One of my favourite 1980s albums is Yes's 90125 from 1983. The fact that it was produced by Trevor Horn is probably one of the main reasons it sounds so good IMO:
Will it all be silent until 11.00 tomorrow (UK time)?
I don't know offhand. Had a search but it seems to be surprisingly difficult to find out the answer.
HUYFD will probably know and I guess he'll be along in a moment.
Just wondered whether the first results will come through overnight.
They start counting the votes as soon as the polling stations close. That's 6pm their time and between 9 and 11am our time.
As I said earlier I'm hoping ABC News will allow a global audience to view their live feed while their election show is being broadcast. They did last time.
One of my favourite 1980s albums is Yes's 90125 from 1983. The fact that it was produced by Trevor Horn is probably one of the main reasons it sounds so good IMO:
As Dave claimed Britain had swept fascism from Europe can we assume his history/geography lessons didn't include Spain and Portugal, arguably Greece too.
Not sure about "Spain was fascist". At a personal level Franco certainly wasn't, a fact which caused him some problems in the internal politics of the Civil War. I'm sure most PBers are aware of the complexities on the Republican side - the kind of dispute and bloodshed that Orwell recounted - but there were issues among the rebels too, who did not represent a politically homogeneous bloc. Franco's rise to power is indicative of his ability to effectively mange those political difficulties.
Franco was allied to the fascists both internally and externally, but didn't follow the ideology and was more of a Catholic traditionalist and would-be autocrat himself. After winning the war, he effectively subsumed the Spanish fascists inside his Nationalist coalition and kept a thumb on them. So while fascist politicians took part in the Spanish government, it wasn't a fascist state, didn't throw its lot in with the cause of global fascism during WWII, and the overall political direction was Carlist. Like the Greek colonels, it was a deeply unpleasant regime, but it wasn't "fascist" in the ideological sense.
Franco wasn't a Carlist. The Carlists were almost exclusively from Navarra, but were part of the Nationalist coalition. Franco was a Francoist. His interest was making sure he retained power and that made him very flexible. He set himself up as a fascist and owed power to the Italians and Germans, when isolated after the war he emphasised his anti-communist credentials to curry favour with the Allies, in the 50s and 60s he ceded control of the economy to corporatists; in the 70s he essentially retired . "The banality of evil" could have been a phrase invented for him. Peter Preston (or was it Paul?) wrote a magnificent biography of him. If you haven't read it, I can thoroughly recommend it.
Probably not immediately, senators don't gain diplomatic immunity. He's mostly hoping it will keep him in the news so he might gain new supporters and he might be able to get the Aussie government into negotiating for him since his situation might start to make them look bad. More likely they'll 'disown' him and say he's on his own and the mainstream of politics wants nothing to do with him.
And I apologise to any Welsh Rugby fans I've upset with this thread
::Innocent face::
You of course realise that post 2003 we have been the dominant force in northern hemisphere rugby and this is likely to continue. Besides, Lewsey's half welsh and his hero was Ieauan Evans. I hope he does well.
In the UK you can watch a few seconds of ABC News 24 at this link before the picture cuts out, leaving you with just audio. It'll become available globally at 9am UK time:
"• Only five years ago, Nokia had 40% of global market share in mobile phone sales. It has since slumped to 14%. Nokia's slice of the smartphone market – 3.1% – means that it is ranked ninth in the world in this category."
Twitter Gerry Braiden @GerryBraiden 7m Scottish Labour politician charged with attempting to pervert the course of justice. Details @TheHeraldPaper tomorrow
Will it all be silent until 11.00 tomorrow (UK time)?
I don't know offhand. Had a search but it seems to be surprisingly difficult to find out the answer.
HUYFD will probably know and I guess he'll be along in a moment.
Just wondered whether the first results will come through overnight.
They start counting the votes as soon as the polling stations close. That's 6pm their time and between 9 and 11am our time.
As I said earlier I'm hoping ABC News will allow a global audience to view their live feed while their election show is being broadcast. They did last time.
Geoblock off so everyone can see the carnage. Exit polls info being leaked and it is looking like a bloodbath.
In New South Wales the Senate ballot paper has 110 candidates.
That means voters have to put 110 numbers into separate boxes if they want to choose their own preferences.
The alternative is to accept the pre-arranged preferences of their number one choice.
Which is why some people with almost no votes will be elected, like the DLP chap Madigan in Victoria with 2.5% of the vote last time on preferences from those who were removed earlier in the process. The 6th senator position in QLD is a doozy between Katter and Palmer parties, and the Green rent a gob Hanson Young looks in danger as 6th and last senator in South Australia. Without complicating it for UK people with limited knowledge, Coalition have 34 seats now in senate and need 37 votes for legislation to pass. Half re elected now and sit in July 14, except Northern Territory reps who are put in immediately. Expect 34 again and 3 who are not part of green-Labor alliance so paid parental leave and cancelling the mining taxes and carbon taxes would be a possibility. 1 seat less and things get messy. Right winger Hansen in NSW also has a chance for 6th seat there, even with limited preferences to her.
Its far too early for it to be good morning but wakened by the rain outside. On thread, Ben Cohen is the only one of these people I have heard of. Thankfully like all these other Reality programmes, Strictly will pass me by for yet another year. However the start of it clearly indicates we are in the run down to Christmas because they usually have the Final of these programmes just before Christmas.
Has Bland the Younger entered Strictly as a possible way to improve his popularlity? SKY News has been going big on the Falkirk fiasco. Should be lots of pro-Labour rhetoric at the TUC conference this weekend, or maybe not!
Large anti labor protest vote in QLD is going to cowboy Bob Katter and billionaire Clive Palmer. Google those 2 and see what anti-pollies are like, they are in nobodies pocket. Up yours to the main parties. Katter 1.01 to win his federal seat. they love him as he looks after his constituents.
Secondary schools face an overcrowding crisis due to Labour’s failure to deal with the effects of immigration.
The previous government’s ministers repeatedly ignored warnings about the fallout from soaring immigration and a baby boom – and even told councils to close schools with too many ‘surplus’ places.
Now a ‘restricted’ paper prepared by the Department for Education – which carries a warning that it is ‘very sensitive and should not be forwarded’ – has laid bare the scale of the so-called ‘ticking timebomb’ caused by Labour’s lack of planning, adding that ministers have ‘faced fears of an impending shortage for some years’.
A steady increase in the number of babies being born has helped fuel the crisis, with 120,000 more born in 2011 than in 2002. In addition, there has been a ‘threefold increase in net long-term migration since the mid-1990s’, the report adds.
The seven-page document cites evidence collected by the Home Office that the ‘impact of immigration has been substantial’, adding that it was seen ‘as an important contributory factor, through both the arrival of migrant children and the high birth rates of some migrant groups’.
Data released under the Freedom of Information Act confirms that internal estimates from the Labour government in May 2007 pointed to a rapid increase in the school population.
Nevertheless, seven months later Labour’s Education Department, then led by Ed Balls, advised councils to ‘close schools with consistently poor performance and/or excessive surplus places’
Secondary schools face an overcrowding crisis due to Labour’s failure to deal with the effects of immigration.
The previous government’s ministers repeatedly ignored warnings about the fallout from soaring immigration and a baby boom – and even told councils to close schools with too many ‘surplus’ places.
Now a ‘restricted’ paper prepared by the Department for Education – which carries a warning that it is ‘very sensitive and should not be forwarded’ – has laid bare the scale of the so-called ‘ticking timebomb’ caused by Labour’s lack of planning, adding that ministers have ‘faced fears of an impending shortage for some years’.
A steady increase in the number of babies being born has helped fuel the crisis, with 120,000 more born in 2011 than in 2002. In addition, there has been a ‘threefold increase in net long-term migration since the mid-1990s’, the report adds.
The seven-page document cites evidence collected by the Home Office that the ‘impact of immigration has been substantial’, adding that it was seen ‘as an important contributory factor, through both the arrival of migrant children and the high birth rates of some migrant groups’.
Data released under the Freedom of Information Act confirms that internal estimates from the Labour government in May 2007 pointed to a rapid increase in the school population.
Nevertheless, seven months later Labour’s Education Department, then led by Ed Balls, advised councils to ‘close schools with consistently poor performance and/or excessive surplus places’
If the Falkirk report vindicates Unite, this would leave a large amount of egg on his face. On this issue he seems to have acted before evidence, in contrast to his insistence on some evidence on Syria before a decision.
I still like EdM, but he increasingly looks like the freindless school nerd.
If the political class' wages were reduced to the average wage (and there was strict policing of them stealing public money from expenses or talking bribes from lobbyists) so they were literally forced to live among the consequences of their decisions then they'd have done something about this years ago.
Similarly if the political class had to live among the consequences of what they've done it wouldn't be possible for a criminal to be convicted twelve times in five years because in any sane criminal justice system the prior convictions would have guaranteed custodial time longer than that.
"He received his first reprimand in 2004 for common assault, and was then convicted of a further 12 offences over the next five years."
The man is 22 according to the article, and came to the UK in 1998, when he was seven.
His common assault conviction would have been aged 13. Unlikely to have been custodial sentences for such a juvenile offender.
He sounds a deeply unpleasant person, but has no real connection with Zimbabwe, having had 2/3 of his life in the UK.
Presumably he is one of the young migrants who tim thinks will be looking after us in our old age. In the meantime he seems to be keeping many lawyers, police and prison officers in work.
If the political class' wages were reduced to the average wage (and there was strict policing of them stealing public money from expenses or talking bribes from lobbyists) so they were literally forced to live among the consequences of their decisions then they'd have done something about this years ago.
Similarly if the political class had to live among the consequences of what they've done it wouldn't be possible for a criminal to be convicted twelve times in five years because in any sane criminal justice system the prior convictions would have guaranteed custodial time longer than that.
"He received his first reprimand in 2004 for common assault, and was then convicted of a further 12 offences over the next five years."
The man is 22 according to the article, and came to the UK in 1998, when he was seven.
His common assault conviction would have been aged 13. Unlikely to have been custodial sentences for such a juvenile offender.
He sounds a deeply unpleasant person, but has no real connection with Zimbabwe, having had 2/3 of his life in the UK.
Presumably he is one of the young migrants who tim thinks will be looking after us in our old age. In the meantime he seems to be keeping many lawyers, police and prison officers in work.
If the political class' wages were reduced to the average wage (and there was strict policing of them stealing public money from expenses or talking bribes from lobbyists) so they were literally forced to live among the consequences of their decisions then they'd have done something about this years ago.
Similarly if the political class had to live among the consequences of what they've done it wouldn't be possible for a criminal to be convicted twelve times in five years because in any sane criminal justice system the prior convictions would have guaranteed custodial time longer than that.
"He received his first reprimand in 2004 for common assault, and was then convicted of a further 12 offences over the next five years."
"His common assault conviction would have been aged 13. Unlikely to have been custodial sentences for such a juvenile offender."
There would be if this was happening where the political class live.
In New South Wales the Senate ballot paper has 110 candidates.
That means voters have to put 110 numbers into separate boxes if they want to choose their own preferences.
The alternative is to accept the pre-arranged preferences of their number one choice.
You only really need to enter as many preferences as will be needed until they're all distributed to elected candidates, or until the vacancies have been filled anyway. Unless someone insists on rating candidates in something like reverse order of popularity, they'd be unlucky if their vote didn't count after entering twice as many preferences as there are vacancies for, say, a 3+ STV seat.
A reminder to the lefties with short term and selective memory loss.. mainly tim and woger. The term "non story" is repeated because it was deemed a "non story" by every leftie poster on here from day one, in one form or another, particularly the Cheshire Famer. And that is an opinion tim.. woger.. if you are looking for someone suffering from Tourettes Syndrome look no further than a Farm in Cheshire or an offie in Liverpool, you may be a victim of it yourself, in my opinion
If the Falkirk report vindicates Unite, this would leave a large amount of egg on his face. On this issue he seems to have acted before evidence, in contrast to his insistence on some evidence on Syria before a decision.
I still like EdM, but he increasingly looks like the freindless school nerd.
I think it shows that the Unions play a role and Ed has to do what he is told for the common good on occasions.
I've got no real problems with Ed as a person. Using the slightly-ridiculous pub test, I could imagine sitting down with him for half an hour in the pub and having a pleasant chat about the state of the world. I can say the same for both Cameron and Clegg, but I just cannot imagine it with Brown.
A couple of months ago I pointed out that Miliband would probably be a bad PM because his track record as a minister was poor (especially at DECC). In particular, his apparent ability to be swayed by outside voices and celebrity, and not to make firm decisions that are politically difficult and stick to them.
The recent events over Syria and Falkirk just cement this opinion in my mind. He may be a good bloke, and he may or may not be as intelligent as Nick Palmer claims, but he is a poor leader of the opposition, and I seriously doubt he would make a good PM.
Labour have to hope that more of the population don't start having the same opinion of him.
A lot depends on how much of the "Ed is crap" factor is already built in to Labours poll lead.
Most normal people do not think about politics much between elections. I can see the Poll lead evaporating, but to keep out the Eds requires a reversal not just a closing of the gap.
That said, it is very rare in British electoral history for a first term government to not win the following election. Heath in 1974 seems to be the only one since 1930's. Coalitions are even more rare though!
If the Falkirk report vindicates Unite, this would leave a large amount of egg on his face. On this issue he seems to have acted before evidence, in contrast to his insistence on some evidence on Syria before a decision.
I still like EdM, but he increasingly looks like the freindless school nerd.
I think it shows that the Unions play a role and Ed has to do what he is told for the common good on occasions.
I've got no real problems with Ed as a person. Using the slightly-ridiculous pub test, I could imagine sitting down with him for half an hour in the pub and having a pleasant chat about the state of the world. I can say the same for both Cameron and Clegg, but I just cannot imagine it with Brown.
A couple of months ago I pointed out that Miliband would probably be a bad PM because his track record as a minister was poor (especially at DECC). In particular, his apparent ability to be swayed by outside voices and celebrity, and not to make firm decisions that are politically difficult and stick to them.
The recent events over Syria and Falkirk just cement this opinion in my mind. He may be a good bloke, and he may or may not be as intelligent as Nick Palmer claims, but he is a poor leader of the opposition, and I seriously doubt he would make a good PM.
Labour have to hope that more of the population don't start having the same opinion of him.
I do seem to recall forecasting that the Falkirk inquiry would end in tears for Ed. In the words of the great songwriter (talking about something a lot more serious)
You who philosophise disgrace and criticise all fears, Bury the rag deep in your face, For now is the time for your tears.”
His best hope is that few will notice and he will probably be right in that but his standing in the party will undoubtedly suffer. Very poor judgement from start to finish.
@IsabelOakeshott: I'm hearing some pretty extraordinary new claims about just why the Labour leadership concluded nobody did anything wrong in Falkirk...
Lucky Ed successfully buried this non-story yesterday.
Labour figures in Falkirk were furious with what one described as “a complete capitulation to the unions”.
“Ed Miliband is finished after this,” one angry member said. “He has capitulated. David Cameron will eat him alive. He is in the wrong job, I’m afraid. How would he deal with Syria if he cannot even take on Karie Murphy?”
Perhaps Tom Watson is going to talk about his role in Australian Labor's election success.
I doubt it - If, Abbott pulls off an election landslide, which is distinctly possibile according to Aus media – Watson will claim he was just visiting friends on holiday, or go into hiding.
@IsabelOakeshott: Joyce says Unite has "vanquished" the Labour leadership. Does @Ed_Miliband actually *want* to win the next election? A whitewash, says Joyce
Isabel Oakeshott @IsabelOakeshott Miaaow! @tom_watson still publicly sniping at shadow defence secretary @jimmurphymp for having gall to ask tricky questions. Extraordinary!
I was thinking about the is-Ed-a-man-of-the-people question yesterday, when Cameron did his 'Hugh Grant from Love Actually' thing at the G20.
At first, I thought that I couldn't imagine EdM doing that because I don't think he's willing to put his sense of humour to the public (if he has one), and that that sort of thing would limit his appeal.
Maybe. One could see Tony Blair pulling off a slight parody of himself (or of his office) in the same way, whereas I can't imagine Gordon Brown going for it - or if he was persuaded to do so, it'd be horribly stilted. Blair won three elections, Brown none.
So far, so obvious: the public like their leaders to have a less serious side? Well, maybe. Go back a bit further and it's precisely the kind of gentle humour that John Major could have made work. Margaret Thatcher on the other hand appeared to have a Brown-like humour bypass. Yet she won three times while Major's record was far more mixed.
At the margin, the likability question does matter and will sway a few votes - but not anything like the number that will be determined on other factors.
In New South Wales the Senate ballot paper has 110 candidates.
That means voters have to put 110 numbers into separate boxes if they want to choose their own preferences.
The alternative is to accept the pre-arranged preferences of their number one choice.
You only really need to enter as many preferences as will be needed until they're all distributed to elected candidates, or until the vacancies have been filled anyway. Unless someone insists on rating candidates in something like reverse order of popularity, they'd be unlucky if their vote didn't count after entering twice as many preferences as there are vacancies for, say, a 3+ STV seat.
IIUC Australian Senate elections have some amazingly mad rules where if you opt to control the preferences yourself rather than doing the "above-the-line" thing you have to number all the way down or your vote is counted as spoiled.
That would require a big change to the upper ranks of the party to have learnt lessons from the Brown war on Blair and his coronation. There is not much evidence in the past of Labour being an organisation that learns.
Eds problem is not that he is crap, it is that he is trying to lead a nest of vipers.
TSE, cheers for the link – excellent reporting so far, the commentator appears to know his onion and they are using a big hi-tech touch screen, easy to follow who, what and where. – And so far, no daft prats, dressed as a cowboy.
In New South Wales the Senate ballot paper has 110 candidates.
That means voters have to put 110 numbers into separate boxes if they want to choose their own preferences.
The alternative is to accept the pre-arranged preferences of their number one choice.
You only really need to enter as many preferences as will be needed until they're all distributed to elected candidates, or until the vacancies have been filled anyway. Unless someone insists on rating candidates in something like reverse order of popularity, they'd be unlucky if their vote didn't count after entering twice as many preferences as there are vacancies for, say, a 3+ STV seat.
IIUC Australian Senate elections have some amazingly mad rules where if you opt to control the preferences yourself rather than doing the "above-the-line" thing you have to number all the way down or your vote is counted as spoiled.
Now you mention it, that rings a bell with me too. And as you say, how ridiculous.
Gaby Hinsliff @gabyhinsliff @IsabelOakeshott How could Ed be so sure, on basis of report, it was dodgy that he practically bankrupted party over it & then...it isn't?
spot on. When choosing who to be PM I think differently to who go down the pub with. I am sure that farage is a witty and entertaining drinking buddy, while Ed is rather earnest and would be on the mineral water.
As PM, I would prefer the designated driver to the barroom lad.
Labour have not put up a spokesman so the Today programmer has been one "Ed is crap" comment after another. No attempt to defend Ed from anyone. Maybe he is doomed.
I was thinking about the is-Ed-a-man-of-the-people question yesterday, when Cameron did his 'Hugh Grant from Love Actually' thing at the G20.
At first, I thought that I couldn't imagine EdM doing that because I don't think he's willing to put his sense of humour to the public (if he has one), and that that sort of thing would limit his appeal.
Maybe. One could see Tony Blair pulling off a slight parody of himself (or of his office) in the same way, whereas I can't imagine Gordon Brown going for it - or if he was persuaded to do so, it'd be horribly stilted. Blair won three elections, Brown none.
So far, so obvious: the public like their leaders to have a less serious side? Well, maybe. Go back a bit further and it's precisely the kind of gentle humour that John Major could have made work. Margaret Thatcher on the other hand appeared to have a Brown-like humour bypass. Yet she won three times while Major's record was far more mixed.
At the margin, the likability question does matter and will sway a few votes - but not anything like the number that will be determined on other factors.
Interesting because it makes apparent just how little has moved on in three years. Then, she rightly said
What is the Labour party for? Is it an opposition-machine, cranking out mechanical hostility to everything the coalition does? Or is it a government in waiting with a coherent and distinctive idea about where Britain should be heading? That's the question being flung at Ed Miliband by almost every newspaper and by many of his own MPs. Go on, Ed, give us the answer: do it now, do it in your next big speech, do it before we write you off as a loser. It is the wrong question. Or rather, it's the right question at the wrong time.
It might have been the wrong time in November 2010. It's still the right question and it's increasingly the right time too.
I saw the coverage (it didn’t look good for Rudd) – And what on earth was all the nonsense about not allowing him to be filmed casting his vote? – A total PR horlicks from start to finish.
spot on. When choosing who to be PM I think differently to who go down the pub with. I am sure that farage is a witty and entertaining drinking buddy, while Ed is rather earnest and would be on the mineral water.
As PM, I would prefer the designated driver to the barroom lad.
Labour have not put up a spokesman so the Today programmer has been one "Ed is crap" comment after another. No attempt to defend Ed from anyone. Maybe he is doomed.
I was thinking about the is-Ed-a-man-of-the-people question yesterday, when Cameron did his 'Hugh Grant from Love Actually' thing at the G20.
At first, I thought that I couldn't imagine EdM doing that because I don't think he's willing to put his sense of humour to the public (if he has one), and that that sort of thing would limit his appeal.
Maybe. One could see Tony Blair pulling off a slight parody of himself (or of his office) in the same way, whereas I can't imagine Gordon Brown going for it - or if he was persuaded to do so, it'd be horribly stilted. Blair won three elections, Brown none.
So far, so obvious: the public like their leaders to have a less serious side? Well, maybe. Go back a bit further and it's precisely the kind of gentle humour that John Major could have made work. Margaret Thatcher on the other hand appeared to have a Brown-like humour bypass. Yet she won three times while Major's record was far more mixed.
At the margin, the likability question does matter and will sway a few votes - but not anything like the number that will be determined on other factors.
Are you sure? When it comes time to leave, Ed will still be nursing his first drink at the bar, talking on the phone to his mother about what to order. "A Perrier? No mum, it isn't a bourgeois drink. Hold on, I'll just give Tom a phone, he knows all the trendy stuff. He told me about this groovy new band, Dredge or something. No, I won't phone David; he only drinks banana smoothies anyway..."
Meanwhile, Cameron will be trashing the snug with his mates, and Clegg'd be in the corner on his own, with a pint of mild and his nose in a book. Brown wouldn't be there after he was barred for using his big clunking fist once too often. Major'd be outside watching the cricket on the village green, whilst Salmond would be in the marquee with a few acolytes, planning on splitting the north end of the village away from the rest, hoping to pay for it by selling the water from the village well.
Likeability does matter, in as much as it helps set the media narrative (at least more than crying at funerals does). Brown had an unusual public personae: he was not particularly likeable per se, but his slugger reputation and big fist may perversely have helped him in some quarters.
Such is the toxicity of the Tory brand among a goodly proportion of the electorate that even the undoubted crapness of Ed may not prevent him from becoming the next PM.
Such is the toxicity of the Tory brand among a goodly proportion of the electorate that even the undoubted crapness of Ed may not prevent him from becoming the next PM.
Perhaps you should be asking yourself if that toxicity is truly deserved, and whether things like the Falkirk shenanigans, Joyce's violence and the McBride scandal might indicate that Labour is much more toxic.
spot on. When choosing who to be PM I think differently to who go down the pub with. I am sure that farage is a witty and entertaining drinking buddy, while Ed is rather earnest and would be on the mineral water.
As PM, I would prefer the designated driver to the barroom lad.
Labour have not put up a spokesman so the Today programmer has been one "Ed is crap" comment after another. No attempt to defend Ed from anyone. Maybe he is doomed.
I was thinking about the is-Ed-a-man-of-the-people question yesterday, when Cameron did his 'Hugh Grant from Love Actually' thing at the G20.
At first, I thought that I couldn't imagine EdM doing that because I don't think he's willing to put his sense of humour to the public (if he has one), and that that sort of thing would limit his appeal.
Maybe. One could see Tony Blair pulling off a slight parody of himself (or of his office) in the same way, whereas I can't imagine Gordon Brown going for it - or if he was persuaded to do so, it'd be horribly stilted. Blair won three elections, Brown none.
So far, so obvious: the public like their leaders to have a less serious side? Well, maybe. Go back a bit further and it's precisely the kind of gentle humour that John Major could have made work. Margaret Thatcher on the other hand appeared to have a Brown-like humour bypass. Yet she won three times while Major's record was far more mixed.
At the margin, the likability question does matter and will sway a few votes - but not anything like the number that will be determined on other factors.
Are you sure? When it comes time to leave, Ed will still be nursing his first drink at the bar, talking on the phone to his mother about what to order. "A Perrier? No mum, it isn't a bourgeois drink. Hold on, I'll just give Tom a phone, he knows all the trendy stuff. He told me about this groovy new band, Dredge or something. No, I won't phone David; he only drinks banana smoothies anyway..."
Meanwhile, Cameron will be trashing the snug with his mates, and Clegg'd be in the corner on his own, with a pint of mild and his nose in a book. Brown wouldn't be there after he was barred for using his big clunking fist once too often. Major'd be outside watching the cricket on the village green, whilst Salmond would be in the marquee with a few acolytes, planning on splitting the north end of the village away from the rest, hoping to pay for it by selling the water from the village well.
Likeability does matter, in as much as it helps set the media narrative (at least more than crying at funerals does). Brown had an unusual public personae: he was not particularly likeable per se, but his slugger reputation and big fist may perversely have helped him in some quarters.
Such is the toxicity of the Tory brand among a goodly proportion of the electorate that even the undoubted crapness of Ed may not prevent him from becoming the next PM.
I take it the comfort blanket mantras will be running all week given Ed's poor start to the Parliamentary session. Maybe if Ed had just published some policies people would be focussing on those instead of the vacuum of his personality. And the crap meme cuts both ways, if Labour can't defeat a foppy porpoise flashman will they ever be in government again, their brand is dying. etc. etc. wake me up when it's finished.
Such is the toxicity of the Tory brand among a goodly proportion of the electorate that even the undoubted crapness of Ed may not prevent him from becoming the next PM.
Perhaps you should be asking yourself if that toxicity is truly deserved, and whether things like the Falkirk shenanigans, Joyce's violence and the McBride scandal might indicate that Labour is much more toxic.
Yes, I think it is deserved. But whether I'm right or not it undoubtedly exists. One day the Tories may stop blaming everyone else for that and will take up Theresa May's challenge to address it. If EdM did somehow get the keys to No 10 maybe that would do it. To not secure majorities against Gordon and then Ed would be a damning indictment.
tim has somehow contived to make a report about an MP backing down from a court case to the PM tweeting pics of himself with bereaved parents.. What is a field completely overrun with rabbits called?.
Such is the toxicity of the Tory brand among a goodly proportion of the electorate that even the undoubted crapness of Ed may not prevent him from becoming the next PM.
I take it the comfort blanket mantras will be running all week given Ed's poor start to the Parliamentary session. Maybe if Ed had just published some policies people would be focussing on those instead of the vacuum of his personality. And the crap meme cuts both ways, if Labour can't defeat a foppy porpoise flashman will they ever be in government again, their brand is dying. etc. etc. wake me up when it's finished.
Labour's excuse will be that Ed is crap, handily forgetting that Labour chose Ed at its leader and for over four years ignored all the very clear signs that he was regarded as a joke. The Tories won't have that excuse with Cameron, who is much more popular than the party he leads.
If your point is that our current party system routinely fails the country I could not agree more. Voters are presented with a poor choice. I blame FPTP.
@MichaelLCrick: Puzzle on Falkirk is does Lab still feel Unite guilty + witnesses leant on? Or is talk of "withdrawn" evidence to hide Ed Mil's red face?
Such is the toxicity of the Tory brand among a goodly proportion of the electorate that even the undoubted crapness of Ed may not prevent him from becoming the next PM.
Ed still needs to enthuse his side to the polls. IIRC, the thread the other day said that 57% of the population dislike the Tory Party, or some such similar wording. That sounds like quite a lot (and is) but if there's only a 55% turnout, for example, because many believe that they're all useless / the same / in it for themselves etc. then that only guarantees 22% of those voting actively dislike the Tories. A 70% turnout guarantees that figure rises to 39%.
Enthusing those who dislike the Tories but have a low propensity to turnout is key to Miliband's GE chances. Relying on 'Not Being the Others' isn't enough.
Such is the toxicity of the Tory brand among a goodly proportion of the electorate that even the undoubted crapness of Ed may not prevent him from becoming the next PM.
Perhaps you should be asking yourself if that toxicity is truly deserved, and whether things like the Falkirk shenanigans, Joyce's violence and the McBride scandal might indicate that Labour is much more toxic.
Yes, I think it is deserved. But whether I'm right or not it undoubtedly exists. One day the Tories may stop blaming everyone else for that and will take up Theresa May's challenge to address it. If EdM did somehow get the keys to No 10 maybe that would do it. To not secure majorities against Gordon and then Ed would be a damning indictment.
Look at what is going on inside your own party and work out which party really deserves a 'toxic' label, if any.
The problem is that the Conservatives cannot really address this perception, as idiots will still keep on calling them toxic whatever they do. *Any* hard decision a politicians makes will effect people negatively. When Labour makes the decision it it is fine; when the Conservatives make the same or similar decision, it is toxic. Witness the spare room subsidy / bedroom tax situation.
Worse, this stupid habit of calling the Conservative's 'toxic' allows Labour to hide some hideous practices. After all, the Conservatives are toxic and worse, aren't they?
SO.. blames FPTP .. Lefties always blame something or someone else. You lot picked the dork .. no-one else
To be fair, Labour did not pick the dork, they picked his brother.
The unions picked the dork.
It's an interesting dilemma for Len and the boys. Obviously they want a feeble patsy as Labour leader, which they've got, but he needs to be not too crap to win the GE, which is looking decidedly problematic now
Comments
IMO Rudd did really well to make the election interesting, if he did will enough to make it close that would be remarkable.
Just wondered whether the first results will come through overnight.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/90125
As I said earlier I'm hoping ABC News will allow a global audience to view their live feed while their election show is being broadcast. They did last time.
http://boothrev.net/
http://www.abc.net.au/news/abcnews24/
http://andrewelder.blogspot.com.au/
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/06/microsoft-nokia-finns-mourn-fame
http://roymorgan.com.au/findings/5170-morgan-federal-election-exit-polls-201309070155
That means voters have to put 110 numbers into separate boxes if they want to choose their own preferences.
The alternative is to accept the pre-arranged preferences of their number one choice.
BBC News - Row over Falkirk vote-rigging report
"Labour is under pressure to publish an internal report that cleared Unite of claims it tried to rig the selection of a party candidate in Falkirk.
Its investigation said no rules were broken and two union officials at the centre of the row have been reinstated.
The Tories said it showed the union was "calling the shots" in the party, and the report should be made public.
But Labour defended the investigation, saying it had "acted quickly to protect the interests of the party""
Daily Mail - Miliband in humiliating retreat over Unite dispute as Labour withdraws vote-rigging claims against union panel
The 6th senator position in QLD is a doozy between Katter and Palmer parties, and the Green rent a gob Hanson Young looks in danger as 6th and last senator in South Australia.
Without complicating it for UK people with limited knowledge, Coalition have 34 seats now in senate and need 37 votes for legislation to pass. Half re elected now and sit in July 14, except Northern Territory reps who are put in immediately. Expect 34 again and 3 who are not part of green-Labor alliance so paid parental leave and cancelling the mining taxes and carbon taxes would be a possibility. 1 seat less and things get messy. Right winger Hansen in NSW also has a chance for 6th seat there, even with limited preferences to her.
Has Bland the Younger entered Strictly as a possible way to improve his popularlity? SKY News has been going big on the Falkirk fiasco. Should be lots of pro-Labour rhetoric at the TUC conference this weekend, or maybe not!
A couple of Highland declarations from 10th June 1983:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YB3cW0mJe90&
Google those 2 and see what anti-pollies are like, they are in nobodies pocket. Up yours to the main parties. Katter 1.01 to win his federal seat. they love him as he looks after his constituents.
Secondary schools face an overcrowding crisis due to Labour’s failure to deal with the effects of immigration.
The previous government’s ministers repeatedly ignored warnings about the fallout from soaring immigration and a baby boom – and even told councils to close schools with too many ‘surplus’ places.
Now a ‘restricted’ paper prepared by the Department for Education – which carries a warning that it is ‘very sensitive and should not be forwarded’ – has laid bare the scale of the so-called ‘ticking timebomb’ caused by Labour’s lack of planning, adding that ministers have ‘faced fears of an impending shortage for some years’.
A steady increase in the number of babies being born has helped fuel the crisis, with 120,000 more born in 2011 than in 2002. In addition, there has been a ‘threefold increase in net long-term migration since the mid-1990s’, the report adds.
The seven-page document cites evidence collected by the Home Office that the ‘impact of immigration has been substantial’, adding that it was seen ‘as an important contributory factor, through both the arrival of migrant children and the high birth rates of some migrant groups’.
Data released under the Freedom of Information Act confirms that internal estimates from the Labour government in May 2007 pointed to a rapid increase in the school population.
Nevertheless, seven months later Labour’s Education Department, then led by Ed Balls, advised councils to ‘close schools with consistently poor performance and/or excessive surplus places’
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2414323/Migrant-influx-fuels-new-crisis-schools-Now-secondary-schools-face-shortage-places.html#ixzz2eBHU30mr
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
I still like EdM, but he increasingly looks like the freindless school nerd.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/10291983/Criminal-who-burned-womans-face-can-stay-in-Britain-because-of-his-human-rights.html
Similarly if the political class had to live among the consequences of what they've done it wouldn't be possible for a criminal to be convicted twelve times in five years because in any sane criminal justice system the prior convictions would have guaranteed custodial time longer than that.
"He received his first reprimand in 2004 for common assault, and was then convicted of a further 12 offences over the next five years."
His common assault conviction would have been aged 13. Unlikely to have been custodial sentences for such a juvenile offender.
He sounds a deeply unpleasant person, but has no real connection with Zimbabwe, having had 2/3 of his life in the UK.
Presumably he is one of the young migrants who tim thinks will be looking after us in our old age. In the meantime he seems to be keeping many lawyers, police and prison officers in work.
There would be if this was happening where the political class live.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-23999054
Kicks out Watson, for backing Unite's candidate, who had worked for him. Reinstates suspended members.
Can't be over, until the fat man sings.
It would appear this well regarded exit poll confirms recent polling 52/48 in favour of the Lib/Nat Coalition.
The term "non story" is repeated because it was deemed a "non story" by every leftie poster on here from day one, in one form or another, particularly the Cheshire Famer.
And that is an opinion tim..
woger.. if you are looking for someone suffering from Tourettes Syndrome look no further than a Farm in Cheshire or an offie in Liverpool, you may be a victim of it yourself, in my opinion
A couple of months ago I pointed out that Miliband would probably be a bad PM because his track record as a minister was poor (especially at DECC). In particular, his apparent ability to be swayed by outside voices and celebrity, and not to make firm decisions that are politically difficult and stick to them.
The recent events over Syria and Falkirk just cement this opinion in my mind. He may be a good bloke, and he may or may not be as intelligent as Nick Palmer claims, but he is a poor leader of the opposition, and I seriously doubt he would make a good PM.
Labour have to hope that more of the population don't start having the same opinion of him.
Most normal people do not think about politics much between elections. I can see the Poll lead evaporating, but to keep out the Eds requires a reversal not just a closing of the gap.
That said, it is very rare in British electoral history for a first term government to not win the following election. Heath in 1974 seems to be the only one since 1930's. Coalitions are even more rare though! I've got no real problems with Ed as a person. Using the slightly-ridiculous pub test, I could imagine sitting down with him for half an hour in the pub and having a pleasant chat about the state of the world. I can say the same for both Cameron and Clegg, but I just cannot imagine it with Brown.
A couple of months ago I pointed out that Miliband would probably be a bad PM because his track record as a minister was poor (especially at DECC). In particular, his apparent ability to be swayed by outside voices and celebrity, and not to make firm decisions that are politically difficult and stick to them.
The recent events over Syria and Falkirk just cement this opinion in my mind. He may be a good bloke, and he may or may not be as intelligent as Nick Palmer claims, but he is a poor leader of the opposition, and I seriously doubt he would make a good PM.
Labour have to hope that more of the population don't start having the same opinion of him.
http://www.itv.com/news/update/2013-09-06/labour-falkirk-mp-very-significant-victory-for-unite/
Perhaps Ed should be worried with Watson goes off to visit Ed Balls (or some other figure) clutching a teddy bear for the kids...
If you want to watch live coverage of the Australian Election, Double Carpet has provided a link
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-05-27/abc-news-24-stream-international/212310
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/sep/06/alastair-campbell-threat-military-action
You who philosophise disgrace and criticise all fears,
Bury the rag deep in your face,
For now is the time for your tears.”
His best hope is that few will notice and he will probably be right in that but his standing in the party will undoubtedly suffer. Very poor judgement from start to finish.
electionista @electionista
#AusVotes - Newspoll/Sky News exit poll: L-NP 97 seats, ALP 21 seats // two-party preferred: L-NP 53%, ALP 47% theaustralian.com.au/national-affai…
Lucky Ed successfully buried this non-story yesterday.
Miaaow! @tom_watson still publicly sniping at shadow defence secretary @jimmurphymp for having gall to ask tricky questions. Extraordinary!
At first, I thought that I couldn't imagine EdM doing that because I don't think he's willing to put his sense of humour to the public (if he has one), and that that sort of thing would limit his appeal.
Maybe. One could see Tony Blair pulling off a slight parody of himself (or of his office) in the same way, whereas I can't imagine Gordon Brown going for it - or if he was persuaded to do so, it'd be horribly stilted. Blair won three elections, Brown none.
So far, so obvious: the public like their leaders to have a less serious side? Well, maybe. Go back a bit further and it's precisely the kind of gentle humour that John Major could have made work. Margaret Thatcher on the other hand appeared to have a Brown-like humour bypass. Yet she won three times while Major's record was far more mixed.
At the margin, the likability question does matter and will sway a few votes - but not anything like the number that will be determined on other factors.
Eds problem is not that he is crap, it is that he is trying to lead a nest of vipers.
@IsabelOakeshott How could Ed be so sure, on basis of report, it was dodgy that he practically bankrupted party over it & then...it isn't?
As PM, I would prefer the designated driver to the barroom lad.
Labour have not put up a spokesman so the Today programmer has been one "Ed is crap" comment after another. No attempt to defend Ed from anyone. Maybe he is doomed.
The harsh spotlight of a GE campaign is yet to come.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-09-07/chaotic-scenes-as-kevin-rudd-arrivesto-cast-ballot/4942682
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-09-07/protesters-confront-tony-abbott-during-visit-to-sydney-polling/4942636
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2010/nov/22/labour-ed-miliband-zen-socialism
Interesting because it makes apparent just how little has moved on in three years. Then, she rightly said It might have been the wrong time in November 2010. It's still the right question and it's increasingly the right time too.
Maybe time for a next leader thread?
What is the method of defenestration favoured by the Labour Rulebook?
http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/2013/09/07/election-night-live/?comment_page=1/#comments
Meanwhile, Cameron will be trashing the snug with his mates, and Clegg'd be in the corner on his own, with a pint of mild and his nose in a book. Brown wouldn't be there after he was barred for using his big clunking fist once too often. Major'd be outside watching the cricket on the village green, whilst Salmond would be in the marquee with a few acolytes, planning on splitting the north end of the village away from the rest, hoping to pay for it by selling the water from the village well.
Likeability does matter, in as much as it helps set the media narrative (at least more than crying at funerals does). Brown had an unusual public personae: he was not particularly likeable per se, but his slugger reputation and big fist may perversely have helped him in some quarters.
P.s: has PB's layout changed?
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/sep/06/uk-lowest-paid-classed-not-working-enough
Hey poor people, how dare you have a poorly paid job; we're going to punish you for that!
Off to walk the dog, and to see what Salmond is up to with that well...
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-09-07/election-day-live/4942328
THE SITE IS NOT ACCEPTING COMMENTS ABOUT UPCOMING COURT CASES.. PARTICULARLY THE ONE YOU MENTIONED
Sometimes you have to lie down and take your medicine when you have an infection. A 3 year lie down. #ausvotes #auspol
What is a field completely overrun with rabbits called?.
1.25 pts on Gumede @ 5.50
1 pt on Riley @ 6.50
0.75 pts on Sophie Ellis Baxter @ 9.00
0.5 pts on Ben Cohen @ 12.00
If your point is that our current party system routinely fails the country I could not agree more. Voters are presented with a poor choice. I blame FPTP.
@MichaelLCrick: Puzzle on Falkirk is does Lab still feel Unite guilty + witnesses leant on? Or is talk of "withdrawn" evidence to hide Ed Mil's red face?
Enthusing those who dislike the Tories but have a low propensity to turnout is key to Miliband's GE chances. Relying on 'Not Being the Others' isn't enough.
The problem is that the Conservatives cannot really address this perception, as idiots will still keep on calling them toxic whatever they do. *Any* hard decision a politicians makes will effect people negatively. When Labour makes the decision it it is fine; when the Conservatives make the same or similar decision, it is toxic. Witness the spare room subsidy / bedroom tax situation.
Worse, this stupid habit of calling the Conservative's 'toxic' allows Labour to hide some hideous practices. After all, the Conservatives are toxic and worse, aren't they?
Except they're not.
My wor Kevin isn't a happy camper, is he?
"So Ed Miliband triggered the gravest constitutional crisis in his party’s 113-year history on a case thinner than a size zero model.
The unions picked the dork.
It's an interesting dilemma for Len and the boys. Obviously they want a feeble patsy as Labour leader, which they've got, but he needs to be not too crap to win the GE, which is looking decidedly problematic now