Tim Indeed, Cameron is not only now losing Thatcherites and old colonels to UKIP by the dozen, but now it would seem 'one nation' moderate Tories who would seem to be his natural constituency are moving to the LDs. Indeed, even Matthew Parris, normally a loyalist, was warning Cameron today to listen to Major and not abandon the centre ground. If the right distrust Cameron and the centre now start to distrust Cameron, and the left of course have always loathed Cameron who does that leave him? Maybe a gay, Old Etonian investment banker in Notting Hill?
Are you saying UKIP is now moustache heavy ?
I am afraid the PBTories may not like to read this but Tim's theory that more the Tories go right, the more it benefits UKIP is indeed proving to be correct.
Fox yes, but that does not mean public services have to be slashed to the bone either, Clegg hit the right note, no more bottomless Labour public spending, but no Tory slashing for slashing's sake either, hence the LD rise in the polls and the Tory fall. Anyway, off to see Gravity
Fox You can have cuts to solve the deficit, you do not need to then go on a spending binge a la Hollande, you do not need to continue to slash services to the bone with once the finances are restored, anyway got to go for now
UKIP will put Miliband and Balls in Downing st, as surely as Militant kept Mrs T in power in 83 and 87.
Worse than that.
If UKIP is "successful" they will also take us INTO the Euro.
Miliband/Balls win ..... referendum votes "Stay in" ...... everyone says the public aren't so Eurosceptic after all ........ momentum then begins to join the Euro.
Genius isn't it. The level of stupidity of breathtaking.
Yet another polling company showing the Labour lead increasing.
I blame Falkirk!
PB Hodges keep up the good work.
I believe you may find a subsection in there that shows that more of the electorate thinks Cameron makes better cup cakes than Red Ed, so the headline figure is irrelevant.
Tic Toc Tic Toc!
You can add Janan Ganesh to the Hodges cake ingredient.
UKIP will put Miliband and Balls in Downing st, as surely as Militant kept Mrs T in power in 83 and 87.
Worse than that.
If UKIP is "successful" they will also take us INTO the Euro.
Miliband/Balls win ..... referendum votes "Stay in" ...... everyone says the public aren't so Eurosceptic after all ........ momentum then begins to join the Euro.
Genius isn't it. The level of stupidity of breathtaking.
Cameron is, it seems, leading the Tories to a quite astonishing defeat, given than he has engineered a decent recovery - having received an appalling legacy from Labour - and is facing one of the most inept, unappetising Oppositions on record.
I
In an era of increasing and evermore obvious social immobility the Tories, more than any other party, HAVE to show they are open to all - but at the moment they are led by poshos. This is the core of their problem.
I wouldn't have mattered as much if he hadn't insisted on surrounding himself with similarly chinless twits, I mean Osborne and Hunt are the other faces of the Tories at the moment, what's all that about?
The strange thing is that Cameron is quite good as prime minister, when it comes to high politics - in the Bismarckian, statesmanlike sense. He did his best in Libya (much better than Blair in Iraq), he has fended off euro-horrors, he plays the PM on the world stage OK.
End.
He seems to be making an epic twat of himself in Sri Lanka, losing a fight that no one asked him to start or is interested in. Syria redux.
You asked any Sri Lankans ? Or is that just the view from behind your latte in the west ?
Spot on, that is exactly what it is. I neither know nor care about the troubles of the Sri Lankans, and I didn't vote for Cameron's party out of a burning desire that he should right their wrongs. Plus he has screwed up so badly - knocked out of the ground by Rajapaksa - that I doubt the people he purports to support are all that happy either.
Fox You can have cuts to solve the deficit, you do not need to then go on a spending binge a la Hollande, you do not need to continue to slash services to the bone with once the finances are restored, anyway got to go for now
Tim Indeed, Cameron is not only now losing Thatcherites and old colonels to UKIP by the dozen, but now it would seem 'one nation' moderate Tories who would seem to be his natural constituency are moving to the LDs. Indeed, even Matthew Parris, normally a loyalist, was warning Cameron today to listen to Major and not abandon the centre ground. If the right distrust Cameron and the centre now start to distrust Cameron, and the left of course have always loathed Cameron who does that leave him? Maybe a gay, Old Etonian investment banker in Notting Hill?
Lol! misread that as "where does leave him?" Thought you were being a little harsh on the gay...
@Andrew_ComRes: ComRes/IoS/S Mirror: 36% expect Cam to come across better than Ed M in a TV debate, 23% expect Ed M to better Cam http://t.co/23rGGC76QH
Simple not true, lets not now try to rewrite Davis abilities as a front line politician. He couldn't even manage to convince the Conservative party he was the best man for the job, And what is worse, he really didn't put in the personal effort needed to come even close in that contest.
Cameron is, it seems, leading the Tories to a quite astonishing defeat, given than he has engineered a decent recovery - having received an appalling legacy from Labour - and is facing one of the most inept, unappetising Oppositions on record.
I
In an era of increasing and evermore obvious social immobility the Tories, more than any other party, HAVE to show they are open to all - but at the moment they are led by poshos. This is the core of their problem.
I wouldn't have mattered as much if he hadn't insisted on surrounding himself with similarly chinless twits, I mean Osborne and Hunt are the other faces of the Tories at the moment, what's all that about?
The strange thing is that Cameron is quite good as prime minister, when it comes to high politics - in the Bismarckian, statesmanlike sense. He did his best in Libya (much better than Blair in Iraq), he has fended off euro-horrors, he plays the PM on the world stage OK.
And Osborne is a decent Chancellor: who has - whatever you might claim - given the UK the best growth in the G7, as of now, and kept unemployment stable (it's now falling quickly). He steered the Treasury quite well when it was facing total wreckage just three years ago, thanks to Labour.
The trouble is both of them are utterly terrible at day-to-day ruthless ordinary politics (this is where Miliband thrives) and both of them are, by nature, ludicrously posh and detached, so posh and detached they are unable to see how posh and detached they appear to everyone else, and thus they blunder, continuously, on things like the pasty tax, or get horribly outflanked on energy prices.
NO MORE F*CKING ETONIANS.
The Tories REALLY need to learn this lesson. Their last successful posh male prime minister was Macmillan, HALF A CENTURY AGO, back when we had a bloody Empire, and even he wasn't that successful.
So you agree that Euroscepticism is a minority position? And that what you call europragmatism is well supported?
Most polls I have seen actually seem to suggest people in this country have a false perception of the EU, our relationship with it and therefore their view of it. In every poll that I have seen that includes the option of being a member of an EU that is just a trading area, that option comes out as by far the most popular.
Of course the misleading consideration in that question is that it is impossible for a country to be a member of the EU (under current terms) whilst only having a trade agreement with them. For that one needs to be outside the EU (and the EEA). Now whether people would in such circumstances prefer to stay in or stay out is anyone's guess but as a full blooded Eurosceptic I would be happy for that confusion to be cleared up.
For people to try and prove one way or another what the general attitude of the electorate is to the EU based on polls is somewhat implausible. Given there is cross party divisions in many parties as to whether to remain part of the EU or not, to use the blunt instrument of party support is even more implausible particularly given that whatever status quo there might have been after Lisbon (and we have yet to feel the full impact of QMV) will now change dramatically
The only thing that is clear is that attitudes toward the EU will likely change considerably over the next few years.
UKIP will put Miliband and Balls in Downing st, as surely as Militant kept Mrs T in power in 83 and 87.
Worse than that.
If UKIP is "successful" they will also take us INTO the Euro.
Miliband/Balls win ..... referendum votes "Stay in" ...... everyone says the public aren't so Eurosceptic after all ........ momentum then begins to join the Euro.
Genius isn't it. The level of stupidity of breathtaking.
UKIP supporters don't owe their votes to the Conservative Party. The Conservatives would do better to pond why 15-20% of their voters have switched to UKIP.
SeanT But even Heath and Major won an election with an overall majority, Cameron could not even do that. Heath and Major also spent some time in the real world and did not have anything like Cameron's privileged background. It is still not impossible he can scrape home, after all Ed M and Balls are about as unappealing an opposition as you can get, but I would say the best Cameron can now hope for is a majority of about 4 (and that is if everything goes right for him from now on)
HYUFD - In all seriousness I cannot see where Cameron can go. The only way I can see this going his way is a serious Labour implosion which just wont happen. If it is anything to do with Miliband they will just withdraw him from view. So he is left with two options. Move to the right and try and return some of their UKIP vote which will harden the Lib Dem switchers to Labour and the Lib Dems themselves and may turn off the Labour switchers who have gone to UKIP. Move to the centre and he strengthens the UKIP vote. The economy is not helping him as only a small proportion are seeing the benefits, and even this is causing him problems as the focus groups say people believe this is being manufactured on purpose to help a certain section of society. He is in between a rock and a hard place.....not that I am complaining.
Do you really think that "withdrawing from view" a candidate for the office of Prime Minister will really work? Aren't you ashamed of the prospect that the candidate you favour is so poor that he can't go out and stump for votes?
Sure. UKIP voters are free to vote as they please. If they think that Miliband in number 10 and no referendum in 2017 would be preferable to a Cameron govt, and that a UKIP takover of the Tory party is possible then they should vote UKIP.
I shall be be voting LD, even though I expect them to lose half their seats in 2015.
UKIP will put Miliband and Balls in Downing st, as surely as Militant kept Mrs T in power in 83 and 87.
Worse than that.
If UKIP is "successful" they will also take us INTO the Euro.
Miliband/Balls win ..... referendum votes "Stay in" ...... everyone says the public aren't so Eurosceptic after all ........ momentum then begins to join the Euro.
Genius isn't it. The level of stupidity of breathtaking.
UKIP supporters don't owe their votes to the Conservative Party. The Conservatives would do better to pond why 15-20% of their voters have switched to UKIP.
The only reason that some former Conservative members now cling onto the idea that Davis would have been a vote winner is because they don't think he would have modernised the party. In other words, Davis would have kept the old boys club feel that was so damaging our image as an inclusive party for the future by keeping us stuck in the past. He certainly wouldn't have widened its appeal enough to make the kind of seat gains Cameron managed in 2010.
People kidding themselves as ever - Conservatives thinking Davis would have done better than Cameron is no different to Labour voters thinking how brilliant Michael Foot would have been.
No, Davis would not have won a majority.
But if, somehow, he had become PM he wouldn't have legalised Gay Marriage - which is, I suspect, of much more concern to many of those Davis supporters.
He would have done better among C1/C2 voters than Cameron does.
Cameron is, it seems, leading the Tories to a quite astonishing defeat, given than he has engineered a decent recovery - having received an appalling legacy from Labour - and is facing one of the most inept, unappetising Oppositions on record.
I
In an era of increasing and evermore obvious social immobility the Tories, more than any other party, HAVE to show they are open to all - but at the moment they are led by poshos. This is the core of their problem.
I wouldn't have mattered as much if he hadn't insisted on surrounding himself with similarly chinless twits, I mean Osborne and Hunt are the other faces of the Tories at the moment, what's all that about?
The strange thing is that Cameron is quite good as prime minister, when it comes to high politics - in the Bismarckian, statesmanlike sense. He did his best in Libya (much better than Blair in Iraq), he has fended off euro-horrors, he plays the PM on the world stage OK.
End.
He seems to be making an epic twit of himself in Sri Lanka, losing a fight that no one asked him to start or is interested in. Syria redux.
Cam didn't start any fight over Sri Lanka. Labour criticised him for going. They even said SL chairmanship of CHOGM should be removed, conveniently forgetting that SL was chosen as chair when Brown was PM? Why no question then? Cam has done the right thing.
@Andrew_ComRes: ComRes/IoS/SMirror: Cam's Eton educn "makes it harder for him to be PM for whole country" agree 34% disagree 45% http://t.co/jgzEDgPVK6
Another meme... Polling versus PB Kinnock anecdote
UKIP will put Miliband and Balls in Downing st, as surely as Militant kept Mrs T in power in 83 and 87.
Worse than that.
If UKIP is "successful" they will also take us INTO the Euro.
Miliband/Balls win ..... referendum votes "Stay in" ...... everyone says the public aren't so Eurosceptic after all ........ momentum then begins to join the Euro.
Genius isn't it. The level of stupidity of breathtaking.
Putting aside the much repeated reality on here that it was the flight of horror filled former Libdems to Labour at the thought of their party co-operating with the Tories that will prove decisive in 2015, I applaud the breathtaking genius of Tories who continue to ignore the counsel of Lynton Crosby and instead believe that continuing to browbeat and abuse UKIP supporters is an effective way of recovering their votes.
Clearly they have read 'How To Win Friends and Influence People' from cover to cover
The only reason that some former Conservative members now cling onto the idea that Davis would have been a vote winner is because they don't think he would have modernised the party. In other words, Davis would have kept the old boys club feel that was so damaging our image as an inclusive party for the future by keeping us stuck in the past. He certainly wouldn't have widened its appeal enough to make the kind of seat gains Cameron managed in 2010.
People kidding themselves as ever - Conservatives thinking Davis would have done better than Cameron is no different to Labour voters thinking how brilliant Michael Foot would have been.
No, Davis would not have won a majority.
But if, somehow, he had become PM he wouldn't have legalised Gay Marriage - which is, I suspect, of much more concern to many of those Davis supporters.
He would have done better among C1/C2 voters than Cameron does.
But, modernisation didn't work. It focused on marginal issues. The Conservatives have lost 50% of their members, under Cameron.
Cameron is, it seems, leading the Tories to a quite astonishing defeat, given than he has engineered a decent recovery - having received an appalling legacy from Labour - and is facing one of the most inept, unappetising Oppositions on record.
I
In an era of increasing and evermore obvious social immobility the Tories, more than any other party, HAVE to show they are open to all - but at the moment they are led by poshos. This is the core of their problem.
I wouldn't have mattered as much if he hadn't insisted on surrounding himself with similarly chinless twits, I mean Osborne and Hunt are the other faces of the Tories at the moment, what's all that about?
The strange thing is that Cameron is quite good as prime minister, when it comes to high politics - in the Bismarckian, statesmanlike sense. He did his best in Libya (much better than Blair in Iraq), he has fended off euro-horrors, he plays the PM on the world stage OK.
End.
He seems to be making an epic twit of himself in Sri Lanka, losing a fight that no one asked him to start or is interested in. Syria redux.
Cam didn't start any fight over Sri Lanka. Labour criticised him for going. They even said SL chairmanship of CHOGM should be removed, conveniently forgetting that SL was chosen as chair when Brown was PM? Why no question then? Cam has done the right thing.
Morally that may be right. Politically and tactically, the first rule is: win fights rather than losing them, and if you need allies to win them make sure you have allies.
@Andrew_ComRes: ComRes/IoS/SMirror: Cam's Eton educn "makes it harder for him to be PM for whole country" agree 34% disagree 45% http://t.co/jgzEDgPVK6
Another meme... Polling versus PB Kinnock anecdote
And the other 21% can't be too bothered if they don't know.
tim posting it another 10,000 times isn't going to make any difference.
UKIP will put Miliband and Balls in Downing st, as surely as Militant kept Mrs T in power in 83 and 87.
Worse than that.
If UKIP is "successful" they will also take us INTO the Euro.
Miliband/Balls win ..... referendum votes "Stay in" ...... everyone says the public aren't so Eurosceptic after all ........ momentum then begins to join the Euro.
Genius isn't it. The level of stupidity of breathtaking.
Putting aside the much repeated reality on here that it was the flight of horror filled former Libdems to Labour at the thought of their party co-operating with the Tories that will prove decisive in 2015, I applaud the breathtaking genius of Tories who continue to ignore the counsel of Lynton Crosby and instead believe that continuing to browbeat and abuse UKIP supporters is an effective way of recovering their votes.
Clearly they have read 'How To Win Friends and Influence People' from cover to cover
Which Tories are abusing UKIP supporters? I recall Anna Soubry calling Farage a scaremonger (an arguable case, rather than an insult) and others on this site setting out what they believe the consequences of a UKIP vote, but no insults (except "stupid" I suppose)
If there are problems with the NHS this Winter, then I can the Tories dropping back to the mid 20's. Cameron does not do himself or the Tories any favour pointing to Labours problems with the NHS in Wales. The point is that the Tories are responsible for Englands NHS and they should get on with the job.
Another issue which may affect the coalition parties is the potential for the BOE to increase interest rates during the first half of 2014. If the BOE think interest rates will have to increase before May 2015, they won't wait until 2015, when politically it would be very difficult.
Curious that ComRes's polls for the Sunday Mirror have developed a habit of scoring the Tories lower and UKIP (much) higher than the ones they do for the Indy.
I see hysteria is breaking out on here again tonight.
Cameron has been party leader for 8 years. Now for much of that time the Conservatives have done well in the polls and for some of it they have done poorly.
But Cameron has been posh throughout. So Cameron being posh is not the reason the Conservatives have been doing poorly in the last 4 to 6 weeks. The reason is Miliband's energy freeze.
Several Conservative supporters are just falling into tim's trap. tim knows that Labour's best chance is for Cameron to be removed and for there to be a massive row and upheaval in the Conservative party.
So tim posts 10,000 times that's it's all about Cameron being posh - just like parents telling a kid something 10,000 times - if it's said enough times some people actually start to believe it.
The fact is that a majority will vote for whoever puts money in their pocket. They don't care about deficits even when they are a cause of economic problems. They don't care about education even when low standards hold the nation back. etc,etc.
All the polls moving in lockstep, though the different methodologies produce more or fewer votes for UKIP and Others. I don't think it's anything to do with Portsmouth, more a sense of exasperation with the Conservatives by people who don't fancy Labour either - some going LD, some going UKIP. I can see the Tories getting these losses back if they recover a sense of direction, but it's getting increasingly hard to see them getting anywhere near a winning position.
The movements within the polls aren't huge but it's another week lost for the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats and with less than 18 months to go before the next election, that's not time that can be readily lost.
We come back to three key points - one, the 40% or so of the 2010 LD vote that has seemingly solidly and irrevocably shifted to Labour putting that bloc in the mid to high 30s which is precariously close to a winning position.
Two, the division of the anti-Labour bloc. Of the 60% or so rejecting Labour, the Conservatives can barely get half while the other half is split between UKIP, the LDs, Greens and others. Until and unless the Conservatives can win 2/3 of that vote, they're going to be on the wrong side of the election result.
Third, the recovery isn't a fact for enough people at this time to make them consider or re-consider their voting intention. The MORI numbers earlier in the week were damning on that score. The repetition of indices and statistics isn't or aren't enough - too many people don't yet have that sense of economic improvement or well-being. For all too many, it's running hard to stand still and that's not a pleasant place to be.
With the deficit shrinking more than expected, it would not surprise me if some money was found for the NHS to cope with winter pressures. In Leicester we need 100 more medical beds. We already have one of the lowest admission rates in the country, but often have no medical beds at all, so surgery gets cancelled to make room. I was speaking to our bedmanager yesterday. It is not unusual for a bed to have three people in it in the same day. One discharged in the AM, One admitted as a daycase, and a third in in the evening. It really is "hot-bedding" and very stressful for staff.
If there are problems with the NHS this Winter, then I can the Tories dropping back to the mid 20's. Cameron does not do himself or the Tories any favour pointing to Labours problems with the NHS in Wales. The point is that the Tories are responsible for Englands NHS and they should get on with the job.
Another issue which may affect the coalition parties is the potential for the BOE to increase interest rates during the first half of 2014. If the BOE think interest rates will have to increase before May 2015, they won't wait until 2015, when politically it would be very difficult.
UKIP will put Miliband and Balls in Downing st, as surely as Militant kept Mrs T in power in 83 and 87.
Worse than that.
If UKIP is "successful" they will also take us INTO the Euro.
Miliband/Balls win ..... referendum votes "Stay in" ...... everyone says the public aren't so Eurosceptic after all ........ momentum then begins to join the Euro.
Genius isn't it. The level of stupidity of breathtaking.
Putting aside the much repeated reality on here that it was the flight of horror filled former Libdems to Labour at the thought of their party co-operating with the Tories that will prove decisive in 2015, I applaud the breathtaking genius of Tories who continue to ignore the counsel of Lynton Crosby and instead believe that continuing to browbeat and abuse UKIP supporters is an effective way of recovering their votes.
Clearly they have read 'How To Win Friends and Influence People' from cover to cover
Which Tories are abusing UKIP supporters? I recall Anna Soubry calling Farage a scaremonger (an arguable case, rather than an insult) and others on this site setting out what they believe the consequences of a UKIP vote, but no insults (except "stupid" I suppose)
It doesn't actually bother me but as a matter of basic fact the loonies and fruitcakes phrase has been used twice on the site today and is still regularly used by Tory diehards. I suppose we should take it as a compliment as it shows they are frightened of us.
The only reason that some former Conservative members now cling onto the idea that Davis would have been a vote winner is because they don't think he would have modernised the party. In other words, Davis would have kept the old boys club feel that was so damaging our image as an inclusive party for the future by keeping us stuck in the past. He certainly wouldn't have widened its appeal enough to make the kind of seat gains Cameron managed in 2010.
Blair modernised' the Labour Party by setting a clear achievable goal (Clause IV) and railroading it through the party in no more than twelve months. He still lost 4 million votes and his successor lost another million. Blair's modernisation 'success' may not have been quite what it was once celebrated as.
Cameron had only vague aspirations to 'modernise' his evidently outdated party and detoxify his evidently toxic party. In doing so he validated those primarily Labour accusations about his party.
Without any clearly defined goals or end to his project it has now lasted for 8 years during which indiscipline, disloyalty and division have continued unabated, where after some years of success he is now polling down at the same levels as his predecessors, where membership has been halved and UKIP are polling 5 times the vote share they were in 2010 and where for the first time in modern history the centre right vote has been split. Not only that but even the gurus of modernisation (Hilton and Blonde) have long since deserted the ship. I suspect considering all this and the current generally dysfunctional state of the Tory party many commentators would consider Cameron's modernisation project as an abject failure.
In such circumstances compared to Blair's 'success' I suspect Cameron's efforts will go down in history as a complete (if well-intentioned') disaster
Morally that may be right. Politically and tactically, the first rule is: win fights rather than losing them, and if you need allies to win them make sure you have allies.
I think that is unfair to Cameron and shows a lack of understanding of what he was trying to do. There was no way he or anyone else thought that just by turning up there and having a good moan he was going to change the mind of the Sri Lankan government over anything.
But he has very effectively highlighted the plight of the Tamils and the abuses by the Sri Lankan government and given the media the opportunity to talk about them around the world. In doing so he has done more than any other leader to bring the issue to the top table and make the Sri Lankans realise it is not something that they will be able to sweep under the carpet.
My Mum, as a prominent non-Tory, is going to be chairing the North Hampshire OP, so will try to get an inside report...
What do non-Tories do at a Tory open primary in a place like NE Hampshire? Do they vote for the most moderate candidate because they know it's 99% likely the blues will win the seat at the next election, or do they vote for the most extreme candidate in the hope that this might reduce the Conservative vote?
The Conservatives stagnated in the polls, and they couldn't even get above 200 MP's after three GE's under three different Leaders against an increasingly sleazy and discredited Labour Government. Under Cameron they gained nearly 100 seats and are now in Government, modernisation did work. The changes brought in by Cameron led you to leave the Conservative party, Cameron's election and those changes he brought in to widen the appeal of the party gave me a reason to stay after seriously contemplating giving up on the Conservatives.
The only reason that some former Conservative members now cling onto the idea that Davis would have been a vote winner is because they don't think he would have modernised the party. In other words, Davis would have kept the old boys club feel that was so damaging our image as an inclusive party for the future by keeping us stuck in the past. He certainly wouldn't have widened its appeal enough to make the kind of seat gains Cameron managed in 2010.
People kidding themselves as ever - Conservatives thinking Davis would have done better than Cameron is no different to Labour voters thinking how brilliant Michael Foot would have been.
No, Davis would not have won a majority.
But if, somehow, he had become PM he wouldn't have legalised Gay Marriage - which is, I suspect, of much more concern to many of those Davis supporters.
He would have done better among C1/C2 voters than Cameron does.
But, modernisation didn't work. It focused on marginal issues. The Conservatives have lost 50% of their members, under Cameron.
The Conservatives stagnated in the polls, and they couldn't even get above 200 MP's after three GE's under three different Leaders against an increasingly sleazy and discredited Labour Government. Under Cameron they gained nearly 100 seats and are now in Government, modernisation did work.
I'll say that Mike and Fita are right about this - Cameron is by far the strongest figure in the Tory Party. I have said before that I am not as down on him as Tim. He's a decent PM on the world stage.
The party quite clearly had to move to the left after the shambles of Hague and Howard, and Cameron was the only viable candidate on the modernising wing of the party. While Sean has a point about his poshness, I would challenge him to tell us who would do any better 18 months out?
I have referred to "swivel eyed loons" but in the context of the Tory party, as indeed it was originally used. I have not used the term for Kippers, SeanTs frothing comments speak for themselves!
UKIP will put Miliband and Balls in Downing st, as surely as Militant kept Mrs T in power in 83 and 87.
Worse than that.
If UKIP is "successful" they will also take us INTO the Euro.
Miliband/Balls win ..... referendum votes "Stay in" ...... everyone says the public aren't so Eurosceptic after all ........ momentum then begins to join the Euro.
Genius isn't it. The level of stupidity of breathtaking.
Putting aside the much repeated reality on here that it was the flight of horror filled former Libdems to Labour at the thought of their party co-operating with the Tories that will prove decisive in 2015, I applaud the breathtaking genius of Tories who continue to ignore the counsel of Lynton Crosby and instead believe that continuing to browbeat and abuse UKIP supporters is an effective way of recovering their votes.
Clearly they have read 'How To Win Friends and Influence People' from cover to cover
Which Tories are abusing UKIP supporters? I recall Anna Soubry calling Farage a scaremonger (an arguable case, rather than an insult) and others on this site setting out what they believe the consequences of a UKIP vote, but no insults (except "stupid" I suppose)
It doesn't actually bother me but as a matter of basic fact the loonies and fruitcakes phrase has been used twice on the site today and is still regularly used by Tory diehards. I suppose we should take it as a compliment as it shows they are frightened of us.
The Conservatives stagnated in the polls, and they couldn't even get above 200 MP's after three GE's under three different Leaders against an increasingly sleazy and discredited Labour Government. Under Cameron they gained nearly 100 seats and are now in Government, modernisation did work.
The only reason that some former Conservative members now cling onto the idea that Davis would have been a vote winner is because they don't think he would have modernised the party. In other words, Davis would have kept the old boys club feel that was so damaging our image as an inclusive party for the future by keeping us stuck in the past. He certainly wouldn't have widened its appeal enough to make the kind of seat gains Cameron managed in 2010.
People kidding themselves as ever - Conservatives thinking Davis would have done better than Cameron is no different to Labour voters thinking how brilliant Michael Foot would have been.
No, Davis would not have won a majority.
But if, somehow, he had become PM he wouldn't have legalised Gay Marriage - which is, I suspect, of much more concern to many of those Davis supporters.
He would have done better among C1/C2 voters than Cameron does.
But, modernisation didn't work. It focused on marginal issues. The Conservatives have lost 50% of their members, under Cameron.
It was the sleazy broken Labour government that allowed Cameron to win those seats. Bear in mind that 8 months before the election he had a near as dammit 20 point lead and he threw that away.
Brown lost the election in 2010. Cameron stupidly failed to win it.
The Conservatives stagnated in the polls, and they couldn't even get above 200 MP's after three GE's under three different Leaders against an increasingly sleazy and discredited Labour Government. Under Cameron they gained nearly 100 seats and are now in Government, modernisation did work. The changes brought in by Cameron led you to leave the Conservative party, Cameron's election and those changes he brought in to widen the appeal of the party gave me a reason to stay after seriously contemplating giving up on the Conservatives.
The only reason that some former Conservative members now cling onto the idea that Davis would have been a vote winner is because they don't think he would have modernised the party. In other words, Davis would have kept the old boys club feel that was so damaging our image as an inclusive party for the future by keeping us stuck in the past. He certainly wouldn't have widened its appeal enough to make the kind of seat gains Cameron managed in 2010.
People kidding themselves as ever - Conservatives thinking Davis would have done better than Cameron is no different to Labour voters thinking how brilliant Michael Foot would have been.
No, Davis would not have won a majority.
But if, somehow, he had become PM he wouldn't have legalised Gay Marriage - which is, I suspect, of much more concern to many of those Davis supporters.
He would have done better among C1/C2 voters than Cameron does.
But, modernisation didn't work. It focused on marginal issues. The Conservatives have lost 50% of their members, under Cameron.
Exactly right. The modernisers have all the evidence they need - that from real votes in real ballot boxes. The right, as ever, prefer the realms of pure fantasy.
The only reason that some former Conservative members now cling onto the idea that Davis would have been a vote winner is because they don't think he would have modernised the party. In other words, Davis would have kept the old boys club feel that was so damaging our image as an inclusive party for the future by keeping us stuck in the past. He certainly wouldn't have widened its appeal enough to make the kind of seat gains Cameron managed in 2010.
What a load of rubbish. Davis was certainly not part of the old boys club. Indeed it is that very quality about Cameron and Osborne that is one of their biggest problems.
It is you who are stuck in the past with your strange notion that somehow it is ones duty to vote conservative no matter what they do or how badly they screw up.
Some of us have grown up and realised those childish ideas don't have any place in modern politics.
The fact is that a majority will vote for whoever puts money in their pocket. They don't care about deficits even when they are a cause of economic problems. They don't care about education even when low standards hold the nation back. etc,etc.
Agreed. And that's why I think Cameron needs to do something significant in the Autumn Statement - not just a bit of fiddling around. Something really headline grabbing.
It's also why Cameron has to make "Labour's Tax Bombshell" the central theme of the 2015 campaign.
If people think Miliband/Balls will put their taxes up - at a time when people are already feeling badly off - then it will really scare people.
It could move a lot of votes - not just away from Lab but it'll also get UKIP voters back to Con.
The movements within the polls aren't huge but it's another week lost for the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats and with less than 18 months to go before the next election, that's not time that can be readily lost.
We come back to three key points - one, the 40% or so of the 2010 LD vote that has seemingly solidly and irrevocably shifted to Labour putting that bloc in the mid to high 30s which is precariously close to a winning position.
Two, the division of the anti-Labour bloc. Of the 60% or so rejecting Labour, the Conservatives can barely get half while the other half is split between UKIP, the LDs, Greens and others. Until and unless the Conservatives can win 2/3 of that vote, they're going to be on the wrong side of the election result.
Third, the recovery isn't a fact for enough people at this time to make them consider or re-consider their voting intention. The MORI numbers earlier in the week were damning on that score. The repetition of indices and statistics isn't or aren't enough - too many people don't yet have that sense of economic improvement or well-being. For all too many, it's running hard to stand still and that's not a pleasant place to be.
For the charge that took shape last week with new revelations about Falkirk is that at the time of that July interview, Miliband knew fine well about Unite’s mass recruitment campaign in Falkirk, having actually signed it off, only to then have the temerity to appear shocked and dismayed about the practice for the benefit of the cameras and his own reputation.
The fact is that a majority will vote for whoever puts money in their pocket. They don't care about deficits even when they are a cause of economic problems. They don't care about education even when low standards hold the nation back. etc,etc.
Agreed. And that's why I think Cameron needs to do something significant in the Autumn Statement - not just a bit of fiddling around. Something really headline grabbing.
It's also why Cameron has to make "Labour's Tax Bombshell" the central theme of the 2015 campaign.
If people think Miliband/Balls will put their taxes up - at a time when people are already feeling badly off - then it will really scare people.
It could move a lot of votes - not just away from Lab but it'll also get UKIP voters back to Con.
Bingo. If more cuts are needed then make em to pay for the tax cuts - 18p and 39p rates would be eyecatching - bigger cuts for the bottom end.
With the deficit shrinking more than expected, it would not surprise me if some money was found for the NHS to cope with winter pressures. In Leicester we need 100 more medical beds. We already have one of the lowest admission rates in the country, but often have no medical beds at all, so surgery gets cancelled to make room. I was speaking to our bedmanager yesterday. It is not unusual for a bed to have three people in it in the same day. One discharged in the AM, One admitted as a daycase, and a third in in the evening. It really is "hot-bedding" and very stressful for staff.
If there are problems with the NHS this Winter, then I can the Tories dropping back to the mid 20's. Cameron does not do himself or the Tories any favour pointing to Labours problems with the NHS in Wales. The point is that the Tories are responsible for Englands NHS and they should get on with the job.
Another issue which may affect the coalition parties is the potential for the BOE to increase interest rates during the first half of 2014. If the BOE think interest rates will have to increase before May 2015, they won't wait until 2015, when politically it would be very difficult.
From your perspective, what would you say has led to this situation in your hospital?
Brilliant comment. "No matter what the polls say".
These polls happen to reflect what the public are thinking. Who happen to decide who will be in charge of this country after 2015. You can say that "the public never learn" but then arguing with the general public isn't a great electoral strategy.
IOS ,,Stick to that thought, but Hideaway is still crap..the polls cannot and will not change that simple fact. No leftie poster even begins to deny it.
The right is also led by a cabal - not just one individual - who don't really want it. A bunch of posh boys that went it to politics because they thought "why the hell not." The fact that they got promoted beyond their ability is a real problem for the Tories.
Ok so if Ed is crap. And the polls give us 3 terms under him. You are right he may still be crap. But he will have made sure that the Tories haven't won a majority in almost 40 years.
UKIP will put Miliband and Balls in Downing st, as surely as Militant kept Mrs T in power in 83 and 87.
Worse than that.
If UKIP is "successful" they will also take us INTO the Euro.
Miliband/Balls win ..... referendum votes "Stay in" ...... everyone says the public aren't so Eurosceptic after all ........ momentum then begins to join the Euro.
Genius isn't it. The level of stupidity of breathtaking.
Putting aside the much repeated reality on here that it was the flight of horror filled former Libdems to Labour at the thought of their party co-operating with the Tories that will prove decisive in 2015, I applaud the breathtaking genius of Tories who continue to ignore the counsel of Lynton Crosby and instead believe that continuing to browbeat and abuse UKIP supporters is an effective way of recovering their votes.
Clearly they have read 'How To Win Friends and Influence People' from cover to cover
Which Tories are abusing UKIP supporters? I recall Anna Soubry calling Farage a scaremonger (an arguable case, rather than an insult) and others on this site setting out what they believe the consequences of a UKIP vote, but no insults (except "stupid" I suppose)
It doesn't actually bother me but as a matter of basic fact the loonies and fruitcakes phrase has been used twice on the site today and is still regularly used by Tory diehards. I suppose we should take it as a compliment as it shows they are frightened of us.
No-one really knows what to do with us Kippers, apart from the Lib Dems as we are the polar opposite.
Crosby thinks we will walk back to them at the GE, he has a big shock coming. Farage says UKIP are the only opposition to Labour in the North, a bit of an overstatement but Labour should not take the WWC vote for granted.
Cameron secured a 3.7% increase in the Conservatives' vote share in 2010, comparable to what Kinnock achieved in 1992. Labour's vote share fell by 6.2% in 2010. It is clear therefore that the seat gains made by the Conservatives were principally due to the electoral system and the unpopularity of the Labour government, rather than the success of 'modernisation'.
Cameron would have been a good choice if he had surrounded himself with people who weren't from his background. He could have been the showman he feels comfortable with but made sure that there was a group of people who could cut down his stupid out of touch ideas.
The Tories problem is not that there is one posh boy at the top of the party - but that there are LOADS!
Farage is part right. You aren't the only opposition to Labour in the north of England .... yet! But you will be in 20 years time. By then the Tories will have died off completely up there.
I'll say that Mike and Fita are right about this - Cameron is by far the strongest figure in the Tory Party. I have said before that I am not as down on him as Tim. He's a decent PM on the world stage.
The party quite clearly had to move to the left after the shambles of Hague and Howard, and Cameron was the only viable candidate on the modernising wing of the party. While Sean has a point about his poshness, I would challenge him to tell us who would do any better 18 months out?
The problem there is that for all the modernisation he still went into an election prioritising an Inheritance Tax cut for the wealthiest in the middle of a recession with bloody unbelievable Baronet fronting it. And then let the same twit link a cut in the top rate to a pasty tax.
5% off the polls in each case.
Daves problem is he alienates three groups
UKIP leaning men Centrist women C1's and C2's particularly outside the South East
Who would do better? Theresa May would do better among the first two groups imo. The removal of the chinless clique around Cameron which would inevitably follow a change may well help with the third group.
Actually, Anna Soubry could be an excellent choice but the Tories do not know this. Why she is still contesting Broxtowe I do not know. I still think Broxtowe is an insurance. Clarke will retire just in time for her to inherit Rushcliffe.
No. I don't think it matters one jot whether he is or not. What matters is who is going to win the next election. And the polls say Labour and Ed Miliband.
Why do we still think Ed is crap? Ed is most definitely not crap! He is merely misunderstood, and I put it to you that is the chief reason why he is so maligned and ridiculed by the evil right-wing media.
I am certain you will agree with me that Ed is magnificently charismatic and eloquent. He is an inspiring and refreshing standard bearer for the social democratic tradition in our great nation. Yes, indeed: One Nation. Nay, his performance at Conference this year must surely have been amongst the greatest (if not the greatest) ever given by a leader of the Labour Party, or indeed of any party leader! Such magnificence, such poise, such alacrity. Wow! And his wonderful repertoire of jokes would put even Harry Hill to shame!
He is articulate, passionate, an accomplished orator, and I think a real progressive alternative to the smarmy posh boy Cameron.
Ok so if Ed is crap. And the polls give us 3 terms under him. You are right he may still be crap. But he will have made sure that the Tories haven't won a majority in almost 40 years.
I'll take that.
No real left-wing politician has won in this country for almost 40 years.
Blair took on the mantle of right-wing policies to win.
As soon as a true lefty took over (Brown), he lost.
Morally that may be right. Politically and tactically, the first rule is: win fights rather than losing them, and if you need allies to win them make sure you have allies.
I think that is unfair to Cameron and shows a lack of understanding of what he was trying to do. There was no way he or anyone else thought that just by turning up there and having a good moan he was going to change the mind of the Sri Lankan government over anything.
But he has very effectively highlighted the plight of the Tamils and the abuses by the Sri Lankan government and given the media the opportunity to talk about them around the world. In doing so he has done more than any other leader to bring the issue to the top table and make the Sri Lankans realise it is not something that they will be able to sweep under the carpet.
There's British citizens murdered in that lot, including the family of a friend of mine so perhaps I am biased. I hope Cameron found time to seek assurances that the perpetrators of those crimes have been brought to justice.
And FFS, Nick Robinson puts deaths at 40,000. That is a truly terrible fact, but the world is full of truly terrible facts including atrocities which kill millions.
It'll be interesting to see how it pans out. The chances of Cameron looking terminally weak at the UN are quite high.
My Mum, as a prominent non-Tory, is going to be chairing the North Hampshire OP, so will try to get an inside report...
What do non-Tories do at a Tory open primary in a place like NE Hampshire? Do they vote for the most moderate candidate because they know it's 99% likely the blues will win the seat at the next election, or do they vote for the most extreme candidate in the hope that this might reduce the Conservative vote?
She's not going to vote because it would be inappropriate.
That said, I understand the party vets the applications before they get put forward and also has a veto if they really don't like the outcome, so there's not much point in game playing.
Also, for most people, life's too short. They probably just vote for the candidate they like the best. Which is usually a GP...
Why do we still think Ed is crap? Ed is most definitely not crap! He is merely misunderstood, and I put it to you that is the chief reason why he is so maligned and ridiculed by the evil right-wing media.
I am certain you will agree with me that Ed is magnificently charismatic and eloquent. He is an inspiring and refreshing standard bearer for the social democratic tradition in our great nation. Yes, indeed: One Nation. Nay, his performance at Conference this year must surely have been amongst the greatest (if not the greatest) ever given by a leader of the Labour Party, or indeed of any party leader! Such magnificence, such poise, such alacrity. Wow! And his wonderful repertoire of jokes would put even Harry Hill to shame!
He is articulate, passionate, an accomplished orator, and I think a real progressive alternative to the smarmy posh boy Cameron.
Apparently the shortlist for the next Conservative MP in Mid Worcs is:
Nigel Huddleston - works for Google, Tory Reform Group, second in Luton South in 2010 Edward Argar - Westminster councillor, third in Oxford East in 2010 Victoria Atkins - criminal prosecutor, second in the Gloucestershire PCC election Nusrat Ghani - public affairs, third in Birmingham Ladywood in 2010
Morally that may be right. Politically and tactically, the first rule is: win fights rather than losing them, and if you need allies to win them make sure you have allies.
I think that is unfair to Cameron and shows a lack of understanding of what he was trying to do. There was no way he or anyone else thought that just by turning up there and having a good moan he was going to change the mind of the Sri Lankan government over anything.
But he has very effectively highlighted the plight of the Tamils and the abuses by the Sri Lankan government and given the media the opportunity to talk about them around the world. In doing so he has done more than any other leader to bring the issue to the top table and make the Sri Lankans realise it is not something that they will be able to sweep under the carpet.
There's British citizens murdered in that lot, including the family of a friend of mine so perhaps I am biased. I hope Cameron found time to seek assurances that the perpetrators of those crimes have been brought to justice.
And FFS, Nick Robinson puts deaths at 40,000. That is a truly terrible fact, but the world is full of truly terrible facts including atrocities which kill millions.
It'll be interesting to see how it pans out. The chances of Cameron looking terminally weak at the UN are quite high.
Fair enough. How many did the Tigers kill ? Do you condemn the Tigers just as much ?
It is not unique to Leicester, or to recent times. In the eighties I would start the day as admitting house officer at a London hospital with a handful of beds for 25-30 emergency admissions. Since then there has been a decline in beds under all govts:
We have fewer beds per head than almost every OECD country, and often by a factor of two or more (France, Germany) despite having higher rates of heart disease, diabetes and obesity:
With the deficit shrinking more than expected, it would not surprise me if some money was found for the NHS to cope with winter pressures. In Leicester we need 100 more medical beds. We already have one of the lowest admission rates in the country, but often have no medical beds at all, so surgery gets cancelled to make room. I was speaking to our bedmanager yesterday. It is not unusual for a bed to have three people in it in the same day. One discharged in the AM, One admitted as a daycase, and a third in in the evening. It really is "hot-bedding" and very stressful for staff.
If there are problems with the NHS this Winter, then I can the Tories dropping back to the mid 20's. Cameron does not do himself or the Tories any favour pointing to Labours problems with the NHS in Wales. The point is that the Tories are responsible for Englands NHS and they should get on with the job.
Another issue which may affect the coalition parties is the potential for the BOE to increase interest rates during the first half of 2014. If the BOE think interest rates will have to increase before May 2015, they won't wait until 2015, when politically it would be very difficult.
From your perspective, what would you say has led to this situation in your hospital?
Comments
I am afraid the PBTories may not like to read this but Tim's theory that more the Tories go right, the more it benefits UKIP is indeed proving to be correct.
After all, why choose the fake alternative !
Enjoy the film!
If UKIP is "successful" they will also take us INTO the Euro.
Miliband/Balls win ..... referendum votes "Stay in" ...... everyone says the public aren't so Eurosceptic after all ........ momentum then begins to join the Euro.
Genius isn't it. The level of stupidity of breathtaking.
http://www.conservativehome.com/parliament/2013/11/over-50-mps-have-served-in-the-armed-forces-here-are-more-than-30-of-them-together.html
"Over 50 MPs have served in the armed forces. Here are more than 30 of them together."
@Andrew_ComRes: ComRes/IoS/S Mirror: 36% expect Cam to come across better than Ed M in a TV debate, 23% expect Ed M to better Cam http://t.co/23rGGC76QH
So, 47% are agnostic or agree with Miliband as PM. He barely needs 36% to vote Labour.
Most polls I have seen actually seem to suggest people in this country have a false perception of the EU, our relationship with it and therefore their view of it. In every poll that I have seen that includes the option of being a member of an EU that is just a trading area, that option comes out as by far the most popular.
Of course the misleading consideration in that question is that it is impossible for a country to be a member of the EU (under current terms) whilst only having a trade agreement with them. For that one needs to be outside the EU (and the EEA). Now whether people would in such circumstances prefer to stay in or stay out is anyone's guess but as a full blooded Eurosceptic I would be happy for that confusion to be cleared up.
For people to try and prove one way or another what the general attitude of the electorate is to the EU based on polls is somewhat implausible. Given there is cross party divisions in many parties as to whether to remain part of the EU or not, to use the blunt instrument of party support is even more implausible particularly given that whatever status quo there might have been after Lisbon (and we have yet to feel the full impact of QMV) will now change dramatically
The only thing that is clear is that attitudes toward the EU will likely change considerably over the next few years.
You probably would have had a lot more members. You can't win a majority without members. The ground game is all that matters.
Longlist of 13:
Kashif Ali
Edward Argar
Vicky Atkins
Nusrat Ghani
Martin Howe
Nigel Huddleston
Seema Kennedy
Wendy Morton
Spencer Pitfield
David Skelton
Michelle Tempest
Maggie Throup
Nick Timothy
http://www.conservativehome.com/parliament/2013/11/introducing-the-13-candidates-on-the-longlist-for-mid-worcestershire.html
That video shows just how devastating it is for the Tories to have so many posh lads at the top.
Falkirk has had a terrible effect ! Fitalass and Carlotta should work even harder.
A fair few UKIP voters would prefer a Labour government. Lot's of those live in safe Labour seats in the nirth of England
I shall be be voting LD, even though I expect them to lose half their seats in 2015.
Another meme... Polling versus PB Kinnock anecdote
Great game, rugbt league!
Clearly they have read 'How To Win Friends and Influence People' from cover to cover
http://www.scotsman.com/news/insight-ed-miliband-and-the-falkirk-scandal-1-3191702
With new revelations in the Falkirk scandal, could Ed Miliband’s bid to enter Downing Street become irreparably damaged?
tim posting it another 10,000 times isn't going to make any difference.
Another issue which may affect the coalition parties is the potential for the BOE to increase interest rates during the first half of 2014. If the BOE think interest rates will have to increase before May 2015, they won't wait until 2015, when politically it would be very difficult.
hopisen: ... The 05 -10 Tories: on 41.5 in Nov 08. Of course, a Lab vote share like Tories got in 2010 would be decent majority. So choose your view!
http://agirlcalledjack.com/2013/11/15/exposed-the-169-mps-who-voted-yes-to-the-bedroom-tax-after-claiming-up-to-25k-in-accommodation-expenses/
The movements within the polls aren't huge but it's another week lost for the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats and with less than 18 months to go before the next election, that's not time that can be readily lost.
We come back to three key points - one, the 40% or so of the 2010 LD vote that has seemingly solidly and irrevocably shifted to Labour putting that bloc in the mid to high 30s which is precariously close to a winning position.
Two, the division of the anti-Labour bloc. Of the 60% or so rejecting Labour, the Conservatives can barely get half while the other half is split between UKIP, the LDs, Greens and others. Until and unless the Conservatives can win 2/3 of that vote, they're going to be on the wrong side of the election result.
Third, the recovery isn't a fact for enough people at this time to make them consider or re-consider their voting intention. The MORI numbers earlier in the week were damning on that score. The repetition of indices and statistics isn't or aren't enough - too many people don't yet have that sense of economic improvement or well-being. For all too many, it's running hard to stand still and that's not a pleasant place to be.
There's time for this to change but not much.
Cameron had only vague aspirations to 'modernise' his evidently outdated party and detoxify his evidently toxic party. In doing so he validated those primarily Labour accusations about his party.
Without any clearly defined goals or end to his project it has now lasted for 8 years during which indiscipline, disloyalty and division have continued unabated, where after some years of success he is now polling down at the same levels as his predecessors, where membership has been halved and UKIP are polling 5 times the vote share they were in 2010 and where for the first time in modern history the centre right vote has been split. Not only that but even the gurus of modernisation (Hilton and Blonde) have long since deserted the ship. I suspect considering all this and the current generally dysfunctional state of the Tory party many commentators would consider Cameron's modernisation project as an abject failure.
In such circumstances compared to Blair's 'success' I suspect Cameron's efforts will go down in history as a complete (if well-intentioned') disaster
I think that is unfair to Cameron and shows a lack of understanding of what he was trying to do. There was no way he or anyone else thought that just by turning up there and having a good moan he was going to change the mind of the Sri Lankan government over anything.
But he has very effectively highlighted the plight of the Tamils and the abuses by the Sri Lankan government and given the media the opportunity to talk about them around the world. In doing so he has done more than any other leader to bring the issue to the top table and make the Sri Lankans realise it is not something that they will be able to sweep under the carpet.
The visit to Jaffna was a masterstroke.
Cameron will never win a parliamentary majority!
I'll say that Mike and Fita are right about this - Cameron is by far the strongest figure in the Tory Party. I have said before that I am not as down on him as Tim. He's a decent PM on the world stage.
The party quite clearly had to move to the left after the shambles of Hague and Howard, and Cameron was the only viable candidate on the modernising wing of the party. While Sean has a point about his poshness, I would challenge him to tell us who would do any better 18 months out?
Brown lost the election in 2010. Cameron stupidly failed to win it.
What a load of rubbish. Davis was certainly not part of the old boys club. Indeed it is that very quality about Cameron and Osborne that is one of their biggest problems.
It is you who are stuck in the past with your strange notion that somehow it is ones duty to vote conservative no matter what they do or how badly they screw up.
Some of us have grown up and realised those childish ideas don't have any place in modern politics.
It's also why Cameron has to make "Labour's Tax Bombshell" the central theme of the 2015 campaign.
If people think Miliband/Balls will put their taxes up - at a time when people are already feeling badly off - then it will really scare people.
It could move a lot of votes - not just away from Lab but it'll also get UKIP voters back to Con.
Correlation and causation. The conservatives didn't make those gains because of Cameron. They did it despite him.
Sean Fear. - The figure is far closer to 66% of members. The Tories haven't released an official figure. But it is under 100,000.
Brilliant comment. "No matter what the polls say".
These polls happen to reflect what the public are thinking. Who happen to decide who will be in charge of this country after 2015. You can say that "the public never learn" but then arguing with the general public isn't a great electoral strategy.
The right is also led by a cabal - not just one individual - who don't really want it. A bunch of posh boys that went it to politics because they thought "why the hell not." The fact that they got promoted beyond their ability is a real problem for the Tories.
Ok so if Ed is crap. And the polls give us 3 terms under him. You are right he may still be crap. But he will have made sure that the Tories haven't won a majority in almost 40 years.
I'll take that.
Crosby thinks we will walk back to them at the GE, he has a big shock coming. Farage says UKIP are the only opposition to Labour in the North, a bit of an overstatement but Labour should not take the WWC vote for granted.
Cameron would have been a good choice if he had surrounded himself with people who weren't from his background. He could have been the showman he feels comfortable with but made sure that there was a group of people who could cut down his stupid out of touch ideas.
The Tories problem is not that there is one posh boy at the top of the party - but that there are LOADS!
ComRes/SM+IOS 16.11.2013: LAB 35, CON 29, UKIP 17, LDEM 10
Farage is part right. You aren't the only opposition to Labour in the north of England .... yet! But you will be in 20 years time. By then the Tories will have died off completely up there.
Agreed she would need to be in cabinet first.
No. I don't think it matters one jot whether he is or not. What matters is who is going to win the next election. And the polls say Labour and Ed Miliband.
I am certain you will agree with me that Ed is magnificently charismatic and eloquent. He is an inspiring and refreshing standard bearer for the social democratic tradition in our great nation. Yes, indeed: One Nation. Nay, his performance at Conference this year must surely have been amongst the greatest (if not the greatest) ever given by a leader of the Labour Party, or indeed of any party leader! Such magnificence, such poise, such alacrity. Wow! And his wonderful repertoire of jokes would put even Harry Hill to shame!
He is articulate, passionate, an accomplished orator, and I think a real progressive alternative to the smarmy posh boy Cameron.
Problem is that the Tories now have so many of "this sort" that they are crowding out the genuine people who "get" the real world.
The Tories would do well do ban Public School boy MPs. Might make things difficult for a few years but the long term benefits would be huge.
Blair took on the mantle of right-wing policies to win.
As soon as a true lefty took over (Brown), he lost.
But he has very effectively highlighted the plight of the Tamils and the abuses by the Sri Lankan government and given the media the opportunity to talk about them around the world. In doing so he has done more than any other leader to bring the issue to the top table and make the Sri Lankans realise it is not something that they will be able to sweep under the carpet.
The visit to Jaffna was a masterstroke.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_attacks_attributed_to_the_LTTE
There's British citizens murdered in that lot, including the family of a friend of mine so perhaps I am biased. I hope Cameron found time to seek assurances that the perpetrators of those crimes have been brought to justice.
And FFS, Nick Robinson puts deaths at 40,000. That is a truly terrible fact, but the world is full of truly terrible facts including atrocities which kill millions.
It'll be interesting to see how it pans out. The chances of Cameron looking terminally weak at the UN are quite high.
That said, I understand the party vets the applications before they get put forward and also has a veto if they really don't like the outcome, so there's not much point in game playing.
Also, for most people, life's too short. They probably just vote for the candidate they like the best. Which is usually a GP...
Blair and Browns policies were almost the same. Miliband and Blairs are. Especially when you compare Miliband to Blair 1994 - 1997.
The first gives a Labour majority of 118. The second one, 70.
Time for Dan Hodges to start writing his article !
Nigel Huddleston - works for Google, Tory Reform Group, second in Luton South in 2010
Edward Argar - Westminster councillor, third in Oxford East in 2010
Victoria Atkins - criminal prosecutor, second in the Gloucestershire PCC election
Nusrat Ghani - public affairs, third in Birmingham Ladywood in 2010
There's British citizens murdered in that lot, including the family of a friend of mine so perhaps I am biased. I hope Cameron found time to seek assurances that the perpetrators of those crimes have been brought to justice.
And FFS, Nick Robinson puts deaths at 40,000. That is a truly terrible fact, but the world is full of truly terrible facts including atrocities which kill millions.
It'll be interesting to see how it pans out. The chances of Cameron looking terminally weak at the UN are quite high.
Fair enough. How many did the Tigers kill ? Do you condemn the Tigers just as much ?
http://www.kingsfund.org.uk/projects/general-election-2010/faqs#beds
We have fewer beds per head than almost every OECD country, and often by a factor of two or more (France, Germany) despite having higher rates of heart disease, diabetes and obesity:
http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SH.MED.BEDS.ZS
Sometimes it is as simple as that!