What do you make of Fraser Nelsons piece, Osborne briefing for post loss or Fraser having inches to fill?
I'm sure he's right that Cameron and Osborne have different outlooks on life, and that Cameron is much more a traditional shires Conservative, with Osborne more a metropolitan business-oriented free-market Tory. Nothing new in that, lots of journalists have said the same over the last few years.
That's not the same as 'cracks starting to show', though.
I don't much like Question Time so I've been re-watching Nick Clegg's 2008 Party conference speech from 2008. Contains some corkers.
'Cameron's only aim was to make the Conservatives inoffensive. The problem is once you take out the offensive parts of the Conservative party there isn't much left.' (Huge cheers)
'Cameron's hope is to become the Andrex puppy of British politics. A cuddly symbol perhaps but fundamentally irrelevant to the product he's promoting.' (I wonder if he has changed his mind?)
'The freewheeling, bonus driven short-termism of the City must come to an end' (How's that one looking?)
It's funny but seeing this young handsome man speaking about fairness and social justice with real passion you could (if you were getting a bit carried away) almost envisage him as our John F Kennedy. Funny how it's turned out.
The last QT I watched live was the one with John Lydon
QT lost its charm when I watched a QT a few years ago, and first three questions from the average local person came from the following
1) The former LD PPC for a neighbouring constituency
FPT. Pt1 - That was a really interesting and informative blog post from Dan Hodges overall on how the behind the scenes campaign operation at Conservative HQ is shaping up in preparation for the GE. And it also gave us a bit of insight into how dysfunctional the previous GE campaign became at times due to the actions or behaviour of some of the main players. Also, its worth noting that Dan Hodges was providing us with the kind of internal Conservative party insight we should expect, but these we are failing to get from our right of centre journalists with their 'supposed' finger on the pulse of the Tory party.
Its a real shame that the wider content of this article from Dan Hodges is actually being totally ignored, and while some of his critics focus solely on single small paragraph which alludes to some private polling. I suspect that when we finally get to the point where we are reviewing the result the day after the next GE, the wider context of Dan Hodges whole article will prove to have been the far more relevant area worthy of a thread.
Pt2. At the moment we have some very talented new journalists on the left who are providing us with some excellent old style political journalism of the best quality through various blogs, and in contrast to familiar faces on both sides of political debate who value their own insight and opinion so highly they shoe horn them into articles . These off message journalists from the left are causing quite a stir, yet they are only now just beginning to catch up with right leaning bloggers like Tim Montgomery & Co who have been very successfully off message and dominating the blogsphere for years.
Atul Hatwal is definitely one to watch too, he was very impressive on the Daily Politics this week and again, his contributions are turning into a must read for political anoraks. And we have a very own Seant of this Parish stirring things up and challenging perceptions in his Telegraph blog too. The one thing I really miss from PB this days, is the former variety of articles which challenged all perceptions and predictions on a regular basis, including OGH's.
This utter obsession with day to day polling to the exclusion of all other opposing views is stifling debate on here to the extent that its become the norm to instantly attack, mock or insult the posters/Dan Hodges for being off message rather than debate the arguments they offer up. And PB is all the poorer for it. Forget 1992 at your peril, yes the polling companies have changed and improved their methodology in the intervening years. But we still got that infamous Cleggism before the last GE, and then that Exit Poll came out at 10pm and set the cat among the pigeons. Indeed, Iain Dale 'it seems too incredible to be true that the LibDems are only predicted to get 59 seats. I'll run naked down Whitehall if that turns out to be true. true.' proves that the polling froth can cloud the result right up to almost GE day.
Also, its worth noting that Dan Hodges was providing us with the kind of internal Conservative party insight we should expect, but these we are failing to get from our right of centre journalists with their 'supposed' finger on the pulse of the Tory party.
Also, its worth noting that Dan Hodges was providing us with the kind of internal Conservative party insight we should expect, but these we are failing to get from our right of centre journalists with their 'supposed' finger on the pulse of the Tory party.
Alternatively Hodges is making it all up.
OR ... he could be gullibly passing on something someone else has made up but he has fallen for hook, line and sinker?
With Dan there are so many possible explanations - from stupidity to lies.
Also, its worth noting that Dan Hodges was providing us with the kind of internal Conservative party insight we should expect, but these we are failing to get from our right of centre journalists with their 'supposed' finger on the pulse of the Tory party.
Alternatively Hodges is making it all up.
OR ... he could be gullibly passing on something someone else has made up but he has fallen for hook, line and sinker?
With Dan there are so many possible explanations - from stupidity to lies.
I think the more charitable explanation, he heard what he wanted to hear.
Also, its worth noting that Dan Hodges was providing us with the kind of internal Conservative party insight we should expect, but these we are failing to get from our right of centre journalists with their 'supposed' finger on the pulse of the Tory party.
FrankBooth Nick Clegg 'Mr only slept with 30 women' is also not far behind JFK on the ladies front, although I would assume now faithful to Miriam
Just need to be clear that it was NO MORE THAN 30 women. Not that I suspect Mr Clegg would get his solicitor to write a letter to OGH about that one. It might after all be just one woman.
But don't worry @another_richard, you are in good company tonight. It looks like @TheScreamingEagles and @Neil have followed you like lemmings over the cliff on the cheap attacks on Dan Hodges rather than actually argue or debate the content of the full article he penned. There was a lot of interesting snippets from the last as well as the future Conservative campaign that was worthy of debate.
Also, its worth noting that Dan Hodges was providing us with the kind of internal Conservative party insight we should expect, but these we are failing to get from our right of centre journalists with their 'supposed' finger on the pulse of the Tory party.
FrankBooth Nick Clegg 'Mr only slept with 30 women' is also not far behind JFK on the ladies front, although I would assume now faithful to Miriam
Just need to be clear that it was NO MORE THAN 30 women. Not that I suspect Mr Clegg would get his solicitor to write a letter to OGH about that one. It might after all be just one woman.
Or it might not even be a woman. Yes and No as it were.
Also, its worth noting that Dan Hodges was providing us with the kind of internal Conservative party insight we should expect, but these we are failing to get from our right of centre journalists with their 'supposed' finger on the pulse of the Tory party.
Alternatively Hodges is making it all up.
OR ... he could be gullibly passing on something someone else has made up but he has fallen for hook, line and sinker?
With Dan there are so many possible explanations - from stupidity to lies.
I think the more charitable explanation, he heard what he wanted to hear.
Or it could be all a sub-sample
Even funnier was his stuff about Messina/Obama and "Time Magazine" giving Obama a 17% chance of winning.
Are you implying Dan Hodges is StuartTruth? It would certainly explain much about the PB Romneys.
But don't worry @another_richard, you are in good company tonight. It looks like @TheScreamingEagles and @Neil have followed you like lemmings over the cliff on the cheap attacks on Dan Hodges rather than actually argue or debate the content of the full article he penned. There was a lot of interesting snippets from the last as well as the future Conservative campaign that was worthy of debate.
Also, its worth noting that Dan Hodges was providing us with the kind of internal Conservative party insight we should expect, but these we are failing to get from our right of centre journalists with their 'supposed' finger on the pulse of the Tory party.
Alternatively Hodges is making it all up.
It isn't that.
The whole piece is based on polling, that one of the country's most respected pollsters says
@MSmithsonPB For complete clarity, what I said is that I don’t believe the poll exists - but that if it did it shld obviously be published
I'm sorry, but when both Mike and Andrew Cooper have huge doubts about the existence of this poll, you can understand the scepticism about the whole piece.
A flick through the Electoral Commission’s records reveals outstanding loans from the bank to the central party and its branches totalling £1,621,289, some at an interest rate as low as 2 per cent above base rate.
Those terms are generous – as apparently is the approach to repayment.
For example, £75,000 was loaned to Islington South and Finsbury Constituency Labour Party on 3rd June 1992. The CLP was meant to pay this back in June 2012, but it’s still listed as “outstanding” by the Electoral Commission. Many a small business would give their eye teeth for low interest rates and a bank manager who was so relaxed about getting the payments in on time.
FrankBooth/Mick Pork Classic, doubt we will still be talking about Clegg in 50 years time in quite the same way we talk about Kennedy though, with the anniversary of his assissination today. Night!
As a former nurse, I have had a growing admiration for Jeremy Hunt over the last few months as he has settled into the Health brief in England. So much so, I have even been tempted to put money on him as the next Tory Leader after watching some of his excellent media performances. This politician really gets the NHS, and he is also able to articulate what is most important when it comes to delivering in its primary role of providing the best medical and nursing care. And for the benefit of the Labour party, that means increasing front line doctors and nurses to provide adequate care provision rather than admin staff totally focussed on meeting their set statistical targets.
Andy Burnham is your classic ambitious and tribal Labour politician, and he is currently screwed because he is up against a Government opponent that really has been able to channel a genuine, in touch and human connection to the NHS. Hunt recognises who got lost in the Labour years of tinkering with the NHS. And more importantly, who its primarily there to serve and provide for, the patients. Burnham is far too often on the defensive, and usually that means he tries to ignore all the real and specific failings in the NHS in favour of defending the 'whole' public sector workforce from any criticism of their performance in its delivery. Hunt's sterling and extremely honest and media friendly performance up against Paxman earlier this week on Newsnight should have been worthy of a thread on the site.
Blair fiddled and moved his Ministers around far too often, Cameron has simple had to tinker around the edges to get the right politicians into the right positions in this Government.
@drjennings: "He [Flowers] got where he did because of his connections" says Jeremy Hunt of Charterhouse and Magdalen, Oxford contemporary of BoJo and DC
Even Richard Nabavi was startled that Jeremy Chum got the plum
I was, but it turns out that Cameron was right and I was wrong. Hunt is proving an excellent health minister, much better than Lansley who might have been good on knowledge of the NHS but was poor on the politics and presentation. No wonder Labour are worried and are trying to counter-attack.
Didn't the Co-Op bank use to have adverts boasting about its ethical policies ?
I seem to remember that they would 'never support authoritarian regimes' or some such.
They never had any problem in subsidising the Labour party and its love of illegal wars.
Coincidentally, the Daily Express this evening have an article highlighting the inconsistences of the Co-ops ‘ethical banking’ policy and its ties with Labour.
“Reverend Flowers and the stench of Labour hypocrisy
LABOUR are fond of posing as the champions of public morality and civic virtue but this self-righteousness could hardly be more hypocritical.”
Didn't the Co-Op bank use to have adverts boasting about its ethical policies ?
I seem to remember that they would 'never support authoritarian regimes' or some such.
They never had any problem in subsidising the Labour party and its love of illegal wars.
Coincidentally, the Daily Express this evening have an article highlighting the inconsistences of the Co-ops ‘ethical banking’ policy and its ties with Labour.
“Reverend Flowers and the stench of Labour hypocrisy
LABOUR are fond of posing as the champions of public morality and civic virtue but this self-righteousness could hardly be more hypocritical.”
Didn't the Co-Op bank use to have adverts boasting about its ethical policies ?
I seem to remember that they would 'never support authoritarian regimes' or some such.
They never had any problem in subsidising the Labour party and its love of illegal wars.
Coincidentally, the Daily Express this evening have an article highlighting the inconsistences of the Co-ops ‘ethical banking’ policy and its ties with Labour.
“Reverend Flowers and the stench of Labour hypocrisy
LABOUR are fond of posing as the champions of public morality and civic virtue but this self-righteousness could hardly be more hypocritical.”
Didn't the Co-Op bank use to have adverts boasting about its ethical policies ?
I seem to remember that they would 'never support authoritarian regimes' or some such.
They never had any problem in subsidising the Labour party and its love of illegal wars.
Coincidentally, the Daily Express this evening have an article highlighting the inconsistences of the Co-ops ‘ethical banking’ policy and its ties with Labour.
“Reverend Flowers and the stench of Labour hypocrisy
LABOUR are fond of posing as the champions of public morality and civic virtue but this self-righteousness could hardly be more hypocritical.”
Anyone who didn't know the Co-op had major links with the Labour Party wasn't paying attention.
Morning Mr OKC,
No doubt all those that should know, do so, - however I suspect less than 1 in 50 appreciate how closely symbiotic the relationship is between the Co-op and the Labour party. Recent events will have been quite an eye opener for many I suspect.
BTW - Hows the cricket down under? - What a cracker Stuart Broad has turned out to be.
No doubt all those that should know, do so, - however I suspect less than 1 in 50 appreciate how closely symbiotic the relationship is between the Co-op and the Labour party. Recent events will have been quite an eye opener for many I suspect.
BTW - Hows the cricket down under? - What a cracker Stuart Broad has turned out to be.
We've had a bit of a spat in the small time where I live, over the co-op, the major retailer in the town, wanting to expand. One of the town's Tory councillors on the local DC put a lot of effort into opposing, apparently!
Sadly I'm not in Oz. Temporarily just outside Bangkok so closer to SeanT geographically (probably) than any other PB poster! Not in his sort of area, though. And it's difficult to WATCH the game without finding an Aussie bar, and there are none locally. Can't even get TMS! Seems to be blocked, due to contract with Aussie TV. Have to watch commentary on Cricinfo. Which is usually very good. (77-2 as I write) But yes, Broad seems to have been fired up!
Did we get all the results through? I have seen the Scarborough one and someone said OGH tweeted that the Tory Party had won in Cambridge....what happened to the rest?
It's interesting to note the attitude of left-wingers to Hodges and Flowers. The former, a second-rate and therefore fairly average journalist, hugely vilified on here and the latter, becomes a non-person who no-one knew or liked apparently - and all the while cashing the cheques!
They say 'cheats seldom prosper'. it restores your faith in divine providence to see a team that chose to play the cheating bastard Stuart Broad get their comeuppance.
Hunt was certainly good with a fairly antagonistic audience on QT last night. QT was a lot better for not having a celebrity or journalist on the panel with better discussion and more time for the three guests..
As a former nurse, I have had a growing admiration for Jeremy Hunt over the last few months as he has settled into the Health brief in England. So much so, I have even been tempted to put money on him as the next Tory Leader after watching some of his excellent media performaHunt certainly nces. This politician really gets the NHS, and he is also able to articulate what is most important when it comes to delivering in its primary role of providing the best medical and nursing care. And for the benefit of the Labour party, that means increasing front line doctors and nurses to provide adequate care provision rather than admin staff totally focussed on meeting their set statistical targets.
Andy Burnham is your classic ambitious and tribal Labour politician, and he is currently screwed because he is up against a Government opponent that really has been able to channel a genuine, in touch and human connection to the NHS. Hunt recognises who got lost in the Labour years of tinkering with the NHS. And more importantly, who its primarily there to serve and provide for, the patients. Burnham is far too often on the defensive, and usually that means he tries to ignore all the real and specific failings
@drjennings: "He [Flowers] got where he did because of his connections" says Jeremy Hunt of Charterhouse and Magdalen, Oxford contemporary of BoJo and DC
Even Richard Nabavi was startled that Jeremy Chum got the plum
I was, but it turns out that Cameron was right and I was wrong. Hunt is proving an excellent health minister, much better than Lansley who might have been good on knowledge of the NHS but was poor on the politics and presentation. No wonder Labour are worried and are trying to counter-attack.
@RicHolden: Ed Miliband advisor Paul Flowers has been arrested by police on Merseyside in connection with supply of Class A drugs http://t.co/n2u79knpqO
Comments
That's not the same as 'cracks starting to show', though.
QT lost its charm when I watched a QT a few years ago, and first three questions from the average local person came from the following
1) The former LD PPC for a neighbouring constituency
2) A current Labour Councillor
3) A current Tory councillor
However I don't remember Bobajob telling everyone it was a non-story and that it was nobody's business what successful businessmen got up to.
Indy's 261
cons 229
https://twitter.com/search?q=pontrilas&src=typd
Is one of the reasons why Mike asked me to be guest editor in his absence.
If I go to bed now, 5 mins after I sleep, both wickets will fall.
Its a real shame that the wider content of this article from Dan Hodges is actually being totally ignored, and while some of his critics focus solely on single small paragraph which alludes to some private polling. I suspect that when we finally get to the point where we are reviewing the result the day after the next GE, the wider context of Dan Hodges whole article will prove to have been the far more relevant area worthy of a thread.
Atul Hatwal is definitely one to watch too, he was very impressive on the Daily Politics this week and again, his contributions are turning into a must read for political anoraks. And we have a very own Seant of this Parish stirring things up and challenging perceptions in his Telegraph blog too. The one thing I really miss from PB this days, is the former variety of articles which challenged all perceptions and predictions on a regular basis, including OGH's.
This utter obsession with day to day polling to the exclusion of all other opposing views is stifling debate on here to the extent that its become the norm to instantly attack, mock or insult the posters/Dan Hodges for being off message rather than debate the arguments they
offer up. And PB is all the poorer for it. Forget 1992 at your peril, yes the polling companies have changed and improved their methodology in the intervening years. But we still got that infamous Cleggism before the last GE, and then that Exit Poll came out at 10pm and set the cat among the pigeons. Indeed, Iain Dale 'it seems too incredible to be true that the LibDems are only predicted to get 59 seats. I'll run naked down Whitehall if that turns out to be true.
true.' proves that the polling froth can cloud the result right up to almost GE day.
Rugby - English clubs frozen out of European rugby
English teams could be frozen out of top-flight European club rugby next season following a fresh development in an ongoing row
http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/news/rugby-english-clubs-frozen-193942294--spt.html
But you'd have to have a heart of stone not to laugh.
That was a fecking fiasco.
Polling Vs "opposing views", eh? Interesting one.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NwW3ytid4DA
LOL! indeed.
With Dan there are so many possible explanations - from stupidity to lies.
Or it could be all a sub-sample
LOL
The whole piece is based on polling, that one of the country's most respected pollsters says
Andrew Cooper @ATCooperNo10 10h
@MSmithsonPB For complete clarity, what I said is that I don’t believe the poll exists - but that if it did it shld obviously be published
I'm sorry, but when both Mike and Andrew Cooper have huge doubts about the existence of this poll, you can understand the scepticism about the whole piece.
Andy Burnham is your classic ambitious and tribal Labour politician, and he is currently screwed because he is up against a Government opponent that really has been able to channel a genuine, in touch and human connection to the NHS. Hunt recognises who got lost in the Labour years of tinkering with the NHS. And more importantly, who its primarily there to serve and provide for, the patients. Burnham is far too often on the defensive, and usually that means he tries to ignore all the real and specific failings in the NHS in favour of defending the 'whole' public sector workforce from any criticism of their performance in its delivery. Hunt's sterling and extremely honest and media friendly performance up against Paxman earlier this week on Newsnight should have been worthy of a thread on the site.
Blair fiddled and moved his Ministers around far too often, Cameron has simple had to tinker around the edges to get the right politicians into the right positions in this Government.
“Reverend Flowers and the stench of Labour hypocrisy
LABOUR are fond of posing as the champions of public morality and civic virtue but this self-righteousness could hardly be more hypocritical.”
http://www.express.co.uk/comment/expresscomment/444242/Reverend-Flowers-and-the-stench-of-Labour-hypocrisy
No doubt all those that should know, do so, - however I suspect less than 1 in 50 appreciate how closely symbiotic the relationship is between the Co-op and the Labour party. Recent events will have been quite an eye opener for many I suspect.
BTW - Hows the cricket down under? - What a cracker Stuart Broad has turned out to be.
YouGov/Sun poll tonight: Labour with a 7 point lead. CON 32%, LAB 39%, LD 10%, UKIP 12%
Sadly I'm not in Oz. Temporarily just outside Bangkok so closer to SeanT geographically (probably) than any other PB poster! Not in his sort of area, though. And it's difficult to WATCH the game without finding an Aussie bar, and there are none locally. Can't even get TMS! Seems to be blocked, due to contract with Aussie TV.
Have to watch commentary on Cricinfo. Which is usually very good. (77-2 as I write)
But yes, Broad seems to have been fired up!
Labour - 39%
Tory - 32%
Ukip - 12%
Clegg - 10%
Dan Hodges says a nameless Tory insider has told him tomorrows Yougov is
Labour - 28%
Tory - 43%
Ukip - 8%
Lib Dem - 16%
Oh and Pietersen's gone. 82-3
Dan Hodges. Oh dear.
And a shocking batting performance from England. Quelle surprise.
"Not enjoyed tonight's cricket much...'
They say 'cheats seldom prosper'. it restores your faith in divine providence to see a team that chose to play the cheating bastard Stuart Broad get their comeuppance.
@thetimes: Today's front page - Labour engulfed by Co-op scandal, with latest online on arrest of Flowers http://t.co/xsU6NA4G5p http://t.co/RmKCAyT0OT