I agree. I know of lifelong Labour supporters who have happily voted for Labour throughout all their schisms, infighting and incompetence. A couple now vote Ukip, and it will take a lot for them to peel off - they're used to holding their noses when voting.
I reckon many voters will be happily in denial re any ukip downsides. For a while anyway. Maybe to 2015.
Oh,dear, "in denial" is such a loaded term and carries with it feelings of comfort to its user. "Those folks are in denial", implies that they are wrong/stupid/barking where as the speaker is a veritable beacon of common sense and wisdom.
I would suggest that with UKIP supporters something else is going on. They are not, "in denial" about their parties weaknesses, they just don't care because they feel that for the first time in many years, there is a party that seems to be speaking for them and people like them.
All the stories about UKIP "eccentricities" don't seem to be denting the Party's popularity so far and I am not sure they will in the future, at least not to the degree that Cameron needs.
UKIP' s big problem is that they have too few Richard Tyndall' s and far too many BNP lite supporters. Until they they can shed the Buffton Tuffton' s and passive aggressive racists they will never advance.
they will never advance.
they've gone from 3% to 12% that sort of says they've advanced.
One factor which ought to have "banked" some Ld/Lab switchers was Ed Miliband's decision not to intervene in Syria. The decision to invade Iraq by Blair was the final straw for many who had traditionally supported Labour.2 million of us marched on the streets to tell him and the Libs opposition to Iraq made them largely the beneficiaries. Had Ed supported Cameron over Syria,there was a fair chance of history repeating itself,with the same electoral effect, if not all straight back to the L/Ds,some to Green or stay at home,but Labour's poll standing would have suffered. The crucial decision over Syria wasn't just the right thing to do,it was politically very sound. Anyway,it didn't happen. 7 out of 10 in the Crapper competiton but I was amazed to see a loo I have used frequently in Amsterdam!
Actually, Miliband's amendment supported action in Syria, as long as a hurdle or two was jumped first.
I reckon many voters will be happily in denial re any ukip downsides. For a while anyway. Maybe to 2015.
Oh,dear, "in denial" is such a loaded term and carries with it feelings of comfort to its user. "Those folks are in denial", implies that they are wrong/stupid/barking where as the speaker is a veritable beacon of common sense and wisdom.
I would suggest that with UKIP supporters something else is going on. They are not, "in denial" about their parties weaknesses, they just don't care because they feel that for the first time in many years, there is a party that seems to be speaking for them and people like them.
All the stories about UKIP "eccentricities" don't seem to be denting the Party's popularity so far and I am not sure they will in the future, at least not to the degree that Cameron needs.
UKIP' s big problem is that they have too few Richard Tyndall' s and far too many BNP lite supporters. Until they they can shed the Buffton Tuffton' s and passive aggressive racists they will never advance.
? Why do you say UKIP aren't advancing? They added 12,000 members last year, and beat the LDs on vote share in the May elections.
Yes time is all and Osborne has got nearly all the big decisions wrong. His crossroads was 2011 when he could either sit on his hands or go for reform. He sat on his hands and has wasted 5 years in this country's economic recovery. All the things he should have done remain undone and somebody will have to do them.
Osborne has never seen the need for reform.
He saw nothing wrong with Brown's economic strategy and has repeated it himself.
So we get house price subsidies and off balance sheet finnacing while such things as productivity and the trade balance are allowed to go to hell.
What is amusing is that the Conservative spinners and supporters are now sounding like Labour's before 2010 even to economic failings always being blamed on foreign countries.
I reckon many voters will be happily in denial re any ukip downsides. For a while anyway. Maybe to 2015.
Oh,dear, "in denial" is such a loaded term and carries with it feelings of comfort to its user. "Those folks are in denial", implies that they are wrong/stupid/barking where as the speaker is a veritable beacon of common sense and wisdom.
I would suggest that with UKIP supporters something else is going on. They are not, "in denial" about their parties weaknesses, they just don't care because they feel that for the first time in many years, there is a party that seems to be speaking for them and people like them.
All the stories about UKIP "eccentricities" don't seem to be denting the Party's popularity so far and I am not sure they will in the future, at least not to the degree that Cameron needs.
UKIP' s big problem is that they have too few Richard Tyndall' s and far too many BNP lite supporters. Until they they can shed the Buffton Tuffton' s and passive aggressive racists they will never advance.
they will never advance.
they've gone from 3% to 12% that sort of says they've advanced.
How many seats will they have in Westminster in 2015? They are unpalatable to large swathes of the public. Being the feck em all party takes you so far. Once the actor Farage explodes as he will when subjected to scrutiny, what then?
I reckon many voters will be happily in denial re any ukip downsides. For a while anyway. Maybe to 2015.
Oh,dear, "in denial" is such a loaded term and carries with it feelings of comfort to its user. "Those folks are in denial", implies that they are wrong/stupid/barking where as the speaker is a veritable beacon of common sense and wisdom.
I would suggest that with UKIP supporters something else is going on. They are not, "in denial" about their parties weaknesses, they just don't care because they feel that for the first time in many years, there is a party that seems to be speaking for them and people like them.
All the stories about UKIP "eccentricities" don't seem to be denting the Party's popularity so far and I am not sure they will in the future, at least not to the degree that Cameron needs.
UKIP' s big problem is that they have too few Richard Tyndall' s and far too many BNP lite supporters. Until they they can shed the Buffton Tuffton' s and passive aggressive racists they will never advance.
they will never advance.
they've gone from 3% to 12% that sort of says they've advanced.
How many seats will they have in Westminster in 2015? They are unpalatable to large swathes of the public. Being the feck em all party takes you so far. Once the actor Farage explodes as he will when subjected to scrutiny, what then?
Well that sort of depends on their approach FPTP works against them, but they've been picking up EU and council seats, the main parties are struggling to differentiate themselves so they keep feeding the beast.
I reckon many voters will be happily in denial re any ukip downsides. For a while anyway. Maybe to 2015.
Oh,dear, "in denial" is such a loaded term and carries with it feelings of comfort to its user. "Those folks are in denial", implies that they are wrong/stupid/barking where as the speaker is a veritable beacon of common sense and wisdom.
I would suggest that with UKIP supporters something else is going on. They are not, "in denial" about their parties weaknesses, they just don't care because they feel that for the first time in many years, there is a party that seems to be speaking for them and people like them.
All the stories about UKIP "eccentricities" don't seem to be denting the Party's popularity so far and I am not sure they will in the future, at least not to the degree that Cameron needs.
UKIP' s big problem is that they have too few Richard Tyndall' s and far too many BNP lite supporters. Until they they can shed the Buffton Tuffton' s and passive aggressive racists they will never advance.
they will never advance.
they've gone from 3% to 12% that sort of says they've advanced.
How many seats will they have in Westminster in 2015? They are unpalatable to large swathes of the public. Being the feck em all party takes you so far. Once the actor Farage explodes as he will when subjected to scrutiny, what then?
All parties are unpalatable to large swathes of the public. There's never been a time when the three main have polled so badly between them (though wartime apart, there's not been a time since the 1920s when al three have been in government in the previous five years).
I reckon many voters will be happily in denial re any ukip downsides. For a while anyway. Maybe to 2015.
Oh,dear, "in denial" is such a loaded term and carries with it feelings of comfort to its user. "Those folks are in denial", implies that they are wrong/stupid/barking where as the speaker is a veritable beacon of common sense and wisdom.
I would suggest that with UKIP supporters something else is going on. They are not, "in denial" about their parties weaknesses, they just don't care because they feel that for the first time in many years, there is a party that seems to be speaking for them and people like them.
All the stories about UKIP "eccentricities" don't seem to be denting the Party's popularity so far and I am not sure they will in the future, at least not to the degree that Cameron needs.
UKIP' s big problem is that they have too few Richard Tyndall' s and far too many BNP lite supporters. Until they they can shed the Buffton Tuffton' s and passive aggressive racists they will never advance.
they will never advance.
they've gone from 3% to 12% that sort of says they've advanced.
How many seats will they have in Westminster in 2015? They are unpalatable to large swathes of the public. Being the feck em all party takes you so far. Once the actor Farage explodes as he will when subjected to scrutiny, what then?
I get the impression that UKIP have one policy …… the obvious …….. which their voters know about. Otherwise their leaders can come up with almost anything and the supporters will go along with it. Provided always that it involves getting out of the EU. Whatever the longterm cost.
I get the impression that UKIP have one policy …… the obvious …….. which their voters know about. Otherwise their leaders can come up with almost anything and the supporters will go along with it. Provided always that it involves getting out of the EU. Whatever the longterm cost.
And that's also why @MickPork's contention that the public will ignore the economic aggregates is similar to the What Have The Romans Done For Us sketch in Life of Brian.
As for this imaginary contention you just made up for me, try reading what I said instead of inventing straw men. I'm saying economic stats are meaningless to the ordinary voter not any economic recovery that they themselves feel. Which is precisely why is called a feel good factor and also why it's immune to inept economic spinning. Either the public will feel it or they won't. Simple as that.
They care about the feelgood factor which may or may not be absent but most are not really You're right. Cam hasn't got the kippers down to less than 5%. Today. But there is not going to be a GE today.
For the reasons I described above I think it's very likely that come GE2015 he will have achieved that.
What happens if his problem isn't kippers ?
last polling said onlt a thired of kippers would vote blue to keep Miliband out. So if we say the kippers are on 12% then Cameron gets 4% back, the kippers stay on 8%. Ince the kipper vote has lots of NOTAs and stay at homes they wouldn't vote Cameron anyway. Cameron's problem may be more that he switches too many of his own voters off and can't get them to come out for him.
Yes. It's a problem. It comes down to those who haven't forgiven Cam for not winning and OM.
Are they lost forever? Perhaps. Listening to the "rebel" Tory MPs (t0ssers one and all) you would think yes. And perhaps this also is testament to the new dynamic of entitlement and lack of responsibility and accountability. I was in a taxi today and the driver told me he was going to buy a new car and the key thing was "monthly payments" if it was low (no matter the APR or overall price paid) it was good.
If Cam has lost those voters then it's a case of strap yourself in because the next few years will be a very bumpy ride.
Even contemplating messing with gun laws is just idiotic. All it would take is one massive shooting in the US for it to be derailed.
Absolutely idiotic idea. Relaxing gun laws is a completely ridiculous idea. Strict laws have kept us safe from gun crime. This is not a road we should go down in this country.
Agree entirely.
I am averse to banning things but if I did ban something it would be guns.
ps - And on the subject of guns and politicians. I had never heard of Budd Dywer till the other day. He was an American politician who committed suicide by gun, live on telly, after reading out a long statement. The footage is on youtube. Bonkers.
"The decision to invade Iraq by Blair was the final straw for many who had traditionally supported Labour.2 million of us marched on the streets to tell him and the Libs opposition to Iraq made them largely the beneficiaries."
Yes - and then stick a Scottish guy in charge and he gets even less votes (in england). Post election - all is forgiven Team Red on the rise.
Even contemplating messing with gun laws is just idiotic. All it would take is one massive shooting in the US for it to be derailed.
Absolutely idiotic idea. Relaxing gun laws is a completely ridiculous idea. Strict laws have kept us safe from gun crime. This is not a road we should go down in this country.
Agree entirely.
I am averse to banning things but if I did ban something it would be guns.
ps - And on the subject of guns and politicians. I had never heard of Budd Dywer till the other day. He was an American politician who committed suicide by gun, live on telly, after reading out a long statement. The footage is on youtube. Bonkers.
Even contemplating messing with gun laws is just idiotic. All it would take is one massive shooting in the US for it to be derailed.
Absolutely idiotic idea. Relaxing gun laws is a completely ridiculous idea. Strict laws have kept us safe from gun crime. This is not a road we should go down in this country.
Agree entirely.
I am averse to banning things but if I did ban something it would be guns.
Exactly the opposite for me. Gun ownership and the right of self defence is a fundamental freedom we are deprived of. I'm very much with the traditional Swiss approach to this.
This is an interesting development as far as I'm concerned. My Euro vote is in the balance and a positive libertarian intervention like this may well tip my decision.
I reckon many voters will be happily in denial re any ukip downsides. For a while anyway. Maybe to 2015.
Oh,dear, "in denial" is such a loaded term and carries with it feelings of comfort to its user. "Those folks are in denial", implies that they are wrong/stupid/barking where as the speaker is a veritable beacon of common sense and wisdom.
I would suggest that with UKIP supporters something else is going on. They are not, "in denial" about their parties weaknesses, they just don't care because they feel that for the first time in many years, there is a party that seems to be speaking for them and people like them.
All the stories about UKIP "eccentricities" don't seem to be denting the Party's popularity so far and I am not sure they will in the future, at least not to the degree that Cameron needs.
UKIP' s big problem is that they have too few Richard Tyndall' s and far too many BNP lite supporters. Until they they can shed the Buffton Tuffton' s and passive aggressive racists they will never advance.
? Why do you say UKIP aren't advancing? They added 12,000 members last year, and beat the LDs on vote share in the May elections.
I reckon many voters will be happily in denial re any ukip downsides. For a while anyway. Maybe to 2015.
Oh,dear, "in denial" is such a loaded term and carries with it feelings of comfort to its user. "Those folks are in denial", implies that they are wrong/stupid/barking where as the speaker is a veritable beacon of common sense and wisdom.
I would suggest that with UKIP supporters something else is going on. They are not, "in denial" about their parties weaknesses, they just don't care because they feel that for the first time in many years, there is a party that seems to be speaking for them and people like them.
All the stories about UKIP "eccentricities" don't seem to be denting the Party's popularity so far and I am not sure they will in the future, at least not to the degree that Cameron needs.
UKIP' s big problem is that they have too few Richard Tyndall' s and far too many BNP lite supporters. Until they they can shed the Buffton Tuffton' s and passive aggressive racists they will never advance.
? Why do you say UKIP aren't advancing? They added 12,000 members last year, and beat the LDs on vote share in the May elections.
And UKIP are continuing the good news by carrying on recruiting. LOL
I reckon many voters will be happily in denial re any ukip downsides. For a while anyway. Maybe to 2015.
Oh,dear, "in denial" is such a loaded term and carries with it feelings of comfort to its user. "Those folks are in denial", implies that they are wrong/stupid/barking where as the speaker is a veritable beacon of common sense and wisdom.
I would suggest that with UKIP supporters something else is going on. They are not, "in denial" about their parties weaknesses, they just don't care because they feel that for the first time in many years, there is a party that seems to be speaking for them and people like them.
All the stories about UKIP "eccentricities" don't seem to be denting the Party's popularity so far and I am not sure they will in the future, at least not to the degree that Cameron needs.
UKIP' s big problem is that they have too few Richard Tyndall' s and far too many BNP lite supporters. Until they they can shed the Buffton Tuffton' s and passive aggressive racists they will never advance.
? Why do you say UKIP aren't advancing? They added 12,000 members last year, and beat the LDs on vote share in the May elections.
Even contemplating messing with gun laws is just idiotic. All it would take is one massive shooting in the US for it to be derailed.
Absolutely idiotic idea. Relaxing gun laws is a completely ridiculous idea. Strict laws have kept us safe from gun crime. This is not a road we should go down in this country.
Agree entirely.
I am averse to banning things but if I did ban something it would be guns.
Exactly the opposite for me. Gun ownership and the right of self defence is a fundamental freedom we are deprived of. I'm very much with the traditional Swiss approach to this.
This is an interesting development as far as I'm concerned. My Euro vote is in the balance and a positive libertarian intervention like this may well tip my decision.
I'm big on civil liberties but don't get the gun thing at all. I think the world would be a far safer place without them.
You are an intelligent bloke and I respect your opinions but I completely disagree on guns. I read Joe Bageant's Deer Hunting with Jesus last year. Bageant was a dyed in the wool socialist from Virginia, USA and he makes a passionate case for gun-ownership in his book. I get the hunting traditions and the civil liberies argument but I still completely disagree with it.
Yes. It's a problem. It comes down to those who haven't forgiven Cam for not winning and OM.
Are they lost forever? Perhaps. Listening to the "rebel" Tory MPs (t0ssers one and all) you would think yes. And perhaps this also is testament to the new dynamic of entitlement and lack of responsibility and accountability. I was in a taxi today and the driver told me he was going to buy a new car and the key thing was "monthly payments" if it was low (no matter the APR or overall price paid) it was good.
If Cam has lost those voters then it's a case of strap yourself in because the next few years will be a very bumpy ride.
And now...Arsenal awaits.
The 'lack of responsibility and accountability' ...
Let us remember what this government said:
" As a result of the measures I will announce today, public sector net borrowing will be: £149 billion this year, falling to £116 billion next year, then £89 billion in 2012-13, and then £60 billion in 2013-14. By 2014-15 borrowing reaches £37 billion, exactly half the amount forecast in the March Budget. "
And yet there is always money for the government's pet projects and for vote buying, would you say that's part of 'the new dynamic of entitlement'.
Yes time is all and Osborne has got nearly all the big decisions wrong. His crossroads was 2011 when he could either sit on his hands or go for reform. He sat on his hands and has wasted 5 years in this country's economic recovery. All the things he should have done remain undone and somebody will have to do them.
Osborne has never seen the need for reform.
He saw nothing wrong with Brown's economic strategy and has repeated it himself.
So we get house price subsidies and off balance sheet finnacing while such things as productivity and the trade balance are allowed to go to hell.
What is amusing is that the Conservative spinners and supporters are now sounding like Labour's before 2010 even to economic failings always being blamed on foreign countries.
Being polite, the comments on this post are either through lack of knowledge or a desire to mislead.
I reckon many voters will be happily in denial re any ukip downsides. For a while anyway. Maybe to 2015.
Oh,dear, "in denial" is such a loaded term and carries with it feelings of comfort to its user. "Those folks are in denial", implies that they are wrong/stupid/barking where as the speaker is a veritable beacon of common sense and wisdom.
I would suggest that with UKIP supporters something else is going on. They are not, "in denial" about their parties weaknesses, they just don't care because they feel that for the first time in many years, there is a party that seems to be speaking for them and people like them.
All the stories about UKIP "eccentricities" don't seem to be denting the Party's popularity so far and I am not sure they will in the future, at least not to the degree that Cameron needs.
UKIP' s big problem is that they have too few Richard Tyndall' s and far too many BNP lite supporters. Until they they can shed the Buffton Tuffton' s and passive aggressive racists they will never advance.
? Why do you say UKIP aren't advancing? They added 12,000 members last year, and beat the LDs on vote share in the May elections.
Yes time is all and Osborne has got nearly all the big decisions wrong. His crossroads was 2011 when he could either sit on his hands or go for reform. He sat on his hands and has wasted 5 years in this country's economic recovery. All the things he should have done remain undone and somebody will have to do them.
Osborne has never seen the need for reform.
He saw nothing wrong with Brown's economic strategy and has repeated it himself.
So we get house price subsidies and off balance sheet finnacing while such things as productivity and the trade balance are allowed to go to hell.
What is amusing is that the Conservative spinners and supporters are now sounding like Labour's before 2010 even to economic failings always being blamed on foreign countries.
Being polite, the comments on this post are either through lack of knowledge or a desire to mislead.
Perhaps you could say something constructive and debate the issue then instead of whining.
But then I can't remember you saying anything which went beyond cheerleading.
Now there's plenty who do likewise here but you're very mediocre at it.
But if you'd like to debate the issue lets talk about productivity and the trade balance under this government.
I reckon many voters will be happily in denial re any ukip downsides. For a while anyway. Maybe to 2015.
Oh,dear, "in denial" is such a loaded term and carries with it feelings of comfort to its user. "Those folks are in denial", implies that they are wrong/stupid/barking where as the speaker is a veritable beacon of common sense and wisdom.
I would suggest that with UKIP supporters something else is going on. They are not, "in denial" about their parties weaknesses, they just don't care because they feel that for the first time in many years, there is a party that seems to be speaking for them and people like them.
All the stories about UKIP "eccentricities" don't seem to be denting the Party's popularity so far and I am not sure they will in the future, at least not to the degree that Cameron needs.
UKIP' s big problem is that they have too few Richard Tyndall' s and far too many BNP lite supporters. Until they they can shed the Buffton Tuffton' s and passive aggressive racists they will never advance.
? Why do you say UKIP aren't advancing? They added 12,000 members last year, and beat the LDs on vote share in the May elections.
Vote share is irrelevant.
Keep telling yourself that.
So how precisely is it relevant? It is likely that Labour will have a lower aggregate vote than the Tories and still come out with most seats and possibly a majority.
It is likely, as well, the UKIP could out poll the LDs and come our with no seats whatsoever.
In two of the last four general elections the direction of the LD vote share has been the opposite of seat changes. 1997 they lost vote share but went up 24 seats. In 2010 they gained votes but were down 5 seats.
Good evening all. I find much of this discussion amusing. It is like groundhog day 1982. Much of what is being said here was said about the SDP. The difference is the SDP was overturning 15,000 Tory majorities in by-elecions and was fronted by someone who was genuinely being ascribed the status of "PM in waiting".
Of course we know what happened. In 1983 most of them sank without trace and the few big names who survived 1983 were toppled in 1987.
Interesting that UKIP made no headway in Cowdenbeath yesterday where the Tory in 3rd increased his share of the vote, increased his actual vote on 2011 and had almost double the votes of UKIP and the LibDems combined and that was in an ex-mining seat represented in part at Westminster by James Gordon Brown.
UKIP will probably do quite well this year on a very small turnout at the Euros. They might even beat Labour into 2nd place behind the Tories. At the GE next year they will do what they did in 2010, cause an irritation and possibly deprive both main parties of a handful of seats.
Even contemplating messing with gun laws is just idiotic. All it would take is one massive shooting in the US for it to be derailed.
Absolutely idiotic idea. Relaxing gun laws is a completely ridiculous idea. Strict laws have kept us safe from gun crime. This is not a road we should go down in this country.
Agree entirely.
I am averse to banning things but if I did ban something it would be guns.
ps - And on the subject of guns and politicians. I had never heard of Budd Dywer till the other day. He was an American politician who committed suicide by gun, live on telly, after reading out a long statement. The footage is on youtube. Bonkers.
Not so bonkers. Dwyer was almost certainly an innocent man with a record of blameless public service. A codefendant fingered him in exchange for a lighter sentence, and years later admitted as much. Dwyer was convicted largely on this testimony. On his sentencing (he was looking at a 55 year sentence) his family would lose their entire pension benefits, etc. While still in office, the day before sentencing, Budd chose to call a press conference . and blow his brains out of live TV.
I would not go in search of the footage. It'll never leave you....
I reckon many voters will be happily in denial re any ukip downsides. For a while anyway. Maybe to 2015.
Oh,dear, "in denial" is such a loaded term and carries with it feelings of comfort to its user. "Those folks are in denial", implies that they are wrong/stupid/barking where as the speaker is a veritable beacon of common sense and wisdom.
I would suggest that with UKIP supporters something else is going on. They are not, "in denial" about their parties weaknesses, they just don't care because they feel that for the first time in many years, there is a party that seems to be speaking for them and people like them.
All the stories about UKIP "eccentricities" don't seem to be denting the Party's popularity so far and I am not sure they will in the future, at least not to the degree that Cameron needs.
UKIP' s big problem is that they have too few Richard Tyndall' s and far too many BNP lite supporters. Until they they can shed the Buffton Tuffton' s and passive aggressive racists they will never advance.
? Why do you say UKIP aren't advancing? They added 12,000 members last year, and beat the LDs on vote share in the May elections.
Vote share is irrelevant.
Keep telling yourself that.
Do you understand what he means?
He's deliberately using a very narrow view. If it was credible, the LDs, Labour, and the Conservatives would never field paper candidates.
They all do, because even if your vote won't win this council ward, it might win this Westminster seat, or this EU region. And next year, or the year after, it might win this council ward too.
I can't say I'm surprised at OGH findings. If you are a labour supporter in a Libdem/Con marginal where labour came a poor third in 2010 and you vote Labour, you risk the Conservative candidate winning and the Conservatives getting a majority, which would mean Gideon being able to implement things like the no fault dismissal recommendations of Beecroft, which the Libdems blocked.
Not a very appealing prospect really is it?, far better to hold your nose and tactically vote Libdem to keep the tory out.
After all had the tories won in 2010 all the seats they held in 79-92, that are now held by Libdems, they would have had quite a comfortable majority.
Even contemplating messing with gun laws is just idiotic. All it would take is one massive shooting in the US for it to be derailed.
Absolutely idiotic idea. Relaxing gun laws is a completely ridiculous idea. Strict laws have kept us safe from gun crime. This is not a road we should go down in this country.
Agree entirely.
I am averse to banning things but if I did ban something it would be guns.
ps - And on the subject of guns and politicians. I had never heard of Budd Dywer till the other day. He was an American politician who committed suicide by gun, live on telly, after reading out a long statement. The footage is on youtube. Bonkers.
Not so bonkers. Dwyer was almost certainly an innocent man with a record of blameless public service. A codefendant fingered him in exchange for a lighter sentence, and years later admitted as much. Dwyer was convicted largely on this testimony. On his sentencing (he was looking at a 55 year sentence) his family would lose their entire pension benefits, etc. While still in office, the day before sentencing, Budd chose to call a press conference . and blow his brains out of live TV.
I would not go in search of the footage. It'll never leave you....
Geez, thanks for that. Poor bastard.
I saw the footage. He looked so calm too. Sad that it came to that.
I won't watch it again but in terms of footage never leaving you I wish I hadn't watched the vid, posted here a few years back, of the Syrian civilians (and children being killed) being shot at on the streets of Syria. It was dreadful, dreadful to watch.
I admire the journos and photographers who put themselves in harms way to allow us to witness the horrors that still take place today. Makes me realise how lucky we are in Britain.
Yes time is all and Osborne has got nearly all the big decisions wrong. His crossroads was 2011 when he could either sit on his hands or go for reform. He sat on his hands and has wasted 5 years in this country's economic recovery. All the things he should have done remain undone and somebody will have to do them.
Osborne has never seen the need for reform.
He saw nothing wrong with Brown's economic strategy and has repeated it himself.
So we get house price subsidies and off balance sheet finnacing while such things as productivity and the trade balance are allowed to go to hell.
What is amusing is that the Conservative spinners and supporters are now sounding like Labour's before 2010 even to economic failings always being blamed on foreign countries.
Being polite, the comments on this post are either through lack of knowledge or a desire to mislead.
Perhaps you could say something constructive and debate the issue then instead of whining.
But then I can't remember you saying anything which went beyond cheerleading.
Now there's plenty who do likewise here but you're very mediocre at it.
But if you'd like to debate the issue lets talk about productivity and the trade balance under this government.
Have you anything to say on these things ?
Productivity - oil and gas production declines have had a big impact on this as it is a very high productivity sector. Additionally - although I haven't looked for stats to back this up, so it is an instinctive argument - new employees would typically be lower productivity and would take some time to improve their skills in a new position. Hence a rapid increase in employment might well be associated with a decline in average productivity.
On the trade balance - yes, but the manufacturing base has been so denude and the general population so addicted to cheap consumer tat that it is unrealistic to expect a turn around in 3.5 years. The first thing to do is to get the education system fixed, then fix welfare and the banks. None of these are short jobs.
I think many voters detect more than a little arrogance in politicians. They are doing us a favour by telling us what to do, so it's only right that they can "fiddle" their expenses and talk down to us. .
Fiddling their expenses?
Judging by this week's events (and previous weeks'), that doesn't seem all they've been fiddling with. (And I don't mean statistics, either).
I'm not so sure that RennardHancockGate will go without a lasting nasty taste for many women voters. It will be interesting to look at the gender split of future L/D polls-my hypothesis being that the amount of women backing them will go down and that they will not be coming back.
The one interesting group are Labour voters in Con>LD marginals. In the past some may have voted LD to keep the Con out, but now that LD = Con that won't happen. Expect UKIP to do very very well in such seats, hoovering up disillusioned Tory voters, disillusioned LibDem left voters and the Labour floaters looking to upset the government
The one interesting group are Labour voters in Con>LD marginals. In the past some may have voted LD to keep the Con out, but now that LD = Con that won't happen. Expect UKIP to do very very well in such seats, hoovering up disillusioned Tory voters, disillusioned LibDem left voters and the Labour floaters looking to upset the government
At the end of the day LAB voters in CON-LD contests will have to decide whether they want to help the Tories or not. The evidence is that a sizeable chunk in the marginals will vote LD. The Ashcroft polling referred to earlier had 16% of 2010 LAB voters deciding to switch. On top of that are the tacticals from last time who'll have to make the same decision.
Having watched this at close hand post coalition be assured that there will be significant switching.
I'm not so sure that RennardHancockGate will go without a lasting nasty taste for many women voters. It will be interesting to look at the gender split of future L/D polls-my hypothesis being that the amount of women backing them will go down and that they will not be coming back.
I could see it hurting Mr Hancock in Portsmouth, but most people aren't going to have a clue who Rennard/Hancock are. It'll just contribute to the popular belief that politicians are bad eggs.
" As a result of the measures I will announce today, public sector net borrowing will be: £149 billion this year, falling to £116 billion next year, then £89 billion in 2012-13, and then £60 billion in 2013-14. By 2014-15 borrowing reaches £37 billion, exactly half the amount forecast in the March Budget. "
And yet there is always money for the government's pet projects and for vote buying, would you say that's part of 'the new dynamic of entitlement'.
Why is it that self-evidently intelligent and numerate posters from the Midlands suddenly lose their marbles when commenting on George Osborne?
Let's look at that 2010 forecast for 'PSNB ex' and compare it to actual outcomes as published in the latest Public Finances Bulletin from the ONS:
That looks to me as very accurate forecasting within the context and complexity of a national economy. In addition, it shows that cumulatively PSNB ex has come in at £18 billion below the forecast St. George made for borrowing in 2010.
Now you may say that this year will be different, so let's look at the monthly figures for both 2012/13 and 2013/14.
Public Sector Net Borrowing 2012 vs 2013 -------------------------------------- Apr 2012 -19,604 Apr 2013 5,137 May 2012 16,003 May 2013 9,335 Jun 2012 12,521 Jun 2013 7,862 Jul 2012 -417 Jul 2013 -102 Aug 2012 12,972 Aug 2013 12,468 Sep 2012 12,473 Sep 2013 11,414 Oct 2012 8,020 Oct 2013 8,858 Nov 2012 16,706 Nov 2013 16,846 Dec 2012 14,225 Dec 2013 12,089 Jan 2012 -9,838 Jan 2014 Feb 2012 6,234 Feb 2014 Mar 2012 11,157 Mar 2014 ------ ------ 80,452 To date 83,907
The last three months of last 2012/13 had net borrowing of £7 billion so even if there was no reduction of borrowing on 2012 in the final quarter of this fiscal year the final figure would be around £90 bn or some £30 bn over the amount forecast three years ago. A cumulative error of £12 bn on a forecast for £414 bn aggregate borrowing.
Come on, ar, have you have one too many at the Normanby Park 19th hole?
Or is it just that our Midlands Misanthropes resent a Chancellor coming from a constituency to the North of them?
Exactly the opposite for me. Gun ownership and the right of self defence is a fundamental freedom we are deprived of. I'm very much with the traditional Swiss approach to this.
This is an interesting development as far as I'm concerned. My Euro vote is in the balance and a positive libertarian intervention like this may well tip my decision.
Just a factual point- if you're a Swiss male of military age you can indeed keep a rifle at home. But you can't have any ammuinition, or a handgun. It's a bit easier to get hold of ammo than a gun on the international market, so although crime is low in Switzerland, gun crime is higher than average. Nonetheless, the ideas that people can go around armed and ready to fire is a misunderstanding.
I wouldn't be surprised if the 2010 LD vote holds up because all anyone is in it for is power and they were successful.
That so misunderstands what makes sometime LibDem voters tick. There is no significant group in Britain which is less motivated by a focus on gaining power except the Greens. If anything, because power requires compromise, many regard it as a negative (which is also why the Greens are in trouble in Brighton, though their tax referendum idea is interesting and may go down well).
Good evening all. I find much of this discussion amusing. It is like groundhog day 1982. Much of what is being said here was said about the SDP. The difference is the SDP was overturning 15,000 Tory majorities in by-elecions and was fronted by someone who was genuinely being ascribed the status of "PM in waiting".
Of course we know what happened. In 1983 most of them sank without trace and the few big names who survived 1983 were toppled in 1987.
Interesting that UKIP made no headway in Cowdenbeath yesterday where the Tory in 3rd increased his share of the vote, increased his actual vote on 2011 and had almost double the votes of UKIP and the LibDems combined and that was in an ex-mining seat represented in part at Westminster by James Gordon Brown.
UKIP will probably do quite well this year on a very small turnout at the Euros. They might even beat Labour into 2nd place behind the Tories. At the GE next year they will do what they did in 2010, cause an irritation and possibly deprive both main parties of a handful of seats.
Political position Centre-left Social Democratic Party - Split from Labour Party - Merged into Liberal Democrats Ideology Centrism
Liberal Democrat: Political position Radical centre to Centre-left
UKIP: Ideology Euroscepticism Right-wing populism Libertarianism Political position Right-wing
OK So UKIP were not formed as a splinter party of the Conservatives, but the voters split mainly from NOTA and then Conservative, some Labour but a NET gain for Labour nonetheless.
That is very different to the SDP/Labour situation. I'm not saying the outcome won't be the same as 1983, but it is different.
And I have to say we might have got beaten 4-0 but that was a bloody good performance by the Sky Blues
I'm not so sure that RennardHancockGate will go without a lasting nasty taste for many women voters. It will be interesting to look at the gender split of future L/D polls-my hypothesis being that the amount of women backing them will go down and that they will not be coming back.
I could see it hurting Mr Hancock in Portsmouth, but most people aren't going to have a clue who Rennard/Hancock are. It'll just contribute to the popular belief that politicians are bad eggs.
They'd know if the BBC or Channel 4 were door-stepping them in the way Bloom was.
I'm not so sure that RennardHancockGate will go without a lasting nasty taste for many women voters. It will be interesting to look at the gender split of future L/D polls-my hypothesis being that the amount of women backing them will go down and that they will not be coming back.
I could see it hurting Mr Hancock in Portsmouth, but most people aren't going to have a clue who Rennard/Hancock are. It'll just contribute to the popular belief that politicians are bad eggs.
They'd know if the BBC or Channel 4 were door-stepping them in the way Bloom was.
I think the blatant hostility to UKIP from BBC-types might have helped them in the past. 1. Because it was obviously unfair. (Their Rotherham boost has been attributed to the public's sense of fair play/injustice).
2. If you don't like BBC types, you're going to try to like those they dislike.
Good evening all. I find much of this discussion amusing. It is like groundhog day 1982. Much of what is being said here was said about the SDP. The difference is the SDP was overturning 15,000 Tory majorities in by-elecions and was fronted by someone who was genuinely being ascribed the status of "PM in waiting".
Of course we know what happened. In 1983 most of them sank without trace and the few big names who survived 1983 were toppled in 1987.
Interesting that UKIP made no headway in Cowdenbeath yesterday where the Tory in 3rd increased his share of the vote, increased his actual vote on 2011 and had almost double the votes of UKIP and the LibDems combined and that was in an ex-mining seat represented in part at Westminster by James Gordon Brown.
UKIP will probably do quite well this year on a very small turnout at the Euros. They might even beat Labour into 2nd place behind the Tories. At the GE next year they will do what they did in 2010, cause an irritation and possibly deprive both main parties of a handful of seats.
Political position Centre-left Social Democratic Party - Split from Labour Party - Merged into Liberal Democrats Ideology Centrism
Liberal Democrat: Political position Radical centre to Centre-left
UKIP: Ideology Euroscepticism Right-wing populism Libertarianism Political position Right-wing
OK So UKIP were not formed as a splinter party of the Conservatives, but the voters split mainly from NOTA and then Conservative, some Labour but a NET gain for Labour nonetheless.
That is very different to the SDP/Labour situation. I'm not saying the outcome won't be the same as 1983, but it is different.
And I have to say we might have got beaten 4-0 but that was a bloody good performance by the Sky Blues
Also - More fans at the Emirates than Sixfields
UKIP has more in common with Oswald Mosley's lot in the 1930s who came out of the Labour Party. Apart from their immigration policy, much of what UKIP want is socialist utopian crap.
" As a result of the measures I will announce today, public sector net borrowing will be: £149 billion this year, falling to £116 billion next year, then £89 billion in 2012-13, and then £60 billion in 2013-14. By 2014-15 borrowing reaches £37 billion, exactly half the amount forecast in the March Budget. "
And yet there is always money for the government's pet projects and for vote buying, would you say that's part of 'the new dynamic of entitlement'.
Why is it that self-evidently intelligent and numerate posters from the Midlands suddenly
Public Sector Net Borrowing Forecasts vs. Outturns -------------------------------------- 2010 Outturn Diff. £bn £bn £bn 2009/10 157
Public Sector Net Borrowing 2012 vs 2013 -------------------------------------- Apr 2012 -19,604 Apr 2013 5,137 4 Mar 2012 11,157 Mar 2014 ------ ------ 80,452 To date 83,907
The last three months of last 2012/13 had net borrowing of £7 billion so even if there was no reduction of borrowing on 2012 in the final quarter of this fiscal year the final figure would be around £90 bn or some £30 bn over the amount forecast three years ago. A cumulative error of £12 bn on a forecast for £414 bn aggregate borrowing.
Come on, ar, have you have one too many at the Normanby Park 19th hole?
Or is it just that our Midlands Misanthropes resent a Chancellor coming from a constituency to the North of them?
Not at all Mr Pole the Midlands folk just get bored with Southern chappies trying to tell us black is white. As Charles sensibly notes any recovery to rebalance the economy is a long trek which just makes us wonder why Osborne hasn't even started yet.
I'm not so sure that RennardHancockGate will go without a lasting nasty taste for many women voters. It will be interesting to look at the gender split of future L/D polls-my hypothesis being that the amount of women backing them will go down and that they will not be coming back.
I could see it hurting Mr Hancock in Portsmouth, but most people aren't going to have a clue who Rennard/Hancock are. It'll just contribute to the popular belief that politicians are bad eggs.
They'd know if the BBC or Channel 4 were door-stepping them in the way Bloom was.
I think the blatant hostility to UKIP from BBC-types might have helped them in the past. 1. Because it was obviously unfair. (Their Rotherham boost has been attributed to the public's sense of fair play/injustice).
2. If you don't like BBC types, you're going to try to like those they dislike.
Yes I agree - hence reminding people as much as possible
I'd be in favor of gun ownership on a "triarii" basis i.e. age 40+, home owner, no criminal record since early 20s etc.
Why home owner? I get the no criminal record, I kinda get the age requirement though not entirely, but home owner?
I am a home owner, but I haven't always been. Even when I wasn't if we had gun laws I'd probably agree with that being one of the rules. Certainly wouldn't fancy living in a HOMO with someone with a gun !
Ed Balls: Future Labour government would run budget surplus The shadow chancellor Ed Balls will tomorrow announce a pledge that a future Labour government will make cuts to "balance the books" and deliver a surplus on the current budget.
Ed Balls: Future Labour government would run budget surplus The shadow chancellor Ed Balls will tomorrow announce a pledge that a future Labour government will make cuts to "balance the books" and deliver a surplus on the current budget.
Ed Balls: Future Labour government would run budget surplus The shadow chancellor Ed Balls will tomorrow announce a pledge that a future Labour government will make cuts to "balance the books" and deliver a surplus on the current budget.
I finally got to have lunch at the new Cheesecake Factory at the mall the other day.
Like many people I won't eat anywhere with a health score of less than 90. The certificate displayed by the door (it has to be) said a perfect 100.
We enjoyed our meal and left. Next day in the local paper I read it failed an inspection the same day I was there and got a 50! 50 is a terrible score.
I'd be in favor of gun ownership on a "triarii" basis i.e. age 40+, home owner, no criminal record since early 20s etc.
Why home owner? I get the no criminal record, I kinda get the age requirement though not entirely, but home owner?
I am a home owner, but I haven't always been. Even when I wasn't if we had gun laws I'd probably agree with that being one of the rules. Certainly wouldn't fancy living in a HOMO with someone with a gun !
And what sort of gun? Any? Air rifle? Pistol? Rifle? Shotgun? Automatic rifle? And how many? And how much ammunition?
Why does anyone need handguns in the home in the UK?
As for those rules: Hamilton was 43 when Dunblane occurred. Although there were rumours about him and he was investigated by police, I don't think he had any convictions. I'm not sure if he owned a house, but he did run a business.
So your rules could well have allowed someone who killed sixteen kids and a teacher to have guns. I think they might need tightening up ...
Not at all Mr Pole the Midlands folk just get bored with Southern chappies trying to tell us black is white. As Charles sensibly notes any recovery to rebalance the economy is a long trek which just makes us wonder why Osborne hasn't even started yet.
GO - big hat, no cattle as they say in Texas.
I don't disagree with Charles (as you know) and nor would George Osborne.
But on this issue of claiming that George made a forecast for borrowing in 2010 which he hasn't kept is bunkum. ar has been a very naughty boy, Mr Brooke.
And as for your reference to Texas, we are not the Lone Star State, Mr. Brooke. There are few, if any, 50,000 acre cattle ranches in Warwickshire. The countryside is characterised by small picturesque fields enclosed by hedgerows and mixed up with copses. "Bocage" as les grenouilles would say.
A big hat would be out of place in the elysian fields of England. Tweed plus fours and a Oxford history degree is all that is needed.
Not at all Mr Pole the Midlands folk just get bored with Southern chappies trying to tell us black is white. As Charles sensibly notes any recovery to rebalance the economy is a long trek which just makes us wonder why Osborne hasn't even started yet.
GO - big hat, no cattle as they say in Texas.
I don't disagree with Charles (as you know) and nor would George Osborne.
But on this issue of claiming that George made a forecast for borrowing in 2010 which he hasn't kept is bunkum. ar has been a very naughty boy, Mr Brooke.
And as for your reference to Texas, we are not the Lone Star State, Mr. Brooke. There are few, if any, 50,000 acre cattle ranches in Warwickshire. The countryside is characterised by small picturesque fields enclosed by hedgerows and mixed up with copses. "Bocage" as les grenouilles would say.
A big hat would be out of place in the elysian fields of England. Tweed plus fours and a Oxford history degree is all that is needed.
Ah perhaps something more Northern then Mr Pole, he's all fur no knickers. His actions in addressing the real needs of the economy are smoke and mirrors. really he should go and be replaced by someone useful as I say we have lost a Parliament's worth of recovery under him.
@georgeeaton: Important to note that Balls's surplus pledge only applies to current spending. Leaving room to borrow for capital. http://t.co/Rk2aBOKrpS
Ed Balls: Future Labour government would run budget surplus The shadow chancellor Ed Balls will tomorrow announce a pledge that a future Labour government will make cuts to "balance the books" and deliver a surplus on the current budget.
Grayson Perry and a couple of blokes wearing OTT frocks on the fp of the Guardian.
I never really "got" Perry, but I heard him give a few lectures on art on Radio 4 a few months ago, and found him really entertaining, and informative. Don't like his taste in hats, though.
Exactly the opposite for me. Gun ownership and the right of self defence is a fundamental freedom we are deprived of. I'm very much with the traditional Swiss approach to this.
This is an interesting development as far as I'm concerned. My Euro vote is in the balance and a positive libertarian intervention like this may well tip my decision.
Just a factual point- if you're a Swiss male of military age you can indeed keep a rifle at home. But you can't have any ammuinition, or a handgun. It's a bit easier to get hold of ammo than a gun on the international market, so although crime is low in Switzerland, gun crime is higher than average. Nonetheless, the ideas that people can go around armed and ready to fire is a misunderstanding.
I wouldn't be surprised if the 2010 LD vote holds up because all anyone is in it for is power and they were successful.
That so misunderstands what makes sometime LibDem voters tick. There is no significant group in Britain which is less motivated by a focus on gaining power except the Greens. If anything, because power requires compromise, many regard it as a negative (which is also why the Greens are in trouble in Brighton, though their tax referendum idea is interesting and may go down well).
You've spoken to them all, Nick?
For a Lab PPC that is a huge assumption about a different political grouping. It's unlike you, for that matter, unless you are drunk on Arsenal's success. Everyone who puts a cross in a box wants that action to be validated. Same for every party. And yes I've done my hours on the streets interacting with "voters". The "candidate" as you know because you are one, has very little time to engage with enough people to produce a view like that.
In fact reading your post "if anything, because power requires compromise, many regard it as a negative" is almost surreally misguided not to say nonsense. As a teenager might say - what does that even mean?
If you are saying that LDs are a uniquely idealistic grouping who vote in order to maintain or create an optimal political environment and don't worry about who eventually assumes power then I'm afraid I am equally non-plussed. Having ideals, whatever they are, doesn't obviate the desire to have a society where you the voter has had a positive input.
Not at all Mr Pole the Midlands folk just get bored with Southern chappies trying to tell us black is white. As Charles sensibly notes any recovery to rebalance the economy is a long trek which just makes us wonder why Osborne hasn't even started yet.
GO - big hat, no cattle as they say in Texas.
I don't disagree with Charles (as you know) and nor would George Osborne.
But on this issue of claiming that George made a forecast for borrowing in 2010 which he hasn't kept is bunkum. ar has been a very naughty boy, Mr Brooke.
And as for your reference to Texas, we are not the Lone Star State, Mr. Brooke. There are few, if any, 50,000 acre cattle ranches in Warwickshire. The countryside is characterised by small picturesque fields enclosed by hedgerows and mixed up with copses. "Bocage" as les grenouilles would say.
A big hat would be out of place in the elysian fields of England. Tweed plus fours and a Oxford history degree is all that is needed.
Ah perhaps something more Northern then Mr Pole, he's all fur no knickers. His actions in addressing the real needs of the economy are smoke and mirrors. really he should go and be replaced by someone useful as I say we have lost a Parliament's worth of recovery under him.
I think you need to reserve "all fur and no knickers" for the Lib Dems, Mr. Brooke,.
I finally got to have lunch at the new Cheesecake Factory at the mall the other day.
Like many people I won't eat anywhere with a health score of less than 90. The certificate displayed by the door (it has to be) said a perfect 100.
We enjoyed our meal and left. Next day in the local paper I read it failed an inspection the same day I was there and got a 50! 50 is a terrible score.
Grayson Perry and a couple of blokes wearing OTT frocks on the fp of the Guardian.
I never really "got" Perry, but I heard him give a few lectures on art on Radio 4 a few months ago, and found him really entertaining, and informative. Don't like his taste in hats, though.
His lectures were great. Got to the nub of (post-Duchamp) modern art in a super-accessible way.
Meantime, it is extremely irritating watching BBC News Channel to see, scrolling, that Manchester effing United have done something or another.
It's not news and if it is news it is not important news.
Not at all Mr Pole the Midlands folk just get bored with Southern chappies trying to tell us black is white. As Charles sensibly notes any recovery to rebalance the economy is a long trek which just makes us wonder why Osborne hasn't even started yet.
GO - big hat, no cattle as they say in Texas.
I don't disagree with Charles (as you know) and nor would George Osborne.
But on this issue of claiming that George made a forecast for borrowing in 2010 which he hasn't kept is bunkum. ar has been a very naughty boy, Mr Brooke.
And as for your reference to Texas, we are not the Lone Star State, Mr. Brooke. There are few, if any, 50,000 acre cattle ranches in Warwickshire. The countryside is characterised by small picturesque fields enclosed by hedgerows and mixed up with copses. "Bocage" as les grenouilles would say.
A big hat would be out of place in the elysian fields of England. Tweed plus fours and a Oxford history degree is all that is needed.
Ah perhaps something more Northern then Mr Pole, he's all fur no knickers. His actions in addressing the real needs of the economy are smoke and mirrors. really he should go and be replaced by someone useful as I say we have lost a Parliament's worth of recovery under him.
I think you need to reserve "all fur and no knickers" for the Lib Dems, Mr. Brooke,.
Almost right! That expression is used locally for the inhabitants of Morningside in south Ednburgh - which came within a few hundred votes of getting a LD MP last time ...
Not at all Mr Pole the Midlands folk just get bored with Southern chappies trying to tell us black is white. As Charles sensibly notes any recovery to rebalance the economy is a long trek which just makes us wonder why Osborne hasn't even started yet.
GO - big hat, no cattle as they say in Texas.
I don't disagree with Charles (as you know) and nor would George Osborne.
A big hat would be out of place in the elysian fields of England. Tweed plus fours and a Oxford history degree is all that is needed.
Ah perhaps something more Northern then Mr Pole, he's all fur no knickers. His actions in addressing the real needs of the economy are smoke and mirrors. really he should go and be replaced by someone useful as I say we have lost a Parliament's worth of recovery under him.
I think you need to reserve "all fur and no knickers" for the Lib Dems, Mr. Brooke,.
Not at all Mr Pole the Midlands folk just get bored with Southern chappies trying to tell us black is white. As Charles sensibly notes any recovery to rebalance the economy is a long trek which just makes us wonder why Osborne hasn't even started yet.
GO - big hat, no cattle as they say in Texas.
I don't disagree with Charles (as you know) and nor would George Osborne.
But on this issue of claiming that George made a forecast for borrowing in 2010 which he A big hat would be out of place in the elysian fields of England. Tweed plus fours and a Oxford history degree is all that is needed.
Ah perhaps something more Northern then Mr Pole, he's all fur no knickers. His actions in addressing the real needs of the economy are smoke and mirrors. really he should go and be replaced by someone useful as I say we have lost a Parliament's worth of recovery under him.
I think you need to reserve "all fur and no knickers" for the Lib Dems, Mr. Brooke,.
with 16 months to go to a GE Mr Pole I don't think the LDs sartorial preferences should be your biggest concern. Just think June 2015 and George might have gone, then Balls can tax all you bankers.
I finally got to have lunch at the new Cheesecake Factory at the mall the other day.
Like many people I won't eat anywhere with a health score of less than 90. The certificate displayed by the door (it has to be) said a perfect 100.
We enjoyed our meal and left. Next day in the local paper I read it failed an inspection the same day I was there and got a 50! 50 is a terrible score.
Still, when your numbers up. There's nothing you can do about it. Best just tidy up your papers and wait.
No problem so far - as luck would have it I went to Costco after the lunch to buy more toilet paper - sorry, bathrom tissue - and am glad to report that now I have almost 40 rolls, and consumption of product has not increased beyond the normal rate......
@georgeeaton: Important to note that Balls's surplus pledge only applies to current spending. Leaving room to borrow for capital. http://t.co/Rk2aBOKrpS
That's a reasonable argument, but not one which Osborne would endorse.
There has been a spat at Davos between St; George and Larry Summers (ex Obama aide) on just this subject.
Balls will seek to raise a greater proportion of the fiscal consolidation required to eliminate the deficit from tax rises. Osborne set the ratio at 20% from tax rises and 80% from spending cuts. This was the lowest proportion from tax rises of any major economy launching a post-recession fiscal consolidation plan, so there is room from Balls to manoeuvre here.
Balls's problem is that any proportional increase in tax rises will reduce the UK's competitiveness, act as a disincentive for foreign investment and slow the rate of GDP growth. He will argue that the reduced consumption (and growth) resulting from higher taxes can be compensated for by increased infrastructure investment which would have to come from increased government borrowing (but excluded from Balls's current account balancing calculations).
Balls's strategy is very Krugmanite, Olivier Blancmange of the IMF and Obama like. George and the OECD may have won recent battles on austerity vs, interim stimulus, but they still haven't conclusively defeated the Obama economic strategy. The Republicans are still fighting on the side of Osborne and the OECD though.
The shadow chancellor Ed Balls will tomorrow announce a pledge that a future Labour government will make cuts to "balance the books" and deliver a surplus on the current budget.
"...inasmuch as the precise correlation between the information you communicated and the facts insofar as they can be determined and demonstrated is such as to cause epistemological problems of sufficient magnitude as to lay upon the logical and semantic resources of the English language a heavier burden than they can reasonably be expected to bear..." (Humphrey Appleby, "Yes, Prime Minister: The Tangled Web")
"Having ideals, whatever they are, doesn't obviate the desire to have a society where you the voter has had a positive input."
Where is the connection between having ideals and the "desire to have a society where you the voter has a positive input"? Isn't it possible to be an idealist communist or some other ist that doesn't involve voters having much of a say let alone a positive input?
Can anyone recommend a decent 24 hour cafe in London?
Go to West Smithfield. On the corner a couple of doors down from Carluccio's place is a 24 hour chinese cafe tres bon! They do really good cafe grub and tea so strong it would clear a blocked sewer pipe, they also do a limited Chinese menu of which I have heard good reports but not tried.
"But there's another UKIP emerging, which we could call NewKIP. This group within the party wants to blend UKIP's patriotism and populism with a social justice message.
Mr Farage already has a range of policies that differentiates his party from "LibLabCon". UKIP is the only party that wants to leave the EU, slash the aid budget, cancel HS2 and replace human rights laws. That's the patriotism and populism part. The next challenge is to persuade voters that UKIP also has a heart. Nigel Farage made a step in this direction, two weeks ago, with his remarks about taking in Syrian refugees.
The strategy for the European elections has already been NewKipped. Rather than a crude anti-Europe, anti-immigration message, UKIP's candidates are framing their arguments with lower-paid Britons in mind. We're not against immigrants, goes the argument, just against how immigration cuts British people out of the labour market and off the housing ladder. Similarly the NewKIP tendency is in favour of a cleaner environment but worried that green taxes are simply leading to higher electricity bills for pensioners and families -- all without cutting emissions.
The NewKIP faction wants the days after the European elections to be the moment when the party surprises people. During what is expected to be a big moment in the spotlight the aim is to showcase opposition to privatisation of the NHS and preview tax cuts for the working and middle classes. "
Comments
I agree. I know of lifelong Labour supporters who have happily voted for Labour throughout all their schisms, infighting and incompetence. A couple now vote Ukip, and it will take a lot for them to peel off - they're used to holding their noses when voting.
they've gone from 3% to 12% that sort of says they've advanced.
Why do you say UKIP aren't advancing? They added 12,000 members last year, and beat the LDs on vote share in the May elections.
He saw nothing wrong with Brown's economic strategy and has repeated it himself.
So we get house price subsidies and off balance sheet finnacing while such things as productivity and the trade balance are allowed to go to hell.
What is amusing is that the Conservative spinners and supporters are now sounding like Labour's before 2010 even to economic failings always being blamed on foreign countries.
http://www.comres.co.uk/poll/1076/sunday-mirror-independent-on-sunday-political-poll.htm
The Conservatives, Labour and LDs are unpalatable to larger swathes of the public than UKIP.
Are they lost forever? Perhaps. Listening to the "rebel" Tory MPs (t0ssers one and all) you would think yes. And perhaps this also is testament to the new dynamic of entitlement and lack of responsibility and accountability. I was in a taxi today and the driver told me he was going to buy a new car and the key thing was "monthly payments" if it was low (no matter the APR or overall price paid) it was good.
If Cam has lost those voters then it's a case of strap yourself in because the next few years will be a very bumpy ride.
And now...Arsenal awaits.
I am averse to banning things but if I did ban something it would be guns.
ps - And on the subject of guns and politicians. I had never heard of Budd Dywer till the other day. He was an American politician who committed suicide by gun, live on telly, after reading out a long statement. The footage is on youtube. Bonkers.
Yes - and then stick a Scottish guy in charge and he gets even less votes (in england). Post election - all is forgiven Team Red on the rise.
http://youtu.be/-TC2xTCb_GU
This is an interesting development as far as I'm concerned. My Euro vote is in the balance and a positive libertarian intervention like this may well tip my decision.
You are an intelligent bloke and I respect your opinions but I completely disagree on guns. I read Joe Bageant's Deer Hunting with Jesus last year. Bageant was a dyed in the wool socialist from Virginia, USA and he makes a passionate case for gun-ownership in his book. I get the hunting traditions and the civil liberies argument but I still completely disagree with it.
I would legalise most drugs though.
I think you've been looking at the graphs too long Mike.
Let us remember what this government said:
" As a result of the measures I will announce today, public sector net borrowing will be: £149 billion this year, falling to £116 billion next year, then £89 billion in 2012-13, and then £60 billion in 2013-14. By 2014-15 borrowing reaches £37 billion, exactly half the amount forecast in the March Budget. "
And yet there is always money for the government's pet projects and for vote buying, would you say that's part of 'the new dynamic of entitlement'.
Touching loyalty from his colleagues.
Re: i Like Guns
Lol
But then I can't remember you saying anything which went beyond cheerleading.
Now there's plenty who do likewise here but you're very mediocre at it.
But if you'd like to debate the issue lets talk about productivity and the trade balance under this government.
Have you anything to say on these things ?
It is likely, as well, the UKIP could out poll the LDs and come our with no seats whatsoever.
In two of the last four general elections the direction of the LD vote share has been the opposite of seat changes. 1997 they lost vote share but went up 24 seats. In 2010 they gained votes but were down 5 seats.
I await your explanation.
A few ONS stats on these issues would be a bonus.
But if there's no response then Perdix will have exposed himself as nothing but a very mediocre cheerleader.
Of course we know what happened. In 1983 most of them sank without trace and the few big names who survived 1983 were toppled in 1987.
Interesting that UKIP made no headway in Cowdenbeath yesterday where the Tory in 3rd increased his share of the vote, increased his actual vote on 2011 and had almost double the votes of UKIP and the LibDems combined and that was in an ex-mining seat represented in part at Westminster by James Gordon Brown.
UKIP will probably do quite well this year on a very small turnout at the Euros. They might even beat Labour into 2nd place behind the Tories. At the GE next year they will do what they did in 2010, cause an irritation and possibly deprive both main parties of a handful of seats.
Dwyer was convicted largely on this testimony. On his sentencing (he was looking at a 55 year sentence) his family would lose their entire pension benefits, etc.
While still in office, the day before sentencing, Budd chose to call a press conference . and blow his brains out of live TV.
I would not go in search of the footage. It'll never leave you....
They all do, because even if your vote won't win this council ward, it might win this Westminster seat, or this EU region. And next year, or the year after, it might win this council ward too.
The EU elections in May are PR elections.
Not a very appealing prospect really is it?, far better to hold your nose and tactically vote Libdem to keep the tory out.
After all had the tories won in 2010 all the seats they held in 79-92, that are now held by Libdems, they would have had quite a comfortable majority.
I saw the footage. He looked so calm too. Sad that it came to that.
I won't watch it again but in terms of footage never leaving you I wish I hadn't watched the vid, posted here a few years back, of the Syrian civilians (and children being killed) being shot at on the streets of Syria. It was dreadful, dreadful to watch.
I admire the journos and photographers who put themselves in harms way to allow us to witness the horrors that still take place today. Makes me realise how lucky we are in Britain.
On the trade balance - yes, but the manufacturing base has been so denude and the general population so addicted to cheap consumer tat that it is unrealistic to expect a turn around in 3.5 years. The first thing to do is to get the education system fixed, then fix welfare and the banks. None of these are short jobs.
Rather a grim thread.
The journalists have done very good work in Syria. Not heard of Budd Dwyer before, but that sounds utterly tragic.
Judging by this week's events (and previous weeks'), that doesn't seem all they've been fiddling with. (And I don't mean statistics, either).
It will be interesting to look at the gender split of future L/D polls-my hypothesis being that the amount of women backing them will go down and that they will not be coming back.
Having watched this at close hand post coalition be assured that there will be significant switching.
Let us remember what this government said:
" As a result of the measures I will announce today, public sector net borrowing will be: £149 billion this year, falling to £116 billion next year, then £89 billion in 2012-13, and then £60 billion in 2013-14. By 2014-15 borrowing reaches £37 billion, exactly half the amount forecast in the March Budget. "
And yet there is always money for the government's pet projects and for vote buying, would you say that's part of 'the new dynamic of entitlement'.
Why is it that self-evidently intelligent and numerate posters from the Midlands suddenly lose their marbles when commenting on George Osborne?
Let's look at that 2010 forecast for 'PSNB ex' and compare it to actual outcomes as published in the latest Public Finances Bulletin from the ONS: That looks to me as very accurate forecasting within the context and complexity of a national economy. In addition, it shows that cumulatively PSNB ex has come in at £18 billion below the forecast St. George made for borrowing in 2010.
Now you may say that this year will be different, so let's look at the monthly figures for both 2012/13 and 2013/14. The last three months of last 2012/13 had net borrowing of £7 billion so even if there was no reduction of borrowing on 2012 in the final quarter of this fiscal year the final figure would be around £90 bn or some £30 bn over the amount forecast three years ago. A cumulative error of £12 bn on a forecast for £414 bn aggregate borrowing.
Come on, ar, have you have one too many at the Normanby Park 19th hole?
Or is it just that our Midlands Misanthropes resent a Chancellor coming from a constituency to the North of them?
This is an interesting development as far as I'm concerned. My Euro vote is in the balance and a positive libertarian intervention like this may well tip my decision.
Just a factual point- if you're a Swiss male of military age you can indeed keep a rifle at home. But you can't have any ammuinition, or a handgun. It's a bit easier to get hold of ammo than a gun on the international market, so although crime is low in Switzerland, gun crime is higher than average. Nonetheless, the ideas that people can go around armed and ready to fire is a misunderstanding. That so misunderstands what makes sometime LibDem voters tick. There is no significant group in Britain which is less motivated by a focus on gaining power except the Greens. If anything, because power requires compromise, many regard it as a negative (which is also why the Greens are in trouble in Brighton, though their tax referendum idea is interesting and may go down well).
Social Democratic Party - Split from Labour Party - Merged into Liberal Democrats
Ideology Centrism
Liberal Democrat:
Political position Radical centre to Centre-left
UKIP:
Ideology Euroscepticism
Right-wing populism
Libertarianism
Political position Right-wing
OK So UKIP were not formed as a splinter party of the Conservatives, but the voters split mainly from NOTA and then Conservative, some Labour but a NET gain for Labour nonetheless.
That is very different to the SDP/Labour situation. I'm not saying the outcome won't be the same as 1983, but it is different.
And I have to say we might have got beaten 4-0 but that was a bloody good performance by the Sky Blues
Also - More fans at the Emirates than Sixfields
The emphasis should be on the first word of my sentence.
The BBC and political class say nothing happens.
If they're lying then that will feed into a vote for Ukip.
1. Because it was obviously unfair. (Their Rotherham boost has been attributed to the public's sense of fair play/injustice).
2. If you don't like BBC types, you're going to try to like those they dislike.
GO - big hat, no cattle as they say in Texas.
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/dexter-dias/fgm-campaign-debate_b_4659631.html
http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/52740
you could prob figure out a bunch of different alternatives. that was just a quick one off the top of my head.
edit: the age relates to the same thing. again you could probably figure out an alternative.
And monkeys might fly out of my butt
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/jan/24/stephen-neil-kinnock-son-labour-aberavon-dynasty
And monkeys might fly out of my butt
Good God - Where ?
And monkeys might fly out of my butt
Well, they did it before, they can do it again.
Like many people I won't eat anywhere with a health score of less than 90. The certificate displayed by the door (it has to be) said a perfect 100.
We enjoyed our meal and left. Next day in the local paper I read it failed an inspection the same day I was there and got a 50! 50 is a terrible score.
http://www.gwinnettdailypost.com/news/2014/jan/23/cheesecake-factory-at-mall-of-georgia-fails/
http://gwinnett.ga.gegov.com/_templates/65/Food/_report_full.cfm?fsimID=502894&domainID=65
'Labour would eliminate Britain’s budget deficit by 2020, says Ed Balls in a "binding fiscal commitment" http://t.co/IMZ8gjInoP'
Pure comedy gold.
Why does anyone need handguns in the home in the UK?
As for those rules: Hamilton was 43 when Dunblane occurred. Although there were rumours about him and he was investigated by police, I don't think he had any convictions. I'm not sure if he owned a house, but he did run a business.
So your rules could well have allowed someone who killed sixteen kids and a teacher to have guns. I think they might need tightening up ...
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/the-life-and-death-of-thomas-watt-hamilton-1672323.html
Edit: and he was very good at working the system to his advantage.
Not at all Mr Pole the Midlands folk just get bored with Southern chappies trying to tell us black is white. As Charles sensibly notes any recovery to rebalance the economy is a long trek which just makes us wonder why Osborne hasn't even started yet.
GO - big hat, no cattle as they say in Texas.
I don't disagree with Charles (as you know) and nor would George Osborne.
But on this issue of claiming that George made a forecast for borrowing in 2010 which he hasn't kept is bunkum. ar has been a very naughty boy, Mr Brooke.
And as for your reference to Texas, we are not the Lone Star State, Mr. Brooke. There are few, if any, 50,000 acre cattle ranches in Warwickshire. The countryside is characterised by small picturesque fields enclosed by hedgerows and mixed up with copses. "Bocage" as les grenouilles would say.
A big hat would be out of place in the elysian fields of England. Tweed plus fours and a Oxford history degree is all that is needed.
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/jan/14/labour-stephen-kinnock-aberavon-welsh-candidacy-election
http://order-order.com/2014/01/24/exc-gordon-brown-office-has-10000-a-week-expenses-raises-over-3-million-gives-less-than-1-million-to-charity/
As some have noted on here, Ed Balls' is unalarmingly dishonest. Miliband completely believes the garbage he spouts.
You've spoken to them all, Nick?
For a Lab PPC that is a huge assumption about a different political grouping. It's unlike you, for that matter, unless you are drunk on Arsenal's success. Everyone who puts a cross in a box wants that action to be validated. Same for every party. And yes I've done my hours on the streets interacting with "voters". The "candidate" as you know because you are one, has very little time to engage with enough people to produce a view like that.
In fact reading your post "if anything, because power requires compromise, many regard it as a negative" is almost surreally misguided not to say nonsense. As a teenager might say - what does that even mean?
If you are saying that LDs are a uniquely idealistic grouping who vote in order to maintain or create an optimal political environment and don't worry about who eventually assumes power then I'm afraid I am equally non-plussed. Having ideals, whatever they are, doesn't obviate the desire to have a society where you the voter has had a positive input.
Still, when your numbers up. There's nothing you can do about it. Best just tidy up your papers and wait.
Meantime, it is extremely irritating watching BBC News Channel to see, scrolling, that Manchester effing United have done something or another.
It's not news and if it is news it is not important news.
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/politics/article3985774.ece
There has been a spat at Davos between St; George and Larry Summers (ex Obama aide) on just this subject.
See http://bloom.bg/1jLfEZ2
Balls will seek to raise a greater proportion of the fiscal consolidation required to eliminate the deficit from tax rises. Osborne set the ratio at 20% from tax rises and 80% from spending cuts. This was the lowest proportion from tax rises of any major economy launching a post-recession fiscal consolidation plan, so there is room from Balls to manoeuvre here.
Balls's problem is that any proportional increase in tax rises will reduce the UK's competitiveness, act as a disincentive for foreign investment and slow the rate of GDP growth. He will argue that the reduced consumption (and growth) resulting from higher taxes can be compensated for by increased infrastructure investment which would have to come from increased government borrowing (but excluded from Balls's current account balancing calculations).
Balls's strategy is very Krugmanite, Olivier Blancmange of the IMF and Obama like. George and the OECD may have won recent battles on austerity vs, interim stimulus, but they still haven't conclusively defeated the Obama economic strategy. The Republicans are still fighting on the side of Osborne and the OECD though.
Interesting battle ahead with Balls.
Plus ca change...
The tedious thing about this site is the 'my party good, your party bad' sheep of all sides.
I am though a little surprised that Charles decided to out his views forward without letting Perdix have a chance first.
Where is the connection between having ideals and the "desire to have a society where you the voter has a positive input"? Isn't it possible to be an idealist communist or some other ist that doesn't involve voters having much of a say let alone a positive input?
Its like a.Lib Dem CEO voting himself a chastity belt. A lot of frustration followed by a sticky end.
And tomorrow we get numbers pulled out of deficit denier Ed Balls arse,its called magic.
"But there's another UKIP emerging, which we could call NewKIP. This group within the party wants to blend UKIP's patriotism and populism with a social justice message.
Mr Farage already has a range of policies that differentiates his party from "LibLabCon". UKIP is the only party that wants to leave the EU, slash the aid budget, cancel HS2 and replace human rights laws. That's the patriotism and populism part. The next challenge is to persuade voters that UKIP also has a heart. Nigel Farage made a step in this direction, two weeks ago, with his remarks about taking in Syrian refugees.
The strategy for the European elections has already been NewKipped. Rather than a crude anti-Europe, anti-immigration message, UKIP's candidates are framing their arguments with lower-paid Britons in mind. We're not against immigrants, goes the argument, just against how immigration cuts British people out of the labour market and off the housing ladder. Similarly the NewKIP tendency is in favour of a cleaner environment but worried that green taxes are simply leading to higher electricity bills for pensioners and families -- all without cutting emissions.
The NewKIP faction wants the days after the European elections to be the moment when the party surprises people. During what is expected to be a big moment in the spotlight the aim is to showcase opposition to privatisation of the NHS and preview tax cuts for the working and middle classes. "
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/opinion/columnists/article3983223.ece