Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » UKIP the only gainers in first voting intention poll of 201

SystemSystem Posts: 12,215
edited January 2014 in General

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » UKIP the only gainers in first voting intention poll of 2014

Opinium is the only online survey which does not have any political weighting and tends to show UKIP on the high side.

Read the full story here


Comments

  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,300
    first...
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,624
    FPT:

    Now, let's assume that in 2020, the same proportion of Britain's gas usage comes from domestic shale as happens in the US - i.e. about a third.

    This would produce a windfall for the government of as much as £20bn ($30bn)/year. That's a lot of money. I mean, that's a seriously large amount of money.

    I mean, that would cut the size of our deficit by 20%.


    Hang on a sec? I thought that Osborne and the OBR were predicting that the budget will be balanced (granted with any energy revenues that have accrued included) by 2020? There will be no deficit?

    If the budget is balanced then surely it is fair enough to look to create a sovereign fund with revenues over and above what is need to balance the budget?

    Well, first you'd want to pay off the national debt, of course.

    That would only take 114 years at that rate.
  • Changes since Jan 2013

    Lab minus 4

    Con minus 1

    LD plus 1

    UKIP plus 5
  • MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053
    ARSENAL !
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 22,398

    Changes since Jan 2013

    Lab minus 4

    Con minus 1

    LD plus 1

    UKIP plus 5

    At that rate of change, the poll on Jan 1 2015 will be Lab 33/Con 29/Lib 9/Ukip 22.

    Pause.

    I'll get me coat.
  • viewcode said:

    Changes since Jan 2013

    Lab minus 4

    Con minus 1

    LD plus 1

    UKIP plus 5

    At that rate of change, the poll on Jan 1 2015 will be Lab 33/Con 29/Lib 9/Ukip 22.

    Pause.

    I'll get me coat.
    The interesting thing is, as I've pointed out for a while, UKIP doesn't just solely hurt the Tories.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,046
    ah new thread.

    FPT

    God I hate Adrian Chiles.

    Sorry, what were we talking about? Swings? UKIP?

    As ever, depends on Lab=>LD=>Lab=>?-ers (apols missed that thread would have liked to have had time to read it).

    UKIP will dissolve to irritation not to say they might not spoil things.

    I will add only that I hate Adrian Chiles.
  • smithersjones2013smithersjones2013 Posts: 740
    edited January 2014
    Well, first you'd want to pay off the national debt, of course.

    That would only take 114 years at that rate.


    Servicing and reducing the debt will be part of balancing the budget. Any revenue above that can be used in a number of ways (reducing taxes, creating a sovereign fund,additional investment in the nation or indeed paying of additional debt if the terms allow)

    However just because we have debts still does not exclude setting up contingency funds. After all just because we are carrying debt you are surely not suggesting that we couldn't have any tax cuts for 114 years now are you?
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,567
    Opinion polls who cares - The Bridge is back on BBC4 at 9.

    Curious to see if they'll actually have a crime on the bridge this time, or just use it metaphorically.
  • smithersjones2013smithersjones2013 Posts: 740
    edited January 2014

    Well, first you'd want to pay off the national debt, of course.

    That would only take 114 years at that rate.


    Servicing and reducing the debt will be part of balancing the budget. Any revenue above that can be used in a number of ways (reducing taxes, creating a sovereign fund,additional investment in the nation or indeed paying of additional debt if the terms allow)

    However just because we have debts still does not exclude setting up contingency funds. After all just because we are carrying debt you are surely not suggesting that we couldn't have any tax cuts for 114 years now are you?

    Not only that but of course inflation will be a major factor in reducing the debt and therefore paying it off quickly may not be the most economic thing to do so the opportunities to redirect additional revenue may be considerably greater than you are suggesting

  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,046

    Opinion polls who cares - The Bridge is back on BBC4 at 9.

    Curious to see if they'll actually have a crime on the bridge this time, or just use it metaphorically.

    Strong no-trump?

    Sorry I've missed the series.
  • HYUFD said:

    Stodge Interesting points, but it is foreign invasions by a foreign power I am talking about of which 1066 was the last real invasion by the Normans

    Of course, it has been argued by R. Allen Brown, following William of Poitiers and William of Jumièges, that the Norman Conquest simply amounted to the removal of a usurper of the crown of England by its rightful inheritor (although see G. Garnett, 'Coronation and Propaganda: Some implications of the Norman claim to the throne of England in 1066', Transactions of the Royal Historical Society, 5th series, 36, (1986), pp. 91-116 for the maximum case to the contrary).
  • corporealcorporeal Posts: 2,549
    @HYUFD,

    In the interregnum Cromwell held the power rather than parliament and was king in all but name, and in any case things changed again post-restoration

    The army wasn't under command of parliament, certainly not pre-1688,
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,962
    edited January 2014
    Front page of the Indy on Sunday.

    Looks like Miliband is trying to outkip the Kippers

    Nick Sutton ‏@suttonnick 3m

    Independent on Sunday front page -

    "Miliband: Stop cheap foreign workers"

    pic.twitter.com/zdddjD46Yq

  • corporealcorporeal Posts: 2,549
    edited January 2014

    Front page of the Indy on Sunday.

    Looks like Miliband is trying to outkip the Kippers

    Nick Sutton ‏@suttonnick 3m

    Independent on Sunday front page -

    "Miliband: Stop cheap foreign workers"

    pic.twitter.com/zdddjD46Yq

    If only a former Labour Prime Minister could suggest a handy slogan for the idea that will definitely go down well. Jobs, British, Workers.

    Any ideas anyone?
  • stodgestodge Posts: 13,989

    HYUFD said:

    Stodge Interesting points, but it is foreign invasions by a foreign power I am talking about of which 1066 was the last real invasion by the Normans

    Of course, it has been argued by R. Allen Brown, following William of Poitiers and William of Jumièges, that the Norman Conquest simply amounted to the removal of a usurper of the crown of England by its rightful inheritor (although see G. Garnett, 'Coronation and Propaganda: Some implications of the Norman claim to the throne of England in 1066', Transactions of the Royal Historical Society, 5th series, 36, (1986), pp. 91-116 for the maximum case to the contrary).
    I wouldn't go as far as to assert that William was the rightful heir to the English throne but his claim was certainly stronger than Harold's. The Godwins had effectively run England since the mid-1050s and tried to cement their rule by marrying their eldest daughter to Edward the Confessor knowing that any child from that marriage would be the rightful heir.

    Edward refused to play ball (so to speak) and there was no child. Edgar, the grandson of Edmund Ironside, was the rightful heir but he was too young and had no support in a Witan dominated by the Godwins. William was Edward's cousin but, as I argued before, I suggest his main motive was as much economic as dynastic.

    The economic power of England joined with Flanders and Normandy would give William a powerful counterpoint to the rest of France and strengthen his influence on the periphery and against the French king.

  • corporeal said:

    Front page of the Indy on Sunday.

    Looks like Miliband is trying to outkip the Kippers

    Nick Sutton ‏@suttonnick 3m

    Independent on Sunday front page -

    "Miliband: Stop cheap foreign workers"

    pic.twitter.com/zdddjD46Yq

    If only a former Labour Prime Minister could suggest a handy slogan for the idea that will definitely go down well. Jobs, British, Workers.

    Any ideas anyone?
    The worst thing about British Jobs for British Workers, apart from the fact it was a BNP idea, was people kept on shortening it to Gordon Brown's BJ4BW.

    The proximity of BJ and Gordon Brown had one needing mind bleach on a constant IV drip.
  • smithersjones2013smithersjones2013 Posts: 740
    edited January 2014

    Front page of the Indy on Sunday.

    Looks like Miliband is trying to outkip the Kippers

    Nick Sutton ‏@suttonnick 3m

    Independent on Sunday front page -

    "Miliband: Stop cheap foreign workers"

    pic.twitter.com/zdddjD46Yq

    Really? Given Miliband's gesture politics in regard to energy prices I'll be intrigued to see how he intends to control free movement of labour and ensure wage controls are enforced.
  • Front page of the Indy on Sunday.

    Looks like Miliband is trying to outkip the Kippers

    Nick Sutton ‏@suttonnick 3m

    Independent on Sunday front page -

    "Miliband: Stop cheap foreign workers"

    pic.twitter.com/zdddjD46Yq

    Really? Given Miliband's gesture politics in regard to energy prices I'll be intrigued to see how he intends to control free movement of labour and ensure wage controls are enforced.
    Don't misunderestimate Ed Miliband
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,711
    edited January 2014
    Part of the potential (at least) difficulty is that some recruitment firms appear to be actively recruiting in Eastern Europe, for health service staff where where there's no shortage here, but the EE recruits are likely to be prepared to work for lower wages than British workers.
    Boots are one firm quoted as likely to be "interested".
  • smithersjones2013smithersjones2013 Posts: 740
    edited January 2014

    corporeal said:

    Front page of the Indy on Sunday.

    Looks like Miliband is trying to outkip the Kippers

    Nick Sutton ‏@suttonnick 3m

    Independent on Sunday front page -

    "Miliband: Stop cheap foreign workers"

    pic.twitter.com/zdddjD46Yq

    If only a former Labour Prime Minister could suggest a handy slogan for the idea that will definitely go down well. Jobs, British, Workers.

    Any ideas anyone?
    The worst thing about British Jobs for British Workers, apart from the fact it was a BNP idea, was people kept on shortening it to Gordon Brown's BJ4BW.

    The proximity of BJ and Gordon Brown had one needing mind bleach on a constant IV drip.
    Of course there is always the question as to who was BW. There were two BW's in the PLP between 2005 and 2010 ~ Bob Wareing and Betty Williams. Is does not bare further thinking about
  • Front page of the Indy on Sunday.

    Looks like Miliband is trying to outkip the Kippers

    Nick Sutton ‏@suttonnick 3m

    Independent on Sunday front page -

    "Miliband: Stop cheap foreign workers"

    pic.twitter.com/zdddjD46Yq

    Miliband's persecution of foreign-born employees is nothing new. Riddell was kite flying this stuff in The Telegraph for him two years ago. The question is why have they dredged it up again now? My guess is that focus groups have revealed that Crosby's dog whistling is being picked up approvingly by Labour's core and they're utterly spooked.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 22,398
    @Hyufd FPT

    "...Viewcode In real terms it is the PM who sends troops into battle, not the monarch, and has been for centuries. His power comes from Parliament..."

    No. Constitutionally, the PM's power is given to him by the Crown. It is given to him *temporarily* in order to form a government,[3] and can be taken back BY THE CROWN at any time for any reason: whim, awkward sneeze, bad hair day, on the blob, whatever. Parliament's involvement is inspecting and approving legislation and passing a Queen's speech and budget, and that's it.

    In theory, the government can govern until the money runs out via Orders-in-Council and the Civil Service: providing the PM doesn't try to pass legislation and restricts expenditure to existing supply, he's constitutionally OK. Since that's time-limited (you have to pay the Civil Service and Army with something!) we don't do that often, but it is constitutional. You definitely don't[1] have to get Parliament approval to start a war, for example.

    Parliament isn't sovereign, or even Sovereign. The Crown is sovereign. It may sound medieval[2] but this is genuinely the constitutional position in the Westminster System.



    [1] Margaret Thatcher in her capacity as PM authorised the Falklands Task Force via Orders-in-Council, and all she needed was the approval of John Nott and Norman Tebbit in their capacities as Ministers of the Crown, not their capacities as MPs
    [2] Fraser Nelson thus described the process of setting up the new press council via Royal Charter.
    [3] Incidentally, technically the Prime Minister does not give orders to the armed forces. The Defence minister does. In practice the difference is elided, but that is the position. I think this is one of the reasons why PM Churchill invented the post of Defence Minister and appointed himself to the post.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,711
    stodge said:

    HYUFD said:

    Stodge Interesting points, but it is foreign invasions by a foreign power I am talking about of which 1066 was the last real invasion by the Normans

    Of course, it has been argued by R. Allen Brown, following William of Poitiers and William of Jumièges, that the Norman Conquest simply amounted to the removal of a usurper of the crown of England by its rightful inheritor (although see G. Garnett, 'Coronation and Propaganda: Some implications of the Norman claim to the throne of England in 1066', Transactions of the Royal Historical Society, 5th series, 36, (1986), pp. 91-116 for the maximum case to the contrary).
    I wouldn't go as far as to assert that William was the rightful heir to the English throne but his claim was certainly stronger than Harold's. The Godwins had effectively run England since the mid-1050s and tried to cement their rule by marrying their eldest daughter to Edward the Confessor knowing that any child from that marriage would be the rightful heir.

    Edward refused to play ball (so to speak) and there was no child. Edgar, the grandson of Edmund Ironside, was the rightful heir but he was too young and had no support in a Witan dominated by the Godwins. William was Edward's cousin but, as I argued before, I suggest his main motive was as much economic as dynastic.

    The economic power of England joined with Flanders and Normandy would give William a powerful counterpoint to the rest of France and strengthen his influence on the periphery and against the French king.

    Had William been "elected properly" by the Witan, would there have been the wholesale replacement of Saxon aristocracy by Normans? After all, there would have been no Battle of Hastings, with it's losses among that aristocracy.
  • FregglesFreggles Posts: 3,486

    Front page of the Indy on Sunday.

    Looks like Miliband is trying to outkip the Kippers

    Nick Sutton ‏@suttonnick 3m

    Independent on Sunday front page -

    "Miliband: Stop cheap foreign workers"

    pic.twitter.com/zdddjD46Yq

    Miliband's persecution of foreign-born employees is nothing new. Riddell was kite flying this stuff in The Telegraph for him two years ago. The question is why have they dredged it up again now? My guess is that focus groups have revealed that Crosby's dog whistling is being picked up approvingly by Labour's core and they're utterly spooked.
    Not sure about that. Judging by the Middlesbrough and South Shields by elections, these voters are bypassing the Conservatives and going direct to UKIP who seem more straight talking and less posh
  • Front page of the Indy on Sunday.

    Looks like Miliband is trying to outkip the Kippers

    Nick Sutton ‏@suttonnick 3m

    Independent on Sunday front page -

    "Miliband: Stop cheap foreign workers"

    pic.twitter.com/zdddjD46Yq

    Really? Given Miliband's gesture politics in regard to energy prices I'll be intrigued to see how he intends to control free movement of labour and ensure wage controls are enforced.
    Don't misunderestimate Ed Miliband
    I'm not that's why I'm intrigued. However given we have no real idea how many European work migrants are in the country and no realistic way to monitor how they are paid in detail it would certainly seem to be a challenge to fulfill such a commitment

  • Changes since Jan 2013

    Lab minus 4

    Con minus 1

    LD plus 1

    UKIP plus 5

    And so the spinning games begin again where people pick a point in time.....I'll go for :

    Since the last General Election:

    Labour +8%

    Tory -6%

    Lib Dem -15%

    Ukip +14%


    Show me the crossover.......Show me the crossover!
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    FPT

    It was noted that Alec Douglas-Home did not have military service. This is correct.

    He was born in 1903 so was underage for WWI. Shortly after Chamberlain resigned in May 1940, Lord Dunglass MP for Lanark as he was, volunteered for military service. However the army medical found he had a hole in his spine surrounded by TB. He was operated on quickly as a delay would have rendered him unable to walk within a few months. The pioneering operation took bone from his shin and although successful placed him in plaster cast for over 2 years and still unfit for military service through the remainder of the war.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 22,398
    @Corporeal

    "...The army wasn't under command of parliament, certainly not pre-1688..."

    They most certainly aren't now. Their allegiance is to the Crown and their orders are issued by (cross fingers a bit) the Prime Minister. Parliament are not in the loop. In practice the help of Parliament is useful (you may need to change a bit of legislation or raise some more tax to pay for your war) but you can carry on for quite a while without it. From memory, I think Gulf War I was so short that Parliamentary involvement was superfluous.
  • Changes since Jan 2013

    Lab minus 4

    Con minus 1

    LD plus 1

    UKIP plus 5

    And so the spinning games begin again where people pick a point in time.....I'll go for :

    Since the last General Election:

    Labour +8%

    Tory -6%

    Lib Dem -15%

    Ukip +14%


    Show me the crossover.......Show me the crossover!

    How is EdM's scapegoating of poverty stricken immigrants sitting with you?

  • smithersjones2013smithersjones2013 Posts: 740
    edited January 2014
    Freggles said:

    Front page of the Indy on Sunday.

    Looks like Miliband is trying to outkip the Kippers

    Nick Sutton ‏@suttonnick 3m

    Independent on Sunday front page -

    "Miliband: Stop cheap foreign workers"

    pic.twitter.com/zdddjD46Yq

    Miliband's persecution of foreign-born employees is nothing new. Riddell was kite flying this stuff in The Telegraph for him two years ago. The question is why have they dredged it up again now? My guess is that focus groups have revealed that Crosby's dog whistling is being picked up approvingly by Labour's core and they're utterly spooked.
    Not sure about that. Judging by the Middlesbrough and South Shields by elections, these voters are bypassing the Conservatives and going direct to UKIP who seem more straight talking and less posh
    It's a bit of both. With all the activity and noise surrounding immigration it would be remiss of Miliband not to provide an offering. Making effective proposals counters both Tory and UKIP offers.
  • Changes since Jan 2013

    Lab minus 4

    Con minus 1

    LD plus 1

    UKIP plus 5

    And so the spinning games begin again where people pick a point in time.....I'll go for :

    Since the last General Election:

    Labour +8%

    Tory -6%

    Lib Dem -15%

    Ukip +14%


    Show me the crossover.......Show me the crossover!

    How is EdM's scapegoating of poverty stricken immigrants sitting with you?

    Don't get all hissy because he is pissing on Daves garden.
  • OGH - How did you describe the Lord of the Polls latest poll "Very Interesting". Indeed so.
  • hucks67hucks67 Posts: 758
    What are we expecting from Lord Ashcrofts poll ?

    Double digit lead for Labour in key marginals.

    Massive shift to Labour by public sector workers.

    Miliband overtakes Cameron in leaders ratings.

    People believe that there is a cost of living crisis and are not feeling the growth.


  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,962
    edited January 2014
    hucks67 said:

    What are we expecting from Lord Ashcrofts poll ?

    Double digit lead for Labour in key marginals.

    Massive shift to Labour by public sector workers.

    Miliband overtakes Cameron in leaders ratings.

    People believe that there is a cost of living crisis and are not feeling the growth.


    I've seen the embargoed copy and I can say that it will show that [redacted until 10pm]

  • stodgestodge Posts: 13,989



    Had William been "elected properly" by the Witan, would there have been the wholesale replacement of Saxon aristocracy by Normans? After all, there would have been no Battle of Hastings, with it's losses among that aristocracy.

    In fact, William was a pretty lenient ruler in the very early days. A number of the Saxons were pleased to be rid of the Godwins and were quite happy to acknowledge him as King. In any case, the Normans would take the lands of the Godwins and everyone else would be fine.

    Unfortunately, and this isn't often reported, the Godwins didn't go down without a fight after Hastings. From 1067-70 there were numerous revolts led by the surviving Godwins and it was only after these were finally and in the case of the Revolt of the North brutally suppressed that William decided he was better off without the Saxon aristocracy.

  • hucks67 said:

    What are we expecting from Lord Ashcrofts poll ?

    Double digit lead for Labour in key marginals.

    Massive shift to Labour by public sector workers.

    Miliband overtakes Cameron in leaders ratings.

    People believe that there is a cost of living crisis and are not feeling the growth.


    I've seen the embargoed copy and I can say that it will show that [redacted until 10pm]

    It doesn't show that, well not the one I have seen.....oh I see, at first look it looked like you were agreeing with him and breaking the embargo.
  • I agree with Tristam Hunt

    Nick Sutton ‏@suttonnick 1m

    Observer front page - "Labour tears into Gove for ‘crass, ugly’ claims over first world war" #tomorrowspaperstoday

    pic.twitter.com/MDmdKjfm41
  • MarkSeniorMarkSenior Posts: 4,699
    stodge said:



    Had William been "elected properly" by the Witan, would there have been the wholesale replacement of Saxon aristocracy by Normans? After all, there would have been no Battle of Hastings, with it's losses among that aristocracy.

    In fact, William was a pretty lenient ruler in the very early days. A number of the Saxons were pleased to be rid of the Godwins and were quite happy to acknowledge him as King. In any case, the Normans would take the lands of the Godwins and everyone else would be fine.

    Unfortunately, and this isn't often reported, the Godwins didn't go down without a fight after Hastings. From 1067-70 there were numerous revolts led by the surviving Godwins and it was only after these were finally and in the case of the Revolt of the North brutally suppressed that William decided he was better off without the Saxon aristocracy.

    I can recommend the 3 ( so far ) historical novels by James Aitcheson which are based in Britain in the years immediately following 1066 .
  • Labour has accused the government of using the centenary of the start of the first world war to "sow political division" after the education secretary, Michael Gove, tore into "leftwing academics" for peddling unpatriotic "myths" about the role of British soldiers and generals in the conflict.

    Writing in today's Observer, Tristram Hunt, Labour's shadow education spokesman and a historian, accuses Gove of a "shocking" attempt to score political points ahead of the events to mark the war, which began in August 1914 and led to the deaths of 16 million.

    Responding to an article in which the education secretary attacked what he sees as an unpatriotic, leftwing version of history that portrays 1914-18 as "a series of catastrophic mistakes perpetrated by an out-of-touch elite", Hunt says such "ugly" and politically motivated interventions diminish what should be a time of national reflection.

    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/jan/04/labour-gove-first-world-war-comments
  • hucks67 said:

    What are we expecting from Lord Ashcrofts poll ?

    Double digit lead for Labour in key marginals.

    Massive shift to Labour by public sector workers.

    Miliband overtakes Cameron in leaders ratings.

    People believe that there is a cost of living crisis and are not feeling the growth.


    I've seen the embargoed copy and I can say that it will show that [redacted until 10pm]

    It doesn't show that, well not the one I have seen.....oh I see, at first look it looked like you were agreeing with him and breaking the embargo.
    I was joking.

    I'll never break an embargo.

    Well apart from the time I prematurely published a ComRes poll, but no one noticed and I pulled it after 10 seconds.
  • compouter1compouter1 Posts: 642
    edited January 2014
    The Top 5 headlines on Politicshome:

    1. Cable Housing Warning
    2.Tory Females Snubbed
    3.Riot Claims unpaid
    4.NHS Overwhelmed
    5.Paterson Woodland Axe

    Looks like Lynton turned off the Tory Grid for Xmas.
  • hucks67 said:

    What are we expecting from Lord Ashcrofts poll ?

    Double digit lead for Labour in key marginals.

    Massive shift to Labour by public sector workers.

    Miliband overtakes Cameron in leaders ratings.

    People believe that there is a cost of living crisis and are not feeling the growth.


    I've seen the embargoed copy and I can say that it will show that [redacted until 10pm]

    It doesn't show that, well not the one I have seen.....oh I see, at first look it looked like you were agreeing with him and breaking the embargo.
    I was joking.

    .
    Err....so was I.
  • I agree with Tristam Hunt

    Nick Sutton ‏@suttonnick 1m

    Observer front page - "Labour tears into Gove for ‘crass, ugly’ claims over first world war" #tomorrowspaperstoday

    pic.twitter.com/MDmdKjfm41

    Reeks of Hunt's ego to me. He regards himself as politics's in-house historian, and can't bear to see another politico voicing an opinion on what he perceives as his patch.
  • SMukeshSMukesh Posts: 1,759
    In the interest of fairness,nice move by coalition to keep free entry for museums.
  • MikeLMikeL Posts: 7,723
    Is this a new Ashcroft poll or just disclosing more findings from the previous survey?

    If it is new, when was it conducted? It seems odd to do a large poll over the holiday period.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,962
    edited January 2014

    I agree with Tristam Hunt

    Nick Sutton ‏@suttonnick 1m

    Observer front page - "Labour tears into Gove for ‘crass, ugly’ claims over first world war" #tomorrowspaperstoday

    pic.twitter.com/MDmdKjfm41

    Reeks of Hunt's ego to me. He regards himself as politics's in-house historian, and can't bear to see another politico voicing an opinion on what he perceives as his patch.
    Nah, it's Gove's idiocy, that any critic of the British military actions during World War I, is a leftie.

    As was noted yesterday, such critics include those well known lefties such as Alan Clark and Sir Winston Churchill.

    That's not even before we get onto Germany's motivations for entering the war.

    Check out the PB thread yesterday afternoon when all of this was discussed.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,962
    edited January 2014
    MikeL said:

    Is this a new Ashcroft poll or just disclosing more findings from the previous survey?

    If it is new, when was it conducted? It seems odd to do a large poll over the holiday period.

    A new poll, and it wasn't conducted over the holiday period.

    It's not a marginals poll per se, but an analysis of a certain type of voter, broken down into three sub-groups.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 43,345
    SMukesh said:

    In the interest of fairness,nice move by coalition to keep free entry for museums.

    Fully agreed. Of course it is not quite as generous as it sounds (which is to say it is even more sensible than it sounds) - there are swings and roundabouts. If admission charges were made then income from fees would have to be reduced by the decreased income from shop, donations, etc.

    There is also the contractual issue - virtually all museum and gallery catering is contracted out those days and the contractors would want much reduced rental payments and/or compensation if the footfall drops thanks to admission charging.

    I know a lot of visitors are from overseas but not all - lots are UK and love the ability to dip in as short or as long as they wish, and there is a case (no pun intended) for regarding this as a loss leader for the UK economy as a whole.

    Interestingly one of the problems with reintroducing free admish some years ago was that it had the perverse effect of meaning that museums couldn't offset VAT, and so had a marked negative impact on budgets over and above the loss of admish fees. I believe that this had to be sorted out before free admission could work smoothly. Not sure how that worked.

  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 7,382

    I agree with Tristam Hunt

    Nick Sutton ‏@suttonnick 1m

    Observer front page - "Labour tears into Gove for ‘crass, ugly’ claims over first world war" #tomorrowspaperstoday

    pic.twitter.com/MDmdKjfm41

    Reeks of Hunt's ego to me. He regards himself as politics's in-house historian, and can't bear to see another politico voicing an opinion on what he perceives as his patch.
    Nah, it's Gove's idiocy, that any critic of the British military actions during World War I, is a leftie.

    As was noted yesterday, such critics include those well known lefties such as Alan Clark and Sir Winston Churchill.

    That's not even before we get onto Germany's motivations for entering the war.

    Check out the PB thread yesterday afternoon when all of this was discussed.
    Spot on TSE. Gove is a huge electoral liability and smart Tories like yourself and Tim Montgomerie relaise it. His FWW comments were beyond the pale. The power has gone to his head

  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,514

    I agree with Tristam Hunt

    Nick Sutton ‏@suttonnick 1m

    Observer front page - "Labour tears into Gove for ‘crass, ugly’ claims over first world war" #tomorrowspaperstoday

    pic.twitter.com/MDmdKjfm41

    Reeks of Hunt's ego to me. He regards himself as politics's in-house historian, and can't bear to see another politico voicing an opinion on what he perceives as his patch.
    Nah, it's Gove's idiocy, that any critic of the British military actions during World War I, is a leftie.

    As was noted yesterday, such critics include those well known lefties such as Alan Clark and Sir Winston Churchill.

    That's not even before we get onto Germany's motivations for entering the war.

    Check out the PB thread yesterday afternoon when all of this was discussed.
    Spot on TSE. Gove is a huge electoral liability and smart Tories like yourself and Tim Montgomerie relaise it. His FWW comments were beyond the pale. The power has gone to his head

    You seriously think think anyone's taking notice ?
  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 7,382

    I agree with Tristam Hunt

    Nick Sutton ‏@suttonnick 1m

    Observer front page - "Labour tears into Gove for ‘crass, ugly’ claims over first world war" #tomorrowspaperstoday

    pic.twitter.com/MDmdKjfm41

    Reeks of Hunt's ego to me. He regards himself as politics's in-house historian, and can't bear to see another politico voicing an opinion on what he perceives as his patch.
    Nah, it's Gove's idiocy, that any critic of the British military actions during World War I, is a leftie.

    As was noted yesterday, such critics include those well known lefties such as Alan Clark and Sir Winston Churchill.

    That's not even before we get onto Germany's motivations for entering the war.

    Check out the PB thread yesterday afternoon when all of this was discussed.
    Spot on TSE. Gove is a huge electoral liability and smart Tories like yourself and Tim Montgomerie relaise it. His FWW comments were beyond the pale. The power has gone to his head

    You seriously think think anyone's taking notice ?
    Yes. Historians in ultra marginals.

  • GeoffMGeoffM Posts: 6,071

    I agree with Tristam Hunt

    Nick Sutton ‏@suttonnick 1m

    Observer front page - "Labour tears into Gove for ‘crass, ugly’ claims over first world war" #tomorrowspaperstoday

    pic.twitter.com/MDmdKjfm41

    Reeks of Hunt's ego to me. He regards himself as politics's in-house historian, and can't bear to see another politico voicing an opinion on what he perceives as his patch.
    Nah, it's Gove's idiocy, that any critic of the British military actions during World War I, is a leftie.

    As was noted yesterday, such critics include those well known lefties such as Alan Clark and Sir Winston Churchill.

    That's not even before we get onto Germany's motivations for entering the war.

    Check out the PB thread yesterday afternoon when all of this was discussed.
    Spot on TSE. Gove is a huge electoral liability and smart Tories like yourself and Tim Montgomerie relaise it. His FWW comments were beyond the pale. The power has gone to his head

    You seriously think think anyone's taking notice ?
    Yes. Historians in ultra marginals.

    Historians in ultra marginals and website owners with an anti-Gove obsession.

    Not exactly an election-switching bloc to strike fear into pollsters.

  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,514

    I agree with Tristam Hunt

    Nick Sutton ‏@suttonnick 1m

    Observer front page - "Labour tears into Gove for ‘crass, ugly’ claims over first world war" #tomorrowspaperstoday

    pic.twitter.com/MDmdKjfm41

    Reeks of Hunt's ego to me. He regards himself as politics's in-house historian, and can't bear to see another politico voicing an opinion on what he perceives as his patch.
    Nah, it's Gove's idiocy, that any critic of the British military actions during World War I, is a leftie.

    As was noted yesterday, such critics include those well known lefties such as Alan Clark and Sir Winston Churchill.

    That's not even before we get onto Germany's motivations for entering the war.

    Check out the PB thread yesterday afternoon when all of this was discussed.
    Spot on TSE. Gove is a huge electoral liability and smart Tories like yourself and Tim Montgomerie relaise it. His FWW comments were beyond the pale. The power has gone to his head

    You seriously think think anyone's taking notice ?
    Yes. Historians in ultra marginals.

    Well then it's just a numbers game. Is the number of upset historians outweighed by people who like seeing historians upset ?

    As for the electoral liability, theme well every party has them Balls and Osborne are both liabilities but short term their bosses won't replace them. Highlighting personalities in politics just once again brings home how short of real policies the parties actually are.
  • New Thread
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,046
    edited January 2014

    I agree with Tristam Hunt

    Nick Sutton ‏@suttonnick 1m

    Observer front page - "Labour tears into Gove for ‘crass, ugly’ claims over first world war" #tomorrowspaperstoday

    pic.twitter.com/MDmdKjfm41

    Reeks of Hunt's ego to me. He regards himself as politics's in-house historian, and can't bear to see another politico voicing an opinion on what he perceives as his patch.
    Nah, it's Gove's idiocy, that any critic of the British military actions during World War I, is a leftie.

    As was noted yesterday, such critics include those well known lefties such as Alan Clark and Sir Winston Churchill.

    That's not even before we get onto Germany's motivations for entering the war.

    Check out the PB thread yesterday afternoon when all of this was discussed.
    Spot on TSE. Gove is a huge electoral liability and smart Tories like yourself and Tim Montgomerie relaise it. His FWW comments were beyond the pale. The power has gone to his head

    You seriously think think anyone's taking notice ?
    Yes. Historians in ultra marginals.

    That's quite funny.

    Gove comes across as geeky, super, absolutely non-PM material more's the pity of our telegenic times and absolutely sharp as a pin and bright as a button.

    That's why he unnerves people like you and less smart lefters.

    He is thoughtful, has the courage of his convictions and doesn't mind you knowing that he is smart in contradistinction to others who pretend they are man of the people fools and are actually bright (but of course not as bright as they like to think they are).

    I haven't followed his Great War pronouncements but I think it safe to say that you will find every flavour of populist, academic, left, right, Chlesea, Moltke to Joan Littlewood interpretation of it out there. So why single anyone out for their own view and criticise it beats me.

    Well done Gove as giving strength and depth to the Conservative Party.
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    edited January 2014
    TOPPING said:

    Well done Gove as giving strength and depth to the Conservative Party.

    *tears of laughter etc.*

    Gove is a twit. A shallow Blair wannabe clickbait columnist twit.
    It's love. "I love A Journey," Michael Gove has confessed to this newspaper. Tony Blair's memoirs are like no other book he has ever read, he declared. And Gove's passion is shared by many in the cabinet. David Cameron has admitted how much he enjoyed the book; George Osborne is said to have an audio version, which allows him to hear the author telling his story in his own voice. At No 10 and No 11 Blair is known as "The Master".


    http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2010/nov/26/davidcameron-georgeosborne
    No wonder the public can't stand him and no wonder the public thinks the tories are out of touch with toecurlingly obsequious spinning like that for the chumcracy.



This discussion has been closed.