politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » EU referendum poll blow for Farage only hours before the TV
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » EU referendum poll blow for Farage only hours before the TV clash with Clegg
The link to watch tonight's #NickvNigel debate live on LBC: http://t.co/bIcLElASpP pic.twitter.com/3bdeTxSxMM thanks to @LibDemMEPs
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Following on from the discussion on the last thread, the problem for Labour is that they want their cake and eat it. They want to be the party of the working class English people, but also want open borders and mass immigration.
You cant have both, as the latter destroys the former
The intellectually honest approach would be to say that the benefits of mass immigration outweigh the damage to working class communities, wages, jobs etc, and some people will have to suffer for the greater good... tim, for all his faults, used to admit this with his "thick white racist" caricature of the working class.
I can understand politicians are reluctant to admit this. Voters see through it, hence the rise of UKIP, but why posters on a debating site don't just admit it is beyond me
Can Nick or Nigel land a knock out blow or will it be a split decision on the judge's scorecards ?
Good that there is a poll on the day of the first debate, as it will be quite unarguable as to the effect the debates had on the public afterwards
When the SNP DOESN'T disappear in a puff of smoke after losing the Indy ref maybe politicians will realise that giving people a say doesn't necessarily spell disaster.
He's going to get clobbered.
It's also probably not correct to say that they think immigration does net damage to working class communities. I know you think that, but not everyone does.
7 mins 22 in is probably the closest to my view, David Aaronovitch at 3.20 is probably as out of touch as some people on here
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rK3JAL3hKRo
Michael Moore reselected in Berwickshire, Roxburgh & Selkirk:
http://www.scotlibdems.org.uk/news/2014/03/moore-reselected-borders-0
Froome has had a lower back problem, whereas Contador has refound some old form winning Tirreno Adriatico. Quintana and Purito there too.
Tour De France clues day.
Go on Farage,rip the illiberal clegg apart.
To my mind, the biggest problem with the 'out' campaign is that they have failed to articulate a clear vision for what they want post independence. Is it membership of EFTA (which includes EEA membership, but also a committment to the 'four freedoms')? Is it to close our borders and implement differentials tariffs according to relative wage rates? Is it to join NAFTA? Is it to return to our free-trading island roots?
Nigel definitely shouldn't underestimate Nick as an opponent, he utterly outmanoeuvred Cameron on the boundary changes and a massive proportion of Lib Dem MPs are in Gov't now.
He doesn't do too badly when facing Hattie in (d)PMQs when Dave is out on international jollies.
Hope Nigel is well prepped.
Shy on Europe could be an expression for them.
The common assumption in Labour, and probably among the Tory leadership too although they won't admit it, is more likely that immigration is generally good for those communities, but often in unintuitive ways (for example, people's intuitions make them think of a "lump of labour", but economists usually think this is a fallacy), which makes allowing immigration good government, but being seen to do it terrible politics.
Whether or not you think they're right about this and whether or not you agree with the attempted deception, it's a different thing to thinking the policy screws working class communities but wanting to do it anyway to help other demographics.
By that logic then it surely makes sense for Salmond to debate with Darling - as Cameron will be the loser again ?
This incoherence is one reason why I think an Out result could never be obtained in a referendum. If UKIP really wanted us to leave the EU, they'd be urging supporters to vote Conservative to get the referendum, and spending the next three years deciding what exactly they are advocating and putting together a coherent case for it. (At the risk of awakening the Nats again, there's a useful model here in the SNP's failure to put together coherent answers on the currency, EU membership, and the Scottish financial services industry. That's how not to do it).
For the avoidance of doubt, I'm not saying that such a case can't be made; I think it can. But you can't make it by cherry-picking the bits you like from three or four mutually-incompatible options.
Probably the biggest insult to the intelligence of the British public I have ever heard.
But it is hard to know if that is an accurate statement of fact as EVERYONE involved in the EU debate seems to have an agenda or some such.
The Institute for Economic Badgers says EU bad, Fiscal Aylesbury Duck club* says EU good. Norway isn't in the EU they seem to be doing OK, but Greece is and they are doing less well.
True appraisals of fact and verifiable counter-factuals are extremely hard to calculate !
*Might have mad those up
That's leaving aside the fact that UKIP can't "gift" their votes to the Conservative Party, even should they wish to. 55% of current UKIP voters didn't vote Conservative in 2010. They wouldn't vote Conservative because Farage told them to.
But in any case, why would right wing and eurosceptic voters *want* to vote for a party that's been so bad at defending right wing and eurosceptic interests?
@MarqueMark – left a reply for you on previous thread.
As regards the Nigel vs Nick debate, I expect a lot of heat and little light. Lots of prepared statements but no question-answering.
Happy to be proved wrong but ...
Do you really think that the Lib Dems could hold on to Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross on just 30% of the vote? If they drop that low then it looks like curtains.
Whatever, Shadsy's current LD price of 2/5 is too short, even if Thurso is the candidate again.
Take Nick Clegg's '3 million jobs' line. It's ridiculous, of course, and no-one takes it seriously. But that doesn't mean that it wouldn't have an effect: voters will tend to split the difference, thinking 'well, I'm sure it won't be that many jobs lost, but it might be some'. That's a hard problem to overcome when you're arguing for a leap into what will seem like the dark, against a pretty consistent barrage of warnings of doom from the BBC, Labour, the LibDems, some Tories, the unions, the CBI, well-known businessmen, and politicians from the rest of the EU and even from the US.
It is rarely a good idea to allow yourselves to be governed by another country. The English dislike it when it happens to them, so they can hardly complain when other people question the wisdom of it.
Sounds very much like the Yes campaign in Scotland!!!
The prosecution need to prove guilt beyond all reasonable doubt.
The defence need to prove nothing.
That is why I think that Scotland, even allowing for much circumstantial evidence to the contrary, will very narrowly be found "not guilty".
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-news-from-elsewhere-26747649
Snakehead meets Slaphead.
What will Clegg be feeling? He's defending a political theory of governance. One which isn't currently working very well. It's hard to be passionate about the EU so he'll have to rely on appealing to people's fears. Fair chance his arguments will be boring, so he'll probably resort to jokey ad homs to liven it up a bit.
NUTS!
The teaching Union
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-26754300
They always say we should go along with whatever is proposed by the EU to have more leverage at some unspecified future date on some unspecified matter. Then when the next thing crops up we should go along with it again no questions asked.
This has been going on for 30 years.
They therefore plan to vote UKIP, anticipating that Cameron will lose office and will be replaced by someone more pliable. The available evidence suggests they are calling this wrong.
However, powers being returned to member states will never happen. Membership of the EU is a one-way street to ever more centralised control.
A few missing..
Just LOLing at the price freeze news.
It would be hilarious to reprint the threads at the time in which our Conservative friends assured us that the energy firms would put their prices up following Ed's policy.
LOL.
Let there be no doubt: there is not a snowflake's chance in hell that Cameron could welch on the referendum promise, even if he wanted to (which he doesn't). He would be absolutely crucified by the Conservative Party (including by Cameroons like me).
Surprising that you want to highlight this success...
Just ask our very own Mark Pack..
A bit like Ed voting against intervention in Syria, but secretly hoping to lose the vote.
Having recently widened the scope of their Constituency betting offering - they had a dedicated website for just this purpose.
I've just attempted to visit there, only to find I'm re-directed to their main site, where surprise, surprise their constituency betting markets are simply nowhere to be found.
This is absolutely crazy and incredibly frustrating considering this is about their third attempt over the recent past to rectify their nightmarish website, still seemingly without any real success.
Was that what Ed wanted?
- Cameron has a Lisbon referendum anyway ("should the HoC now repeal it")
- Armed with a Yes he then indicates that unless Britain's terms are changed he'll invoke Article whatever it is
- It is the EU's problem to figure out how to make this happen.
It is therefore probably truer to say Cameron is looking for any excuse not to have a referendum. It is not clear based on previous cast-iron guarantees that he considers himself in any way bound by any particular promise.
Of course he does not want any of the above, and does not want to alter Britain's terms. If he did, he'd want to enter such negotiations armed with a mandate to walk away if not appeased.
Otherwise the conversation will go as follows:
DC: Look, this really isn't good enough. I want some sovereignty back.
EU: No.
DC: Oh. OK.
(leaves room and addresses assembled press)
DC: I have triumphed! This is a great deal for Britain!
He withheld his party's support for a previously agreed deal. I don't want to get into a discussion on whether Clegg was justified or a lying skunk for doing so (the latter, btw) because I doubt anyone's mind will be changed.
But that's not clever politics: it's just throwing your toys out of a pram. At the most, Cameron can be criticised for believing that Clegg was a man of his word.
1) From the Politics page, click on 'See All' in the left-hand panel
2) You should get some extra categories appearing in the panel. One of them is 'UK General Election (1)'. You might naively think this means there's only one market available, but click on it all the same.
3) You should get one seat come up (currently Bermondsey & Southwark). In the header for that market, it says "04 May 2015 00:00 Next General Election Constitu..." followed by a number and a right arrow. The number is currently 104 (the number of constituency markets available). Click on the 104.
4) Voila!
It would be like trusting Sauron.
Just realised the debate clashes with Futurama on Pick. Decision, decisions. I think I'd vote for Leela ahead of any current party leader.
That's why the best case for the Out campaign is "we tried to renegotiate but those damn French, Germans, Europeans weren't having any of it"
Party sources were yesterday briefing they expected around two dozen of their backbenchers to vote against.”
Greg Hands has already 'tweeted' who they were.
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2014/03/22-mps-rebel-on-welfare-cap/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=22-mps-rebel-on-welfare-cap