politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » As long as Ipsos-Mori keeps on getting findings like this,
The “spiral of silence” came from an observation made twenty years’ ago that the more people became shy about saying they were going to vote for party x, the worse that party did in the polls and the less inclined people became in turn to say they supported it.
Comments
-
No comment0
-
Summary : lefties are more bitter, envious and bile filled.
I don't hate Labour - just prefer they were kept nicely away from the levers of power.0 -
That's an interesting take on the issue. My impression (which is essentially anecdotal) is that there is a LARGE bloc of voters we think we all suck, which to my mind points towards a low poll next time. But I'm not sure that antipathy to the Tories is sufficiently broad-based to make people shy of admitting support - that 57% is basically the 38% Labour voters plus less than 1 in 3 of the rest. The figure I'd look at closely in the coming months is certainty to vote - which currently is usually highest among UKIP voters, thirsting for a chance to tell us all where we get off.0
-
Mr Eagles what a thoughtful host you are, a whole thread on toxic brands to keep the Kinnocky chaps happy. :-)0
-
The party which is actually having to take some of the most difficult decisions for decades is not liked... who'd a thunk it?0
-
As someone who's made the leap into Evil Tory Bigot Racist Heartless Disabled Bashing Stereotype - I've actually found the rise of social media rather liberating.
It makes such a change to be able to share views with other like minds and argue your POV in a fairly civilised way [there are always numpties and bullies]. And to read the views of others who are more moderate or more gungho.
It's really straddled the gap between what I generally thought/felt able to say and feeling bashed over the head by the liberal-left media who were generally pretty anti.
I hope this alternative universe of real people commenting rather than a few dozen talking heads marks a change in how we treat competing political views.0 -
Nah the summary is tories get it in the neck from lefties and then again from kippers. The question is does the poll change as the economy picks up and the GE approaches.TGOHF said:Summary : lefties are more bitter, envious and bile filled.
I don't hate Labour - just prefer they were kept nicely away from the levers of power.0 -
I'm aware of that, but the point I didn't make clear was, ICM have a longer track record of accuracy, and I'm talking about mid term polling.tim said:ICM and MORI have identical levels of accuracy at the last two elections as a quick review of the evidence confirms
http://www7.politicalbetting.com/index.php/the-pb-2010-polling-league-table/
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/historical-polls/voting-intention-2001-2005
For example in September 2008, ICM gave the Tories a lead of 9%, whereas as Ipsos-Mori in the same month gave the Tories a 28% lead.0 -
0
-
Not so sure Nickpalmer that everyone who is going to vote labour dislikes the tories (as you imply) . For instance if you were a natural labour voter in a lib dem/tory maginal you might be more likely to vote lib dem (and hence not classed as a labour voter) ,if you really disliked the tories and more likely to vote labour ,if you did not dislike them but merely liked labour.0
-
Excellent tim, now we'll have lots more tim to read repetitive bilge on fops, porpoises and Eton.tim said:Just to save some time, heres the next two hours postings from the lower league PB Tories in one easily digestible bite
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100234456/labour-is-losing-its-licence-to-govern/
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100234456/labour-is-losing-its-licence-to-govern/
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100234456/labour-is-losing-its-licence-to-govern/
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100234456/labour-is-losing-its-licence-to-govern/
Dan Hodges
Lost licence to govern
1983, 1987.
Dan Hodges
Hodges Dan
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100234456/labour-is-losing-its-licence-to-govern/
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100234456/labour-is-losing-its-licence-to-govern/
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100234456/labour-is-losing-its-licence-to-govern/
There you go.0 -
@tim - Thanks, tim. Good article, although one link would have sufficed.0
-
I'm beginning to worry about tim.. he's even more deranged than normal today..Alanbrooke said:
Excellent tim, now we'll have lots more tim to read repetitive bilge on fops, porpoises and Eton.tim said:Just to save some time, heres the next two hours postings from the lower league PB Tories in one easily digestible bite
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100234456/labour-is-losing-its-licence-to-govern/
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100234456/labour-is-losing-its-licence-to-govern/
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100234456/labour-is-losing-its-licence-to-govern/
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100234456/labour-is-losing-its-licence-to-govern/
Dan Hodges
Lost licence to govern
1983, 1987.
Dan Hodges
Hodges Dan
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100234456/labour-is-losing-its-licence-to-govern/
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100234456/labour-is-losing-its-licence-to-govern/
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100234456/labour-is-losing-its-licence-to-govern/
There you go.0 -
Don't MORI alter their methology as the election approaches (or even during the campaign itself?) and thus their record on the day is pretty creditable?0
-
They do, when they follow ICM's approachJohnO said:Don't MORI alter their methology as the election approaches (or even during the campaign itself?) and thus their record on the day is pretty creditable?
Moving on from ICM and Populus, Ipsos MORI do not normally carry out any form of re-allocating their don’t knows (though it is worth noting they did do so for their final pre-election poll in 2005), however, they do try and squeeze a voting intention of them if they don’t offer one. Anyone who says don’t know, or refuses to answer is asked a “squeeze question” of “Which party are you most inclined to support?”. These people are given equal weight to those who give a firm intention to vote.
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/faq-dont-knows
0 -
See the post below this onetim said:
And in November 2009 six months before an election they foundTheScreamingEagles said:
I'm aware of that, but the point I didn't make clear was, ICM have a longer track record of accuracy, and I'm talking about mid term polling.tim said:ICM and MORI have identical levels of accuracy at the last two elections as a quick review of the evidence confirms
http://www7.politicalbetting.com/index.php/the-pb-2010-polling-league-table/
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/historical-polls/voting-intention-2001-2005
For example in September 2008, ICM gave the Tories a lead of 9%, whereas as Ipsos-Mori in the same month gave the Tories a 28% lead.
Ipsos-MORI/Observer 2009-11-15 Con 37 Lab 31 LD 17
ICM/Guardian 2009-11-15 Con 42 Lab 29 LD 19
We can all cherrypick, but the two firms have identical success over the last decade in British elections.0 -
This "spiral of silence" issue is going to get somewhat more complicated nearer May 2015 as pollsters fail to find anyone who will admit voting for Ed Miliband as our next Prime Minister...0
-
Dan !! Dan !!! Dan!!!0
-
You should have seen the evolution of this article, at first it began as an Ed is crap thread, when I looked at how many disliked him, even more than the Tory party, then it evolved into their all crap post, then into this.NickPalmer said:That's an interesting take on the issue. My impression (which is essentially anecdotal) is that there is a LARGE bloc of voters we think we all suck, which to my mind points towards a low poll next time. But I'm not sure that antipathy to the Tories is sufficiently broad-based to make people shy of admitting support - that 57% is basically the 38% Labour voters plus less than 1 in 3 of the rest. The figure I'd look at closely in the coming months is certainty to vote - which currently is usually highest among UKIP voters, thirsting for a chance to tell us all where we get off.
0 -
I think David Aaronovitch marching off the Miliband Reservation with a placard saying ED IS CRAP has pushed some PBers into a bit of tail-spin.
I must have been sent it on Twitter about 30x already today. It's been Most Read and Most Commented story virtually all day - now on 177 183 comments 95% of which are saying I Agree With You.
" ...And in this moment of crisis it became clear — as it does — what Mr Miliband is. A personable man (and he is a very pleasant companion), politically he is not a presence at all, he is an absence. He is Oedipal Ed, the negator of the unpopular actions of the fathers; the anti-Blair, the non-Brown. His technique for victory to is follow behind the leader, wait for a slip-up and exploit his or her mistakes. He did it to his brother. He hopes to do it to David Cameron. He is neither hunter nor prey, he is scavenger. He is a political vulture. Mission creep? His mission is all about creeping.
And though you can just about see how in a bad year Ed Miliband could become prime minister, what I cannot any longer pretend, after three years of his leadership, is that he would be a good one. On the contrary. I think he would be a disaster. Strangely, I think both the country and his party already know it." http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/opinion/columnists/davidaaronovitch/article3860789.ece0 -
The danger with this is that it's created a series of echo-chambers where people only converse with those with the same views, and start confusing fact with opinion. A more unpleasant and partisan politics seems to have been the result.Plato said:
It makes such a change to be able to share views with other like minds and argue your POV in a fairly civilised way [there are always numpties and bullies]. And to read the views of others who are more moderate or more gungho.
It's really straddled the gap between what I generally thought/felt able to say and feeling bashed over the head by the liberal-left media who were generally pretty anti.
I hope this alternative universe of real people commenting rather than a few dozen talking heads marks a change in how we treat competing political views.
As for the "liberal-left" media, 14 of the 22 mainstream newspapers endorsed the Conservatives at the last election (source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_general_election,_2010). There is undoubted left-wing bias at the BBC but I'd say it is far outweighed by the right-wing populism promoted by three quarters of the press.0 -
@tim - I think you'd be wasting your money on IDS. He's engaged in a hugely complex and much-needed reorganisation of the welfare monster. No-one expected it to be easy, or for the DWP suddenly to become the world's most proficient implementor of IT systems (it's not Tesco or Walmart, after all). He's taken steps to sort out the problems which have cropped up, and is sensibly not rushing in to full implementation before the IT systems are ready (thank goodness for that!).0
-
How do you know which was the more accurate? There wasn't a General Election in October 2008 to test them.TheScreamingEagles said:
I'm aware of that, but the point I didn't make clear was, ICM have a longer track record of accuracy, and I'm talking about mid term polling.
For example in September 2008, ICM gave the Tories a lead of 9%, whereas as Ipsos-Mori in the same month gave the Tories a 28% lead.
0 -
I see TUD was earlier trailing the Panelbase Leader satisfaction numbers.
By some bizarre oversight, he neglected to mention the other question Panelbase asked - what impact would the expected UK 2015 GE have on referendum voting intentions.
I can't imagine why.
Very/quite : Unlikely/Very unlikely to vote for independence:
Con/Con led govt: 50 : 41
Lab led govt: 47 : 42
That's the massive swing our friends in the north have been fondly predicting......0 -
LOLMarqueeMark said:This "spiral of silence" issue is going to get somewhat more complicated nearer May 2015 as pollsters fail to find anyone who will admit voting for Ed Miliband as our next Prime Minister...
0 -
yes Richard -only in the public sector can you be dammed for being 'overly ambitious' which I believe was what the Audit Office came up with about Universal Credit0
-
Wasting your money - like when you bet on Gove to be next out.tim said:Spamming the same article over and over, or taking notice of political betting issues?
Ladbrokes Politics @LadPolitics
Iain Duncan Smith cut from 16/1 to 8/1 to be Next Cabinet Minister out. http://bit.ly/1aRWdfm0 -
You cant, but you can measure which pollster maintains its methodology all the way to the election, or which one changes it during the campaign proper.JohnLilburne said:
How do you know which was the more accurate? There wasn't a General Election in October 2008 to test them.TheScreamingEagles said:
I'm aware of that, but the point I didn't make clear was, ICM have a longer track record of accuracy, and I'm talking about mid term polling.
For example in September 2008, ICM gave the Tories a lead of 9%, whereas as Ipsos-Mori in the same month gave the Tories a 28% lead.0 -
Yes, you're right - I was generalising as writing in a hurry, but I think the post was broadly true. Real hatred is pretty rare at the moment, happily. I'd say the average view of the Tories, even among most Labour supporters and a lot of floating voters, is mild distaste. It's a climate where doing a plato and actually joining them is perhaps seen as a bit eccentric, but it's not deeply embarrassing to admit to voting for them.state_go_away said:Not so sure Nickpalmer that everyone who is going to vote labour dislikes the tories (as you imply) . For instance if you were a natural labour voter in a lib dem/tory maginal you might be more likely to vote lib dem (and hence not classed as a labour voter) ,if you really disliked the tories and more likely to vote labour ,if you did not dislike them but merely liked labour.
Is there any survey on membershjp changes spread across types of constituency? Broxtowe Labour membership has nearly doubled since the election, presumably because it's now an ultra-marginal (or maybe they were waiting till I was out of the way?), but my impression is that we're languishing in safe seats. Is the Tory decline more or less marked in safe seats?
0 -
It may also explain why the LDs are doing better in ICM than in other polls, why UKIP seems to do worse and why the smart money has to be on a hung Parliament next time round, despite EdM's deep unpopularity.
It's also worth looking at the "understands the needs of ordinary voters" and variations thereof questions. Labour seems to score much better in that than the Tories do. And Ed even leads Dave!0 -
tim, the "IDS car crash" is but a fender bender compared to Ed Miliband's multi-lane highway wrecker.
Was Ed driving on Sheppey today?
Go on - tell us how Ed Miliband is nailed on to be our next Prime Minister. You know you want to...on the record...for posterity.0 -
NickPalmer said:
Broxtowe Labour membership has nearly doubled since the election...state_go_away said:Not so sure Nickpalmer that everyone who is going to vote labour dislikes the tories (as you imply) . For instance if you were a natural labour voter in a lib dem/tory maginal you might be more likely to vote lib dem (and hence not classed as a labour voter) ,if you really disliked the tories and more likely to vote labour ,if you did not dislike them but merely liked labour.
A bit like Falkirk ?
0 -
Now that's where I find its not so true - there are some who are infamous in their echo chambers - Owen Jones and his shadow Eoin Clark who block everyone who is mildly in disagreement - but I suspect they'll have friends who also have the same opinions on most things. So they need to ignore everyone else as it does suit them. It's like going LALALALALALA in the playground and convinces no one.
Where I like social media is that I can be entirely on the same page as someone about say Labour, yet diametrically opposed on badger culling. Or keen on animal adoptions/charities but at odds over greenie energy. Or on education vs gay marriage.
I read much more widely and am exposed to a huge number of views than if I was simply chatting to a handful of friends or neighbours.not_on_fire said:
The danger with this is that it's created a series of echo-chambers where people only converse with those with the same views, and start confusing fact with opinion. A more unpleasant and partisan politics seems to have been the result.Plato said:
It makes such a change to be able to share views with other like minds and argue your POV in a fairly civilised way [there are always numpties and bullies]. And to read the views of others who are more moderate or more gungho.
It's really straddled the gap between what I generally thought/felt able to say and feeling bashed over the head by the liberal-left media who were generally pretty anti.
I hope this alternative universe of real people commenting rather than a few dozen talking heads marks a change in how we treat competing political views.
As for the "liberal-left" media, 14 of the 22 mainstream newspapers endorsed the Conservatives at the last election (source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_general_election,_2010). There is undoubted left-wing bias at the BBC but I'd say it is far outweighed by the right-wing populism promoted by three quarters of the press.0 -
Ignore IDS - Not on your nelly.tim said:
The PB Tories would prefer to ignore the IDS car crash and the halving of his odds to be next out instead, so I suspect that covering that issue may be more relevant on a betting and politics site today.Alanbrooke said:
Excellent tim, now we'll have lots more tim to read repetitive bilge on fops, porpoises and Eton.tim said:Just to save some time, heres the next two hours postings from the lower league PB Tories in one easily digestible bite
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100234456/labour-is-losing-its-licence-to-govern/
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100234456/labour-is-losing-its-licence-to-govern/
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100234456/labour-is-losing-its-licence-to-govern/
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100234456/labour-is-losing-its-licence-to-govern/
Dan Hodges
Lost licence to govern
1983, 1987.
Dan Hodges
Hodges Dan
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100234456/labour-is-losing-its-licence-to-govern/
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100234456/labour-is-losing-its-licence-to-govern/
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100234456/labour-is-losing-its-licence-to-govern/
There you go.
Still, Dan Hodges eh?
Dan Hodges.
Dan
Hodges.
The more we hear from IDS and Steve Webb the better !!
0 -
I think it varies hugely from one seat to another, and not just according to whether the seat is a safe one. I suspect it's more to do with whether there is a small group of dedicated individuals putting in the work to attract and retain members, plus the effort the MP puts in.NickPalmer said:Is there any survey on membershjp changes spread across types of constituency? Broxtowe Labour membership has nearly doubled since the election, presumably because it's now an ultra-marginal (or maybe they were waiting till I was out of the way?), but my impression is that we're languishing in safe seats. Is the Tory decline more or less marked in safe seats?
0 -
Off topic a bit, but the most interesting article today for me is from Bloomberg on the potential Merkel/Cameron love in following her re-election.
It suggests Dave is going to get a lot of what he wants in 2014, not just shooting UKIPs fox, but running over it several times in a range rover to make sure.
It can be accessed via Guido's site.0 -
(Like I predicted) Front page of the Bradford T&A.
Bradford council already moaning about population increase(and how they will not be able to cope),just wait until the full facts of mass immigration from Eastern Europe in the last few years hits the fan.
Council outlines major challenges as population set to explode by 44,000
http://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/news/10654782.Council_outlines_major_challenges_as_population_set_to_explode_by_44_000/0 -
Now this is an odd one. Who is the 'Jonathan Hill' available at 20/1 from Paddy Power as the next to leave the coalition cabinet???0
-
Lord Hill, the Leader of the House of Lords.RichardNabavi said:Now this is an odd one. Who is the 'Jonathan Hill' available at 20/1 from Paddy Power as the next to leave the coalition cabinet???
I backed him a while back, as he wanted to quit at the last reshuffle as a junior minister, but Dave didn't hear him
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/9546485/David-Camerons-farcical-reshuffle-the-Prime-Minister-didnt-hear-minister-attempting-to-quit.html
0 -
Ah, of course, silly me.TheScreamingEagles said:
Lord Hill, the Leader of the House of Lords.RichardNabavi said:Now this is an odd one. Who is the 'Jonathan Hill' available at 20/1 from Paddy Power as the next to leave the coalition cabinet???
I backed him a while back, as he wanted to quit at the last reshuffle as a junior minister, but Dave didn't hear him
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/9546485/David-Camerons-farcical-reshuffle-the-Prime-Minister-didnt-hear-minister-attempting-to-quit.html
0 -
OT Syria: ABC House whip count:
OPPOSE MILITARY ACTION IN SYRIA: 63
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2013/09/military-action-in-syria-where-the-house-stands/
LIKELY TO OPPOSE: 136
SUPPORT MILITARY ACTION IN SYRIA: 20
LIKELY TO SUPPORT: 25
UNDECIDED: 153
UNKNOWN: 360 -
Only once they've completed their homework.tim said:All those under tens need both primary school places AND jobs?
Do you still send them up chimneys?0 -
Yup that's the one ....tim said:
The Steve Webb who couldn't be arsed turning up for the Syria vote?JackW said:
Ignore IDS - Not on your nelly.tim said:
The PB Tories would prefer to ignore the IDS car crash and the halving of his odds to be next out instead, so I suspect that covering that issue may be more relevant on a betting and politics site today.Alanbrooke said:
Excellent tim, now we'll have lots more tim to read repetitive bilge on fops, porpoises and Eton.tim said:Just to save some time, heres the next two hours postings from the lower league PB Tories in one easily digestible bite
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100234456/labour-is-losing-its-licence-to-govern/
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100234456/labour-is-losing-its-licence-to-govern/
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100234456/labour-is-losing-its-licence-to-govern/
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100234456/labour-is-losing-its-licence-to-govern/
Dan Hodges
Lost licence to govern
1983, 1987.
Dan Hodges
Hodges Dan
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100234456/labour-is-losing-its-licence-to-govern/
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100234456/labour-is-losing-its-licence-to-govern/
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100234456/labour-is-losing-its-licence-to-govern/
There you go.
Still, Dan Hodges eh?
Dan Hodges.
Dan
Hodges.
The more we hear from IDS and Steve Webb the better !!
Strangely you seem to have completely forgotten those 30 absent Labour MP's .... but fear not I'll be at hand to remind you - quite regularly if needs be !!
0 -
If they get a school place ;-)RichardNabavi said:
Only once they've completed their homework.tim said:All those under tens need both primary school places AND jobs?
Do you still send them up chimneys?0 -
The same Steve Webb who is widely viewed as the best Pensions Minister we've had this Millenium - which given the hordes of Labour minions who were shuffled through that position isn't saying much - but he's got more respect in the 'industry' than any of those clowns.
But hey, smear away.0 -
On the 'Next out' market, I think Peter from Putney is on to something with his tip on PP's 25/1 on Eric Pickles. Pickles to Chief Whip would make sense.
PP's market is very strangely-worded, though:
Applies to the next person to be confirmed to have left the coalition cabinet by any means other than coalition reshuffle. Reshuffle = more than one minister leaving on one date. Cabinet is as 'List Of Cabinet Ministers' on cabinetoffice.gov.uk . Special: Ministers leaving via reshuffle will be paid out at 1/5 of odds. PP decision final.
Why not dead-heat rules?0 -
OT
"If over half the electorate dislike the Conservative party, you can understand why some Conservative supporters maybe shy of expressing their support, as happened in the 90s, then ICM may well be vindicated again in 2015."
It vindicates in terms of reallocating some 2010 Conservative don't knows back to the Conservatives.
It doesn't vindicate it in terms of reallocating 2010 Lib Dem don't knows back to the Lib Dems in similar proportions, ignoring the defection of a significant chunk of much of the rest of the 2010 Lib Dems to Labour and the thus possibility that some of the Lib Dem don't knows could yet follow them.0 -
John Rentoul in Independent blogs - Ed Miliband on Syria: let anyone decide as long as it’s not me
"But those MPs who failed to support the Government have to accept that their decision not to act has consequences. It would have meant, if the air strikes do not go ahead, that there is no prospect of deterring Assad from using chemical weapons again.
And Miliband ought to be honest about the consequences of his parliamentary games. Andrew Grice, my esteemed colleague, reports elsewhere in today’s Independent:
The Shadow Cabinet expected Mr Miliband to trumpet the concessions he won from Mr Cameron and support the Government. But after a summer in which the Tories spent attacking him as “weak”, Mr Miliband decided not to risk a messy split in which many Labour MPs would have defied him by voting against military strikes.
Miliband “did not want or expect to defeat the Government”, says Grice. He quotes a Labour insider: “We were relying on the Tory whips to win the vote and the Tories were relying on us to support them.”
This is the most extraordinary and spineless admission. As I say in my article, what Miliband and many of his MPs wanted was for the Government and the Americans – anyone, anyone as long as it wasn’t them – to take responsibility for a military action about which they could not make up their minds.
Deplorable."0 -
Strangely you seem to have completely forgotten those 30 absent Labour MP's .... but fear not I'll be at hand to remind you - quite regularly if needs be !!
Jack W - ah but perhaps Ed M strongly and decisively ordered them to stay away to try and ensure the Opposition didn't defeat the Govt?
0 -
PLEASE DELETE THIS POST - IT IS NOT BY DAN HODGESfitalass said:John Rentoul in Independent blogs - Ed Miliband on Syria: let anyone decide as long as it’s not me
"But those MPs who failed to support the Government have to accept that their decision not to act has consequences. It would have meant, if the air strikes do not go ahead, that there is no prospect of deterring Assad from using chemical weapons again.
And Miliband ought to be honest about the consequences of his parliamentary games. Andrew Grice, my esteemed colleague, reports elsewhere in today’s Independent:
The Shadow Cabinet expected Mr Miliband to trumpet the concessions he won from Mr Cameron and support the Government. But after a summer in which the Tories spent attacking him as “weak”, Mr Miliband decided not to risk a messy split in which many Labour MPs would have defied him by voting against military strikes.
Miliband “did not want or expect to defeat the Government”, says Grice. He quotes a Labour insider: “We were relying on the Tory whips to win the vote and the Tories were relying on us to support them.”
This is the most extraordinary and spineless admission. As I say in my article, what Miliband and many of his MPs wanted was for the Government and the Americans – anyone, anyone as long as it wasn’t them – to take responsibility for a military action about which they could not make up their minds.
Deplorable."
0 -
From the population increase in Bradford report -
'About 10,000 jobs will have to be created by 2021, just to keep the same level of employment as there is now'
Good luck with that one,this is Bradford we are talking about ;-)0 -
That is not how the ICM reallocation works . It does allocate a part of the Lib Dem Don't Knows to Labour ( and a few to Conservative and even UKIP ) but a greater portion back to the Lib Dems than other pollsters .Wulfrun_Phil said:OT
It doesn't vindicate it in terms of reallocating 2010 Lib Dem don't knows back to the Lib Dems in similar proportions, ignoring the defection of a significant chunk of much of the rest of the 2010 Lib Dems to Labour and the thus possibility that some of the Lib Dem don't knows could yet follow them.
0 -
Oh, and still OT.
If the "dislike" ratings are relevant to shyness in terms of future VI, shouldn't they also be relevant to shyness in terms of past VI? Are the same Conservatives who are too shy to disclose an intention to vote Conservative in 2015 really going to willingly disclose that they voted Conservative in 2010?0 -
PaddyPower get into some strange messes with politics betting - they still have a bet of mine pending --on the 2012 London Mayor election (highest borough turnout) .I am not sure if figures are available to settle it but they shoudl make a decision over it soon .0
-
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2013/09/military-action-in-syria-where-the-house-stands/edmundintokyo said:OT Syria: ABC House whip count:
OPPOSE MILITARY ACTION IN SYRIA: 63
LIKELY TO OPPOSE: 136
SUPPORT MILITARY ACTION IN SYRIA: 20
LIKELY TO SUPPORT: 25
UNDECIDED: 153
UNKNOWN: 36
That looks like overwhelming opposition in the House, and probably includes a majority of both Republicans and Democrats.
If the Senate (which has primacy in foreign affairs) votes Yes, and the House votes No, will Obama treat that as giving him the green light to attack?0 -
The sort of figures that ICM gives the Lib Dems are far more believable than the figures of 7-9% that some pollsters have been giving them. And, while it pains me to say so, UKIP won't be polling in the high teens in 2015.SouthamObserver said:It may also explain why the LDs are doing better in ICM than in other polls, why UKIP seems to do worse and why the smart money has to be on a hung Parliament next time round, despite EdM's deep unpopularity.
It's also worth looking at the "understands the needs of ordinary voters" and variations thereof questions. Labour seems to score much better in that than the Tories do. And Ed even leads Dave!
0 -
That looks like overwhelming opposition in the House, and probably includes a majority of both Republicans and Democrats.Sean_F said:
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2013/09/military-action-in-syria-where-the-house-stands/edmundintokyo said:OT Syria: ABC House whip count:
OPPOSE MILITARY ACTION IN SYRIA: 63
LIKELY TO OPPOSE: 136
SUPPORT MILITARY ACTION IN SYRIA: 20
LIKELY TO SUPPORT: 25
UNDECIDED: 153
UNKNOWN: 36
If the Senate (which has primacy in foreign affairs) votes Yes, and the House votes No, will Obama treat that as giving him the green light to attack?
I think if the House vote it down that counts as a no. He's still saying that technically he doesn't need the support of either house, but I don't think he'd go ahead in the face of one or the other voting it down.0 -
''This is the most extraordinary and spineless admission.''
It's Nick Palmer I feel sorry for. He supported Labour's stance on the basis it was an honestly and deeply held conviction that we should not go to war on principle.
0 -
That looks like overwhelming opposition in the House, and probably includes a majority of both Republicans and Democrats.Sean_F said:
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2013/09/military-action-in-syria-where-the-house-stands/edmundintokyo said:OT Syria: ABC House whip count:
OPPOSE MILITARY ACTION IN SYRIA: 63
LIKELY TO OPPOSE: 136
SUPPORT MILITARY ACTION IN SYRIA: 20
LIKELY TO SUPPORT: 25
UNDECIDED: 153
UNKNOWN: 36
If the Senate (which has primacy in foreign affairs) votes Yes, and the House votes No, will Obama treat that as giving him the green light to attack?
"the Senate (which has primacy in foreign affairs)" answered your own question I think there.0 -
Fact: IDS never lost a GE as Tory leaderJackW said:
Ignore IDS - Not on your nelly.tim said:
The PB Tories would prefer to ignore the IDS car crash and the halving of his odds to be next out instead, so I suspect that covering that issue may be more relevant on a betting and politics site today.Alanbrooke said:
Excellent tim, now we'll have lots more tim to read repetitive bilge on fops, porpoises and Eton.tim said:Just to save some time, heres the next two hours postings from the lower league PB Tories in one easily digestible bite
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100234456/labour-is-losing-its-licence-to-govern/
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100234456/labour-is-losing-its-licence-to-govern/
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100234456/labour-is-losing-its-licence-to-govern/
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100234456/labour-is-losing-its-licence-to-govern/
Dan Hodges
Lost licence to govern
1983, 1987.
Dan Hodges
Hodges Dan
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100234456/labour-is-losing-its-licence-to-govern/
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100234456/labour-is-losing-its-licence-to-govern/
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100234456/labour-is-losing-its-licence-to-govern/
There you go.
Still, Dan Hodges eh?
Dan Hodges.
Dan
Hodges.
The more we hear from IDS and Steve Webb the better !!
0 -
Really, Tim: why are you attacking Samantha Cameron on this?tim said:@fitalass.
You do realise that the Labour amendment included the option of military action?
Of course nobody expected Cameron to take all future action off the table in a fit of pique,particularly after all the posturing and Sam Cam photoshoots designed to tell us how much he cares and how much she cares "As a mother"
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2299858/Samantha-Camerons-emotional-visit-Syrian-refugee-camp-Childhoods-smashed-pieces.html
By all means attack politicians but their spouses are off limits unless they start engaging in politics and she hasn't. After the nastiness of Brown's henchmen trying to smear the wives of Cameron and Osborne, I'd have thought that lesson would be obvious.
MPs voted and those who voted - as well as those who didn't turn up - need to accept the consequences of their actions, regardless of which party they belong to.
0 -
"the Senate (which has primacy in foreign affairs)" answered your own question I think there.Pulpstar said:
That looks like overwhelming opposition in the House, and probably includes a majority of both Republicans and Democrats.Sean_F said:
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2013/09/military-action-in-syria-where-the-house-stands/edmundintokyo said:OT Syria: ABC House whip count:
OPPOSE MILITARY ACTION IN SYRIA: 63
LIKELY TO OPPOSE: 136
SUPPORT MILITARY ACTION IN SYRIA: 20
LIKELY TO SUPPORT: 25
UNDECIDED: 153
UNKNOWN: 36
If the Senate (which has primacy in foreign affairs) votes Yes, and the House votes No, will Obama treat that as giving him the green light to attack?
Obama's already going to war with the House over issues he really cares about like the debt ceiling and immigration, both of which have him on the popular side of the divide. I can't see him creating a big public pseudo-constitutional-crisis where the other side has the overwhelming support of voters in both parties.0 -
You do realise that the Labour amendment included the option of military action?
If that's the case why did they vote against the tories?? it was only a vote on principle, after all.
Why don;t you just admit trying to defend labour's conduct on the Syria vote you are defending the indefensible?
There must be some mud you can throw on universal credit, surely.
0 -
Tyko..There should be quite a few new jobs in the Benefits office.The Local NHS, Social services, House bulding and renovation depts, New teachers brought in. Extra police, Interpreters..not to mention the rises in local rates0
-
@Cyclefree
"MPs voted and those who voted - as well as those who didn't turn up - need to accept the consequences of their actions, regardless of which party they belong to."
Well said.0 -
Poor Dan Hodges doesn't half get a roasting on this site from those on the left, the fact that he was the first of the Labour supporting political commentators to really question or criticise Ed Miliband stills rankles. But he is not a lone voice any more, there has been a growing flood of criticism towards the Labour Leadership building up since the spring from left leaning commentators. Even the Daily Mirror is struggling to find anything positive to offer on Ed Miliband's Leadership, the irony is that they are left copying the Labour strategy of attacking their opponents without any clear alternative to offer their readers. At this rate, even Mary Riddell may finally see the light and join Dan Hodges in questioning the suitability of Ed Miliband as a Labour Leader and future PM.
David Cameron has always had plenty of criticism from Right Leaning commentators such as Iain Martin, Fraser Nelson, Tim Montgomery & Co. Indeed, I used to wonder if David Cameron had once nicked Iain Martin's parking space! But reading Fraser Nelson's reaction to Aronovitch's piece in the Times in the Spectator was amusing, expect some of the Right leaning media to start panicking at the thought that Cameron may yet achieve that Tory majority.Scrapheap_as_was said:
PLEASE DELETE THIS POST - IT IS NOT BY DAN HODGESfitalass said:John Rentoul in Independent blogs - Ed Miliband on Syria: let anyone decide as long as it’s not me
"But those MPs who failed to support the Government have to accept that their decision not to act has consequences. It would have meant, if the air strikes do not go ahead, that there is no prospect of deterring Assad from using chemical weapons again.
And Miliband ought to be honest about the consequences of his parliamentary games. Andrew Grice, my esteemed colleague, reports elsewhere in today’s Independent:
The Shadow Cabinet expected Mr Miliband to trumpet the concessions he won from Mr Cameron and support the Government. But after a summer in which the Tories spent attacking him as “weak”, Mr Miliband decided not to risk a messy split in which many Labour MPs would have defied him by voting against military strikes.
Miliband “did not want or expect to defeat the Government”, says Grice. He quotes a Labour insider: “We were relying on the Tory whips to win the vote and the Tories were relying on us to support them.”
This is the most extraordinary and spineless admission. As I say in my article, what Miliband and many of his MPs wanted was for the Government and the Americans – anyone, anyone as long as it wasn’t them – to take responsibility for a military action about which they could not make up their minds.
Deplorable."0 -
@tim - You'd better take it up with Douglas Alexander:
Asked whether action could still be taken if MPs refused to vote in favour, he replied: "I don't think it [the government] would have a mandate in Parliament, I can't state it more clearly than that."
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2013/08/douglas-alexander-warns-cameron-vote-must-be-held-syria-and-labour-could-oppose-gov
0 -
tim is effectively blaming Cameron for not taking Labour's double dealing and vacillation into account over the Syria vote.
It really is one of the most ludicrous positions he has ever taken on PB, in my view.0 -
I think Latvian homophobes could swing the next GE...0
-
It must be tough being a liberal interventionist Blairite this week. I hope Dan Hodges, David Aaronovitch and John Rentoul have founded a self-help therapy group.0
-
Is there a betting book open on how many times Cameron has been snubbed at the G20.0
-
Does anyone have historical records of the dislike factor for individual parties. I would be curious to see if it was always like this.
It may be fair to say that the tories did not do much to help themselves but the propaganda machine of the early Blair years with Campbell and Mandy was fantastically effective and on any view won the 2001 and 2005 elections despite the government itself being increasingly unpopular.
Cameron tried hard in his early years with his detoxification to change this but with limited success which is the only rational explanation I can find for nearly 30% of our fellow citizens who could be bothered to vote voting for Gordon Brown in 2010. There simply are not enough asylums for any other explanation.
After the omnishambles budget we had a pretty serious reprise of this but it seems to have faded, at least in the media with Ed being the target de jours.
It would be interesting to weigh these subjective perceptions against the polling record.0 -
More shouts of SLAVES!!!
"The unemployed should be forced to undertake 30 hours per week of either charity or community work, work experience, training or monitored job searching, a new report says today. The TaxPayers’ Alliance, the author of the plan, Work for the Dole, says that people already in work but claiming benefits should be forced to top up their working time to 30 hours per week, in an effort to cut the cost of in-work benefits.
Frank Field, a former Labour welfare minister, is urging his party to take the suggestion seriously. Using data from around the world, the TaxPayers’ Alliance projects that its plan would lead to annual savings of £3.51 billion and help 345,000 people off benefits over time. Not everyone would be obliged to take part, with more leeway being given to people who have paid into the system previously, in a move that would strengthen the contributory concept of out-of-work benefits.
The 30-hour benchmark may be reduced for people with childcare or similar obligations. There would be no requirement at all for parents with young children, pensioners or individuals with a severe disability. >> http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/politics/article3860046.ece0 -
In a lengthy field it's certainly a strong contender !!taffys said:tim is effectively blaming Cameron for not taking Labour's double dealing and vacillation into account over the Syria vote.
It really is one of the most ludicrous positions he has ever taken on PB, in my view.
0 -
Is there a betting book open on how many times Cameron has been snubbed at the G20.
AS far as the press is concerned, Cameron was always going to get 'snubbed' whether it happens or not.0 -
click on the 1st green text below the graph.DavidL said:Does anyone have historical records of the dislike factor for individual parties. I would be curious to see if it was always like this.
It may be fair to say that the tories did not do much to help themselves but the propaganda machine of the early Blair years with Campbell and Mandy was fantastically effective and on any view won the 2001 and 2005 elections despite the government itself being increasingly unpopular.
Cameron tried hard in his early years with his detoxification to change this but with limited success which is the only rational explanation I can find for nearly 30% of our fellow citizens who could be bothered to vote voting for Gordon Brown in 2010. There simply are not enough asylums for any other explanation.
After the omnishambles budget we had a pretty serious reprise of this but it seems to have faded, at least in the media with Ed being the target de jours.
It would be interesting to weigh these subjective perceptions against the polling record.
0 -
tim can join them he if remembers what he's 'supposed' to be..antifrank said:It must be tough being a liberal interventionist Blairite this week. I hope Dan Hodges, David Aaronovitch and John Rentoul have founded a self-help therapy group.
0 -
Edit: double post.0 -
taffys maybe sporting index shoudl do a 'sent to coventry' spread
1pt per snub (daily Mail adjuticated), 3 pts every time Obama refers to France in a positive way but not Britain , 5pts per the number of seats between Obama and Cameron at the official dinner and a 50pt bonus if Cameron runs after Obama in the kitchen0 -
I have been muttering on here for over a year that the delays and lack of clear planning in respect of the implementation of Universal Credit were alarm bells that really should have been attended to earlier. In fairness I think Osborne has tried to address the problems but inevitably Treasury intervention is too focussed on the budgetary aspects.
Of the various reform programs undertaken by the Coalition, whether in schools, hospitals or pensions, this always struck me as the most ambitious and problematic. Our benefits system is an unholy mess of bits stuck on over time and desperately needs sorted but it also has to deal with people with a staggeringly different range of circumstances and needs.
IDS has spoken well on this but he bluntly never seemed the sharpest tool in the box and I fear this has proved beyond him. No disgrace in that but there is a cost and it means that we will go into the next election with a largely unreformed system. Not a big problem if the tories win but a major problem if they don't.
I fear that the smart political move will now be to effectively put this on the back burner. Very unfortunate but there is just not enough time to deal with the inevitable issues before the next election now.0 -
The Times has an article claiming this because attendees are in alphabetical order - its been panned as trivia playground stuff in the comments. Imagine what they'd pen about changes to a wedding guest list!taffys said:Is there a betting book open on how many times Cameron has been snubbed at the G20.
AS far as the press is concerned, Cameron was always going to get 'snubbed' whether it happens or not.
"The seating plan has been changed. Originally Mr Putin and Mr Obama would have been separated only by the King of Saudi Arabia. Now it has been reshuffled according to the alphabet, to put five other leaders including Mr Cameron between the main players"
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/world/article3861150.ece0 -
Nearly as good as a Blairista calling him a US poodle.tim said:
You have to admit that after Cameron's inability to organise a piss up in a brewery last week this is a classic headlinetaffys said:Is there a betting book open on how many times Cameron has been snubbed at the G20.
AS far as the press is concerned, Cameron was always going to get 'snubbed' whether it happens or not.
@hendopolis: FT UK: Cameron calls for US resolve over Syria strike #tomorrowspaperstoday #bbcpapers http://t.co/ISEy3zY3kP0 -
You get an additional 50 bonus points if Cameron gets some DVD's as a official present.state_go_away said:taffys maybe sporting index shoudl do a 'sent to coventry' spread
1pt per snub (daily Mail adjuticated), 3 pts every time Obama refers to France in a positive way but not Britain , 5pts per the number of seats between Obama and Cameron at the official dinner and a 50pt bonus if Cameron runs after Obama in the kitchen0 -
What exactly is the problem with his reforms that make them unworkable? I've not paid much attention to this, but as far as I can see IDS makes some changes and the civil service says it is absolutely impossible to create an appropriate database because they don't want to have to bother with the reforms.tim said:RichardNabavi said:@tim - I think you'd be wasting your money on IDS. He's engaged in a hugely complex and much-needed reorganisation. No-one expected it to be easy, or for the DWP suddenly to become the world's most proficient implementor of IT systems (it's not Tesco or Walmart, after all). He's taken steps to sort out the problems which have cropped up, and is sensibly not rushing in to full implementation before the IT systems are ready (thank goodness for that!).
I think antifranks conclusion is more realistic
antifrank Posts: 1,384
12:04PM
The NAO's commentary on the implementation of the Universal Credit is about as damning as it could be. It really should be a resignation matter. Iain Duncan Smith is fortunate that the coalition is so carefully brokered and that he is a key component in keeping the Tory headbangers reasonably quiet.
Personally I was surprised when I looked at Ladbrokes overrounds last night on this market, I expected IDS to be 25/1 rather than 16's.
He's out of his depth,always has been, wandering around a Glasgow estate with a bible looking for a purpose hasn't changed that.0 -
Many thanks. This seems quite a low for the tories. Difficult to discern obvious patterns.TGOHF said:
click on the 1st green text below the graph.DavidL said:Does anyone have historical records of the dislike factor for individual parties. I would be curious to see if it was always like this.
It may be fair to say that the tories did not do much to help themselves but the propaganda machine of the early Blair years with Campbell and Mandy was fantastically effective and on any view won the 2001 and 2005 elections despite the government itself being increasingly unpopular.
Cameron tried hard in his early years with his detoxification to change this but with limited success which is the only rational explanation I can find for nearly 30% of our fellow citizens who could be bothered to vote voting for Gordon Brown in 2010. There simply are not enough asylums for any other explanation.
After the omnishambles budget we had a pretty serious reprise of this but it seems to have faded, at least in the media with Ed being the target de jours.
It would be interesting to weigh these subjective perceptions against the polling record.0 -
Actually IDS made a very good point on Today this morning (well, several good points).
All the doomsters were saying that the introduction of the RTI (Real-Time Information) system for PAYE would be an unmitigated disaster and lead to complete chaos. It was certainly a huge change::
http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/news/article-2304199/Fears-chaos-PAYE-faces-reform-70-years.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/9975559/Chaos-over-biggest-employment-tax-shake-up-in-70-years.html
http://www.accountingweb.co.uk/anyanswers/question/warning-rti-will-be-chaotic
Guess what? It went smoothly, and has vanished from the news.
0 -
That looks like overwhelming opposition in the House, and probably includes a majority of both Republicans and Democrats.Sean_F said:
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2013/09/military-action-in-syria-where-the-house-stands/edmundintokyo said:OT Syria: ABC House whip count:
OPPOSE MILITARY ACTION IN SYRIA: 63
LIKELY TO OPPOSE: 136
SUPPORT MILITARY ACTION IN SYRIA: 20
LIKELY TO SUPPORT: 25
UNDECIDED: 153
UNKNOWN: 36
If the Senate (which has primacy in foreign affairs) votes Yes, and the House votes No, will Obama treat that as giving him the green light to attack?
To be cynical, Obama should stress the support of Iran and Hezbollah for the Syrian government, rather than the whole wishy-washy, liberal handwringing over poison gas. That should get some GOP votes.0 -
To be cynical, Obama should stress the support of Iran and Hezbollah for the Syrian government, rather than the whole wishy-washy, liberal handwringing over poison gas. That should get some GOP votes.Kevin_McCandless said:
That looks like overwhelming opposition in the House, and probably includes a majority of both Republicans and Democrats.Sean_F said:
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2013/09/military-action-in-syria-where-the-house-stands/edmundintokyo said:OT Syria: ABC House whip count:
OPPOSE MILITARY ACTION IN SYRIA: 63
LIKELY TO OPPOSE: 136
SUPPORT MILITARY ACTION IN SYRIA: 20
LIKELY TO SUPPORT: 25
UNDECIDED: 153
UNKNOWN: 36
If the Senate (which has primacy in foreign affairs) votes Yes, and the House votes No, will Obama treat that as giving him the green light to attack?
And just don't mention Al Qaeda...
Enterprising Republicans like Rand Paul are managing to attack him from both directions simultaneously, on the grounds that Obama has a plan to entangle them in a war but no plan to do enough to actually win it.0 -
Consider this post 'Liked'state_go_away said:taffys maybe sporting index shoudl do a 'sent to coventry' spread
1pt per snub (daily Mail adjuticated), 3 pts every time Obama refers to France in a positive way but not Britain , 5pts per the number of seats between Obama and Cameron at the official dinner and a 50pt bonus if Cameron runs after Obama in the kitchen0 -
Afternoon all.
Late on today, so this may have been posted before.
I’ve thought for some time that Labour would be rejected the next general election. I now think Labour may well not even contest that election. Ed Miliband should be giving the British people a choice in 2015. Instead, there is now a serious danger he will give the voters no choice but to hand a second term to David Cameron.
Labour is not just losing the 2015 election. As was the case in 1983 and 1987, it is losing its licence to govern.
Does anyone know who wrote this?0 -
FPT
Plato - Re: American survey of British cities
Yes, "Wales" and "Paris" were pretty incredible picks, but in relative terms surely no worse than one of the BBC2's Eggheads wrongly guessing that Dunstable and Biggleswade are both located in Suffolk.
There's hope for us all!0 -
For those disenchanted with politicians - perhaps its time to follow these examples
"...By the way, in case I haven't already mentioned it, Mayor Stubbs is a cat. Fifteen years ago the good people of Talkeetna elected old Stubbsy in a write-in campaign and since then he's proven to be a skilled and popular politician. From the Washington Post:
“We all love him,” said Geoff Pfeiffer, a waiter at the West Rib Pub and Cafe located inside the same building as the general store. The staff there is hanging on to Stubbs’ wine glass, hoping they get to fill it again with water and a catnip garnish, a feline cocktail for a regular who commands attention every time he comes in. “It’s like Elvis has entered the building,” Pfeiffer said.
Stubbs isn't the world's first animal mayor. Bosco, a Labrador-Rottweiler mix, served 13 years as the mayor of Sunol, California and was even invited to address Chinese revolutionaries during the Tiananmen Sqaure protests (I'm not making this up). A family of goats called the Clays have governed Lajitas, Texas since 1986. The current mayor, Henry Clay III, has a taste for beer that has developed into a full blown drink problem – so don't be surprised if we have another Chappaquiddick on our hands.
And in 1998, a Kentucky hamlet elected a German Shepherd called Goofy to put things in order. Goofy beat a human candidate by 8,000 votes – which must've stung his opponent. The town has elected two more canines since then, and the 2013 incumbent – Lucy Lou – has campaigned hard for the right of dogs to hang out in the general store. Sensible policies for a better tomorrow... >> http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/timstanley/100234418/cat-mayor-attacked-by-dog-in-alaska-was-this-an-assassination-attempt-by-human-politicians/0 -
Neil Kinnock ?AveryLP said:Afternoon all.
Late on today, so this may have been posted before.
I’ve thought for some time that Labour would be rejected the next general election. I now think Labour may well not even contest that election. Ed Miliband should be giving the British people a choice in 2015. Instead, there is now a serious danger he will give the voters no choice but to hand a second term to David Cameron.
Labour is not just losing the 2015 election. As was the case in 1983 and 1987, it is losing its licence to govern.
Does anyone know who wrote this?0 -
Administrators complaining about having to do work shock. Who would have thought it?RichardNabavi said:Actually IDS made a very good point on Today this morning (well, several good points).
All the doomsters were saying that the introduction of the RTI (Real-Time Information) system for PAYE would be an unmitigated disaster and lead to complete chaos. It was certainly a huge change::
http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/news/article-2304199/Fears-chaos-PAYE-faces-reform-70-years.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/9975559/Chaos-over-biggest-employment-tax-shake-up-in-70-years.html
http://www.accountingweb.co.uk/anyanswers/question/warning-rti-will-be-chaotic
Guess what? It went smoothly, and has vanished from the news.0 -
This is no more than anacdotal Richard based on irregular contact over the years but my perception is that there is a real and qualitative difference between the quality of civil servants working in the Treasury and the DSS or whatever it is called these days. The latter, in my experience, are almost invariably jobsworths hidebound by horrendously complicated regulations.RichardNabavi said:Actually IDS made a very good point on Today this morning (well, several good points).
All the doomsters were saying that the introduction of the RTI (Real-Time Information) system for PAYE would be an unmitigated disaster and lead to complete chaos. It was certainly a huge change::
http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/news/article-2304199/Fears-chaos-PAYE-faces-reform-70-years.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/9975559/Chaos-over-biggest-employment-tax-shake-up-in-70-years.html
http://www.accountingweb.co.uk/anyanswers/question/warning-rti-will-be-chaotic
Guess what? It went smoothly, and has vanished from the news.
I did wonder if coming from an army, can do, background IDS has found this particularly frustrating but these are highly technical issues and he seems to struggle with the never ending detail.
I would repeat this is not a particularly severe criticism. I have been involved in the odd judicial case about benefits and had to have regard to the law in this area. It is undoubtedly the most confusing and confused area of law I have ever come across. Really bewildering.
0 -
To be cynical, Obama should stress the support of Iran and Hezbollah for the Syrian government, rather than the whole wishy-washy, liberal handwringing over poison gas. That should get some GOP votes.Kevin_McCandless said:
That looks like overwhelming opposition in the House, and probably includes a majority of both Republicans and Democrats.Sean_F said:
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2013/09/military-action-in-syria-where-the-house-stands/edmundintokyo said:OT Syria: ABC House whip count:
OPPOSE MILITARY ACTION IN SYRIA: 63
LIKELY TO OPPOSE: 136
SUPPORT MILITARY ACTION IN SYRIA: 20
LIKELY TO SUPPORT: 25
UNDECIDED: 153
UNKNOWN: 36
If the Senate (which has primacy in foreign affairs) votes Yes, and the House votes No, will Obama treat that as giving him the green light to attack?
I suspect Obama doesn't want to get on the wrong side of Ed Miliband.0 -
It's a pain in the butt.RichardNabavi said:Actually IDS made a very good point on Today this morning (well, several good points).
All the doomsters were saying that the introduction of the RTI (Real-Time Information) system for PAYE would be an unmitigated disaster and lead to complete chaos. It was certainly a huge change::
http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/news/article-2304199/Fears-chaos-PAYE-faces-reform-70-years.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/9975559/Chaos-over-biggest-employment-tax-shake-up-in-70-years.html
http://www.accountingweb.co.uk/anyanswers/question/warning-rti-will-be-chaotic
Guess what? It went smoothly, and has vanished from the news.0 -
To repeat your wearisome and oft-used bleat, perhaps you can provide a link to predictions of a massive swing?CarlottaVance said:I see TUD was earlier trailing the Panelbase Leader satisfaction numbers.
By some bizarre oversight, he neglected to mention the other question Panelbase asked - what impact would the expected UK 2015 GE have on referendum voting intentions.
I can't imagine why.
Very/quite : Unlikely/Very unlikely to vote for independence:
Con/Con led govt: 50 : 41
Lab led govt: 47 : 42
That's the massive swing our friends in the north have been fondly predicting......
If you think a 4% difference wouldn't be important in what may be a very close result, I can only say I hope your BT pals are of a similarly complacent cast of mind. Nice that you're taking Panelbase seriously though.0 -
It is a pain in the butt, but it is actually working (at the moment)...Alanbrooke said:
It's a pain in the butt.RichardNabavi said:Actually IDS made a very good point on Today this morning (well, several good points).
All the doomsters were saying that the introduction of the RTI (Real-Time Information) system for PAYE would be an unmitigated disaster and lead to complete chaos. It was certainly a huge change::
http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/news/article-2304199/Fears-chaos-PAYE-faces-reform-70-years.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/9975559/Chaos-over-biggest-employment-tax-shake-up-in-70-years.html
http://www.accountingweb.co.uk/anyanswers/question/warning-rti-will-be-chaotic
Guess what? It went smoothly, and has vanished from the news.0 -
For all you Dan Fans
"...Labour, with a different leader and slightly more pragmatic taxation policy, could probably have won in 1992. David Cameron, had he driven the process of Conservative party modernisation through harder, would probably have won an overall majority in 2010. In both instances the government of the day had lost the trust of the people. But the opposition had not done quite enough to secure it.
The same could not be said of the elections of 1983, 1987, 2001 and 2005. None of them were up for grabs. An illegal war in Iraq. The destruction of the post-war social consensus. It didn’t matter. The government couldn’t “lose” those elections, because the opposition had moved into a political “dead zone”. They were unelectable. Their licence to govern had been revoked.
Watching Prime Minister’s Questions yesterday I realised that Labour is now teetering on the cusp of that political dead zone. As in 1983 and 1987, it is flirting with outright unelectability >> http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100234456/labour-is-losing-its-licence-to-govern/0
