People following JackW's tips have generally made money (let's forgive him Watford, everyone knows Ave It is the local expert there). Have your tips been as profitable?
People following JackW's tips have generally made money (let's forgive him Watford, everyone knows Ave It is the local expert there). Have your tips been as profitable?
What, you bet on the basis of those "hilarious" polls that JackW makes up?
People following JackW's tips have generally made money (let's forgive him Watford, everyone knows Ave It is the local expert there). Have your tips been as profitable?
What, you bet on the basis of those "hilarious" polls that JackW makes up?
People following JackW's tips have generally made money (let's forgive him Watford, everyone knows Ave It is the local expert there). Have your tips been as profitable?
What, you bet on the basis of those "hilarious" polls that JackW makes up?
Have you noticed the name of the site yet?
Is that a yes? You really use JackW's made-up joke polls as an informative basis on which to risk your money?
People following JackW's tips have generally made money (let's forgive him Watford, everyone knows Ave It is the local expert there). Have your tips been as profitable?
What, you bet on the basis of those "hilarious" polls that JackW makes up?
Have you noticed the name of the site yet?
Is that a yes? You really use JackW's made-up joke polls as an informative basis on which to risk your money?
If you're asking whether I would be happier putting money on JackW's tips or yours the answer is very much the former. He's reigning tipster of the year on the site. He has called elections correctly in the past. Your record is not as good as his no matter how hard you try to belittle him.
People following JackW's tips have generally made money (let's forgive him Watford, everyone knows Ave It is the local expert there). Have your tips been as profitable?
What, you bet on the basis of those "hilarious" polls that JackW makes up?
Have you noticed the name of the site yet?
Is that a yes? You really use JackW's made-up joke polls as an informative basis on which to risk your money?
If you're asking whether I would be happier putting money on JackW's tips or yours the answer is very much the former. He's reigning tipster of the year on the site. He has called elections correctly in the past. Your record is not as good as his no matter how hard you try to belittle him.
No that wasn't was I was asking.
I was talking about made-up or (at best) extremely dubious polling, whether reported by Dan Hodges or JackW.
After Tory rebels failed to defeat the government tonight on sacking much of the regular army and replacing it with reservists, could we see some more moves to UKIP in the next few polls?
@DavidL the delete or block function is on a pull down sub menu, linked to the user profile, whereas the favourite lies at the bottom right of the tweet.
The next excuses will be I was doing research, the intern did it, I was spammed, or I was out of my mind after a meeting with Rev Paul.
Thanks. It just seems so unlikely that anyone in the public domain, let alone an MP, would be so stupid. Still a relatively trivial story though.
So stupid he did it more than once if Guido has the facts right.
Labour never learn, whether its running the economy into the ground or .... err other things
After Tory rebels failed to defeat the government tonight on sacking much of the regular army and replacing it with reservists, could we see some more moves to UKIP in the next few polls?
Tory / UKIP are exercised by these kind of side issues, and have been sparring a few votes off each other for a long time now, it's one of those little things that could have an impact at those margins. But probably not.
Channel 4 has quite a scoop - Blair lifted the decades old ban on the US spying on British citizens a few weeks before he left office.......
'These documents show that, as late as 2007, the British government did object to its citizens' data being scraped and analysed by US spies. And they show that in 2005 the USA was preparing to spy on Britain "unilaterally" and without its knowledge.
Something changed during the Blair government – but no account of it has been given in public by those who took the decisions, nor is it clear what the politicians knew.'
Tony Blair's government allowed America to store and analyse the email, mobile phone and internet records of potentially millions of innocent Britons, Channel 4 News can reveal.
The phone, internet and email records of UK citizens not suspected of any wrongdoing have been analysed and stored by America's National Security Agency under a secret deal that was approved by British intelligence officials, according to documents from the whistleblower Edward Snowden.
In the first explicit confirmation that UK citizens have been caught up in US mass surveillance programs, an NSA memo describes how in 2007 an agreement was reached that allowed the agency to "unmask" and hold on to personal data about Britons that had previously been off limits.
The memo, published in a joint investigation by the Guardian and Britain's Channel 4 News, says the material is being put in databases where it can be made available to other members of the US intelligence and military community.
The Tories concentrating on the phoney wars over Unite and the Co-Op and the various weaknesses of Ed will cost them at the next GE. It's as fruitless as Labour going after Ashcroft (see GE2010) or the ex-staff of NI.
Aside from their UKIP problem, The Tories have a perception problem: too many people out there are indoctrinated to believe Conservative = party of the rich, anti-poor party, heartlessness. If the battle going into the next war becomes a finger-pointing contest, with the Tories calling Ed "weak" and Ed calling the Tories "out of touch" then Labour will win.
Cameron and Osborne should get out there and spend more time winning people over to fiscal conservatism. Do the SOUND MONEY mantra. Persuade people, make them understand that borrowed money has to be paid back. Tell them how much money we spend on interest and welfare (and before Tim bleats on about Osborne spending more than Darling, remember that he was left without a pot to piss in or a window to throw the piss out of, and that debts were always going to rise over the medium term). Make them believe that future governments should be running a deficit surplus and paying off some debt whilst spending within its means, on capital projects that return more bang for their buck. Intellectually fisk and destroy the Labour method. It shouldn't be difficult.
I don't support the Tories because of their stance on the EU or because they make me richer, or because it is popular to do so. And I certainly don' support any of their traditional social policies. But I do think that my kids will have live in a more competitive, more financially stable and better run Britain under the Tories than they would do under a Labour government.
Thatcher won massively on this point. However unpopular or odd she was perceived by the public they trusted her to run a tight ship. Cameron and Osborne need to re-establish that about the Tories. They will do so by making the intellectual argument and thrusting it down the throats of the public.
The fact they don't do so is very frustrating because it is the only way they will win the next GE.
Tony Blair's government allowed America to store and analyse the email, mobile phone and internet records of potentially millions of innocent Britons, Channel 4 News can reveal.
The phone, internet and email records of UK citizens not suspected of any wrongdoing have been analysed and stored by America's National Security Agency under a secret deal that was approved by British intelligence officials, according to documents from the whistleblower Edward Snowden.
In the first explicit confirmation that UK citizens have been caught up in US mass surveillance programs, an NSA memo describes how in 2007 an agreement was reached that allowed the agency to "unmask" and hold on to personal data about Britons that had previously been off limits.
The memo, published in a joint investigation by the Guardian and Britain's Channel 4 News, says the material is being put in databases where it can be made available to other members of the US intelligence and military community.
That's the sort of thing that should really annoy me. But given that it hasn't had the slightest impact on my life, and almost certainly won't ever have the slightest impact on my life, I really don't care. Wrong.
They've started with 'ravey' background muzak. Cos it's the youth.
'As well as a panel including Conservative MP Jacob Rees-Mogg and Labour MP Stella Creasy, the leaders of Britain's political parties give exclusive interviews explaining what they are doing to engage young voters and answer questions set by the Free Speech social media audience, including ones on youth unemployment and freedom of speech.'
On the other hand you are right about the lack of seriousness among the PB Tory analysis, it's a shame really.
I may look back in twenties years wondering what the hell I was thinking. Wonder why the hell I supported the Tories. Because I know I might be wrong on the economics. I don't think I am and I try hard to visualise how a more leftist model would work but I don't think it can. Not in the world market anyway. But, I will be willing to look back and admit I was wrong if austerity proves an abject failure.
What I won't be looking back and wondering about is Falkirk, or EdM versus EdB Kremlinism.
The next GE will be won on the big issues and it will be an important one to win.
I fear neither side wants to grasp the nettle of just how much economic difficulty we are in and explain it to the public in Stephen King terms.
Looks like Cameron and the Tories are over-egging it.As much as they try to blame Labour for Co-op bank and Paul Flowers,it won`t register as Paul Flowers is essentially unknown.
Miliband is talking about stuff people want addressed.Cameron is just fighting phony wars.
Looks like Cameron and the Tories are over-egging it.As much as they try to blame Labour for Co-op bank and Paul Flowers,it won`t register as Paul Flowers is essentially unknown.
This won’t be Labour’s Leveson, but with the party’s close connection to the Co-op Bank, it has the potential to connect the party’s name in some gruesome headlines over time.
And the whole Co-op crisis also raises further questions about how Labour is going to afford a general election campaign. Its generous credit facility with the Co-op must now be a thing of the past, and that at a time when Ed Miliband’s funding reforms are potentially squeezing the Party’s union funding.
The Tories concentrating on the phoney wars over Unite and the Co-Op and the various weaknesses of Ed will cost them at the next GE. It's as fruitless as Labour going after Ashcroft (see GE2010) or the ex-staff of NI.
Aside from their UKIP problem, The Tories have a perception problem: too many people out there are indoctrinated to believe Conservative = party of the rich, anti-poor party, heartlessness. If the battle going into the next war becomes a finger-pointing contest, with the Tories calling Ed "weak" and Ed calling the Tories "out of touch" then Labour will win.
Cameron and Osborne should get out there and spend more time winning people over to fiscal conservatism. Do the SOUND MONEY mantra. Persuade people, make them understand that borrowed money has to be paid back. Tell them how much money we spend on interest and welfare (and before Tim bleats on about Osborne spending more than Darling, remember that he was left [snip] method. It shouldn't be difficult.
I don't support the Tories because of their stance on the EU or because they make me richer, or because it is popular to do so. And I certainly don' support any of their traditional social policies. But I do think that my kids will have live in a more competitive, more financially stable and better run Britain under the Tories than they would do under a Labour government.
[snip] argument and thrusting it down the throats of the public.
The fact they don't do so is very frustrating because it is the only way they will win the next GE.
Great post. You should post more often. The standard of debate on here of late has been dire - I myself have been guilty of it. I honestly don't know why social conservatism has come back. I thought we'd seen the back of that nonsense. The dialogue on here today, and from the government shows the fight goes on.
Sorry that I'm not at Dirty Dicks tonight, just got back from a wonderful 3 weeks in Ecuador (Amazon, avenue of volcanoes and the Galapagos) and had too much to do to make it. Hope everyone is having a great time there.
Looks like Cameron and the Tories are over-egging it.As much as they try to blame Labour for Co-op bank and Paul Flowers,it won`t register as Paul Flowers is essentially unknown.
Miliband is talking about stuff people want addressed.Cameron is just fighting phony wars.
I'd agree. Whether Miliband's talk will be useful or is achievable, I certainly don't know even if I'm doubtful, but it is getting attention and the Tories do seem to be focusing on things that just are not likely to register as much. Porn blocking, murky and complex internal electoral issues for Labour and a scandal involving someone no-one's ever heard of before, with the best news today being how the Tories have managed to defeat its own rebels.
The Tories are divided, focusing on minor issues or the wrong issues despite facing an uphill task to remain largest party, and Labour are on cruise control (which is their biggest risk - the recent issues do have potential to harm them if they are careless, but it'd have to be incredibly careless.)
Looks like Cameron and the Tories are over-egging it.As much as they try to blame Labour for Co-op bank and Paul Flowers,it won`t register as Paul Flowers is essentially unknown.
Miliband is talking about stuff people want addressed.Cameron is just fighting phony wars.
I'd agree. Whether Miliband's talk will be useful or is achievable, I certainly don't know even if I'm doubtful, but it is getting attention and the Tories do seem to be focusing on things that just are not likely to register as much. Porn blocking, murky and complex internal electoral issues for Labour and a scandal involving someone no-one's ever heard of before, with the best news today being how the Tories have managed to defeat its own rebels.
The Tories are divided, focusing on minor issues or the wrong issues despite facing an uphill task to remain largest party, and Labour are on cruise control (which is their biggest risk - the recent issues do have potential to harm them if they are careless, but it'd have to be incredibly careless.)
Agree about the Cruise Control. Miliband has had a bad week - childcare pledge got drowned out by the porn thing, PMQS was poor. The usually well honed machine misfired a bit. You Gov down today. Ought to be a wake up call, but still in a strong position overall.
Aside from their UKIP problem, The Tories have a perception problem: too many people out there are indoctrinated to believe Conservative = party of the rich, anti-poor party, heartlessness. If the battle going into the next war becomes a finger-pointing contest, with the Tories calling Ed "weak" and Ed calling the Tories "out of touch" then Labour will win.
Great point. The Tories may wish it wasn't so that with equally tired mudslinging and namecalling, the Tories come off worse, but that is the perception. As has been pointed out again and again, instinctive anti-Toryness is more pervasive and powerful and instinctive anti-labourness. Even as someone who has never voted Tory, I think that's weird and a bit unfair, such as with the claim that plenty in the north support Tory policies until they hear they are tory policies (or at least would not vote for the party even so), but it is the reality, and I don't know how that changes.
Trying to modernize the image hasn't worked, apologising for things hasn't worked. It's no wonder many want a return to being hard right one everything - if the toxicity still exists, what was the point of making that journey that was suppoed to remove it? It's made them more electable to me, but the general numbers disagree that that would be true for most people.
Looks like Cameron and the Tories are over-egging it.As much as they try to blame Labour for Co-op bank and Paul Flowers,it won`t register as Paul Flowers is essentially unknown.
Miliband is talking about stuff people want addressed.Cameron is just fighting phony wars.
I'd agree. Whether Miliband's talk will be useful or is achievable, I certainly don't know even if I'm doubtful, but it is getting attention and the Tories do seem to be focusing on things that just are not likely to register as much. Porn blocking, murky and complex internal electoral issues for Labour and a scandal involving someone no-one's ever heard of before, with the best news today being how the Tories have managed to defeat its own rebels.
The Tories are divided, focusing on minor issues or the wrong issues despite facing an uphill task to remain largest party, and Labour are on cruise control (which is their biggest risk - the recent issues do have potential to harm them if they are careless, but it'd have to be incredibly careless.)
Agree about the Cruise Control. Miliband has had a bad week - childcare pledge got drowned out by the porn thing, PMQS was poor. The usually well honed machine misfired a bit. You Gov down today. Ought to be a wake up call, but still in a strong position overall.
It's true they are not flawless, and personally I still don't get the logic of hitting the bedroom tax so hard when it seems pretty popular as far as I'm aware (apart from concerns about the diabled - I think? - I've not seen any Labour comments in protest over it which were compelling enough to even vaguely recollect), but as you say, they are in strong position, and I think Ed M is cautious enough to avoid an giant pitfalls.
So apparently Robert Peston finally got the job he has coveted for so long as BBC Economics Editor.
I really hate that guy. I don't know why, but I really hate him. Nothing to do with any perceived bias or otherwise, I just have an irrational hatred of Peston. Could be his terrible speaking style and awful hesitation when he speaks.
At least it's not that David Blanchflower idiot, was half expecting the BBC to go for him.
Did you know Peston's wife died, horribly young, rather recently, in very saddening circumstances?
I agree his accent grates but when I read about this, much of my animosity melted.
Agree there Sean. It received remarkably little publicity - a truly saddening tragedy and my reaction was the same as yours, from the same position.
Sorry but he was a Gordon Brown toady. Just read the book he wrote about the man! Still that seems to be the route to success in journalism nowadays. If I thought the Tories were going to win the next election then I'd expect his eventual replacement to be Janan Ganesh.
The odd thing about Flowers is the inaction, the unwillingness to consider that he might not be up to the job when he was first proposed as a main board member.
It might not damage Labour if no Lab Co MPs were named as being involved pushing for his appointment. It doesn't say much for the quality of financial journalists, or the Tories in 2008-12, as both didn't go after Flowers earlier.
It can't be good for Ed M to have his line of attack at PMQs deconstructed by one of his own MPs, then have Cameron use it against him in real time. It broke up Ed M's position. Cameron may have had a day when Labour screwed up, but Labour will be hoping that the Co-Op stuff dies down sooner rather than later.
Great post. You should post more often. The standard of debate on here of late has been dire - I myself have been guilty of it. I honestly don't know why social conservatism has come back. I thought we'd seen the back of that nonsense. The dialogue on here today, and from the government shows the fight goes on.
Thank you, that's very nice of you.
Fact is, I understand that the Tories need to kick Labour over things such as Falkirk or Flowers and vice versa. It keeps the troops happy and is good knockabout politics. I don't claim to be above the fray on some moral cloud. I just fear that the Tories sometimes think a bit of Labour bashing over the unions is enough to see Ed off. It won't be. Tory-disdain is deep-rooted and needs some serious intellectual persuasion to win people round.
I follow politics and read about it, yet I don't even know what happened in Falkirk. If any Tory supporters or MPs think issues like Falkirk will win over many swing-voters in the marginals then they are wrong. It's self-delusion.
The odd thing about Flowers is the inaction, the unwillingness to consider that he might not be up to the job when he was first proposed as a main board member.
It might not damage Labour if no Lab Co MPs were named as being involved pushing for his appointment. It doesn't say much for the quality of financial journalists, or the Tories in 2008-12, as both didn't go after Flowers earlier.
It can't be good for Ed M to have his line of attack at PMQs deconstructed by one of his own MPs, then have Cameron use it against him in real time. It broke up Ed M's position. Cameron may have had a day when Labour screwed up, but Labour will be hoping that the Co-Op stuff dies down sooner rather than later.
I know this is an extreme (gobsmacking) case, but in all honesty I can understand how the most inappropriate and incompetent individuals can slither up the ranks. I've seen it in the public and private sector many times.
One reason is the yawning gap that develops between policy makers and those on the front line/shop floor/whatever - not talking in terms of pay etc, but in re understanding what the impact of their decisions are. They don't consult, or trial, or evaluate - they just plough on. Then when things go tits up they close ranks and blame the lower orders.
Some basic points for those who still don't get it.
The less Lib Dem MPs there are the less chance there is of a hung parliament.
If Farage implodes in a Robert Kilroy-Silk like manner or if the lib dems ditch the toxic calamity Clegg then everything is up for grabs.
The two biggest and most meaningful events that have clearly shifting VI in this parliament are Calamity Clegg utterly tanking the lib dem brand in 2010 and Osbrowne's omnishambles. The first saw labour shoot up in the polls and the second marked the real start of kippers rise in the polls.
Labour's problem is that they realise they have a psephological comfort blanket. Too easy to sit back.
Perhaps. Good problem to have though, compared to some. I kind of hope they don't get back in purely on the basis that they haven't worked hard enough for it yet, and that's not good for a party's attitude (similar to what happens when a party is in power for too long)
Prime Minister David Cameron in TWITTER HOOKER SHAME http://ow.ly/27KmEk Yes, the Internet is a bad place you dirty dog...
LOL
You probably shouldn't believe everything you read on twitter, since it appears to be Gordon Brown responsible for this.
""Prior to 2010, an auto-follow process was used, meaning that @Number10gov automatically followed anyone who followed the account.
"This was common practice at the time for many corporate accounts, but was discontinued in 2009.
"As a result of this legacy, the @Number10gov account follows almost 370,000 accounts and we have taken steps to un-follow as many as possible that are inactive, spam or inappropriate. This work is ongoing.""
Some basic points for those who still don't get it.
The less Lib Dem MPs there are the less chance there is of a hung parliament.
If Farage implodes in a Robert Kilroy-Silk like manner or if the lib dems ditch the toxic calamity Clegg then everything is up for grabs.
The two biggest and most meaningful events that have clearly shifting VI in this parliament are Calamity Clegg utterly tanking the lib dem brand in 2010 and Osbrowne's omnishambles. The first saw labour shoot up in the polls and the second marked the start of kippers rise in the polls.
The utter consistency of the LD drop after 2010 (that it happened also immediately is proof that it had little to do with any actions they did - although that did reinforce it later that year - and more just the principle of coalition with the Tories, proving the party was very significantly made up of labour-lites) is another major indication that even if they do rebound quiet a bit in 2015 come crunch time at election day, as many suspect as do I to some degree, it is unlikely to be by enough, as there surely would have been at least some sustained recovered since hitting that polling floor almost 3 years ago.
Ditching Clegg is a necessity. Not because the rest are not almost all as culpable in making the coalition decision in the first place, it is not as though he did not get his party's backing, but it is the sort of superficial change that might be just enough to convince LD-Lab switchers in a Con-LD marginal to hold their noses and vote LD again.
Man, the Tories were really riding high up to 2012. Feels like a long time ago now.
I totally disagree with you over Falkirk, Unite, Flowers and the Co-op. All of these issues are now combining to highlight that the Labour party has learnt nothing from their previous mistakes in Government and as the sleazy party. And more importantly, it also shows that neither Ed Miliband or Ed Balls have displayed particularly sound judgement over these issues. Its now painting a picture of Labour as a dysfunctional and corner cutting political party. And one who has far too often allowed their own prejudice and arrogance to let them think that 'ethical' rules only apply to their political opponents, as if they have some morale high ground get out clause.
Great post. You should post more often. The standard of debate on here of late has been dire - I myself have been guilty of it. I honestly don't know why social conservatism has come back. I thought we'd seen the back of that nonsense. The dialogue on here today, and from the government shows the fight goes on.
Thank you, that's very nice of you.
Fact is, I understand that the Tories need to kick Labour over things such as Falkirk or Flowers and vice versa. It keeps the troops happy and is good knockabout politics. I don't claim to be above the fray on some moral cloud. I just fear that the Tories sometimes think a bit of Labour bashing over the unions is enough to see Ed off. It won't be. Tory-disdain is deep-rooted and needs some serious intellectual persuasion to win people round.
I follow politics and read about it, yet I don't even know what happened in Falkirk. If any Tory supporters or MPs think issues like Falkirk will win over many swing-voters in the marginals then they are wrong. It's self-delusion.
Comments
I was talking about made-up or (at best) extremely dubious polling, whether reported by Dan Hodges or JackW.
Was Dan Hodges using JackW and his "projections" as his insider "Tory analyst" I wonder!
The problem would seem to be that you're too stupid to carry out a relatively simple task successfully.
Labour never learn, whether its running the economy into the ground or .... err other things
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/ad4ef6a4-503d-11e3-befe-00144feabdc0.html#axzz2lDOUGPpB
Meanwhile, we're stuck paying for his armoured limos and bullet catchers.
Something changed during the Blair government – but no account of it has been given in public by those who took the decisions, nor is it clear what the politicians knew.'
http://www.channel4.com/news/nsa-edward-snowden-america-britain-tony-blair
Tony Blair's government allowed America to store and analyse the email, mobile phone and internet records of potentially millions of innocent Britons, Channel 4 News can reveal.
http://www.channel4.com/news/nsa-edward-snowden-america-britain-tony-blair
and
The phone, internet and email records of UK citizens not suspected of any wrongdoing have been analysed and stored by America's National Security Agency under a secret deal that was approved by British intelligence officials, according to documents from the whistleblower Edward Snowden.
In the first explicit confirmation that UK citizens have been caught up in US mass surveillance programs, an NSA memo describes how in 2007 an agreement was reached that allowed the agency to "unmask" and hold on to personal data about Britons that had previously been off limits.
The memo, published in a joint investigation by the Guardian and Britain's Channel 4 News, says the material is being put in databases where it can be made available to other members of the US intelligence and military community.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/nov/20/us-uk-secret-deal-surveillance-personal-data
5-a-side was moved to Wednesday this week, I thought it would be bad form to turn up pissed.
Quinnipiac Colorado
•Chris Christie (R) 46% [43%] (44%)
•Hillary Clinton (D) 38% [42%] (41%)
•Rand Paul (R) 47%
•Hillary Clinton (D) 44%
•Paul Ryan (R) 45%
•Hillary Clinton (D) 43%
•Hillary Clinton (D) 44% [45%]
•Ted Cruz (R) 44% [42%]
Aside from their UKIP problem, The Tories have a perception problem: too many people out there are indoctrinated to believe Conservative = party of the rich, anti-poor party, heartlessness. If the battle going into the next war becomes a finger-pointing contest, with the Tories calling Ed "weak" and Ed calling the Tories "out of touch" then Labour will win.
Cameron and Osborne should get out there and spend more time winning people over to fiscal conservatism. Do the SOUND MONEY mantra. Persuade people, make them understand that borrowed money has to be paid back. Tell them how much money we spend on interest and welfare (and before Tim bleats on about Osborne spending more than Darling, remember that he was left without a pot to piss in or a window to throw the piss out of, and that debts were always going to rise over the medium term). Make them believe that future governments should be running a deficit surplus and paying off some debt whilst spending within its means, on capital projects that return more bang for their buck. Intellectually fisk and destroy the Labour method. It shouldn't be difficult.
I don't support the Tories because of their stance on the EU or because they make me richer, or because it is popular to do so. And I certainly don' support any of their traditional social policies. But I do think that my kids will have live in a more competitive, more financially stable and better run Britain under the Tories than they would do under a Labour government.
Thatcher won massively on this point. However unpopular or odd she was perceived by the public they trusted her to run a tight ship. Cameron and Osborne need to re-establish that about the Tories. They will do so by making the intellectual argument and thrusting it down the throats of the public.
The fact they don't do so is very frustrating because it is the only way they will win the next GE.
How is that even possible?
Cameron's probably reversed all this hasn't he?
http://www7.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2013/08/22/history-suggests-the-tories-will-see-their-share-of-the-vote-decline-in-2015-2/
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b03jnp96
They've started with 'ravey' background muzak. Cos it's the youth.
'As well as a panel including Conservative MP Jacob Rees-Mogg and Labour MP Stella Creasy, the leaders of Britain's political parties give exclusive interviews explaining what they are doing to engage young voters and answer questions set by the Free Speech social media audience, including ones on youth unemployment and freedom of speech.'
What I won't be looking back and wondering about is Falkirk, or EdM versus EdB Kremlinism.
The next GE will be won on the big issues and it will be an important one to win.
I fear neither side wants to grasp the nettle of just how much economic difficulty we are in and explain it to the public in Stephen King terms.
NUMBER CRUNCHING
£7.4m Cost of four-year Chilcot inquiry into the invasion of Iraq
130 Number of conversations between Tony Blair and George W Bush that cabinet secretary Sir Jeremy Heywood refuses to release to the inquiry
140,000 Iraqis killed in the war
Miliband is talking about stuff people want addressed.Cameron is just fighting phony wars.
I honestly don't know why social conservatism has come back. I thought we'd seen the back of that nonsense. The dialogue on here today, and from the government shows the fight goes on.
The Tories are divided, focusing on minor issues or the wrong issues despite facing an uphill task to remain largest party, and Labour are on cruise control (which is their biggest risk - the recent issues do have potential to harm them if they are careless, but it'd have to be incredibly careless.)
Great point. The Tories may wish it wasn't so that with equally tired mudslinging and namecalling, the Tories come off worse, but that is the perception. As has been pointed out again and again, instinctive anti-Toryness is more pervasive and powerful and instinctive anti-labourness. Even as someone who has never voted Tory, I think that's weird and a bit unfair, such as with the claim that plenty in the north support Tory policies until they hear they are tory policies (or at least would not vote for the party even so), but it is the reality, and I don't know how that changes.
Trying to modernize the image hasn't worked, apologising for things hasn't worked. It's no wonder many want a return to being hard right one everything - if the toxicity still exists, what was the point of making that journey that was suppoed to remove it? It's made them more electable to me, but the general numbers disagree that that would be true for most people.
http://tinyurl.com/oxbq5w2
It might not damage Labour if no Lab Co MPs were named as being involved pushing for his appointment. It doesn't say much for the quality of financial journalists, or the Tories in 2008-12, as both didn't go after Flowers earlier.
It can't be good for Ed M to have his line of attack at PMQs deconstructed by one of his own MPs, then have Cameron use it against him in real time. It broke up Ed M's position. Cameron may have had a day when Labour screwed up, but Labour will be hoping that the Co-Op stuff dies down sooner rather than later.
LOL
Great post. You should post more often. The standard of debate on here of late has been dire - I myself have been guilty of it.
I honestly don't know why social conservatism has come back. I thought we'd seen the back of that nonsense. The dialogue on here today, and from the government shows the fight goes on.
Thank you, that's very nice of you.
Fact is, I understand that the Tories need to kick Labour over things such as Falkirk or Flowers and vice versa. It keeps the troops happy and is good knockabout politics. I don't claim to be above the fray on some moral cloud. I just fear that the Tories sometimes think a bit of Labour bashing over the unions is enough to see Ed off. It won't be. Tory-disdain is deep-rooted and needs some serious intellectual persuasion to win people round.
I follow politics and read about it, yet I don't even know what happened in Falkirk. If any Tory supporters or MPs think issues like Falkirk will win over many swing-voters in the marginals then they are wrong. It's self-delusion.
Labour's problem is that they realise they have a psephological comfort blanket. Too easy to sit back.
One reason is the yawning gap that develops between policy makers and those on the front line/shop floor/whatever - not talking in terms of pay etc, but in re understanding what the impact of their decisions are. They don't consult, or trial, or evaluate - they just plough on. Then when things go tits up they close ranks and blame the lower orders.
The less Lib Dem MPs there are the less chance there is of a hung parliament.
If Farage implodes in a Robert Kilroy-Silk like manner or if the lib dems ditch the toxic calamity Clegg then everything is up for grabs.
The two biggest and most meaningful events that have clearly shifting VI in this parliament are Calamity Clegg utterly tanking the lib dem brand in 2010 and Osbrowne's omnishambles.
The first saw labour shoot up in the polls and the second marked the real start of kippers rise in the polls.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/96/UK_opinion_polling_2010-2015.png
They should keep on the attack though. I'm sure they will.
You probably shouldn't believe everything you read on twitter, since it appears to be Gordon Brown responsible for this.
""Prior to 2010, an auto-follow process was used, meaning that @Number10gov automatically followed anyone who followed the account.
"This was common practice at the time for many corporate accounts, but was discontinued in 2009.
"As a result of this legacy, the @Number10gov account follows almost 370,000 accounts and we have taken steps to un-follow as many as possible that are inactive, spam or inappropriate. This work is ongoing.""
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-25015034
Ditching Clegg is a necessity. Not because the rest are not almost all as culpable in making the coalition decision in the first place, it is not as though he did not get his party's backing, but it is the sort of superficial change that might be just enough to convince LD-Lab switchers in a Con-LD marginal to hold their noses and vote LD again.
Man, the Tories were really riding high up to 2012. Feels like a long time ago now.
Fact is, I understand that the Tories need to kick Labour over things such as Falkirk or Flowers and vice versa. It keeps the troops happy and is good knockabout politics. I don't claim to be above the fray on some moral cloud. I just fear that the Tories sometimes think a bit of Labour bashing over the unions is enough to see Ed off. It won't be. Tory-disdain is deep-rooted and needs some serious intellectual persuasion to win people round.
I follow politics and read about it, yet I don't even know what happened in Falkirk. If any Tory supporters or MPs think issues like Falkirk will win over many swing-voters in the marginals then they are wrong. It's self-delusion.
You probably shouldn't believe everything you read on twitter, since it appears to be Gordon Brown responsible for this.
*tears of laughter etc.*