politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » With Dacre attacks on the Guardian and Cameron attacks on t
Comments
-
As a 2010 LD voter (!) I can certainly say that there is no surprise in seeing their trust level go through the floor. Voters have longer memories than Mr Clegg had hoped, and this is another pointer to show that their lost voters won't be returning in 2015.
On a brighter note, I saw 5 dippers on the River Tees today!0 -
On the other hand, some cunning political stunts do backfire.
http://politicalscrapbook.net/2013/03/question-time-audience-member-slams-ukip-on-immigration-stats/
In this case the ordinary member of public = Labour activist.
Re Wharton, are his agent and PR advisers able to organise the opening of bottles in a brewery?0 -
Twitter
Ed Fraser @frasereC4 59s
“@meropemills: Paul Dacre's Guardian piece now has over 3000 comments. Think that might be a record http://gu.com/p/3jfpd/tw ”0 -
SandyRentool said:
As a 2010 LD voter (!) I can certainly say that there is no surprise in seeing their trust level go through the floor. Voters have longer memories than Mr Clegg had hoped, and this is another pointer to show that their lost voters won't be returning in 2015.
On a brighter note, I saw 5 dippers on the River Tees today!
I'm with you Mr Rentoul. I'm a long term Lib & LibDem voter and I'm disgusted by Clegg. Not sure whether I'll sit on my hands or vote Labour next time.SandyRentool said:As a 2010 LD voter (!) I can certainly say that there is no surprise in seeing their trust level go through the floor. Voters have longer memories than Mr Clegg had hoped, and this is another pointer to show that their lost voters won't be returning in 2015.
On a brighter note, I saw 5 dippers on the River Tees today!
Different leader and I might be persuaded to stay with LibDems.
I'm disappointed in Cable, too, but I think that at least he's shown willing.
0 -
These comments have been chosen by Guardian staff because they contribute to the debate.
No comments have been picked yet.
3082 - bet the moderators are spoilt for choice re rejected comments.0 -
-
To be fair on tim, he is rarely an advocate of Labour or Ed Miliband. Indeed he very rarely makes positive comments about anything apart from immigration and social housing.
He is essentially a Dementor with an entirely negative aura. So Ed is not his man. Ed is capable of being positive.TGOHF said:tim said:TGOHF said:
Cam is PM - your chap won a rigged vote , a few mid term polls and warm words from red Len and the sycophantic leftie twatterati - ie the square root of ferk all.tim said:
Then it would be quite remarkable if Cameron and Osborne allowed labour to recover by 2015 wouldn't itTCPoliticalBetting said:
Polls and opinions come and go - but here's a fact :JosiasJessop said:TwistedFireStopper said:
I like being anonymous.
You chose not to be as that suits your personality, and your professional life as an author, blogger and journo.
What happened to tim on here a few years ago was disgusting, and not one of PB's finest hours, although I don't know all the specifics, I think I remember tim's name, his rough location and job, details which it's absolutely none of my business knowing. There was also something involving TSE a few years ago as well, again, I can't recall the specifics, again, it's none of my business.
Labour got only 28.1% of the votes in the GE in England.
They were thrashed - humiliated.
Until he wins a GE you might be advised to tone down the bragging. Pride, fall etc - some Sat night advice for free.0 -
I think Mark Senior did. Apologies to him if not.tim said:
Who predicted a Lib Dem gain?Easterross said:Who knows what will happen in Scotland next year Mick let alone in 2015. One thing is for certain, neither you nor the wine salesman have any better idea than I have as to what will happen. None of you saw an 18% increase in the Tory vote in Tweeddale West on Thursday, that's for sure. You all predicted a LibDem gain. Like the SNP they lost 8% of their vote.
No Opinium tonight?0 -
POACWAS.
Alastair Campbell @campbellclaret 11m
Channel 4 joining in anti Mail conspiracy properly. They cut out the bits where I said Dacre a bully/coward, and Rothermere spineless0 -
So what polls can we look forward to this evening?0
-
Pity the poor estate agent. On a par with Sun/Mirror/Star levels of comical mistrust. Tragic.
Though I somehow doubt that 'Mugabe' Dacre will be pleased that Trade Union Leaders rank higher in the public level of trust than his paper. But at least he narrowly beats leading Con politicians in trust so that must be some consolation.
Poor old PB Dacres.
*chortle*0 -
Hats off to the Borderers ;Easterross said:Who knows what will happen in Scotland next year Mick let alone in 2015. One thing is for certain, neither you nor the wine salesman have any better idea than I have as to what will happen. None of you saw an 18% increase in the Tory vote in Tweeddale West on Thursday, that's for sure. You all predicted a LibDem gain. Like the SNP they lost 8% of their vote.
Really stunning Tweeddale West by-election result: @Conservatives 43% (+18%); Lab 8% (-1%); LD 25% (-10%); SNP 13% (-9%); Ukip 1.6%; Oth 12%
0 -
From T'Guardain
3106 comments and counting - now there's obsession for you.0 -
Blimey. I'm amazed that anyone trusts us considering we're responsible for all society's ills.0
-
Lord Pearson put forward a bill to make non-payment of the TV licence a civil offence, rather than a criminal offence. I'm expecting to see that policy in UKIP's 2015 manifesto.Mick_Pork said:On the subject of the license fee, I have to wonder if some of little Ed's policy wonks are mulling over the idea of big changes. It's the kind of issue Labour could get away with promising big change on while the tories motives would likely be viewed with intense mistrust.
Given little Ed's new found fondness for taking on all and sundry then the BBC would seem to be the next in line. It also presupposes that little Ed might be fond of a headline grabbing manifesto promise like "we'll slash the license fee" which, given recent events, is quite likely.
If I were a BBC manager I'd be drawing up contingency plans for a freemium type model because the public is indeed growing more hostile to the license fee as technology gives them so many more options. So some kind of change is inevitable. Even the lib dems might be persuaded to look at it again.
http://www.ukip.org/newsroom/news/842-ukip-call-for-bbc-non-payment-to-be-made-a-civil-not-criminal-offence
0 -
Those horrible marxist Teachers come in second with a minute 74%
No wonder it's a puzzle to so many tea party tories why the twit Gove doesn't poll well with the voters.0 -
Absolutely. As I said above, I've got no problem with anonymity; it's a personal choice, and often a necessity.antifrank said:All posters are entitled to reveal as much or as little information about themselves as they choose. No poster should have their own personal information revealed publicly without their explicit agreement. All of us draw the boundary between private and public information differently. Some can only contribute fully with full anonymity.
Anyway, does it really matter what any one poster's individual circumstances are? What matters is whether what they are arguing stands up or not.
The problem occurs when anonymity is abused, which can occur in either direction.
You just need to look to New Orleans for a recent case of people using anonymity badly, with alarming results.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/09/17/us-usa-crime-neworleans-idUSBRE98G14P20130917
People wanting anonymity should be respected. People using anonymity should use it with respect.0 -
The mail should do a dodgy dossier special
0 -
Carola said:
Blimey. I'm amazed that anyone trusts us considering we're responsible for all society's ills.
I can't find any polling on it, but I'm certain that operational firefighters are some of the most trusted professionals in the country-except when we're striking, sleeping, being lazy or moonlighting!
0 -
Good point actually. They ought be be 80-90%+ trusted to justify their protected monopoly position.felix said:
The BBC should not be compared to print media on trust - it is a taxpayer funded state broadcaster whose trust levels need to be much higher if it's monopoly position is to be tenable.Mick_Pork said:dr_spyn said:@Mick_Pork - trust in the BBC undermined by :- ongoing trials of former music & light entertainment presenters, expenses & re-enumeration packages, costs of BBC Salford move, special 'redundancy' sweeteners, use of presenters' children as prize winners, Newsnight spats. Quite a few of these issues appeared in the last 2 years and have hardly enhanced public trust in the corporation's activities or reputation.
In other words a whole bundle of scandals that have played out resembling a slow motion car-crash. I certainly don't regret calling for a public inquiry when all that started and the continuing idiotic blundering from BBC execs bears that out. Strange that not many PB tories agreed with me though. Their trust is eroding but it's still WAY above the print media while ITV has somehow managed to be below the BBC and they haven't made the same kind of stupid scandalous errors.
Trust levels are poor for all of them with most still dropping apart from those who basically couldn't get much lower anyway.
Most stark is the precipitous drop from leading lib dem politicians who are certainly feeling the warmth of Clegg's almost comical level of voter repelling toxicity.0 -
Twitter
Philip Aldrick @PhilAldrick 53m
IMF final communique singles out UK for praise. Britain is a country where 'growth is already picking up'0 -
I wonder about the figures above. I'm curious what those asked interpreted "telling the truth" to mean. Do I think the BBC would deliberately lie about a major news story? No. Do I think they might rush to comment and turn out to be wrong (I.e report something too quickly with no sources)? Yes. Do I think they would fail to tell the truth about senior salaries or internal shenanigans? Yes. Does that make me less favourable overall? Not really, I judge them on their output.
Similarly, who are the 20% who distrust they family doctor? Are they the aromatherapists?0 -
They already did.MrJones said:The mail should do a dodgy dossier special
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2009/11/25/article-1230824-075CFD49000005DC-984_468x555.jpg
Some gullible fools even believed it at the time.0 -
That's why they should try and needle him over stuff like the dodgy dossier - see if he they can get him to have a full-on twitter meltdown for a laugh.SeanT said:
He is totally losing it. Obsessive and weird.dr_spyn said:POACWAS.
Alastair Campbell @campbellclaret 11m
Channel 4 joining in anti Mail conspiracy properly. They cut out the bits where I said Dacre a bully/coward, and Rothermere spineless0 -
Good evening, comrades.0
-
0
-
Another AC gem :- "it is an anagram of RED AC - it just cuts him up."0
-
I remember Johann Hari's activities on Wikipedia as 'David Rose' basically trying to defame Cristina Odone.JosiasJessop said:
Absolutely. As I said above, I've got no problem with anonymity; it's a personal choice, and often a necessity.antifrank said:All posters are entitled to reveal as much or as little information about themselves as they choose. No poster should have their own personal information revealed publicly without their explicit agreement. All of us draw the boundary between private and public information differently. Some can only contribute fully with full anonymity.
Anyway, does it really matter what any one poster's individual circumstances are? What matters is whether what they are arguing stands up or not.
The problem occurs when anonymity is abused, which can occur in either direction.
You just need to look to New Orleans for a recent case of people using anonymity badly, with alarming results.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/09/17/us-usa-crime-neworleans-idUSBRE98G14P20130917
People wanting anonymity should be respected. People using anonymity should use it with respect.
Though there are truly anonymous postings allowed on some blogs, most allow pseudonymous postings, such as this one.0 -
foxinsoxuk said:
To be fair on tim, he is rarely an advocate of Labour or Ed Miliband. Indeed he very rarely makes positive comments about anything apart from immigration and social housing.
He is essentially a Dementor with an entirely negative aura. So Ed is not his man. Ed is capable of being positive.TGOHF said:tim said:
Tim along with a couple of others is purely and simply a troll. He says what he thinks will push the most buttons. If the topic that pushes the most buttons changes, so does Tim's opinion. Good luck to him in some ways, it obviously gives him pleasure and he has trained a few posters to provide him with his gratification. Plato in her own less sophisticated ways does the same thing, she's not as skillful at it so does not get as much reaction, but she tries all the sameTGOHF said:
Cam is PM - your chap won a rigged vote , a few mid term polls and warm words from red Len and the sycophantic leftie twatterati - ie the square root of ferk all.tim said:
Then it would be quite remarkable if Cameron and Osborne allowed labour to recover by 2015 wouldn't itTCPoliticalBetting said:
Polls and opinions come and go - but here's a fact :JosiasJessop said:TwistedFireStopper said:
I like being anonymous.
You chose not to be as that suits your personality, and your professional life as an author, blogger and journo.
What happened to tim on here a few years ago was disgusting, and not one of PB's finest hours, although I don't know all the specifics, I think I remember tim's name, his rough location and job, details which it's absolutely none of my business knowing. There was also something involving TSE a few years ago as well, again, I can't recall the specifics, again, it's none of my business.
Labour got only 28.1% of the votes in the GE in England.
They were thrashed - humiliated.
Until he wins a GE you might be advised to tone down the bragging. Pride, fall etc - some Sat night advice for free.0 -
I read Dacre's piece in the Guardian talking of 'losing it'. I would have thought he of all people would know that before the message comes knowing who your market is and it's sure as Hell not page 44 of the Guardian.
He talks of 'left wing tweeting influencing the BBC' I assumed political tweeting was much more a right wing thing. Am I wrong?0 -
While it would be sad for his family and friends, it would be difficult for me to be too upset. He has a great deal to answer for and not just his hand in starting wars.SeanT said:
Yes. He seems close to the edge to me. However he is the type who might just go and top himself (rather ironically). So you can see why they might hesitate, even though Dacre must be somewhat peeved.MrJones said:
That's why they should try and needle him over stuff like the dodgy dossier - see if he they can get him to have a full-on twitter meltdown for a laugh.SeanT said:
He is totally losing it. Obsessive and weird.dr_spyn said:POACWAS.
Alastair Campbell @campbellclaret 11m
Channel 4 joining in anti Mail conspiracy properly. They cut out the bits where I said Dacre a bully/coward, and Rothermere spineless
0 -
No charity calendars from your Watch?TwistedFireStopper said:Firefighter porn. One for the ladies.
http://www.orble.com/images/prod71529920.jpg0 -
I know some actual stripogram firemen. They don't look like tubby, northern pub singers.tim said:Michael Deacon @MichaelPDeacon 26s
I've said it before and I'll say it again. Gary Barlow looks like a stripogram fireman
Any comments TwistedFireStopper or are you off somewhere in an offshore haven at the moment?0 -
Every bloke I know of a certain age has a snazzy guitar on a stand, on show in the house somewhere. None of us can play 'em, mind.tim said:
I know how to snare himCarola said:
What with that and the car and the chirpy singalong choon I'd say it's just that you're a bloke around the 50 mark.SeanT said:I'm now drinking a supple Aussie red, with M&S spatchcock poussin, and watching a cookery programme I recorded on Sky Plus.
F*ck it, maybe I AM gay.
Sunburst
Fender
Stratocaster.
0 -
We only need 180 undervalued flotations and we would have enough to cover the cost of Labour's 2009-2010 deficit.tim said:Labour is right to push this one
"Royal Mail privatisation: Labour calls for two inquiries into sell-off which may have lost taxpayers £750MILLION
12 Oct 2013 19:24
The National Audit Office and the Public Accounts Committee have been asked to investigate the "woefully undervalued" flotation"
Check out all the latest News, Sport & Celeb gossip at Mirror.co.uk http://www.mirror.co.uk/money/city-news/royal-mail-privatisation-labour-calls-2365740?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter#ixzz2hXHDDe2H
Follow us: @DailyMirror on Twitter | DailyMirror on Facebook
Osborne and Cameron's spiel on fiscal probity takes a big hit if they gave away that much.0 -
It's grim oop North London.tim said:SeanT said:Has anyone had a gayer moment than this, without actually being gay?
Ten minutes ago I was driving through Highgate in a pepper-white, red-trimmed Mini Cooper JCW, while loudly singing along to 'Don't Feel Like Dancin' by the Scissor Sisters.
Eeeek.
Going to the dressage?
http://private-eye.co.uk/pictures/strips/grim_up_north_london/1346.gif
Foptastic.
0 -
0
-
@tim
Ahh, tim, sorry to hear that. I lost a close friend this year. We remembered him last weekend, on a boozy watch weekend away.
I'm raising a glass to the ones who go too early0 -
Madagascar 3 was indeed a classic. A very, very rare example of the third in a series being the best.SeanT said:My word, look what happens when you go to see Turbo 3D* with your offspring - an apology from tim?!
Despite my incredulity, it would be churlish to refuse such a rarity: so apology accepted.
*pretty good; beautifully detailed; but not up there with Monsters Inc or Madagascar 3 and the other animated masterpieces of recent years
Edit. The Bourne series being the only other example I can immediately think of.0 -
I kinda lost momentum in book 8. Is it worth perservering?MikeK said:Here is a fine poem about trust. That it's from a fantasy novel doesn't detract from its message:
Give me your trust, said the Aes Sedai.
On my shoulders I support the sky.
Trust me to know and to do what is best,
And I will take care of the rest.
But trust is the color of a dark seed growing.
Trust is the color of a heart’s blood flowing.
Trust is the color of a soul’s last breath.
Trust is the color of death.
Give me your trust, said the queen on her throne,
for I must bear the burden all alone.
Trust me to lead and to judge and to rule,
and no man will think you a fool.
But trust is the sound of the grave-dog’s bark.
Trust is the sound of betrayal in the dark.
Trust is the sound of a soul’s last breath.
Trust is the sound of death.
0 -
I'm gay and 45. Pity my other half.0
-
Blimey. Firestopper must be having a cheery night in with his beers, reading PB.0
-
Of course they do. If anything, the midlife crisis hits harder, without children to rein back the excesses.SeanT said:
Do gays also get gayer into middle age, like straights? Is there a limit to *gayness*? There may be a farcical, unread blog in this.antifrank said:I'm gay and 45. Pity my other half.
0 -
A bloke I'd been set up with by a mutual friend dropped dead on route to our first date a few years back. I defy anyone to beat that.
Hope the two events weren't related.0 -
Oh for pity's sake. This is totally morbid. Start being rude to each other again. It is more entertaining.0
-
This is like a top trumps of death. Forgive me if I leave for the night.0
-
-
If you can persevere to volume 10, it get much better with great action 'till the end of volume 14. Well worth rereading from the beginning. Next to "Game of Thrones" it's the best in my opinion.DavidL said:
I kinda lost momentum in book 8. Is it worth perservering?MikeK said:Here is a fine poem about trust. That it's from a fantasy novel doesn't detract from its message:
Give me your trust, said the Aes Sedai.
On my shoulders I support the sky.
Trust me to know and to do what is best,
And I will take care of the rest.
But trust is the color of a dark seed growing.
Trust is the color of a heart’s blood flowing.
Trust is the color of a soul’s last breath.
Trust is the color of death.
Give me your trust, said the queen on her throne,
for I must bear the burden all alone.
Trust me to lead and to judge and to rule,
and no man will think you a fool.
But trust is the sound of the grave-dog’s bark.
Trust is the sound of betrayal in the dark.
Trust is the sound of a soul’s last breath.
Trust is the sound of death.0 -
-
Just don't put it in a Tele blog ffs.SeanT said:
That's just BRILLIANT. Am I allowed to repeat this anecdote? Superb.Carola said:A bloke I'd been set up with by a mutual friend dropped dead on route to our first date a few years back. I defy anyone to beat that.
Hope the two events weren't related.
0 -
0
-
Ok. I will start at the beginning of book 8 again.MikeK said:
If you can persevere to volume 10, it get much better with great action 'till the end of volume 14. Well worth rereading from the beginning. Next to "Game of Thrones" it's the best in my opinion.DavidL said:
I kinda lost momentum in book 8. Is it worth perservering?MikeK said:Here is a fine poem about trust. That it's from a fantasy novel doesn't detract from its message:
Give me your trust, said the Aes Sedai.
On my shoulders I support the sky.
Trust me to know and to do what is best,
And I will take care of the rest.
But trust is the color of a dark seed growing.
Trust is the color of a heart’s blood flowing.
Trust is the color of a soul’s last breath.
Trust is the color of death.
Give me your trust, said the queen on her throne,
for I must bear the burden all alone.
Trust me to lead and to judge and to rule,
and no man will think you a fool.
But trust is the sound of the grave-dog’s bark.
Trust is the sound of betrayal in the dark.
Trust is the sound of a soul’s last breath.
Trust is the sound of death.
Game of thrones honestly strikes me as about 5 books with one really good LOTR length book struggling to get out. Some large sections seemed completely pointless and then there would be a brilliant bit. And killing off all his best characters got wearing after a while. if Jon Snow is really dead I may give up. Sacrilige I know. I blame the modern world and short attention spans.0 -
Oh, I'm not sharing my top trumps.saddened said:0 -
Please accept my sympathies which I extend to you, your late friend's family and those other friends affected by his sudden death.tim said:
Found out earlier on today that a close friend of mine died of a heart attack, fifty, wife forty two, two kids under twelve.TwistedFireStopper said:
Every bloke I know of a certain age has a snazzy guitar on a stand, on show in the house somewhere. None of us can play 'em, mind.tim said:
I know how to snare himCarola said:
What with that and the car and the chirpy singalong choon I'd say it's just that you're a bloke around the 50 mark.SeanT said:I'm now drinking a supple Aussie red, with M&S spatchcock poussin, and watching a cookery programme I recorded on Sky Plus.
F*ck it, maybe I AM gay.
Sunburst
Fender
Stratocaster.
This is the guitar piece he always used to play when we were stoned and owned the world.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N9e62HJ1Ncw0 -
Likewise tim, my condolences.0
-
The press have made a rod for their own backs. Journalists have of course always been a mixed bag - perhaps in the very distant past more bad than good, and perhaps the other way around now. However there has been a perceived shift recently towards lesser standards, and that is why we're where we are.
I have a couple of books by a journalist called James Cameron who wrote in the 60s. He writes very well and in an interesting way about various subjects. I can't think of a journalist who is currently writing whose books I'd buy on that basis alone. The books in recent years written by journalists that I have bought have on the whole been pretty average.
0 -
Left and right united in music? I must be drunker than I thought! It's like a carol service on the Western Front. We'll be playing football next.0
-
Looks like there a really interesting Survation poll coming out for the Mail on Sunday.0
-
Oh you tease.MikeSmithson said:Looks like there a really interesting Survation poll coming out for the Mail on Sunday.
0 -
I'm basing my Survation comment on this Tweet from the CEO
Damian Lyons Lowe @DamianSurvation 1h
After a week's *monstering* by press and party @AdamAfriyie should find some respite in our poll for tomorrow's Mail On Sunday. Stay tuned..0 -
Labour will be tougher than the Tories when it comes to slashing the benefits bill, Rachel Reeves, the new shadow work and pensions secretary, has insisted in her first interview since winning promotion in Ed Miliband's frontbench reshuffle.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/oct/12/labour-benefits-tories-labour-rachel-reeves-welfare?CMP=twt_fd
The 34-year-old Reeves, who is seen by many as a possible future party leader, said that under Labour the long-term unemployed would not be able to "linger on benefits" for long periods but would have to take up a guaranteed job offer or lose their state support.0 -
OK, pick whichever you want - thinking things are good/bad ideas, and personally approving of them.GeoffM said:
Very presumptuous of you to use "us" and assume that you speak for more than just yourself.
You rather oddly manage to mix up two completely different concepts there. You ask for approval of anything Ed has done and then flip that to something that is "a bad idea". Those aren't the same things.
To dig you out of your own confusion about what you're asking, I'd summarise that I'm not a fan of either of them but I'd take Dave as PM rather than Ed if forced to choose.
The point I'm trying to make is people come on here and slam particular things Ed does - on a personal opinion basis - when their posting record demonstrates there would be nothing Ed could ever do to earn their vote. The same goes for some left-wing voters (indeed, some UKIPpers) with Cameron. It's not really enlightening, it's just people with agendas pushing their line and convincing nobody.
Of course if you want to come on and say why Ed's/Dave's policies will be unpopular that's a different kettle of fish (I've not analysed your posting record so it may be that's what you do, I'm speaking in generalities here)
0 -
Remember what Anthony Wells always says:
If you ask people if they want a referendum on ANYTHING they will say yes.
Only main exception is the monarchy.
So asking if people want a referendum on the EU now is 100% GUARANTEED to get a high Yes.0 -
I completely agree with that. Posters like that drive me crazy and there are far too many of them.
@Freggles The point I'm trying to make is people come on here and slam particular things Ed does - on a personal opinion basis - when their posting record demonstrates there would be nothing Ed could ever do to earn their vote. The same goes for some left-wing voters (indeed, some UKIPpers) with Cameron. It's not really enlightening, it's just people with agendas pushing their line and convincing nobody.
0 -
Labour now wants to talk tough on welfare, but while expecting the Coalition Government to have done all the heavy lifting by 2015.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/oct/12/labour-benefits-tories-labour-rachel-reeves-welfare?CMP=twt_fdScott_P said:Labour will be tougher than the Tories when it comes to slashing the benefits bill, Rachel Reeves, the new shadow work and pensions secretary, has insisted in her first interview since winning promotion in Ed Miliband's frontbench reshuffle.
The 34-year-old Reeves, who is seen by many as a possible future party leader, said that under Labour the long-term unemployed would not be able to "linger on benefits" for long periods but would have to take up a guaranteed job offer or lose their state support.
0 -
Reeves's remarks, made just days after she replaced Liam Byrne in the key shadow cabinet job, reflect a recognition that Labour will be punished by voters if it is seen to be too focused on opposing cuts, particularly cuts to benefits.
Labour dancing to Osborne's tune...
Last week Labour's own pollster James Morris said the party faced a "very severe" challenge in overcoming the Conservatives' opinion poll leads on benefit cuts. He pointed to a TUC survey which showed that 64% of key Labour/Conservative swing voters backed the government over benefit cuts.0 -
Now what are the chances of charges or a trial?tim said:David Jack @DJack_Journo 31s
Helluva Plebgate splash in Sunday Times: Senior cop alleges officers conspired to stitch up Andrew Mitchell
0 -
They are going to have to do an awful lot of tough talking over the next 19 months to undo the last 41 months of "no benefits cuts!" Just like the Tories on the NHS, however sincere, I doubt they'll be believed......fitalass said:
Labour now wants to talk tough on welfare, but while expecting the Coalition Government to have done all the heavy lifting by 2015.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/oct/12/labour-benefits-tories-labour-rachel-reeves-welfare?CMP=twt_fdScott_P said:Labour will be tougher than the Tories when it comes to slashing the benefits bill, Rachel Reeves, the new shadow work and pensions secretary, has insisted in her first interview since winning promotion in Ed Miliband's frontbench reshuffle.
The 34-year-old Reeves, who is seen by many as a possible future party leader, said that under Labour the long-term unemployed would not be able to "linger on benefits" for long periods but would have to take up a guaranteed job offer or lose their state support.
0 -
If anyone is interested, the Australian Labor Party is announcing its new leader at 4am tonight UK time (2pm OZ time). The result will decide whether Anthony Albanese or Bill Shorten succeeds Kevin Rudd. Early indications are Shorten has won the MPs' section of the electoral college, while Albanese leads the members' section.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-10-13/labors-new-leader-to-be-unveiled-today/50188980 -
Tim - You are forgetting the rule not to reply, directly or indirectly with either of Fitalass or ScottP.0
-
It means you are not allowed to reply to any of their posts, directly or indirectly.tim said:
I thought the rule was that we must not refer to each other, I didn't interpret that as replying directly to their posts.PBModerator said:Tim - You are forgetting the rule not to reply, directly or indirectly with either of Fitalass or ScottP.
Clarify that for me please0 -
Are we putting ScottP and fitalass into Coventry?0
-
If you're casting yourself as Nelson Mandela, then remember, we have the power to exile you to the PB equivalent of Robben Island for 27 years.tim said:
OK, but I oppose intellectual Apartheid and will protest accordingly from time to time.PBModerator said:
It means you are not allowed to reply to any of their posts, directly or indirectly.tim said:
I thought the rule was that we must not refer to each other, I didn't interpret that as replying directly to their posts.PBModerator said:Tim - You are forgetting the rule not to reply, directly or indirectly with either of Fitalass or ScottP.
Clarify that for me please0 -
tim said:CarlottaVance said:
They are going to have to do an awful lot of tough talking over the next 19 months to undo the last 41 months of "no benefits cuts!" Just like the Tories on the NHS, however sincere, I doubt they'll be believed......
fitalass said:Labour now wants to talk tough on welfare, but while expecting the Coalition Government to have done all the heavy lifting by 2015.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/oct/12/labour-benefits-tories-labour-rachel-reeves-welfare?CMP=twt_fdScott_P said:Labour will be tougher than the Tories when it comes to slashing the benefits bill, Rachel Reeves, the new shadow work and pensions secretary, has insisted in her first interview since winning promotion in Ed Miliband's frontbench reshuffle.
The 34-year-old Reeves, who is seen by many as a possible future party leader, said that under Labour the long-term unemployed would not be able to "linger on benefits" for long periods but would have to take up a guaranteed job offer or lose their state support.
There's one big area that the public will support.
And it's simple
Forty years ago 90% of govt spending on housing in the UK went on building, 10% on benefits
Today 10% of govt spending on housing goes on building, 90% on benefits.
That has to be reversed
Yes - but both parties have dreadful housing records - I doubt either will be believed. And "housing" is one of those binary issues - it either affects you seriously, or hardly at all. For the majority housing is good or ok. For a minority dreadful. And knowing us, we don't want our country views built over for the minority.....Much as the country would benefit from courageous leadership I doubt we'll see it as it may well not only go unrewarded, but actually punished....
0 -
Not Conservativehome? Surely?PBModerator said:
If you're casting yourself as Nelson Mandela, then remember, we have the power to exile you to the PB equivalent of Robben Island for 27 years.tim said:
OK, but I oppose intellectual Apartheid and will protest accordingly from time to time.PBModerator said:
It means you are not allowed to reply to any of their posts, directly or indirectly.tim said:
I thought the rule was that we must not refer to each other, I didn't interpret that as replying directly to their posts.PBModerator said:Tim - You are forgetting the rule not to reply, directly or indirectly with either of Fitalass or ScottP.
Clarify that for me please
What is the Convention for for goodness sake?0 -
Twitter
PoliticsHome @politicshome 2m
Tomorrow’s Sunday Times front page: Police insider blows whistle on Plebgate http://polho.me/1ai6V9I0 -
Blood pressure on both left & right to be driven up over Sunday breakfast:
Observer: "Middle class young "to fare worse than their parents',
Telegraph: "True scale of European immigration"
At least the Express has a "Madeleine Sensation".
http://www.politicshome.com/uk/article/86388/sunday_express_sunday_13th_october_2013.html0 -
We are going to see a lot of Labour U turns in the coming months. Conservatives should just add this slogan next to a growing list of policies. 'We implemented it, Labour opposed it, and now they back it'.
CarlottaVance said:They are going to have to do an awful lot of tough talking over the next 19 months to undo the last 41 months of "no benefits cuts!" Just like the Tories on the NHS, however sincere, I doubt they'll be believed......
fitalass said:Labour now wants to talk tough on welfare, but while expecting the Coalition Government to have done all the heavy lifting by 2015.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/oct/12/labour-benefits-tories-labour-rachel-reeves-welfare?CMP=twt_fdScott_P said:Labour will be tougher than the Tories when it comes to slashing the benefits bill, Rachel Reeves, the new shadow work and pensions secretary, has insisted in her first interview since winning promotion in Ed Miliband's frontbench reshuffle.
The 34-year-old Reeves, who is seen by many as a possible future party leader, said that under Labour the long-term unemployed would not be able to "linger on benefits" for long periods but would have to take up a guaranteed job offer or lose their state support.
0 -
"OK, but I oppose intellectual Apartheid"
I am Tim!
0 -
Mail on Sunday not good for George
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2455653/George-Osbornes-best-man-Peter-Davies-make-millions-Royal-Mail-shares.html0 -
How so, wasn't it Vince Cable who was in charge of this gig?
"A Conservative spokesman said the allegations were "completely untrue". "At no point was George involved in, or even made aware of, the allocations," a spokesman said.
A spokesman for Lansdowne said: ‘To be clear, it is not Lansdowne who directly benefited from these investments, rather British pension funds, charities, universities and others who entrust their money with the firm.
‘Lansdowne is a highly respected, long-term investor in UK and international businesses on behalf of our clients which include numerous UK pension funds.
'Our commitment over many months to this long-term investment opportunity, and the process followed, have been identical to those in many other IPOs. Our interaction has only been with the company management and its advisers."MikeSmithson said:Mail on Sunday not good for George
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2455653/George-Osbornes-best-man-Peter-Davies-make-millions-Royal-Mail-shares.html0 -
That story's been kicking around for a couple of days.MikeSmithson said:Mail on Sunday not good for George
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2455653/George-Osbornes-best-man-Peter-Davies-make-millions-Royal-Mail-shares.html
Tbh I'm not sure that it will be a problem for Osborne particularly, but it does feed in to the globalisation/rich pickings for the rich meme. Not that those embers need fanning - it's what's behind much of the polling imo.
Is the poll coming out tonight? I saw a glimpse of it on skypapers, though they were talking about the story above it - Hunt coming out in favour of free schools (he always was in favour I thought, with provisos).0 -
Survation poll out
Lab 37 (nc)
Con 27 (-2)
UKIP 18 (+1)
LD 11 (nc)
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2456832/Most-voters-want-2014-poll-quitting-EU-Survey-reveals-backing-Tory-rebels-controversial-referendum-call.html0 -
"A Conservative spokesman said the allegations were "completely untrue". "At no point was George involved in, or even made aware of, the allocations," a spokesman said."
Those weren't the allegations. Just that George's best man made a cool £50 million. Nothing wrong with that. We're all capitalists now.
PS Would Lansdownes mind not writing to me any more if they only deal with pension funds and charities. I'm neither0 -
New thread0
-
He did say, to be fair: "We are all in it together".MikeSmithson said:Mail on Sunday not good for George
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2455653/George-Osbornes-best-man-Peter-Davies-make-millions-Royal-Mail-shares.html
He had a different "we" in mind.
For SeanT's benefit. I am sitting in the MAS lounge at KLIA. Bigger than the SIA lounge at Singapore. More like a football pitch !0 -
Is anyone really surprised that one of Gideons friends made millions from the Royal Mail sale....really.Carola said:
That story's been kicking around for a couple of days.MikeSmithson said:Mail on Sunday not good for George
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2455653/George-Osbornes-best-man-Peter-Davies-make-millions-Royal-Mail-shares.html
Tbh I'm not sure that it will be a problem for Osborne particularly, but it does feed in to the globalisation/rich pickings for the rich meme. Not that those embers need fanning - it's what's behind much of the polling imo.
Is the poll coming out tonight? I saw a glimpse of it on skypapers, though they were talking about the story above it - Hunt coming out in favour of free schools (he always was in favour I thought, with provisos).0 -
Nope, I don't think they will be. Just more fuel to the 'them and us' fire, like I say.RedRag1 said:
Is anyone really surprised that one of Gideons friends made millions from the Royal Mail sale....really.Carola said:
That story's been kicking around for a couple of days.MikeSmithson said:Mail on Sunday not good for George
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2455653/George-Osbornes-best-man-Peter-Davies-make-millions-Royal-Mail-shares.html
Tbh I'm not sure that it will be a problem for Osborne particularly, but it does feed in to the globalisation/rich pickings for the rich meme. Not that those embers need fanning - it's what's behind much of the polling imo.
Is the poll coming out tonight? I saw a glimpse of it on skypapers, though they were talking about the story above it - Hunt coming out in favour of free schools (he always was in favour I thought, with provisos).0 -
I recently made EXACTLY this point - EXACTLY THE SAME (go check) - about some Labour pb-er who came on here to diss Cameron and praise Ed (I believe it was Smukesh, or maybe IOS). I made this point, because I agree: the site dies if there is too much of this tedious partisan astroturfing, especially if unchallenged.SeanT said:
I completely agree with that. Posters like that drive me crazy and there are far too many of them.MikeSmithson said:
@Freggles The point I'm trying to make is people come on here and slam particular things Ed does - on a personal opinion basis - when their posting record demonstrates there would be nothing Ed could ever do to earn their vote. The same goes for some left-wing voters (indeed, some UKIPpers) with Cameron. It's not really enlightening, it's just people with agendas pushing their line and convincing nobody.
Your response? You complained about ME, and said I was being repetitive. Why did you do this?
Who knows. Because I was mean about the LDs and their less folically-blessed supporters? That's my guess.
Either way, BE CONSISTENT.
Probably because you are repetitive:
"I made lots of money this morning, you didn't" etc, ad infinitum
"I'm in a great hotel in Sydney, Singapore, Somewhere else, it costs £1000 per night but I'm not paying. You're not here, haha, but I am" ....and slight variations on this theme ad infinitum
"I was right, you were wrong, I am right and you are wrong"....again with slight variations but ad infinitum. A stopped clock can manage to be right now and then but you don't even manage that despite your endless protestation and affirmation to the contrary.
We can only guess as to the likely cause or causes of this innate need constantly to say that you are better than and superior to a bunch of complete strangers on the internet, but I am sure it would be enough to keep a conference of psychiatrists busy for a whole weekend.0
