to be a criticism of them - I do think there is likely to be an unconscious bias from the make-up of the employee bias. The other element, I think, which demonstrates a bias is the desire (I think I recall a spectator article about it) is the search for someone to say controversial things on the right. this means that 2 right vs 2 left often becomes 1 Tory, vs 2 Labour vs 1 "right winger" (e.g. UKIP, or Peter Hitchens, or Simon Heffer) that are often very much not Tories.
It was more the fact that all their coverage could be called into question. How could they get around that issue?
You're on to a pattern there - as a Labour MP I was frustrated by the frequency that someone like Clare Short or even George Galloway would be put on to be one of the "left" participants. I think the thing is that they aim for a broad left-right balance but like to have colour, which means dissent, and dissent is usually more noticeable on the government side, since that's where it's actually worth revolting since it may change policy.
So rather than a long-term political bias, it's perhaps a journalistic bias, for livelier debates at the expense of fair treatment of both main parties.
I am just not that sure that he would be re-elected with a huge majority if he does survive the first round right now. Telegraph - Four fifths of French believe Francois Hollande will lose election " Francois Hollande, France's beleagured president, suffered a fresh blow on Thursday with an opinion poll showing only one in five people believing he had any hope of winning a second term.
A third of those questioned for the Harris Interactive poll for Le Figaro newspaper said they wanted Manuel Valls, his hardline interior minister, to stand as the Socialist presidential candidate in 2017, with just 23 per cent wanting Mr Hollande to run.
High unemployment, anger over tax hikes and rows within Mr Hollande's governing coalition of Socialists and Greens have helped make him the most unloved French president in decades.
Fifty-four percent of those surveyed said they believed Mr Valls, currently one of France's most popular politicians, would beat a right-wing candidate in the 2017 presidential" election. Only 16 per cent said Mr Hollande could achieve that.
@Fitalass - Yes, he could quit - but why? - or not seek re-election.
One thought though. If he does stand again in 2016 and survives the first round even if Marie Le Pen tops the poll, he will be re-elected with a huge majority (like Jacques Chirac). All he needs is around 20-23%. The traditional centre-right is in complete disarray at the moment.
Can Hollande chose to resign before the end of his term, or simple step down at the end without running for re-election?
I presume he can resign before the end of his term, but I don't think it has ever happened since the current system was set up. For the next election, he'll have to be reselected by the Parti Socialiste if he wants to stand again; that's usually a formality for a sitting president, but there's no guarantee, and certainly if he remains this unpopular he'd face a serious challenge.
However - there are two sides to this coin, and the other side of the coin is that the centre-right are in even more disarray than the left at the moment. As things stand, it would likely be an Hollande/Le Pen second round, and Hollande would win that.
Of course, it's early days - the next election's not due until 2017.
DeGaulle resigned in 1969. And Pompidou died in 1974.
Dying, of course, being nothing more than a particularly dramatic form of resignation
Can Hollande chose to resign before the end of his term, or simple step down at the end without running for re-election?
I presume he can resign before the end of his term, but I don't think it has ever happened since the current system was set up. For the next election, he'll have to be reselected by the Parti Socialiste if he wants to stand again; that's usually a formality for a sitting president, but there's no guarantee, and certainly if he remains this unpopular he'd face a serious challenge.
However - there are two sides to this coin, and the other side of the coin is that the centre-right are in even more disarray than the left at the moment. As things stand, it would likely be an Hollande/Le Pen second round, and Hollande would win that.
Of course, it's early days - the next election's not due until 2017.
DeGaulle resigned in 1969. And Pompidou died in 1974.
Dying, of course, being nothing more than a particularly dramatic form of resignation
I do remember the story of a businessman who died whilst having sex with his mistress in a hotel.
His family put out a story that he died during a wine tasting event at the hotel.
At the wake, a person, who was unaware of what actually happened went up to the widow and said
"It must be a great comfort for you to know that the old boy died doing what he enjoyed the most"
Labour Party members in Falkirk were awarded star-ratings based on their loyalty to Unite, and a database containing the information was found in the workplace of Stephen Deans, the trade union official at the centre of vote-rigging claims, The Times has learnt.
Ineos, the owners of the Grangemouth plant, have now alerted the Information Commissioner to look into any data protection breaches.
Twitter Guido Fawkes @GuidoFawkes 27 Oct @OwenJones84 A "think-tank" is stretching it. Run out of Unite's HQ and funded largely by Unite. You are Len McCluskey's media moppet.
Did anyone else read Owen Jones' piece in i today?
I would like to submit it as evidence that he is (1) functionally innumerate, and has no idea how business works, plus (2) he is happy to scapegoat those of whom his disapproves.
(1) He looked at the accounts of Grangemouth, commenting that the gross margin was below 20% and then said that since labour costs were only 17% of the total costs of the business it was ridiculous to focus on them
- Assuming that cost of inputs is outwith the company's control, then a cost item that reduces gross margin from 19% to a EBIT of 2% before considering all other costs is clearly a huge area to focus on
(2) "With suggestions that Ineos had saddled external debts on the plant for tax purposes, there was clearly an overwhelming case for the plants books to be laid open and independently scrutinised as well as for an HMRC investigation into the company's tax affairs"
- Just how does a "suggestion" (i.e. allegation from a presumably not-disinterested party) become an "overwhelming case" without further evdience... unless via a scapegoating process?
Scotsman - Lord Ashcroft: On the trail of the Scottish Tories "Despite the party’s shrinking vote share, there are potential Tories at large in Scotland. As well as the small “Tory Core” – loyal Conservatives who always turn out – I found a group of what I have called “Reluctant Cameroons”. These people, one in six of the Scottish electorate, are attracted to David Cameron and trust the Tories on the economy, but most say they would not vote Conservative tomorrow. Another one in ten falls into the “Willing to Listen” group, who currently lean towards Labour despite preferring Cameron as PM, though many are undecided.
The Conservative Party holds three main attractions for its target voters: they prefer Cameron as PM; they see the Tories as willing to take tough decisions; and they trust the Tory team over Miliband and Balls to manage the economy.
At the same time, they see three big drawbacks. First, like many in England, they doubt the Tories are really on the side of people like them. Second, they do not feel the party cares much about Scotland, and has little enthusiasm for devolution. Finally, they consider the Tories effectively irrelevant in Scottish elections. Many who would support the Conservatives if they lived in England instead vote to try to keep out whichever of Labour or the SNP they believe more disastrous.
What can the Tories do about all this? First of all, they must show they are in touch with people’s anxieties and aspirations as they are today. This means campaigning on health, public services and housing as well as constitutional issues and the deficit, and understanding that the benefits of an economic recovery seem remote to many people.
Like David Cameron, Ruth Davidson is an asset here. If she has yet to make a big impression on Scottish voters, she is not alone: neither have Johann Lamont or Willie Rennie. The swing voters we spoke to had a generally positive view of her – and if the thing that most stuck in their minds was that she had been asked for ID when trying to buy a beer at a Springsteen gig at Hampden Park, this at least proves her to be the antithesis of the hunting-shooting-fishing caricature of the Scots Tory."
Con -> Green switchers ? Smells like an outlier to me
Unless they were attracted by Cameron's husky-powered windmills but have just this past week been driven off by Osborne covering our green and pleasant land with Chinese nuclear power stations.
Con -> Green switchers ? Smells like an outlier to me
Unless they were attracted by Cameron's husky-powered windmills but have just this past week been driven off by Osborne covering our green and pleasant land with Chinese nuclear power stations.
Its the 3% that follow who or whatever is on the Telly methinks
Probably just noise. But the Greens should tick up a bit if the economy starts getting better.
David Cameron always seems to be two or three years too late. He reinvented himself as the next Tony Blair just as everybody got sick of Tony Blair, did the whole green/husky-dog thing right before the economy blew up and people became more worried about short-term living costs, and now he's trying to run against green taxes just in time for the economy to get better and people to have the luxury of worrying about the environment again.
The biggest risk is a hung parliament with no stable combination of parties to form a government
So people should vote LibDem?
Considering their internal tensions it's a bit much to describe the LibDems themselves as a "stable combination of parties"
Disagree - it's been the least internally tense government for decades. More harmonious than Thatcher vs the Wets, or Major vs the Bastards, or Blair vs Brown, or McBride vs Whoever he thought the enemy was.
We get used to it but the stability of the whole thing is a little bit astonishing - I don't think many people would have predicted it before 2010. A lot of credit is due to Cameron and Clegg for bringing it off, and also to Hague and the other people involved in the design of the agreement.
There's this morning's thread written " Labour back in the forties....." Latest YouGov / The Sun results 28th October - Con 31%, Lab 40%, LD 9%, UKIP 12%; APP -28
The biggest risk is a hung parliament with no stable combination of parties to form a government
So people should vote LibDem?
Considering their internal tensions it's a bit much to describe the LibDems themselves as a "stable combination of parties"
Disagree - it's been the least internally tense government for decades. More harmonious than Thatcher vs the Wets, or Major vs the Bastards, or Blair vs Brown, or McBride vs Whoever he thought the enemy was.
We get used to it but the stability of the whole thing is a little bit astonishing - I don't think many people would have predicted it before 2010. A lot of credit is due to Cameron and Clegg for bringing it off, and also to Hague and the other people involved in the design of the agreement.
I was talking about inside the LibDems - Orange Bookers against SDP but never mind. Too early in the morning perhaps. I agree with you about the broader Coalition stability.
I can only say from a quick look at the data from this ComRes poll that Labour have (at least in this poll) picked up a lot of former non voters (balancing out higher Tory certainty to vote). The weird secondary and tertiary questions are picking up more Labour voters and Less Tory voters, whereas the first question "If there was a general election tomorrow" has most of the numbers (apart from Greens) within 1% of September's poll, except "don't knows" up 4%. Soas a snapshot i'm guessing slightly more non tribal people are noticing Labour and liking what they see, but how long will they remain interested?
OT, but for the benefit of LibDem activist pb'ers who will want to be the first to study and deploy this new advance in bar-chart technology, comparing Softbank's 4G service (top bar) to its competitors:
People do not believe the stats or are not feeling the effects of growth. So the key question is: when the growth does eventually (sometime next year) have a positive impact on the lives of workers, will they thank the government and reward the Tories and Lib Dems with votes, or go to Labour who will doubtless spend it all again. Perhaps the government needs to continue highlighting the debt mountain we have, remind voters that even when growth does mean more pounds in our pockets we still have a trillion pounds of debt to pay off.
People do not believe the stats or are not feeling the effects of growth. So the key question is: when the growth does eventually (sometime next year) have a positive impact on the lives of workers, will they thank the government and reward the Tories and Lib Dems with votes, or go to Labour who will doubtless spend it all again. Perhaps the government needs to continue highlighting the debt mountain we have, remind voters that even when growth does mean more pounds in our pockets we still have a trillion pounds of debt to pay off.
I'd imagine it'll bring back some of the temporarily-cheezed-off UKIP defectors, at the very least.
There's this morning's thread written " Labour back in the forties....." Latest YouGov / The Sun results 28th October - Con 31%, Lab 40%, LD 9%, UKIP 12%; APP -28
The Scotland poll is more important Either way, Dave is pony
"While 84% of Conservative voters saw Cameron as the best available PM, only 56% of Labour voters said the same of Miliband, 13% of them named Cameron."
1. The bulk (the mega 10,000 element) of this poll was conducted between February and May!! That's a long way back.....
2. Those voting figures - presumably from the October 1,000 sample and nothing wrong in that - show a small Lab-Con swing since 2010. Labour's share is static at 42% but the Tories move up from 16.7% in 2010 to 19% now.
Now if the rest of the UK also shows a 1% swing to the Tories....you see where's this is going, tim?
Iain Duncan Smith accused the BBC of promoting Labour’s views by calling a key welfare reform a ‘bedroom tax’, newly released documents show.
In a furious letter, the Work and Pensions Secretary said the corporation was misleading viewers and the phrase was ‘innately political and indeed factually wrong’. Documents released under Freedom of Information legislation show Government officials have complained repeatedly about BBC coverage.
Former immigration minister Damian Green wrote to bosses saying its reports were ‘inconsistent and unacceptable’.
...Accusing the BBC of a ‘public disservice’, he said: ‘It is not a tax and it is wrong to describe it in this way.
‘A tax, as the Oxford English Dictionary makes clear, is a “compulsory contribution to state revenue, levied by the government on workers’ income and business profits, or added to the cost of some goods, services and transactions”. What this policy does is reduce some social housing tenants’ benefits if their home has one or more spare bedrooms. This cannot in any way be described as a tax.’
He added: ‘What should not happen, is for the BBC to adopt the language of the Labour Party without making it clear that the phrase is innately political and indeed, factually wrong. We do not believe it is the job of the BBC to use misleading terms and promote the views of the Labour Party.’
"THE trade union official at the centre of the Grangemouth row is facing an investigation by the information watchdog over alleged data protection breaches."
1. The bulk (the mega 10,000 element) of this poll was conducted between February and May!! That's a long way back.....
2. Those voting figures - presumably from the October 1,000 sample and nothing wrong in that - show a small Lab-Con swing since 2010. Labour's share is static at 42% but the Tories move up from 16.7% in 2010 to 19% now.
And, er, that's about it.
Thats why I posted the Oct VI. The leader ratings won't have moved much since spring, Ed in the lead UK wide then and now. But it blows apart the idiocy of Easterross et al that post Brown Labour will combust in Scotland due to Milibands standing - utterly deluded as ever
Your man has been a bag of shite since Syria, bet you wish he'd listened to Hague on recalling parliament rather than the Master Strategist Osborne.
So you accept that there's been a Lab-Con swing in Scotland since 2010 then?? Go on, admit it.
Iain Duncan Smith accused the BBC of promoting Labour’s views by calling a key welfare reform a ‘bedroom tax’, newly released documents show.
In a furious letter, the Work and Pensions Secretary said the corporation was misleading viewers and the phrase was ‘innately political and indeed factually wrong’. Documents released under Freedom of Information legislation show Government officials have complained repeatedly about BBC coverage.
If that part is accurate and civil servants have been drafted in to complain, the story might be bigger than -- and not the same as -- you think.
The Scottish polling is mildly encouraging for the tories who continue their slow recovery. The collapse of the Lib Dem vote taken with this small improvement would give them a number of opportunities to gain seats, specifically Berwickshire etc, Kincardine etc, and Argyll with NE Fife a toss up.
How ironic if Scotland helps the tories stay the largest party.
Iain Duncan Smith accused the BBC of promoting Labour’s views by calling a key welfare reform a ‘bedroom tax’, newly released documents show.
This is one where I think that IDS is completely right: the Labour Party has managed to successfully brand something that is indisputably not a tax as a tax, and it is clearly partial of the BBC to describe it as such.
This is one where I think that IDS is completely right: the Labour Party has managed to successfully brand something that is indisputably not a tax as a tax, and it is clearly partial of the BBC to describe it as such.
A Tory MP at the Populus reception called it the bedroom tax too. Like the "poll tax" rather than the Community Charge, it's easier to remember, and people don't really distinguish between removing well-established support and imposing a tax, since the effect on the people involved is identical.
This is one where I think that IDS is completely right: the Labour Party has managed to successfully brand something that is indisputably not a tax as a tax, and it is clearly partial of the BBC to describe it as such.
A Tory MP at the Populus reception called it the bedroom tax too. Like the "poll tax" rather than the Community Charge, it's easier to remember, and people don't really distinguish between removing well-established support and imposing a tax, since the effect on the people involved is identical.
Well, calling it the "community charge" was deeply misleading, even if it was the official name. It was, after all, a tax.
Under no traditional definition of the word "tax", is this possibly a tax.
To paraphrase the great Douglas Adams "this is clearly some new meaning of the word 'tax' that I was previously unaware of".
This is one where I think that IDS is completely right: the Labour Party has managed to successfully brand something that is indisputably not a tax as a tax, and it is clearly partial of the BBC to describe it as such.
A Tory MP at the Populus reception called it the bedroom tax too. Like the "poll tax" rather than the Community Charge, it's easier to remember, and people don't really distinguish between removing well-established support and imposing a tax, since the effect on the people involved is identical.
Says Labour PPC. The BBC should never have called it the Poll Tax either - its all par for the course.
Mr. Palmer, the state not giving people money and the state taking away people's own money are completely different.
The so-called bedroom tax is by no definition a tax, and if the term has entered common usage it's because of the left's superior use of language (upon which I've remarked many times) and the spoon-fed idiocy of the media.
Backed Verdasco to beat Gasquet at 3.2 in the BNP Paribas Masters. They're 6:5 head-to-head, in Verdasco's favour, and he has a 3:1 advantage on hard surface (which they'll be playing on). More of a 50/50 than a 2/1 shot in my view.
I've also backed Cornet to beat Kirilenko in the Tournament of Champions, at 2.3. She has a 3:0 record, including 2 wins on hard (the surface they'll be playing on).
Comments
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24722248
Fnarr, fnarr
It gives great praise to Jeremy Hunt.
However - there are two sides to this coin, and the other side of the coin is that the centre-right are in even more disarray than the left at the moment. As things stand, it would likely be an Hollande/Le Pen second round, and Hollande would win that.
Of course, it's early days - the next election's not due until 2017.
I would like to submit it as evidence that he is (1) functionally innumerate, and has no idea how business works, plus (2) he is happy to scapegoat those of whom his disapproves.
(1) He looked at the accounts of Grangemouth, commenting that the gross margin was below 20% and then said that since labour costs were only 17% of the total costs of the business it was ridiculous to focus on them
- Assuming that cost of inputs is outwith the company's control, then a cost item that reduces gross margin from 19% to a EBIT of 2% before considering all other costs is clearly a huge area to focus on
(2) "With suggestions that Ineos had saddled external debts on the plant for tax purposes, there was clearly an overwhelming case for the plants books to be laid open and independently scrutinised as well as for an HMRC investigation into the company's tax affairs"
- Just how does a "suggestion" (i.e. allegation from a presumably not-disinterested party) become an "overwhelming case" without further evdience... unless via a scapegoating process?
Would UKIP exist today?
Tommy Robinson has visited mosques more often than I have in the last few years.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24715666
It is a Scottish policing matter but people in the North West of England may also want to breathe easier as some of those scooped were seen around a couple of potential targets in that region.
PS They haven't gone away you know.
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/voting-intention-2
There's a slight rise in the Conservative numbers since the low point of around May (which might possibly have stalled or gone into reverse slightly in the last few weeks), but otherwise not much change in recent months.
So rather than a long-term political bias, it's perhaps a journalistic bias, for livelier debates at the expense of fair treatment of both main parties.
Exclusive: Derbyshire, Leicestershire and Warwickshire trusts warn the rush to privatisation could have deadly consequences
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/oct/28/chris-grayling-delay-probation-service-privatisation
Telegraph - Four fifths of French believe Francois Hollande will lose election
" Francois Hollande, France's beleagured president, suffered a fresh blow on Thursday with an opinion poll showing only one in five people believing he had any hope of winning a second term.
A third of those questioned for the Harris Interactive poll for Le Figaro newspaper said they wanted Manuel Valls, his hardline interior minister, to stand as the Socialist presidential candidate in 2017, with just 23 per cent wanting Mr Hollande to run.
High unemployment, anger over tax hikes and rows within Mr Hollande's governing coalition of Socialists and Greens have helped make him the most unloved French president in decades.
Fifty-four percent of those surveyed said they believed Mr Valls, currently one of France's most popular politicians, would beat a right-wing candidate in the 2017 presidential" election. Only 16 per cent said Mr Hollande could achieve that.
His family put out a story that he died during a wine tasting event at the hotel.
At the wake, a person, who was unaware of what actually happened went up to the widow and said
"It must be a great comfort for you to know that the old boy died doing what he enjoyed the most"
Ineos, the owners of the Grangemouth plant, have now alerted the Information Commissioner to look into any data protection breaches.
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/politics/article3907198.ece
Guido Fawkes @GuidoFawkes 27 Oct
@OwenJones84 A "think-tank" is stretching it. Run out of Unite's HQ and funded largely by Unite. You are Len McCluskey's media moppet.
"Despite the party’s shrinking vote share, there are potential Tories at large in Scotland. As well as the small “Tory Core” – loyal Conservatives who always turn out – I found a group of what I have called “Reluctant Cameroons”. These people, one in six of the Scottish electorate, are attracted to David Cameron and trust the Tories on the economy, but most say they would not vote Conservative tomorrow. Another one in ten falls into the “Willing to Listen” group, who currently lean towards Labour despite preferring Cameron as PM, though many are undecided.
The Conservative Party holds three main attractions for its target voters: they prefer Cameron as PM; they see the Tories as willing to take tough decisions; and they trust the Tory team over Miliband and Balls to manage the economy.
At the same time, they see three big drawbacks. First, like many in England, they doubt the Tories are really on the side of people like them. Second, they do not feel the party cares much about Scotland, and has little enthusiasm for devolution. Finally, they consider the Tories effectively irrelevant in Scottish elections. Many who would support the Conservatives if they lived in England instead vote to try to keep out whichever of Labour or the SNP they believe more disastrous.
What can the Tories do about all this? First of all, they must show they are in touch with people’s anxieties and aspirations as they are today. This means campaigning on health, public services and housing as well as constitutional issues and the deficit, and understanding that the benefits of an economic recovery seem remote to many people.
Like David Cameron, Ruth Davidson is an asset here. If she has yet to make a big impression on Scottish voters, she is not alone: neither have Johann Lamont or Willie Rennie. The swing voters we spoke to had a generally positive view of her – and if the thing that most stuck in their minds was that she had been asked for ID when trying to buy a beer at a Springsteen gig at Hampden Park, this at least proves her to be the antithesis of the hunting-shooting-fishing caricature of the Scots Tory."
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/benedictbrogan/100243393/londons-astonishing-boom-can-lift-the-whole-of-britain/
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24722248
David Cameron always seems to be two or three years too late. He reinvented himself as the next Tony Blair just as everybody got sick of Tony Blair, did the whole green/husky-dog thing right before the economy blew up and people became more worried about short-term living costs, and now he's trying to run against green taxes just in time for the economy to get better and people to have the luxury of worrying about the environment again.
We get used to it but the stability of the whole thing is a little bit astonishing - I don't think many people would have predicted it before 2010. A lot of credit is due to Cameron and Clegg for bringing it off, and also to Hague and the other people involved in the design of the agreement.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BXrNEAECcAE7HPW.jpg
http://yougov.co.uk/news/2013/10/28/how-tories-can-turn-economic-growth-victory-2015/
People do not believe the stats or are not feeling the effects of growth. So the key question is: when the growth does eventually (sometime next year) have a positive impact on the lives of workers, will they thank the government and reward the Tories and Lib Dems with votes, or go to Labour who will doubtless spend it all again. Perhaps the government needs to continue highlighting the debt mountain we have, remind voters that even when growth does mean more pounds in our pockets we still have a trillion pounds of debt to pay off.
DM - England has ill-treated Scots for 800 years, says Archbishop Justin Welby [..]”
Has anyone ever seen MalcolmG and the Arch Bishop in the same room…? : )
http://tinyurl.com/kqo8lq7
On your preferred measure, among VI:
Miliband: +59
Cameron: +85
Salmond: +82
Clegg: +47
How's Falkirk going?
I wonder whether Dave saw him as a safe pick, being ex BP etc ?
Cameron: +1
Miliband: -36
Clegg: -20
Salmond: -18
1. The bulk (the mega 10,000 element) of this poll was conducted between February and May!! That's a long way back.....
2. Those voting figures - presumably from the October 1,000 sample and nothing wrong in that - show a small Lab-Con swing since 2010. Labour's share is static at 42% but the Tories move up from 16.7% in 2010 to 19% now.
Now if the rest of the UK also shows a 1% swing to the Tories....you see where's this is going, tim?
And, er, that's about it.
Iain Duncan Smith accused the BBC of promoting Labour’s views by calling a key welfare reform a ‘bedroom tax’, newly released documents show.
In a furious letter, the Work and Pensions Secretary said the corporation was misleading viewers and the phrase was ‘innately political and indeed factually wrong’. Documents released under Freedom of Information legislation show Government officials have complained repeatedly about BBC coverage.
Former immigration minister Damian Green wrote to bosses saying its reports were ‘inconsistent and unacceptable’.
...Accusing the BBC of a ‘public disservice’, he said: ‘It is not a tax and it is wrong to describe it in this way.
‘A tax, as the Oxford English Dictionary makes clear, is a “compulsory contribution to state revenue, levied by the government on workers’ income and business profits, or added to the cost of some goods, services and transactions”. What this policy does is reduce some social housing tenants’ benefits if their home has one or more spare bedrooms. This cannot in any way be described as a tax.’
He added: ‘What should not happen, is for the BBC to adopt the language of the Labour Party without making it clear that the phrase is innately political and indeed, factually wrong. We do not believe it is the job of the BBC to use misleading terms and promote the views of the Labour Party.’
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2478643/Duncan-Smith-blasts-BBC-bedroom-tax-bias-Work-Pensions-Secretary-accuses-corporation-promoting-Labours-views-furious-letter.html#ixzz2j5q9FURx
Too late was the cry. The govt conceded that ground when it tried to move on to tax cuts. The next election won't be fought on the debt/deficit.
http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/home-news/grangemouth-union-official-faces-data-watchdog-inquiry.22551165
Eric Joyce on R4 Today......
....Stick to Ed and gas prices, you're on slightly firmer ground there.
Heroic spinning from someone who got both Plebgate and Falkirk wrong!
But you did get "man cries at funeral"!
An article almost deliberately intended to appeal to SeanT types, but few others I suspect.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/benedictbrogan/100243393/londons-astonishing-boom-can-lift-the-whole-of-britain/
How ironic if Scotland helps the tories stay the largest party.
Con 31%, Lab 40%, LD 9%, UKIP 12%; APP -28
Secondaries show sharp drop in support for Government handling of the economy, though satisfaction a bit better than yesterday's.
Under no traditional definition of the word "tax", is this possibly a tax.
To paraphrase the great Douglas Adams "this is clearly some new meaning of the word 'tax' that I was previously unaware of".
Mr. Palmer, the state not giving people money and the state taking away people's own money are completely different.
The so-called bedroom tax is by no definition a tax, and if the term has entered common usage it's because of the left's superior use of language (upon which I've remarked many times) and the spoon-fed idiocy of the media.
Betting PostBacked Verdasco to beat Gasquet at 3.2 in the BNP Paribas Masters. They're 6:5 head-to-head, in Verdasco's favour, and he has a 3:1 advantage on hard surface (which they'll be playing on). More of a 50/50 than a 2/1 shot in my view.
I've also backed Cornet to beat Kirilenko in the Tournament of Champions, at 2.3. She has a 3:0 record, including 2 wins on hard (the surface they'll be playing on).