But the result was (IIRC) Con 511, Lab 272, LD 267. So the tactical voting went the wrong way.
This could help Lab this time quite a lot even if the voters were to go into the election with exactly the same opinions about the parties as last time. What with the Cleggasm making the news and the famous bar-chart technology, there must have been quite a few Labour supporters in Lab/Con marginals who "tactically" voted LibDem in 2010...
I'm with the hardline UKIPpers on the subject of Syria (and I'm generally pro-immigration). There are 9 million displaced Syrians. Accepting a few refugees - or even tens of thousands of refugees - is not going to make any meaningful difference.
What are you talking about, it's going to make a huge difference to those few refugees, or the tens of thousands of refugees.
Have to say the comments by ukip voters slagging off Farage for his comments about Syrian refugees aren't good... Shame so many people confuse immigration with mass immigration, and refugees with economic migrants
Large chunks of UKIP support do a very good impression of BNP lite. Sadly they drag down the more thoughtful of their membership. It's the primary reason I would tactically vote against them.
I think there are a few BNP lite types in UKIP, but I wouldn't say those people are all bad just because they arent able to articulate their thoughts and feelings as well as others... Ukip is consistent in its anti racist stance while standing up for the right to choose who we let live and work in the uk on their ability to contribute.. I think that's a tricky path to tread without giving in to either side.. Hopefully the BNP lite types will learn that controlling immigration doesn't mean being anti immigrant, and I think Farage, married to an immigrant of course, is helping that.
Not defending racism, but plenty of people expect criminals to be given a second chance and look for their upbringing and social circumstances before judging too harshly, but want zero tolerance for BNP lite types who also have their reasons, wrong though they are...
''what I have seen is a complete lack of discipline and no effort or ability on the part of the teacher to do anything other than get through the lesson and get the children out.''
V. disturbing, and backed up by the testimony of a relative who is a teacher in a sink school just outside Cardiff.
I'm with the hardline UKIPpers on the subject of Syria (and I'm generally pro-immigration). There are 9 million displaced Syrians. Accepting a few refugees - or even tens of thousands of refugees - is not going to make any meaningful difference. It's gesture politics at its worst.
The British government has got this right - we should be giving generous aid to help the people on the ground. And we are.
That's incredible,... Changing/rescuing the lives tens of thousands of refugees would make a big difference to them and their families... What an inhuman thing to say.
The great thing about what Farage has said is that it really isn't gesture politics... Whereas Cameron would probably feel its right to accept refugees but is too scared of losing far right votes to do it...
Amazing how many left wingers see only the financial implications of immigration and never the social/human factor
I'm with the hardline UKIPpers on the subject of Syria (and I'm generally pro-immigration). There are 9 million displaced Syrians. Accepting a few refugees - or even tens of thousands of refugees - is not going to make any meaningful difference.
What are you talking about, it's going to make a huge difference to those few refugees, or the tens of thousands of refugees.
As I said yesterday it might also have the effect of encouraging our neighbours to be a bit more forthcoming with help. So whilst we may not ourselves be able to make a huge difference, overall the effect could be significant.
It is also a complete myth to think that a significant percentage of the 9 million refugees want to come to Europe. The vast majority want to go home. They want to stay as close as possible to their homeland so that when things improve they can go back. Every charity and NGO in the area has repeated this message ever since the crisis started. As such we need to cater for those who are genuinely in need of escape from the camps due to illness of specific persecution (such as some of the Christian communities) by offering them an alternative whilst at the same time making sure we make existence bearable for the large majority who chose to remain in the camps.
@edmundintokyo A meaningful difference to the problem of displaced persons in and around Syria. We can take in 500 refugees (as Labour suggest) and have a warm glow about having helped those people. Or we can take in 500,000 people, set up a New Damascus in Shropshire, and have a warm glow about having helped those people. But that would still leave a much greater problem behind.
Nigel Farage is posturing to enable himself to be more hardline on other immigration questions to deflect accusations of racism. A whitewash, if you like.
Far better to tackle the problem on the ground. Britain has done well on this so far.
But the result was (IIRC) Con 511, Lab 272, LD 267. So the tactical voting went the wrong way.
This could help Lab this time quite a lot even if the voters were to go into the election with exactly the same opinions about the parties as last time. What with the Cleggasm making the news and the famous bar-chart technology, there must have been quite a few Labour supporters in Lab/Con marginals who "tactically" voted LibDem in 2010...
In Con/Lab marginals, the Lib Dems (unsurprisingly) poll well below their national vote share (18% in 2010 in the seats surveyed by Ashcroft). That suggests that there must already be plenty of leftward-leaning voters in such seats who vote Labour who might vote Lib Dem in a different constituency.
Really, there'll be two countervailing trends in such seats in 2015. Tactical voting by ex-Lib Dems, vs first-time incumbency.
But the result was (IIRC) Con 511, Lab 272, LD 267. So the tactical voting went the wrong way.
This could help Lab this time quite a lot even if the voters were to go into the election with exactly the same opinions about the parties as last time. What with the Cleggasm making the news and the famous bar-chart technology, there must have been quite a few Labour supporters in Lab/Con marginals who "tactically" voted LibDem in 2010...
The LD vote went up 800,000 between 2005-2010. Lab dropped by almost 1m but the Tories went up by 2m. Shows what previous non-voters can do!
Far better to tackle the problem on the ground. Britain has done well on this so far.
I don't understand the "either/or". Some of those people, if you gave them visas, would be able to move to Britain, get jobs, pay taxes and remit some money back to other friends and family who are displaced in Syria. Giving those people visas doesn't interfere with your ability to give people stuck in refugee camps who didn't get visas handouts so they don't starve or die of exposure.
On Syria, we (along with many others, specifically Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the US) positively encouraged a rebellion against the Assad regime. As a result many Syrians are, even temporarily, much worse off than they might have been had the rebellion simply been repressed. Like the Marsh Arabs of Iraq under Hussain they are paying a heavy price for listening to that external encouragement.
Some, in particular the Christian community, face an extremely uncertain future. If Assad wins they will be regarded as traitors but if he loses his replacements are likely to be even more hostile to them than the Assad regime has been. Staying in Syria looks problematic for these people whatever the outcome.
I agree that the vast majority of the refugees want to return to Syria and it is sensible to keep them local if at all possible. But it seems likely to me that some minority communities such as the Christians face a future of long term refugees who will effectively lose their homeland. I think it is morally correct for us to help these people by providing them with a home if they want it (in association with others of course).
@edmundintokyo A meaningful difference to the problem of displaced persons in and around Syria. We can take in 500 refugees (as Labour suggest) and have a warm glow about having helped those people. Or we can take in 500,000 people, set up a New Damascus in Shropshire, and have a warm glow about having helped those people. But that would still leave a much greater problem behind.
Nigel Farage is posturing to enable himself to be more hardline on other immigration questions to deflect accusations of racism. A whitewash, if you like.
Far better to tackle the problem on the ground. Britain has done well on this so far.
Blinkers on
Surely it's more racist to favour a European protectionist superstate with free movement of workers while requiring visas and controls for more talented people from Africa and Asia?
Why would Labour voters be likely to switch to the Lib Dems now in Con/LD marginals when:
- They backed Labour when that party was much more unpopular than it is now? - The Lib Dems, by contrast, are far less popular nationally? - The Lib Dems have deeply undermined their 'vote Yellow to stop Blue' by going into coalition with Blue. - Most Con/LD marginals in 2015 were also that in 2010, so tactical considerations are the same now as they were then?
Much has been written about LibDem MPs' personal following bucking the national trend, and I suspect this will be the case here.
A left-leaning LibDem such as Norman Baker, for example, will continue to enjoy tactical support from people who would otherwise vote Labour. But I doubt that an Orange Booker in a LD-Con marginal, such as Jeremy Browne, is sleeping quite so comfortably at night.
@edmundintokyo You're avoiding the most difficult question (as did Nigel Farage), which is: how many refugees do you accept? What are the limits to the compassion that Britain should offer?
To his credit, Nick Palmer did put a figure on this last night when I asked him. But any figure is either going to look ridiculously small given the scale of the problem, impossibly difficult for Britain to absorb or both.
WRT the picture at the top of this thread, it's really unclear who you should vote for in St. Albans should you want to defeat the Conservative. Which is why I think Anne Main is firm favourite to retain the seat. I think the only Hertfordshire seats that are in play are Watford and Stevenage.
''Amazing how many left wingers see only the financial implications of immigration and never the social/human factor''.
I'd have thought the people of Syria are a more deserving case for settlement than those of Bulgaria and Romania....???
More needful, perhaps, rather than deserving.
Typically, the right wing Tory front BBC has not questioned the FCO's role in encouraging uprising, then urging armed support of Al Qaeda, and now twiddling its thumbs. Cf Libya and back to Iraq under Blair.
@edmundintokyo A meaningful difference to the problem of displaced persons in and around Syria. We can take in 500 refugees (as Labour suggest) and have a warm glow about having helped those people. Or we can take in 500,000 people, set up a New Damascus in Shropshire, and have a warm glow about having helped those people. But that would still leave a much greater problem behind.
Nigel Farage is posturing to enable himself to be more hardline on other immigration questions to deflect accusations of racism. A whitewash, if you like.
Far better to tackle the problem on the ground. Britain has done well on this so far.
Your convoluted thinking to try and make this into something bad for Farage is a sight to behold. You are utterly wrong with this because you view immigration in simple black and white terms - just as you view UKIP in the same way.
Afternoon all. Amazing the big debate on Syrian immigration raging in UKIP the last 24hours.
Below,a missive from UKIP HQ:
Dear Supporter, In an interview with the BBC on the weekend, UKIP Leader Nigel Farage said that Britain should honour the 1951 declaration on refugee status and permit those fleeing the civil war in Syria to come to the UK.
He is the only senior political leader in the UK to publicly advocate this compassionate policy.
Following the interview, The Daily Telegraph, not normally known for its support of UKIP, today addressed the issue coming out in full support of Mr Farage and clearly stating why.
You can read the article here.
It should be compulsory reading for every UKIP member and supporter and we urge you to share the link so that others may learn for themselves why we are advocating this move.
Also, Nigel will be on BBC Radio 2's Jeremy Vine Show at noon today (Monday) discussing the issue. Tune in, if you can. Thank you for your continued support.
Sean_F - Watford is one of the seats I'm most looking forward too seeing the result of.
Is TSE saying he will vote tactically for Clegg in 2015? I'm not entirely sure if he's living in Sheffield Hallam. If so, why? He's said before that Clegg has no chance of losing Sheffield Hallam, so why not vote with his heart. Apologies if TSE is referring to a different constituency.
The great thing about what Farage has said is that it really isn't gesture politics...
I fully support Farage's position on Syrian refugees (well, unless it really is true that he only wants to take those of the right religion, I presume that was a joke). But you're being naive if you dont think it was a nakedly political gesture. Mind you I'm quite impressed that UKIP have come up with it, definitely shows them on a continuing upward curve of saviness. Now all they have to do is select some candidates in target seats and they will be motoring.
The British government was champing at the bit to facilitate and encourage change in Syria. We're therefore at least a little responsible for the plight of the ordinary Syrian population. We should do as much as possible to help the refugees, the only caveat being that we need to be a bit careful about letting in the more unsavoury types.
The British government was champing at the bit to facilitate and encourage change in Syria. We're therefore at least a little responsible for the plight of the ordinary Syrian population.
Nonsense.
We should do as much as possible to help the refugees, the only caveat being that we need to be a bit careful about letting in the more unsavoury types.
And how would you suggest these' unsavoury types' are vetted - and on what criteria?
@edmundintokyo You're avoiding the most difficult question (as did Nigel Farage), which is: how many refugees do you accept? What are the limits to the compassion that Britain should offer?
To his credit, Nick Palmer did put a figure on this last night when I asked him. But any figure is either going to look ridiculously small given the scale of the problem, impossibly difficult for Britain to absorb or both.
Any individual (or single-country) assistance to any significant problem is going to look ridiculously small given the scale of the problem. So do you close all the hospitals because each one only helps a fraction of the sick people in the world?
Since you want a number, my suggestion would be to take the number of displaced people, divide it by the world population in non-extreme-poverty-stricken and/or war-torn countries and multiply by your own population. So say 6 million need to get to a foreign country, Japan is 100 million out of 4 billion or 2.5% = 150,000. UK maybe 100,000. But I'm more positive to immigration than the median voter. If they'll only go for 4, that's 4 better than zero.
Sean_F - Watford is one of the seats I'm most looking forward too seeing the result of.
Is TSE saying he will vote tactically for Clegg in 2015? I'm not entirely sure if he's living in Sheffield Hallam. If so, why? He's said before that Clegg has no chance of losing Sheffield Hallam, so why not vote with his heart. Apologies if TSE is referring to a different constituency.
Watford ought to have been an easy gain for the Lib Dems in 2010. On the basis of subsequent local elections, it should be in 2015. But, clearly, there are plenty of people who vote Lib Dem locally who vote Labour and Conservative nationally. So, what does an anti-conservative voter do in 2015?
The great thing about what Farage has said is that it really isn't gesture politics...
I fully support Farage's position on Syrian refugees (well, unless it really is true that he only wants to take those of the right religion, I presume that was a joke). But you're being naive if you dont think it was a nakedly political gesture. Mind you I'm quite impressed that UKIP have come up with it, definitely shows them on a continuing upward curve of saviness. Now all they have to do is select some candidates in target seats and they will be motoring.
I am sure he was aware of the benefits of saying what he said politically, with Jan 1st looming, but I believe he means it. I believe Cameron thinks the same, but has tied himself in knots, trying to appeal to the left while keeping the right wing vote, and probably thinks he would lose "racist" votes if he allowed Syria refugees in alongside Bulgarian and Romanian economic migrants.
I don't think it was a joke about allowing in Christian refugees, I think Farage slightly lost his bottle in the face of "BNP lite" criticism regarding muslims...
To be fair it probably is the Christians that are most in need in Syria from my limited knowledge, although I reckon it will be used as a stick to beat him with on here.. it certainly is in Iraq
The British government was champing at the bit to facilitate and encourage change in Syria. We're therefore at least a little responsible for the plight of the ordinary Syrian population.
Nonsense.
We should do as much as possible to help the refugees, the only caveat being that we need to be a bit careful about letting in the more unsavoury types.
And how would you suggest these' unsavoury types' are vetted - and on what criteria?
So Cameron didn't want to intervene?.....and... Dunno, that's way above my paygrade.
Sean_F - Watford is one of the seats I'm most looking forward too seeing the result of.
Is TSE saying he will vote tactically for Clegg in 2015? I'm not entirely sure if he's living in Sheffield Hallam. If so, why? He's said before that Clegg has no chance of losing Sheffield Hallam, so why not vote with his heart. Apologies if TSE is referring to a different constituency.
If the rumours turn out to be true that Farage stands in Hallam then I'd vote tactically.
Not that I can foresee Farage ever winning Sheffield Hallam.
But seeing Farage humiliated maybe the only high point of GE 2015 for me.
The great thing about what Farage has said is that it really isn't gesture politics...
I fully support Farage's position on Syrian refugees (well, unless it really is true that he only wants to take those of the right religion, I presume that was a joke). But you're being naive if you dont think it was a nakedly political gesture. Mind you I'm quite impressed that UKIP have come up with it, definitely shows them on a continuing upward curve of saviness. Now all they have to do is select some candidates in target seats and they will be motoring.
Christians are being driven out of muslim countries in the middle-east. If the UK can only accept a subset of Syrian refugees, it makes sense to choose christians.
I did vote tactically last time to keep out the Tories however I will vote for my own party this time as the Lib Dems have lost all credibility. Many of my friends will do the same even though in the long run it may not be to our advantage.
While I don't doubt the findings are technically accurate, they do run completely contrary to any kind of reasoning.
Why would Labour voters be likely to switch to the Lib Dems now in Con/LD marginals when:
- They backed Labour when that party was much more unpopular than it is now? - The Lib Dems, by contrast, are far less popular nationally? - The Lib Dems have deeply undermined their 'vote Yellow to stop Blue' by going into coalition with Blue. - Most Con/LD marginals in 2015 were also that in 2010, so tactical considerations are the same now as they were then?
The arguments for tactical voting are all very well but the question is not whether tactical voting will take place or not, but whether more or less will do so than last time.
Because their desire to "get rid of the Tories" is more intense than it was last time, to the extent that any reduction in the number of Conservative MPs would be a "good" thing, even if it means getting a Lib Dem MP instead of a Labour MP. The gamble for such tactical voters would be that if Labour is the largest single party, then the Lib Dems can be relied on to be treacherous scoundrels who will happily change sides and jump into bed with Miliband just because Labour has more seats than the Conservatives.
But Labour voters probably WON'T believe the Lib Dems can be relied upon to go over to them in a hung parliament.
I've said it before, but I really think the Lib Dems are going to come under huge pressure from the media in the runup to the next election to say whether they would prefer to go into coalition with Labour or with the Tories, and rule out a coalition with the other. That's standard practice for small parties to do in advance of elections in other European countries where coalitions are common (e.g. in Germany, the Greens always say they would only go into coalition with the SDP, while the FDP openly say they would only go into coalition with the CDU) - you don't get this anti-democratic nonsense the LibDems seem to be promoting of expecting people to vote for them but not find out what their vote will actually be used for until after the election.
Unless the Lib Dems rule out another coalition with the Tories, I really don't see them coaxing many Labour supporters over to tactically vote for them again - and with such slim majorities in many Con/LD marginals, and with the Tories typically holding up quite well in the south where most of those said marginals are, it will only take a shift of 5 percentage points from the Libs over to Labour for a lot of those seats to flip over to the Tories.
Christians are being driven out of muslim countries in the middle-east. If the UK can only accept a subset of Syrian refugees, it makes sense to choose christians.
I think you'll find that all the Syrian refugees have been driven out of their homes whatever their religion.
Sean_F - Watford is one of the seats I'm most looking forward too seeing the result of.
Is TSE saying he will vote tactically for Clegg in 2015? I'm not entirely sure if he's living in Sheffield Hallam. If so, why? He's said before that Clegg has no chance of losing Sheffield Hallam, so why not vote with his heart. Apologies if TSE is referring to a different constituency.
If the rumours turn out to be true that Farage stands in Hallam then I'd vote tactically.
Not that I can foresee Farage ever winning Sheffield Hallam.
But seeing Farage humiliated maybe the only high point of GE 2015 for me.
It would be a major error for Farage to stand in Hallam.
Christians are being driven out of muslim countries in the middle-east. If the UK can only accept a subset of Syrian refugees, it makes sense to choose christians.
I think you'll find that all the Syrian refugees have been driven out of their homes whatever their religion.
Think Farages justification is that there are other friendly places for non Christians to go that are nearer Syria
It would be a major error for Farage to stand in Hallam.
For one thing it would be much harder to find a safe place to ditch an airplane.
He's obviously not going to stand in Hallam though. He should announce where he is standing soon though. or at least start working whichever constituency it is under the radar (maybe he is but I get the sense that they genuinely havent chosen yet).
Afternoon all. Amazing the big debate on Syrian immigration raging in UKIP the last 24hours.
Below,a missive from UKIP HQ:
Dear Supporter, In an interview with the BBC on the weekend, UKIP Leader Nigel Farage said that Britain should honour the 1951 declaration on refugee status and permit those fleeing the civil war in Syria to come to the UK.
He is the only senior political leader in the UK to publicly advocate this compassionate policy.
Following the interview, The Daily Telegraph, not normally known for its support of UKIP, today addressed the issue coming out in full support of Mr Farage and clearly stating why.
You can read the article here.
It should be compulsory reading for every UKIP member and supporter and we urge you to share the link so that others may learn for themselves why we are advocating this move.
Also, Nigel will be on BBC Radio 2's Jeremy Vine Show at noon today (Monday) discussing the issue. Tune in, if you can. Thank you for your continued support.
The UKIP Campaign Team
But now Farage only wants to import Christian Syrians! How many Syrians in total? What about the millions of displaced people in Africa's civil wars, is there no moral equivalence for them? I would ignore the DT's leader comment. It spends most of the year scaremongering about immigration and then blaming the government for not breaking the law. The DT is a closet ukip paper, pandering to its many ukip readers.
Christians are being driven out of muslim countries in the middle-east. If the UK can only accept a subset of Syrian refugees, it makes sense to choose christians.
I think you'll find that all the Syrian refugees have been driven out of their homes whatever their religion.
Think Farages justification is that there are other friendly places for non Christians to go that are nearer Syria
So he really said it? Phew, I'm back to disagreeing with Farage again, the natural order is restored
''Both teaching standards and discipline in schools are now far worse than they were when I was at school in the 1970s''
Are you advocating the return of corporal punishment? I remember seeing many a jack the lad getting smacked around by the larger teachers at school in the 70s.
We didn't have corporal punishment at my schools.
Having done a fair bit of work in schools over the years I am stunned to see kids playing on their mobiles, openly chatting with each other and sitting with their backs to the teachers whilst lessons are being 'taught'. Swearing at the teachers and talking over them/answering back is now endemic.
I have seen this in more than a dozen schools I have visited in the East Midlands over the last 5 years. There have been one or two honourable exceptions (notably a couple of Grammar schools and one very good Academy) but generally what I have seen is a complete lack of discipline and no effort or ability on the part of the teacher to do anything other than get through the lesson and get the children out.
That is an extremely disturbing account of every day behaviour in our schools today – how did we get to this state, where the basics for a stable learning environment has been allowed to decay into anarchy?
Sean_F - Watford is one of the seats I'm most looking forward too seeing the result of.
Is TSE saying he will vote tactically for Clegg in 2015? I'm not entirely sure if he's living in Sheffield Hallam. If so, why? He's said before that Clegg has no chance of losing Sheffield Hallam, so why not vote with his heart. Apologies if TSE is referring to a different constituency.
If the rumours turn out to be true that Farage stands in Hallam then I'd vote tactically.
Not that I can foresee Farage ever winning Sheffield Hallam.
But seeing Farage humiliated maybe the only high point of GE 2015 for me.
That would be my concern. Farage standing might give Clegg victory by default. Labour need a big chunk of 2010 LD voters and to avoid Con > LD switching.
The great thing about what Farage has said is that it really isn't gesture politics...
I fully support Farage's position on Syrian refugees (well, unless it really is true that he only wants to take those of the right religion, I presume that was a joke). But you're being naive if you dont think it was a nakedly political gesture. Mind you I'm quite impressed that UKIP have come up with it, definitely shows them on a continuing upward curve of saviness. Now all they have to do is select some candidates in target seats and they will be motoring.
Christians are being driven out of muslim countries in the middle-east. If the UK can only accept a subset of Syrian refugees, it makes sense to choose christians.
Wouldn't that just be facilitating the ethnic (or religious) cleansing?
It would be a major error for Farage to stand in Hallam.
For one thing it would be much harder to find a safe place to ditch an airplane.
He's obviously not going to stand in Hallam though. He should announce where he is standing soon though. or at least start working whichever constituency it is under the radar (maybe he is but I get the sense that they genuinely havent chosen yet).
They should certainly be doing that, but they should be doing that in maybe a dozen places where they have the people. They probably are. The Tories in those dozen or so places should be doing likewise, and they're probably not.
Surely Farage wouldn't stand in Hallam? That seat is one of the worst fits for UKIP anywhere. Dominated by public-sector workers, quite young, relatively liberal.
They should certainly be doing that, but they should be doing that in maybe a dozen places where they have the people. They probably are.
But not getting the names of the candidates out there as early as possible is just putting an unnecessary drag on their electoral chances. I think 12 would be too many seats to target, they can only realistically win 2 or 3 at the very best, though targeting a few more (with an eye on 2020 and in regions where they wont realistically ship any canvassers etc. to the main targets could make sense).
While I don't doubt the findings are technically accurate, they do run completely contrary to any kind of reasoning.
Why would Labour voters be likely to switch to the Lib Dems now in Con/LD marginals when:
- They backed Labour when that party was much more unpopular than it is now? - The Lib Dems, by contrast, are far less popular nationally? - The Lib Dems have deeply undermined their 'vote Yellow to stop Blue' by going into coalition with Blue. - Most Con/LD marginals in 2015 were also that in 2010, so tactical considerations are the same now as they were then?
The arguments for tactical voting are all very well but the question is not whether tactical voting will take place or not, but whether more or less will do so than last time.
But Labour voters probably WON'T believe the Lib Dems can be relied upon to go over to them in a hung parliament.
I've said it before, but I really think the Lib Dems are going to come under huge pressure from the media in the runup to the next election to say whether they would prefer to go into coalition with Labour or with the Tories, and rule out a coalition with the other. That's standard practice for small parties to do in advance of elections in other European countries where coalitions are common (e.g. in Germany, the Greens always say they would only go into coalition with the SDP, while the FDP openly say they would only go into coalition with the CDU) - you don't get this anti-democratic nonsense the LibDems seem to be promoting of expecting people to vote for them but not find out what their vote will actually be used for until after the election.
Unless the Lib Dems rule out another coalition with the Tories, I really don't see them coaxing many Labour supporters over to tactically vote for them again - and with such slim majorities in many Con/LD marginals, and with the Tories typically holding up quite well in the south where most of those said marginals are, it will only take a shift of 5 percentage points from the Libs over to Labour for a lot of those seats to flip over to the Tories.
The mistake you are making is that you are assuming that anyone who has voted for Labour in one election say 1997 and Lib Dem in a later election is a natural Labour supporter . It is possibly true but much more likely that they are a non or anti Conservative who at every election since 1974 onwards has voted for the most likely party perceived to defeat the Conservatives locally without any great enthusiasm ( again perhaps except 1997 ) . A natural Labour supporter would very rarely vote Lib Dem even tactically even in 2010 whereas a natural anti Conservative would have done so and may well do so again in 2015 in certain constituencies .
''Both teaching standards and discipline in schools are now far worse than they were when I was at school in the 1970s''
Are you advocating the return of corporal punishment? I remember seeing many a jack the lad getting smacked around by the larger teachers at school in the 70s.
We didn't have corporal punishment at my schools.
Having done a fair bit of work in schools over the years I am stunned to see kids playing on their mobiles, openly chatting with each other and sitting with their backs to the teachers whilst lessons are being 'taught'. Swearing at the teachers and talking over them/answering back is now endemic.
I have seen this in more than a dozen schools I have visited in the East Midlands over the last 5 years. There have been one or two honourable exceptions (notably a couple of Grammar schools and one very good Academy) but generally what I have seen is a complete lack of discipline and no effort or ability on the part of the teacher to do anything other than get through the lesson and get the children out.
That is an extremely disturbing account of every day behaviour in our schools today – how did we get to this state, where the basics for a stable learning environment has been allowed to decay into anarchy?
My father has been a teacher and, since his retirement age, a teaching assistant in East London for over 30 years, and what @RichardTyndall says tallies almost exactly with his experience.
Kids really do sit wearing earphones / fall asleep during lessons, boyfriends and girlfriends are at it in the classroom... And if the teacher tries to install any discipline, it is all too easy for kids to make accusations and the teacher put on trial...
Sean_F - Watford is one of the seats I'm most looking forward too seeing the result of.
Is TSE saying he will vote tactically for Clegg in 2015? I'm not entirely sure if he's living in Sheffield Hallam. If so, why? He's said before that Clegg has no chance of losing Sheffield Hallam, so why not vote with his heart. Apologies if TSE is referring to a different constituency.
If the rumours turn out to be true that Farage stands in Hallam then I'd vote tactically.
Not that I can foresee Farage ever winning Sheffield Hallam.
But seeing Farage humiliated maybe the only high point of GE 2015 for me.
That would be my concern. Farage standing might give Clegg victory by default. Labour need a big chunk of 2010 LD voters and to avoid Con > LD switching.
Clegg is always winning Sheffield Hallam.
it's not by default.
I keep on telling you he and the Lib Dems are popular in this part of Sheffield.
You awe allowing your personal animus cloud your judgement.
As the wise man Michael Corleone said
"Never hate your enemies. It affects your judgment."
Sean_F - Watford is one of the seats I'm most looking forward too seeing the result of.
Is TSE saying he will vote tactically for Clegg in 2015? I'm not entirely sure if he's living in Sheffield Hallam. If so, why? He's said before that Clegg has no chance of losing Sheffield Hallam, so why not vote with his heart. Apologies if TSE is referring to a different constituency.
If the rumours turn out to be true that Farage stands in Hallam then I'd vote tactically.
Not that I can foresee Farage ever winning Sheffield Hallam.
But seeing Farage humiliated maybe the only high point of GE 2015 for me.
That would be my concern. Farage standing might give Clegg victory by default. Labour need a big chunk of 2010 LD voters and to avoid Con > LD switching.
If Farage were to stand in Hallam, I'd check the odds for him to lose his deposit.
Sean_F - Watford is one of the seats I'm most looking forward too seeing the result of.
Is TSE saying he will vote tactically for Clegg in 2015? I'm not entirely sure if he's living in Sheffield Hallam. If so, why? He's said before that Clegg has no chance of losing Sheffield Hallam, so why not vote with his heart. Apologies if TSE is referring to a different constituency.
If the rumours turn out to be true that Farage stands in Hallam then I'd vote tactically.
Not that I can foresee Farage ever winning Sheffield Hallam.
But seeing Farage humiliated maybe the only high point of GE 2015 for me.
That would be my concern. Farage standing might give Clegg victory by default. Labour need a big chunk of 2010 LD voters and to avoid Con > LD switching.
Clegg is always winning Sheffield Hallam.
it's not by default.
I keep on telling you he and the Lib Dems are popular in this part of Sheffield.
...I'm not sure that's really true. The Lib Dems have been getting hammered in Sheffield council elections, and from what I hear from some people I know in the constituency, Clegg is held in disdain by his constituents because they never see him locally.
The Labour branch in Hallam do honestly feel they have a shot of taking the seat in 2015, although they think the ceiling on Labour's own vote there is about 30%, so they'd have to rely on some independents or small-party candidates to pull down Clegg's vote below that. But they feel there's an outside chance of it happening.
They should certainly be doing that, but they should be doing that in maybe a dozen places where they have the people. They probably are.
But not getting the names of the candidates out there as early as possible is just putting an unnecessary drag on their electoral chances. I think 12 would be too many seats to target, they can only realistically win 2 or 3 at the very best, though targeting a few more (with an eye on 2020 and in regions where they wont realistically ship any canvassers etc. to the main targets could make sense).
If you look at the seats UKIP "won" in local elections, then throw in Eastleigh as well, there's quite a reasonable geographical spread. I guess the only tricky area is Kent where they have a few possibles, but even if they end up going after South Thanet they'd still want to run up their score in North Thanet for when Roger Gale moves on (which actuarially speaking could well happen in a way that results in a by-election...)
They should certainly be doing that, but they should be doing that in maybe a dozen places where they have the people. They probably are.
But not getting the names of the candidates out there as early as possible is just putting an unnecessary drag on their electoral chances. I think 12 would be too many seats to target, they can only realistically win 2 or 3 at the very best, though targeting a few more (with an eye on 2020 and in regions where they wont realistically ship any canvassers etc. to the main targets could make sense).
If you look at the seats UKIP "won" in local elections, then throw in Eastleigh as well, there's quite a reasonable geographical spread. I guess the only tricky area is Kent where they have a few possibles, but even if they end up going after South Thanet they'd still want to run up their score in North Thanet for when Roger Gale moves on (which actuarially speaking could well happen in a way that results in a by-election...)
Sean_F - Watford is one of the seats I'm most looking forward too seeing the result of.
Is TSE saying he will vote tactically for Clegg in 2015? I'm not entirely sure if he's living in Sheffield Hallam. If so, why? He's said before that Clegg has no chance of losing Sheffield Hallam, so why not vote with his heart. Apologies if TSE is referring to a different constituency.
If the rumours turn out to be true that Farage stands in Hallam then I'd vote tactically.
Not that I can foresee Farage ever winning Sheffield Hallam.
But seeing Farage humiliated maybe the only high point of GE 2015 for me.
That would be my concern. Farage standing might give Clegg victory by default. Labour need a big chunk of 2010 LD voters and to avoid Con > LD switching.
Clegg is always winning Sheffield Hallam.
it's not by default.
I keep on telling you he and the Lib Dems are popular in this part of Sheffield.
...I'm not sure that's really true. The Lib Dems have been getting hammered in Sheffield council elections, and from what I hear from some people I know in the constituency, Clegg is held in disdain by his constituents because they never see him locally.
The Labour branch in Hallam do honestly feel they have a shot of taking the seat in 2015, although they think the ceiling on Labour's own vote there is about 30%, so they'd have to rely on some independents or small-party candidates to pull down Clegg's vote below that. But they feel there's an outside chance of it happening.
Incorrect on so many levels.
The Lib Dems do well in the Wards that make up Hallam, as the Fullwood by election showed.
The constituents like him and think he's been badly treated by the media.
And the key demographic that adores Clegg, those that work in the university sectors and make up a large part of the Hallam constituency will vote for him because of his vote on university fees.
Thanks for Junior's 5/1 bet on Brent-crude going under £30/Barrel [2014]. However....
I will raise the [sad] princely sum of £50 to pulpstar - if, and only if - based upon the fact that oil falls under the £50/barrel at any time within CY2014 I will pay this site as debenture. If Junior wishes to offer - slightly less than 5/1 - on same bet then I will equally fund his adventure.
Sean_F - Watford is one of the seats I'm most looking forward too seeing the result of.
Is TSE saying he will vote tactically for Clegg in 2015? I'm not entirely sure if he's living in Sheffield Hallam. If so, why? He's said before that Clegg has no chance of losing Sheffield Hallam, so why not vote with his heart. Apologies if TSE is referring to a different constituency.
Watford ought to have been an easy gain for the Lib Dems in 2010. On the basis of subsequent local elections, it should be in 2015. But, clearly, there are plenty of people who vote Lib Dem locally who vote Labour and Conservative nationally. So, what does an anti-conservative voter do in 2015?
You are probably right about Watford but that seat is a very rare beast indeed, a genuine 3-way marginal. In most Tory seats it is very clear indeed whether Labour or the Lib Dems are the main opposition.
Afternoon all. Amazing the big debate on Syrian immigration raging in UKIP the last 24hours.
Below,a missive from UKIP HQ:
Dear Supporter, In an interview with the BBC on the weekend, UKIP Leader Nigel Farage said that Britain should honour the 1951 declaration on refugee status and permit those fleeing the civil war in Syria to come to the UK.
He is the only senior political leader in the UK to publicly advocate this compassionate policy.
Following the interview, The Daily Telegraph, not normally known for its support of UKIP, today addressed the issue coming out in full support of Mr Farage and clearly stating why.
You can read the article here.
It should be compulsory reading for every UKIP member and supporter and we urge you to share the link so that others may learn for themselves why we are advocating this move.
Also, Nigel will be on BBC Radio 2's Jeremy Vine Show at noon today (Monday) discussing the issue. Tune in, if you can. Thank you for your continued support.
The UKIP Campaign Team
But now Farage only wants to import Christian Syrians! How many Syrians in total? What about the millions of displaced people in Africa's civil wars, is there no moral equivalence for them? I would ignore the DT's leader comment. It spends most of the year scaremongering about immigration and then blaming the government for not breaking the law. The DT is a closet ukip paper, pandering to its many ukip readers.
Has the British Government been undermining governments in Africa leading to civil war?
If not, then there is no moral obligation to receive refugees.
A much better way of gaming the system than tactical voting is for people who live in safe seats to register to vote in marginal seats. In a way this already happens in those seats where students distort the result.
Comments
Thinking about it, the tories might have more success branding UKIP supporters as serial malcontents than fruitcakes and closet racists.
UKIP and their people = never bl**dy satisfied.
Not defending racism, but plenty of people expect criminals to be given a second chance and look for their upbringing and social circumstances before judging too harshly, but want zero tolerance for BNP lite types who also have their reasons, wrong though they are...
V. disturbing, and backed up by the testimony of a relative who is a teacher in a sink school just outside Cardiff.
The great thing about what Farage has said is that it really isn't gesture politics... Whereas Cameron would probably feel its right to accept refugees but is too scared of losing far right votes to do it...
Amazing how many left wingers see only the financial implications of immigration and never the social/human factor
It is also a complete myth to think that a significant percentage of the 9 million refugees want to come to Europe. The vast majority want to go home. They want to stay as close as possible to their homeland so that when things improve they can go back. Every charity and NGO in the area has repeated this message ever since the crisis started. As such we need to cater for those who are genuinely in need of escape from the camps due to illness of specific persecution (such as some of the Christian communities) by offering them an alternative whilst at the same time making sure we make existence bearable for the large majority who chose to remain in the camps.
Nigel Farage is posturing to enable himself to be more hardline on other immigration questions to deflect accusations of racism. A whitewash, if you like.
Far better to tackle the problem on the ground. Britain has done well on this so far.
Really, there'll be two countervailing trends in such seats in 2015. Tactical voting by ex-Lib Dems, vs first-time incumbency.
I'd have thought the people of Syria are a more deserving case for settlement than those of Bulgaria and Romania....???
Shows what previous non-voters can do!
Slightly!
But as long as the balance sheet shows that GDP goes up on the back of it that's all that matters it seems
Farage is on the Jeremy Vine show talking about this now
Some, in particular the Christian community, face an extremely uncertain future. If Assad wins they will be regarded as traitors but if he loses his replacements are likely to be even more hostile to them than the Assad regime has been. Staying in Syria looks problematic for these people whatever the outcome.
I agree that the vast majority of the refugees want to return to Syria and it is sensible to keep them local if at all possible. But it seems likely to me that some minority communities such as the Christians face a future of long term refugees who will effectively lose their homeland. I think it is morally correct for us to help these people by providing them with a home if they want it (in association with others of course).
Surely it's more racist to favour a European protectionist superstate with free movement of workers while requiring visas and controls for more talented people from Africa and Asia?
A left-leaning LibDem such as Norman Baker, for example, will continue to enjoy tactical support from people who would otherwise vote Labour. But I doubt that an Orange Booker in a LD-Con marginal, such as Jeremy Browne, is sleeping quite so comfortably at night.
Crikey ! Farage is French !
To his credit, Nick Palmer did put a figure on this last night when I asked him. But any figure is either going to look ridiculously small given the scale of the problem, impossibly difficult for Britain to absorb or both.
Did he say that? Crikey....
This is getting like Ali G
'let in da fit ones'
Typically, the right wing Tory front BBC has not questioned the FCO's role in encouraging uprising, then urging armed support of Al Qaeda, and now twiddling its thumbs. Cf Libya and back to Iraq under Blair.
Below,a missive from UKIP HQ:
Dear Supporter,
In an interview with the BBC on the weekend, UKIP Leader Nigel Farage said that Britain should honour the 1951 declaration on refugee status and permit those fleeing the civil war in Syria to come to the UK.
He is the only senior political leader in the UK to publicly advocate this compassionate policy.
Following the interview, The Daily Telegraph, not normally known for its support of UKIP, today addressed the issue coming out in full support of Mr Farage and clearly stating why.
You can read the article here.
It should be compulsory reading for every UKIP member and supporter and we urge you to share the link so that others may learn for themselves why we are advocating this move.
Also, Nigel will be on BBC Radio 2's Jeremy Vine Show at noon today (Monday) discussing the issue. Tune in, if you can.
Thank you for your continued support.
The UKIP Campaign Team
Is TSE saying he will vote tactically for Clegg in 2015? I'm not entirely sure if he's living in Sheffield Hallam. If so, why? He's said before that Clegg has no chance of losing Sheffield Hallam, so why not vote with his heart. Apologies if TSE is referring to a different constituency.
And BTW Israel has more than 100 wounded Syrian refugees having treatment in hospitals in Haifa and Safad. Not many people know that!
Since you want a number, my suggestion would be to take the number of displaced people, divide it by the world population in non-extreme-poverty-stricken and/or war-torn countries and multiply by your own population. So say 6 million need to get to a foreign country, Japan is 100 million out of 4 billion or 2.5% = 150,000. UK maybe 100,000. But I'm more positive to immigration than the median voter. If they'll only go for 4, that's 4 better than zero.
I don't think it was a joke about allowing in Christian refugees, I think Farage slightly lost his bottle in the face of "BNP lite" criticism regarding muslims...
To be fair it probably is the Christians that are most in need in Syria from my limited knowledge, although I reckon it will be used as a stick to beat him with on here.. it certainly is in Iraq
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2013/12/christmas-bombers-target-christians-iraq-201312263451677794.html
Dunno, that's way above my paygrade.
And BTW Israel has more than 100 wounded Syrian refugees having treatment in hospitals in Haifa and Safad. Not many people know that!
If one was a middle Eastern Christian, Israel would, by some margin, be the best country to live in.
Not that I can foresee Farage ever winning Sheffield Hallam.
But seeing Farage humiliated maybe the only high point of GE 2015 for me.
I've said it before, but I really think the Lib Dems are going to come under huge pressure from the media in the runup to the next election to say whether they would prefer to go into coalition with Labour or with the Tories, and rule out a coalition with the other. That's standard practice for small parties to do in advance of elections in other European countries where coalitions are common (e.g. in Germany, the Greens always say they would only go into coalition with the SDP, while the FDP openly say they would only go into coalition with the CDU) - you don't get this anti-democratic nonsense the LibDems seem to be promoting of expecting people to vote for them but not find out what their vote will actually be used for until after the election.
Unless the Lib Dems rule out another coalition with the Tories, I really don't see them coaxing many Labour supporters over to tactically vote for them again - and with such slim majorities in many Con/LD marginals, and with the Tories typically holding up quite well in the south where most of those said marginals are, it will only take a shift of 5 percentage points from the Libs over to Labour for a lot of those seats to flip over to the Tories.
He's obviously not going to stand in Hallam though. He should announce where he is standing soon though. or at least start working whichever constituency it is under the radar (maybe he is but I get the sense that they genuinely havent chosen yet).
I can only imagine the 'christian' test at immigration.
'If I could just see you consume this cold pint of lager sir.....'
Kids really do sit wearing earphones / fall asleep during lessons, boyfriends and girlfriends are at it in the classroom... And if the teacher tries to install any discipline, it is all too easy for kids to make accusations and the teacher put on trial...
it's not by default.
I keep on telling you he and the Lib Dems are popular in this part of Sheffield.
You awe allowing your personal animus cloud your judgement.
As the wise man Michael Corleone said
"Never hate your enemies. It affects your judgment."
The Labour branch in Hallam do honestly feel they have a shot of taking the seat in 2015, although they think the ceiling on Labour's own vote there is about 30%, so they'd have to rely on some independents or small-party candidates to pull down Clegg's vote below that. But they feel there's an outside chance of it happening.
http://survation.com/2013/05/ukip-won-in-8-westminster-constituencies-last-thursday/
The Lib Dems do well in the Wards that make up Hallam, as the Fullwood by election showed.
The constituents like him and think he's been badly treated by the media.
And the key demographic that adores Clegg, those that work in the university sectors and make up a large part of the Hallam constituency will vote for him because of his vote on university fees.
Thanks for Junior's 5/1 bet on Brent-crude going under £30/Barrel [2014]. However....
I will raise the [sad] princely sum of £50 to pulpstar - if, and only if - based upon the fact that oil falls under the £50/barrel at any time within CY2014 I will pay this site as debenture. If Junior wishes to offer - slightly less than 5/1 - on same bet then I will equally fund his adventure.
:usual-rules-apply: :pete-the-punter-rules: :no-need-to-mentions-how atractive-Marf-is(oops):
And the very best of health to Sir Peter and Roger if you are reading this,.
If not, then there is no moral obligation to receive refugees.