politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The other story that’s getting people excited this Easter S
Daily Mail chooses Easter Sunday to attack Christians for feeding the poor. #WWJD pic.twitter.com/ow3PvM28Vk
Comments
-
If that's the £40 of groceries pictured, I'm a (past its sell by date) banana.0
-
Good investigative journalism.0
-
I suspect this is a re-run of the BINGO! ad - much hyperventilation from our friends on the left....and in the real world, nothing much changes. Either that, or sales of the Mail will plummet vertiginously in Hampstead and Dartmouth Park, or not....0
-
Seriously? Who gives a sh*t what Dacre and his obsequious idiots are ranting about on a daily basis. The clock is still running for he and his increasingly irrelevant fellow 'organs'.
Tick, tock.
0 -
The 4 million people who read it? (Which is four times as many as read the Guardian...and about ten times as many as read the Independent)Mick_Pork said:Seriously? Who gives a sh*t what Dacre and his obsequious idiots are ranting about on a daily basis.
Not all of them are reading it to be offended by it.....
0 -
People who hate the Mail will think it's outrageous. People who like the Mail will think it's doing what it does best. Everyone else won't care.
Besides which, if we're picking an Easter story from the Daily Mail, shouldn't this be it? http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2608789/Easter-Clegg-Labour-created-festive-treat-shape-Lib-Dem-leader-Nick-Clegg-completely-hollow-melts-heat.html0 -
It is confirmation of IDS's war against the poor and as such is very blatant Tory propaganda.Hate crimes against disabled people have risen and it is articles such as this that provide the justification.There is enough hate in the world without encouraging it.
This is a day for love and peace anyway.It 4:20 day celebrating the cannabis plant.I hope people all observe the tobacco smoking ban in public places.Tobacco is a very harmful contaminant so keep it pure.
Happy Easter Sunday everyone.0 -
So why has the DM got one of the biggest on line profiles ? XxxMick_Pork said:Seriously? Who gives a sh*t what Dacre and his obsequious idiots are ranting about on a daily basis. The clock is still running for he and his increasingly irrelevant fellow 'organs'.
Tick, tock.
0 -
It's a pretty silly story IMO. So, food banks do not have in place the full bureaucratic mechanics to ensure that only the deserving get help. But, if they did, they'd end up being much like the government benefits system, with formal rules and procedures which would inevitably mean that they didn't help some of the very people they want to help. It's a charity, not a government department spending taxpayers' money.0
-
At 9.00am communion no-one mentioned the Mail or Billy Bragg. Odd that.Richard_Nabavi said:It's a pretty silly story IMO. So, food banks do not have in place the full bureaucratic mechanics to ensure that only the deserving get help. But, if they did, they'd end up being much like the government benefits system, with formal rules and procedures which would inevitably mean that they didn't help some of the very people they want to help. It's a charity, not a government department spending taxpayers' money.
0 -
Agreed. The CAB, by contrast, is shown to assess the applicant quite thoroughly. By the time people get to the food bank they've already been screened once - most people couldn't tell you where the food banks are, since they don't advertise themselves to avoid people just wandering in.Richard_Nabavi said:It's a pretty silly story IMO. So, food banks do not have in place the full bureaucratic mechanics to ensure that only the deserving get help. But, if they did, they'd end up being much like the government benefits system, with formal rules and procedures which would inevitably mean that they didn't help some of the very people they want to help. It's a charity, not a government department spending taxpayers' money.
The Mail does like to live down to its reputation though.
0 -
Journalist finds freebie is not a story.0
-
If not blind then senile, living in a dream world.SeanT said:Fpt
MarkSenior said:
» show previous quotes
"I know facts are not your strong point but the last 12 polls from all pollsters have shown the following ( all in comparison with the previous poll from the same pollster )
5 have shown a decrease in the NO lead
3 have shown no change in the lead at all
4 have shown an increase in the No lead
There is no narrowing of the lead , the position is static because most people have made up their minds and did so ages ago . All you are seeing is MofE variations from poll to poll "
Mark, I wish you were right, but you are completely, delusionally wrong.
Here is the FT's independence poll tracker, which doesn't even include the latest ICM.
http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/2a5bdce0-c4a4-11e3-b2fb-00144feabdc0.html
I presume you aren't blind, so you can see what I can see. On present trends YES will overtake NO in the summer, and win fairly easily in September.0 -
Top Mail online story.CarlottaVance said:
The 4 million people who read it?Mick_Pork said:Seriously? Who gives a sh*t what Dacre and his obsequious idiots are ranting about on a daily basis.
Not all of them are reading it to be offended by it.....
Kate and Wills appear to enjoy Sydney zoo just as much as George as the duchess discovers that koalas really do smell of eucalyptus
*chortle*
Hard hitting copy I know. Yet even that pales into comparison to the rest of the excoriating celeb gossip on the right attract column. Which is where the Mail captures the overwhelming majority of it's 'readers' and views due to some very clever search algorithms, complete devotion to chasing that celeb traffic and headlines which exploit them to the full.
That's where the Mail is hammering it's competition while Dacre and his beloved hard copy looks like an apoplectic dinosaur bumbling into politics with ever more comically counterproductive results. Something Rothermere is all too aware of.
One of those models has a future, one does not.
If Dacre's obsequious fanclub can't spot the obvious that would be entirely their problem.
0 -
Alan, you do have to wonder, it is puerile crap.Alanbrooke said:
So why has the DM got one of the biggest on line profiles ? XxxMick_Pork said:Seriously? Who gives a sh*t what Dacre and his obsequious idiots are ranting about on a daily basis. The clock is still running for he and his increasingly irrelevant fellow 'organs'.
Tick, tock.0 -
go easy malc Porky works for the DM.malcolmg said:
Alan, you do have to wonder, it is puerile crap.Alanbrooke said:
So why has the DM got one of the biggest on line profiles ? XxxMick_Pork said:Seriously? Who gives a sh*t what Dacre and his obsequious idiots are ranting about on a daily basis. The clock is still running for he and his increasingly irrelevant fellow 'organs'.
Tick, tock.0 -
Yeah - I'm kinda anti-food banks because of the Liverpool culture thing.0
-
and yet he sells more than the Daily Record.Mick_Pork said:
Top Mail online story.CarlottaVance said:
The 4 million people who read it?Mick_Pork said:Seriously? Who gives a sh*t what Dacre and his obsequious idiots are ranting about on a daily basis.
Not all of them are reading it to be offended by it.....
Kate and Wills appear to enjoy Sydney zoo just as much as George as the duchess discovers that koalas really do smell of eucalyptus
*chortle*
Hard hitting copy I know. Yet even that pales into comparison to the rest of the excoriating celeb gossip on the right attract column. Which is where the Mail captures the overwhelming majority of it's 'readers' and views due to some very clever search algorithms, complete devotion to chasing that celeb traffic and headlines which exploit them to the full.
That's where the Mail is hammering it's competition while Dacre and his beloved hard copy looks like an apoplectic dinosaur bumbling into politics with ever more comically counterproductive results. Something Rothermere is all too aware of.
One of those models has a future, one does not.
If Dacre's obsequious fanclub can't spot the obvious that would be entirely their problem.0 -
It is a pretty stupid story by the Mail really.
What scandal have they unearthed...if you lie, the gatekeepers and charities take you at your word. If you plead poverty they will bend their own rules to give you another food package. Some people are probably exploiting the good nature of the charities to take more than the rules set by the charity themselves (I presume so they don't run out of supplies).
That really isn't exactly explosive stuff.
It is pretty obvious this was the case. Giving out free stuff, some people are going to try and take advantage. All the Mail got was some random comments about the odd person people working at the food banks know are gaming the system.
We know that the guy in charge is a Labour supporter and has spun the figures a bit to get a headline grabber the other week, but the Daily Mails undercover scoop doesn't really add up to anything. They would have been better off just junking the undercover work when that is all they turned up.
0 -
Alan, You jest of courseAlanbrooke said:
go easy malc Porky works for the DM.malcolmg said:
Alan, you do have to wonder, it is puerile crap.Alanbrooke said:
So why has the DM got one of the biggest on line profiles ? XxxMick_Pork said:Seriously? Who gives a sh*t what Dacre and his obsequious idiots are ranting about on a daily basis. The clock is still running for he and his increasingly irrelevant fellow 'organs'.
Tick, tock.0 -
Of course - he's more the People's Friend.malcolmg said:
Alan, You jest of courseAlanbrooke said:
go easy malc Porky works for the DM.malcolmg said:
Alan, you do have to wonder, it is puerile crap.Alanbrooke said:
So why has the DM got one of the biggest on line profiles ? XxxMick_Pork said:Seriously? Who gives a sh*t what Dacre and his obsequious idiots are ranting about on a daily basis. The clock is still running for he and his increasingly irrelevant fellow 'organs'.
Tick, tock.0 -
Alan, there is puerile and there is puerile. Beggars belief that anyone buys the Daily RangerAlanbrooke said:
and yet he sells more than the Daily Record.Mick_Pork said:
Top Mail online story.CarlottaVance said:
The 4 million people who read it?Mick_Pork said:Seriously? Who gives a sh*t what Dacre and his obsequious idiots are ranting about on a daily basis.
Not all of them are reading it to be offended by it.....
Kate and Wills appear to enjoy Sydney zoo just as much as George as the duchess discovers that koalas really do smell of eucalyptus
*chortle*
Hard hitting copy I know. Yet even that pales into comparison to the rest of the excoriating celeb gossip on the right attract column. Which is where the Mail captures the overwhelming majority of it's 'readers' and views due to some very clever search algorithms, complete devotion to chasing that celeb traffic and headlines which exploit them to the full.
That's where the Mail is hammering it's competition while Dacre and his beloved hard copy looks like an apoplectic dinosaur bumbling into politics with ever more comically counterproductive results. Something Rothermere is all too aware of.
One of those models has a future, one does not.
If Dacre's obsequious fanclub can't spot the obvious that would be entirely their problem.0 -
Wonder no more. Brookies peurile crap is because his gay bondage fantasies have been rebuffed by his very close friend Avery . Hence his collapse into drunken deranged ranting on here after he hits the bottle. He desperately wants someone to act as a go between for him and Avery (yes, exactly like a wean at school) so you'd better watch out since he is hitting on everyone else in the meantime.malcolmg said:
Alan, you do have to wonder, it is puerile crap.Alanbrooke said:
So why has the DM got one of the biggest on line profiles ? XxxMick_Pork said:Seriously? Who gives a sh*t what Dacre and his obsequious idiots are ranting about on a daily basis. The clock is still running for he and his increasingly irrelevant fellow 'organs'.
Tick, tock.0 -
A mistake or great journalism? A bit of both, probably. On the one hand, is does make the journalist seem like a bit of an ass. But on the other - if Lefties are going to use Food Banks as a campaigning tool and make claims that they "prove" people are much poorer, saying that the evidence of the growth in their numbers means something about government policy then I think we should expect some scrutiny of the claims. Regardless of whether the journalist was asked questions, he got food without any actual evidence he needed it. That's okay with me - it's nice that people are generous and trusting. But it also demonstrates that the figures don't actually "prove" anything. The idea of local people teaming up to help those who need help, without state interference and on a mostly trust basis is a lovely one. It'd be nice if we could just stick to that without a lot of political point scoring on BOTH sides of the equation.0
-
Ah, shifting the goalposts!Mick_Pork said:
Top Mail online story.CarlottaVance said:
The 4 million people who read it?Mick_Pork said:Seriously? Who gives a sh*t what Dacre and his obsequious idiots are ranting about on a daily basis.
Not all of them are reading it to be offended by it.....
The print edition is still out-read four to one vs the Guardian and ten-to one vs the Independent.......which do you think will be around longest?
0 -
naughty Mick. You know you're the one.Mick_Pork said:
Wonder no more. Brookies peurile crap is because his gay bondage fantasies have been rebuffed by his very close friend Avery . Hence his collapse into drunken deranged ranting on here after he hits the bottle. He desperately wants someone to act as a go between for him and Avery (yes, exactly like a wean at school) so you'd better watch out since he is hitting on everyone else in the meantime.malcolmg said:
Alan, you do have to wonder, it is puerile crap.Alanbrooke said:
So why has the DM got one of the biggest on line profiles ? XxxMick_Pork said:Seriously? Who gives a sh*t what Dacre and his obsequious idiots are ranting about on a daily basis. The clock is still running for he and his increasingly irrelevant fellow 'organs'.
Tick, tock.0 -
No, he's drunk. Even his fellow PB tories were embarrassed when he was as drunk as this the last time and starting spamming the site with his gay fantasies. Just let him get on with it as he'll sober up eventually.malcolmg said:
Alan, You jest of courseAlanbrooke said:
go easy malc Porky works for the DM.malcolmg said:
Alan, you do have to wonder, it is puerile crap.Alanbrooke said:
So why has the DM got one of the biggest on line profiles ? XxxMick_Pork said:Seriously? Who gives a sh*t what Dacre and his obsequious idiots are ranting about on a daily basis. The clock is still running for he and his increasingly irrelevant fellow 'organs'.
Tick, tock.0 -
I think it is mundane and simple.
If the rise of food banks is used as a political weapon, the functioning of food banks will be subject to political comment and scrutiny.0 -
Mick it's afternoon here, we don't start drinking until late, you've gone all Surrey golf club again.Mick_Pork said:
No, he's drunk. Even his fellow PB tories were embarrassed when he was as drunk as this the last time and starting spamming the site with his gay fantasies. Just let him get on with it as he'll sober up eventually.malcolmg said:
Alan, You jest of courseAlanbrooke said:
go easy malc Porky works for the DM.malcolmg said:
Alan, you do have to wonder, it is puerile crap.Alanbrooke said:
So why has the DM got one of the biggest on line profiles ? XxxMick_Pork said:Seriously? Who gives a sh*t what Dacre and his obsequious idiots are ranting about on a daily basis. The clock is still running for he and his increasingly irrelevant fellow 'organs'.
Tick, tock.0 -
Only a comically out of touch tory would bleat about the Record in response to the Mail.malcolmg said:
Alan, there is puerile and there is puerile. Beggars belief that anyone buys the Daily RangerAlanbrooke said:
and yet he sells more than the Daily Record.Mick_Pork said:
Top Mail online story.CarlottaVance said:
The 4 million people who read it?Mick_Pork said:Seriously? Who gives a sh*t what Dacre and his obsequious idiots are ranting about on a daily basis.
Not all of them are reading it to be offended by it.....
Kate and Wills appear to enjoy Sydney zoo just as much as George as the duchess discovers that koalas really do smell of eucalyptus
*chortle*
Hard hitting copy I know. Yet even that pales into comparison to the rest of the excoriating celeb gossip on the right attract column. Which is where the Mail captures the overwhelming majority of it's 'readers' and views due to some very clever search algorithms, complete devotion to chasing that celeb traffic and headlines which exploit them to the full.
That's where the Mail is hammering it's competition while Dacre and his beloved hard copy looks like an apoplectic dinosaur bumbling into politics with ever more comically counterproductive results. Something Rothermere is all too aware of.
One of those models has a future, one does not.
If Dacre's obsequious fanclub can't spot the obvious that would be entirely their problem.
Not hard to tell he's been hitting the bottle again, is it? 0 -
The main problem for the Daily Mail in running these kind of stories, if they do get a genuine big scoop.
Lets presume for a second, that it is found there is some huge scandal to do with the charity behind a large number of food banks, or individuals involved with them (I am not saying for a second there is)...if the Daily Mail was to break that story, people would just turn around and say but you have it in for them, look at this....
They don't seemed to have learned from the Ralph Miliband headline / OTT hatch job on him...when a simple article in relation to the facts probably would have had the same effect on its readers. When they tried the attack in relation to PIE, that was severely blunted by this.
0 -
Looks like folks at home are listening to Sean
From Cornwall, in The Western Morning News :
“The facts speak for themselves. The Scottish Parliament already promotes more people-friendly and socialist policies than its counterpart in Westminster. It has a more efficient health service, a more enlightened education system, a pledge to create a non-nuclear defence force, and a commitment to re-nationalise essential industries and utilities. Who wouldn’t want to live in a nation with such aspirations?”
Read more: http://www.westernmorningnews.co.uk/Scottish-independence-affect-South-West/story-20986178-detail/story.html#ixzz2zQZzlDpk
0 -
malc you've set him off he's trying to pretend he's scottish again.malcolmg said:
Alan, there is puerile and there is puerile. Beggars belief that anyone buys the Daily RangerAlanbrooke said:
and yet he sells more than the Daily Record.Mick_Pork said:
Top Mail online story.CarlottaVance said:
The 4 million people who read it?Mick_Pork said:Seriously? Who gives a sh*t what Dacre and his obsequious idiots are ranting about on a daily basis.
Not all of them are reading it to be offended by it.....
Kate and Wills appear to enjoy Sydney zoo just as much as George as the duchess discovers that koalas really do smell of eucalyptus
*chortle*
Hard hitting copy I know. Yet even that pales into comparison to the rest of the excoriating celeb gossip on the right attract column. Which is where the Mail captures the overwhelming majority of it's 'readers' and views due to some very clever search algorithms, complete devotion to chasing that celeb traffic and headlines which exploit them to the full.
That's where the Mail is hammering it's competition while Dacre and his beloved hard copy looks like an apoplectic dinosaur bumbling into politics with ever more comically counterproductive results. Something Rothermere is all too aware of.
One of those models has a future, one does not.
If Dacre's obsequious fanclub can't spot the obvious that would be entirely their problem.0 -
Panelbase poll 01/02/2012 No lead 5 pointsmalcolmg said:
If not blind then senile, living in a dream world.SeanT said:Fpt
MarkSenior said:
» show previous quotes
"I know facts are not your strong point but the last 12 polls from all pollsters have shown the following ( all in comparison with the previous poll from the same pollster )
5 have shown a decrease in the NO lead
3 have shown no change in the lead at all
4 have shown an increase in the No lead
There is no narrowing of the lead , the position is static because most people have made up their minds and did so ages ago . All you are seeing is MofE variations from poll to poll "
Mark, I wish you were right, but you are completely, delusionally wrong.
Here is the FT's independence poll tracker, which doesn't even include the latest ICM.
http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/2a5bdce0-c4a4-11e3-b2fb-00144feabdc0.html
I presume you aren't blind, so you can see what I can see. On present trends YES will overtake NO in the summer, and win fairly easily in September.
Panelbase poll 04/04/2014 No lead 5 points
Change in 2 years Zero0 -
Porky are you seriously trying to claim you post your stuff sober ?Mick_Pork said:
Only a comically out of touch tory would bleat about the Record in response to the Mail.malcolmg said:
Alan, there is puerile and there is puerile. Beggars belief that anyone buys the Daily RangerAlanbrooke said:
and yet he sells more than the Daily Record.Mick_Pork said:
Top Mail online story.CarlottaVance said:
The 4 million people who read it?Mick_Pork said:Seriously? Who gives a sh*t what Dacre and his obsequious idiots are ranting about on a daily basis.
Not all of them are reading it to be offended by it.....
Kate and Wills appear to enjoy Sydney zoo just as much as George as the duchess discovers that koalas really do smell of eucalyptus
*chortle*
Hard hitting copy I know. Yet even that pales into comparison to the rest of the excoriating celeb gossip on the right attract column. Which is where the Mail captures the overwhelming majority of it's 'readers' and views due to some very clever search algorithms, complete devotion to chasing that celeb traffic and headlines which exploit them to the full.
That's where the Mail is hammering it's competition while Dacre and his beloved hard copy looks like an apoplectic dinosaur bumbling into politics with ever more comically counterproductive results. Something Rothermere is all too aware of.
One of those models has a future, one does not.
If Dacre's obsequious fanclub can't spot the obvious that would be entirely their problem.
Not hard to tell he's been hitting the bottle again, is it?
0 -
Broadsheets will either be kept alive by online (freemium models, paywalls etc.) or from a benefactor with very deep pockets They could rely on loss offsetting before from their tabloid arms but that won't be viable for very much longer as you seem to have missed the part where the decline in hard copy readership is across the board and irreversible.CarlottaVance said:
Ah, shifting the goalposts!Mick_Pork said:
Top Mail online story.CarlottaVance said:
The 4 million people who read it?Mick_Pork said:Seriously? Who gives a sh*t what Dacre and his obsequious idiots are ranting about on a daily basis.
Not all of them are reading it to be offended by it.....
The print edition is still out-read four to one vs the Guardian and ten-to one vs the Independent.......which do you think will be around longest?
You're predicating a political influence that flies in the face of every new election result and every year that passes. The tory friendly press launched a blitzkrieg on Farage and the kippers before last May and will almost certainly do so again.
How did that turn out?
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/96/UK_opinion_polling_2010-2015.png0 -
"Who wouldn’t want to live in a nation with such aspirations?”malcolmg said:Looks like folks at home are listening to Sean
From Cornwall, in The Western Morning News :
“The facts speak for themselves. The Scottish Parliament already promotes more people-friendly and socialist policies than its counterpart in Westminster. It has a more efficient health service, a more enlightened education system, a pledge to create a non-nuclear defence force, and a commitment to re-nationalise essential industries and utilities. Who wouldn’t want to live in a nation with such aspirations?”
Read more: http://www.westernmorningnews.co.uk/Scottish-independence-affect-South-West/story-20986178-detail/story.html#ixzz2zQZzlDpk
Anyone who realises that nationalisation (even of just 'essential industries and utilities') does not necessarily mean better or cheaper services, as has been shown many times in the past. Nationalisation and privatisation are tools; when misused they often make things much worse.
What's the evidence for a 'more efficient health service'? That's a genuine question: is there some study I've missed?0 -
I could be as simple as realising the Indyref is this year so minds are more concentrated.SeanT said:
There is a fascinating factoid buried in that FT poll tracker. YES started gaining, crucially, in mid January, a while before the Osborne currency speech, and a while after the SNP White Paper.malcolmg said:
If not blind then senile, living in a dream world.SeanT said:Fpt
MarkSenior said:
» show previous quotes
"I know facts are not your strong point but the last 12 polls from all pollsters have shown the following ( all in comparison with the previous poll from the same pollster )
5 have shown a decrease in the NO lead
3 have shown no change in the lead at all
4 have shown an increase in the No lead
There is no narrowing of the lead , the position is static because most people have made up their minds and did so ages ago . All you are seeing is MofE variations from poll to poll "
Mark, I wish you were right, but you are completely, delusionally wrong.
Here is the FT's independence poll tracker, which doesn't even include the latest ICM.
http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/2a5bdce0-c4a4-11e3-b2fb-00144feabdc0.html
I presume you aren't blind, so you can see what I can see. On present trends YES will overtake NO in the summer, and win fairly easily in September.
So something happened then, in mid January, to change the campaign. What was it? If it was something NO did, they need to do the reverse; if it was something YES did, NO need to counter it.
But what was it?0 -
There was a Radio 4 series/doccy on the power of the press a few years ago. The key point made by the newspaper bods was that papers follow public opinion, they don't lead it.Mick_Pork said:
Broadsheets will either be kept alive by online (freemium models, paywalls etc.) or from a benefactor with very deep pockets They could rely on loss offsetting before from their tabloid arms but that won't be viable for very much longer as you seem to have missed the part where the decline in hard copy readership is across the board and irreversible.CarlottaVance said:
Ah, shifting the goalposts!Mick_Pork said:
Top Mail online story.CarlottaVance said:
The 4 million people who read it?Mick_Pork said:Seriously? Who gives a sh*t what Dacre and his obsequious idiots are ranting about on a daily basis.
Not all of them are reading it to be offended by it.....
The print edition is still out-read four to one vs the Guardian and ten-to one vs the Independent.......which do you think will be around longest?
You're predicating a political influence that flies in the face of every new election result and every year that passes. The tory friendly press launched a blitzkrieg on Farage and the kippers before last May and will almost certainly do so again.
How did that turn out?
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/96/UK_opinion_polling_2010-2015.png
0 -
They clearly haven't been keeping up with mortality stats or the unalloyed success that the CfE is......my former local paper was less then complimentary.....malcolmg said:It has a more efficient health service, a more enlightened education system
0 -
And they're such big fans of PanelBase too!MarkSenior said:
Panelbase poll 01/02/2012 No lead 5 pointsmalcolmg said:
If not blind then senile, living in a dream world.SeanT said:Fpt
MarkSenior said:
» show previous quotes
"I know facts are not your strong point but the last 12 polls from all pollsters have shown the following ( all in comparison with the previous poll from the same pollster )
5 have shown a decrease in the NO lead
3 have shown no change in the lead at all
4 have shown an increase in the No lead
There is no narrowing of the lead , the position is static because most people have made up their minds and did so ages ago . All you are seeing is MofE variations from poll to poll "
Mark, I wish you were right, but you are completely, delusionally wrong.
Here is the FT's independence poll tracker, which doesn't even include the latest ICM.
http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/2a5bdce0-c4a4-11e3-b2fb-00144feabdc0.html
I presume you aren't blind, so you can see what I can see. On present trends YES will overtake NO in the summer, and win fairly easily in September.
Panelbase poll 04/04/2014 No lead 5 points
Change in 2 years Zero
0 -
It's a mixture of fantasy and my idea of a nightmare. Although all those of a strong political disposition are susceptible, it does seem to be a particular feature of left-wing journalism to assume that all people think the same as they do.JosiasJessop said:
"Who wouldn’t want to live in a nation with such aspirations?”malcolmg said:Looks like folks at home are listening to Sean
From Cornwall, in The Western Morning News :
“The facts speak for themselves. The Scottish Parliament already promotes more people-friendly and socialist policies than its counterpart in Westminster. It has a more efficient health service, a more enlightened education system, a pledge to create a non-nuclear defence force, and a commitment to re-nationalise essential industries and utilities. Who wouldn’t want to live in a nation with such aspirations?”
Read more: http://www.westernmorningnews.co.uk/Scottish-independence-affect-South-West/story-20986178-detail/story.html#ixzz2zQZzlDpk
Anyone who realises that nationalisation (even of just 'essential industries and utilities') does not necessarily mean better or cheaper services, as has been shown many times in the past. Nationalisation and privatisation are tools; when misused they often make things much worse.
What's the evidence for a 'more efficient health service'? That's a genuine question: is there some study I've missed?0 -
The smarter ones do and the fact is celeb gossip and a good sport section are generally the bankers. Dinosaurs like Dacre just can't let go. Let's not forget that's also used as an excuse when it all goes 'pear shaped'. The public gets what the public wants etc. 'Stick it up your punter' indeed.anotherDave said:
There was a Radio 4 series/doccy on the power of the press a few years ago. The key point made by the newspaper bods was that papers follow public opinion, they don't lead it.Mick_Pork said:
Broadsheets will either be kept alive by online (freemium models, paywalls etc.) or from a benefactor with very deep pockets They could rely on loss offsetting before from their tabloid arms but that won't be viable for very much longer as you seem to have missed the part where the decline in hard copy readership is across the board and irreversible.CarlottaVance said:
Ah, shifting the goalposts!Mick_Pork said:
Top Mail online story.CarlottaVance said:
The 4 million people who read it?Mick_Pork said:Seriously? Who gives a sh*t what Dacre and his obsequious idiots are ranting about on a daily basis.
Not all of them are reading it to be offended by it.....
The print edition is still out-read four to one vs the Guardian and ten-to one vs the Independent.......which do you think will be around longest?
You're predicating a political influence that flies in the face of every new election result and every year that passes. The tory friendly press launched a blitzkrieg on Farage and the kippers before last May and will almost certainly do so again.
How did that turn out?
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/96/UK_opinion_polling_2010-2015.png 0 -
Eh? The DM is a UK-wide organ, the DR just a Scottish one, or am I missing something?Alanbrooke said:
and yet he sells more than the Daily Record.Mick_Pork said:
Top Mail online story.CarlottaVance said:
The 4 million people who read it?Mick_Pork said:Seriously? Who gives a sh*t what Dacre and his obsequious idiots are ranting about on a daily basis.
Not all of them are reading it to be offended by it.....
Kate and Wills appear to enjoy Sydney zoo just as much as George as the duchess discovers that koalas really do smell of eucalyptus
*chortle*
Hard hitting copy I know. Yet even that pales into comparison to the rest of the excoriating celeb gossip on the right attract column. Which is where the Mail captures the overwhelming majority of it's 'readers' and views due to some very clever search algorithms, complete devotion to chasing that celeb traffic and headlines which exploit them to the full.
That's where the Mail is hammering it's competition while Dacre and his beloved hard copy looks like an apoplectic dinosaur bumbling into politics with ever more comically counterproductive results. Something Rothermere is all too aware of.
One of those models has a future, one does not.
If Dacre's obsequious fanclub can't spot the obvious that would be entirely their problem.
0 -
TNS/BMRB poll Dec 2013 No lead 14 pointsSeanT said:
There is a fascinating factoid buried in that FT poll tracker. YES started gaining, crucially, in mid January, a while before the Osborne currency speech, and a while after the SNP White Paper.malcolmg said:
If not blind then senile, living in a dream world.SeanT said:Fpt
MarkSenior said:
» show previous quotes
"I know facts are not your strong point but the last 12 polls from all pollsters have shown the following ( all in comparison with the previous poll from the same pollster )
5 have shown a decrease in the NO lead
3 have shown no change in the lead at all
4 have shown an increase in the No lead
There is no narrowing of the lead , the position is static because most people have made up their minds and did so ages ago . All you are seeing is MofE variations from poll to poll "
Mark, I wish you were right, but you are completely, delusionally wrong.
Here is the FT's independence poll tracker, which doesn't even include the latest ICM.
http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/2a5bdce0-c4a4-11e3-b2fb-00144feabdc0.html
I presume you aren't blind, so you can see what I can see. On present trends YES will overtake NO in the summer, and win fairly easily in September.
So something happened then, in mid January, to change the campaign. What was it? If it was something NO did, they need to do the reverse; if it was something YES did, NO need to counter it.
But what was it?
TNS/BMRB poll April 2014 No lead 14 points
Change Zero
Ipsos Mori poll Dec 2013 No lead 23 points
Ipsos Mori poll End Fen 2013 No lead 25 points
Change No lead up by 2
0 -
Would you agree though that the growth in foodbank usage is not connected to growth in need and not connected to the pretty minor changes in welfare, which towards the end of your governments term of office was precisely the kind that they were introducing?NickPalmer said:
Agreed. The CAB, by contrast, is shown to assess the applicant quite thoroughly. By the time people get to the food bank they've already been screened once - most people couldn't tell you where the food banks are, since they don't advertise themselves to avoid people just wandering in.Richard_Nabavi said:It's a pretty silly story IMO. So, food banks do not have in place the full bureaucratic mechanics to ensure that only the deserving get help. But, if they did, they'd end up being much like the government benefits system, with formal rules and procedures which would inevitably mean that they didn't help some of the very people they want to help. It's a charity, not a government department spending taxpayers' money.
The Mail does like to live down to its reputation though.
Growth is connected specifically to two things:
Greater awareness
Public bodies being allowed to give referrals. Referral to food banks was blocked by the labour government for any departmental government body.
Not only were Job Centres and other public bodies barred from issuing vouchers, they were barred from "sign posting".
The policy of DWP is now “it is the policy for all Jobcentre Plus branches to signpost people to food banks where it is appropriate to do so”
The policy under your government was to pretend they didnt exist.
0 -
Well I can't think of too much Indyref wise which happened in January. If it's "now on my radar syndrome" you'd see it in a declining number of DKs.SeanT said:
No. Don't buy that. Too simplistic. Voters don't suddenly realise 'there is an election this year' in January, then change their minds who to vote for.Alanbrooke said:
I could be as simple as realising the Indyref is this year so minds are more concentrated.SeanT said:
There is a fascinating factoid buried in that FT poll tracker. YES started gaining, crucially, in mid January, a while before the Osborne currency speech, and a while after the SNP White Paper.malcolmg said:
If not blind then senile, living in a dream world.SeanT said:Fpt
MarkSenior said:
» show previous quotes
"I know facts are not your strong point but the last 12 polls from all pollsters have shown the following ( all in comparison with the previous poll from the same pollster )
5 have shown a decrease in the NO lead
3 have shown no change in the lead at all
4 have shown an increase in the No lead
There is no narrowing of the lead , the position is static because most people have made up their minds and did so ages ago . All you are seeing is MofE variations from poll to poll "
Mark, I wish you were right, but you are completely, delusionally wrong.
Here is the FT's independence poll tracker, which doesn't even include the latest ICM.
http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/2a5bdce0-c4a4-11e3-b2fb-00144feabdc0.html
I presume you aren't blind, so you can see what I can see. On present trends YES will overtake NO in the summer, and win fairly easily in September.
So something happened then, in mid January, to change the campaign. What was it? If it was something NO did, they need to do the reverse; if it was something YES did, NO need to counter it.
But what was it?0 -
That was very much Brooks' testimony at Leveson too.....anotherDave said:
There was a Radio 4 series/doccy on the power of the press a few years ago. The key point made by the newspaper bods was that papers follow public opinion, they don't lead it.Mick_Pork said:
Broadsheets will either be kept alive by online (freemium models, paywalls etc.) or from a benefactor with very deep pockets They could rely on loss offsetting before from their tabloid arms but that won't be viable for very much longer as you seem to have missed the part where the decline in hard copy readership is across the board and irreversible.CarlottaVance said:
Ah, shifting the goalposts!Mick_Pork said:
Top Mail online story.CarlottaVance said:
The 4 million people who read it?Mick_Pork said:Seriously? Who gives a sh*t what Dacre and his obsequious idiots are ranting about on a daily basis.
Not all of them are reading it to be offended by it.....
The print edition is still out-read four to one vs the Guardian and ten-to one vs the Independent.......which do you think will be around longest?
You're predicating a political influence that flies in the face of every new election result and every year that passes. The tory friendly press launched a blitzkrieg on Farage and the kippers before last May and will almost certainly do so again.
How did that turn out?
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/96/UK_opinion_polling_2010-2015.png0 -
Look at the actual poll figures by pollster ,SeanT said:
LOOK AT THE POLL TRACKER. Are you seriously denying the NO lead hasn't narrowed dramatically? Really?MarkSenior said:
Panelbase poll 01/02/2012 No lead 5 pointsmalcolmg said:
If not blind then senile, living in a dream world.SeanT said:Fpt
MarkSenior said:
» show previous quotes
"I know facts are not your strong point but the last 12 polls from all pollsters have shown the following ( all in comparison with the previous poll from the same pollster )
5 have shown a decrease in the NO lead
3 have shown no change in the lead at all
4 have shown an increase in the No lead
There is no narrowing of the lead , the position is static because most people have made up their minds and did so ages ago . All you are seeing is MofE variations from poll to poll "
Mark, I wish you were right, but you are completely, delusionally wrong.
Here is the FT's independence poll tracker, which doesn't even include the latest ICM.
http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/2a5bdce0-c4a4-11e3-b2fb-00144feabdc0.html
I presume you aren't blind, so you can see what I can see. On present trends YES will overtake NO in the summer, and win fairly easily in September.
Panelbase poll 04/04/2014 No lead 5 points
Change in 2 years Zero
0 -
No it was a totally unfair and provocative comparison.Carnyx said:
Eh? The DM is a UK-wide organ, the DR just a Scottish one, or am I missing something?Alanbrooke said:
and yet he sells more than the Daily Record.Mick_Pork said:
Top Mail online story.CarlottaVance said:
The 4 million people who read it?Mick_Pork said:Seriously? Who gives a sh*t what Dacre and his obsequious idiots are ranting about on a daily basis.
Not all of them are reading it to be offended by it.....
Kate and Wills appear to enjoy Sydney zoo just as much as George as the duchess discovers that koalas really do smell of eucalyptus
*chortle*
Hard hitting copy I know. Yet even that pales into comparison to the rest of the excoriating celeb gossip on the right attract column. Which is where the Mail captures the overwhelming majority of it's 'readers' and views due to some very clever search algorithms, complete devotion to chasing that celeb traffic and headlines which exploit them to the full.
That's where the Mail is hammering it's competition while Dacre and his beloved hard copy looks like an apoplectic dinosaur bumbling into politics with ever more comically counterproductive results. Something Rothermere is all too aware of.
One of those models has a future, one does not.
If Dacre's obsequious fanclub can't spot the obvious that would be entirely their problem.0 -
It took time for people to get the White Paper in the post and then read it over the holidays? Certainly applies to one friend of mine. Anecdotal = valueless, except as a hypothesis stimulator ...SeanT said:
No. Don't buy that. Too simplistic. Voters don't suddenly realise 'there is an election this year' in January, then change their minds who to vote for.Alanbrooke said:
I could be as simple as realising the Indyref is this year so minds are more concentrated.SeanT said:
There is a fascinating factoid buried in that FT poll tracker. YES started gaining, crucially, in mid January, a while before the Osborne currency speech, and a while after the SNP White Paper.malcolmg said:
If not blind then senile, living in a dream world.SeanT said:Fpt
MarkSenior said:
» show previous quotes
"I know facts are not your strong point but the last 12 polls from all pollsters have shown the following ( all in comparison with the previous poll from the same pollster )
5 have shown a decrease in the NO lead
3 have shown no change in the lead at all
4 have shown an increase in the No lead
There is no narrowing of the lead , the position is static because most people have made up their minds and did so ages ago . All you are seeing is MofE variations from poll to poll "
Mark, I wish you were right, but you are completely, delusionally wrong.
Here is the FT's independence poll tracker, which doesn't even include the latest ICM.
http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/2a5bdce0-c4a4-11e3-b2fb-00144feabdc0.html
I presume you aren't blind, so you can see what I can see. On present trends YES will overtake NO in the summer, and win fairly easily in September.
So something happened then, in mid January, to change the campaign. What was it? If it was something NO did, they need to do the reverse; if it was something YES did, NO need to counter it.
But what was it?
0 -
Must I go back and show where the mockney clickbaiter was trotting out the same imbecilic polling stupidity as Clegg's incompetent spinner and proud member of his ostrich faction?
0 -
On topic.
Paul Lewis @paullewismoney 51m
Donations pour in to @TrussellTrust after Mail reporter lied to get food for article criticising foodbank charity http://goo.gl/GLdwOp
Every cloud and all that.0 -
Carnyx said:
It took time for people to get the White Paper in the post and then read it over the holidays? Certainly applies to one friend of mine. Anecdotal = valueless, except as a hypothesis stimulator ...SeanT said:
No. Don't buy that. Too simplistic. Voters don't suddenly realise 'there is an election this year' in January, then change their minds who to vote for.Alanbrooke said:
I could be as simple as realising the Indyref is this year so minds are more concentrated.SeanT said:
There is a fascinating factoid buried in that FT poll tracker. YES started gaining, crucially, in mid January, a while before the Osborne currency speech, and a while after the SNP White Paper.malcolmg said:
If not blind then senile, living in a dream world.SeanT said:Fpt
MarkSenior said:
» show previous quotes
"I know facts are not your strong point but the last 12 polls from all pollsters have shown the following ( all in comparison with the previous poll from the same pollster )
5 have shown a decrease in the NO lead
3 have shown no change in the lead at all
4 have shown an increase in the No lead
There is no narrowing of the lead , the position is static because most people have made up their minds and did so ages ago . All you are seeing is MofE variations from poll to poll "
Mark, I wish you were right, but you are completely, delusionally wrong.
Here is the FT's independence poll tracker, which doesn't even include the latest ICM.
http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/2a5bdce0-c4a4-11e3-b2fb-00144feabdc0.html
I presume you aren't blind, so you can see what I can see. On present trends YES will overtake NO in the summer, and win fairly easily in September.
So something happened then, in mid January, to change the campaign. What was it? If it was something NO did, they need to do the reverse; if it was something YES did, NO need to counter it.
But what was it?
Just make up some pretend anecdote with an Swiss/American financier then it becomes comedy gold.
*chortle*
0 -
WHO?CarlottaVance said:
That was very much Brooks' testimony at Leveson too.....anotherDave said:
There was a Radio 4 series/doccy on the power of the press a few years ago. The key point made by the newspaper bods was that papers follow public opinion, they don't lead it.Mick_Pork said:
Broadsheets will either be kept alive by online (freemium models, paywalls etc.) or from a benefactor with very deep pockets They could rely on loss offsetting before from their tabloid arms but that won't be viable for very much longer as you seem to have missed the part where the decline in hard copy readership is across the board and irreversible.CarlottaVance said:
Ah, shifting the goalposts!Mick_Pork said:
Top Mail online story.CarlottaVance said:
The 4 million people who read it?Mick_Pork said:Seriously? Who gives a sh*t what Dacre and his obsequious idiots are ranting about on a daily basis.
Not all of them are reading it to be offended by it.....
The print edition is still out-read four to one vs the Guardian and ten-to one vs the Independent.......which do you think will be around longest?
You're predicating a political influence that flies in the face of every new election result and every year that passes. The tory friendly press launched a blitzkrieg on Farage and the kippers before last May and will almost certainly do so again.
How did that turn out?
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/96/UK_opinion_polling_2010-2015.png
ROFL0 -
Eastleigh News write up of the Survation poll.
http://www.eastleighnews.co.uk/2014/04/ukip-top-general-election-poll-in-eastleigh/0 -
Interesting projection going on there......Mick_Pork said:
his gay bondage fantasiesmalcolmg said:
Alan, you do have to wonder, it is puerile crap.Alanbrooke said:
So why has the DM got one of the biggest on line profiles ? XxxMick_Pork said:Seriously? Who gives a sh*t what Dacre and his obsequious idiots are ranting about on a daily basis. The clock is still running for he and his increasingly irrelevant fellow 'organs'.
Tick, tock.
0 -
Who to believe....an editor giving testimony under oath or a....well....what, exactly?Mick_Pork said:
WHO?CarlottaVance said:
That was very much Brooks' testimony at Leveson too.....anotherDave said:
There was a Radio 4 series/doccy on the power of the press a few years ago. The key point made by the newspaper bods was that papers follow public opinion, they don't lead it.Mick_Pork said:
Broadsheets will either be kept alive by online (freemium models, paywalls etc.) or from a benefactor with very deep pockets They could rely on loss offsetting before from their tabloid arms but that won't be viable for very much longer as you seem to have missed the part where the decline in hard copy readership is across the board and irreversible.CarlottaVance said:
Ah, shifting the goalposts!Mick_Pork said:
Top Mail online story.CarlottaVance said:
The 4 million people who read it?Mick_Pork said:Seriously? Who gives a sh*t what Dacre and his obsequious idiots are ranting about on a daily basis.
Not all of them are reading it to be offended by it.....
The print edition is still out-read four to one vs the Guardian and ten-to one vs the Independent.......which do you think will be around longest?
You're predicating a political influence that flies in the face of every new election result and every year that passes. The tory friendly press launched a blitzkrieg on Farage and the kippers before last May and will almost certainly do so again.
How did that turn out?
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/96/UK_opinion_polling_2010-2015.png
ROFL
0 -
CarlottaVance said:
Interesting projection going on there......Mick_Pork said:
his gay bondage fantasiesmalcolmg said:
Alan, you do have to wonder, it is puerile crap.Alanbrooke said:
So why has the DM got one of the biggest on line profiles ? XxxMick_Pork said:Seriously? Who gives a sh*t what Dacre and his obsequious idiots are ranting about on a daily basis. The clock is still running for he and his increasingly irrelevant fellow 'organs'.
Tick, tock.
The projection is all yours dear.CarlottaVance said:
That was very much Brooks' testimony at Leveson too.....
LOL
0 -
tears of laughter etc.CarlottaVance said:
Who to believe....an editor giving testimony under oath or a....well....what, exactly?Mick_Pork said:
WHO?CarlottaVance said:
That was very much Brooks' testimony at Leveson too.....anotherDave said:
There was a Radio 4 series/doccy on the power of the press a few years ago. The key point made by the newspaper bods was that papers follow public opinion, they don't lead it.Mick_Pork said:
Broadsheets will either be kept alive by online (freemium models, paywalls etc.) or from a benefactor with very deep pockets They could rely on loss offsetting before from their tabloid arms but that won't be viable for very much longer as you seem to have missed the part where the decline in hard copy readership is across the board and irreversible.CarlottaVance said:
Ah, shifting the goalposts!Mick_Pork said:
Top Mail online story.CarlottaVance said:
The 4 million people who read it?Mick_Pork said:Seriously? Who gives a sh*t what Dacre and his obsequious idiots are ranting about on a daily basis.
Not all of them are reading it to be offended by it.....
The print edition is still out-read four to one vs the Guardian and ten-to one vs the Independent.......which do you think will be around longest?
You're predicating a political influence that flies in the face of every new election result and every year that passes. The tory friendly press launched a blitzkrieg on Farage and the kippers before last May and will almost certainly do so again.
How did that turn out?
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/96/UK_opinion_polling_2010-2015.png
ROFL
By all means keep digging away furiously. This is not hilarious AT ALL.0 -
TNS last 6 polls No leads 14/14/13/13/14/12SeanT said:
You're cherry picking. And you know it. Look at this:MarkSenior said:
TNS/BMRB poll Dec 2013 No lead 14 pointsSeanT said:
There is a fascinating factoid buried in that FT poll tracker. YES started gaining, crucially, in mid January, a while before the Osborne currency speech, and a while after the SNP White Paper.malcolmg said:
If not blind then senile, living in a dream world.SeanT said:Fpt
MarkSenior said:
» show previous quotes
"I know facts are not your strong point but the last 12 polls from all pollsters have shown the following ( all in comparison with the previous poll from the same pollster )
5 have shown a decrease in the NO lead
3 have shown no change in the lead at all
4 have shown an increase in the No lead
There is no narrowing of the lead , the position is static because most people have made up their minds and did so ages ago . All you are seeing is MofE variations from poll to poll "
Mark, I wish you were right, but you are completely, delusionally wrong.
Here is the FT's independence poll tracker, which doesn't even include the latest ICM.
http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/2a5bdce0-c4a4-11e3-b2fb-00144feabdc0.html
I presume you aren't blind, so you can see what I can see. On present trends YES will overtake NO in the summer, and win fairly easily in September.
So something happened then, in mid January, to change the campaign. What was it? If it was something NO did, they need to do the reverse; if it was something YES did, NO need to counter it.
But what was it?
TNS/BMRB poll April 2014 No lead 14 points
Change Zero
Ipsos Mori poll Dec 2013 No lead 23 points
Ipsos Mori poll End Fen 2013 No lead 25 points
Change No lead up by 2
Scotland: NO lead in #IndyRef polls, chg. from previous:
TNS: 12(-2)
Panelbase: 5
Survation: 8(-2)
YouGov: 15(-3)
ICM: 3(-4)
Ipsos: 25(+2)
The trend is clear. And has been for several weeks. I wish you were right. But you ain't.
Any competent mathematician/statistician will tell you there is no trend there at all0 -
Jim Murphy is manning the NO barricades by writing for the Scottish edition of the, ahem, Sunday Express.
http://express.co.uk/scotland/471450/COMMENT-Patriotism-not-nationalism-is-basis-for-independence-vote
0 -
29% of the people of Eastleigh think Immigration is a problem for 'the country'.....but only 4% think its a problem 'for Eastleigh'.....anotherDave said:Eastleigh News write up of the Survation poll.
http://www.eastleighnews.co.uk/2014/04/ukip-top-general-election-poll-in-eastleigh/
0 -
Lord Ashcroft @LordAshcroft
Just listening to the No campaign to Scottish independence I might even be tempted to vote YES.
0 -
I was in the library last month, and a gentleman got up from a table in front of posters for a food bank and asked me if I knew of anyone who would like to avail themselves of the bank. He seemed fairly keen for me to go along.
Mind you, that could say more about me than about food banks.
0 -
Which mocknery clickbaiter with more than a passing resemblance to Alan Partridge tried to pretend the polls on Indy weren't changing because he cited 2012 and somehow missed out the entirety of 2013?
Could it be the same effete mockney hypocritically berating the incompetent Clegg spinner for doing the same?
'But there must be vastly amusing quotes for that' you say? Indeed there is.
Gertcha! Mashed potatoes.0 -
O/t
For a start, the headline is inaccurate (dishonest?????). It says "no questions asked" whereas in fact, as the story makes plain, the reporter had his story carefully worked out, so that he could lie convincingly to the CAB worker.0 -
Darwin?SeanT said:
Tomorrow I fly to one of the most remote towns in the most remote part of Australia. Difficult to believe it could be any more boring than Perth, but we shall see.Alanbrooke said:
Well I can't think of too much Indyref wise which happened in January. If it's "now on my radar syndrome" you'd see it in a declining number of DKs.SeanT said:
No. Don't buy that. Too simplistic. Voters don't suddenly realise 'there is an election this year' in January, then change their minds who to vote for.Alanbrooke said:
I could be as simple as realising the Indyref is this year so minds are more concentrated.SeanT said:
There is a fascinating factoid buried in that FT poll tracker. YES started gaining, crucially, in mid January, a while before the Osborne currency speech, and a while after the SNP White Paper.malcolmg said:
If not blind then senile, living in a dream world.SeanT said:Fpt
MarkSenior said:
» show previous quotes
"I know facts are not your strong point but the last 12 polls from all pollsters have shown the following ( all in comparison with the previous poll from the same pollster )
5 have shown a decrease in the NO lead
3 have shown no change in the lead at all
4 have shown an increase in the No lead
There is no narrowing of the lead , the position is static because most people have made up their minds and did so ages ago . All you are seeing is MofE variations from poll to poll "
Mark, I wish you were right, but you are completely, delusionally wrong.
Here is the FT's independence poll tracker, which doesn't even include the latest ICM.
http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/2a5bdce0-c4a4-11e3-b2fb-00144feabdc0.html
I presume you aren't blind, so you can see what I can see. On present trends YES will overtake NO in the summer, and win fairly easily in September.
So something happened then, in mid January, to change the campaign. What was it? If it was something NO did, they need to do the reverse; if it was something YES did, NO need to counter it.
But what was it?
G'day.
0 -
Ye think he's seen the polls? He just might at that. Shame so many of the PB tories and scottish tory surgers are still trapped in their bubble.Tykejohnno said:
Lord Ashcroft @LordAshcroft
Just listening to the No campaign to Scottish independence I might even be tempted to vote YES.0 -
Mick quit blagging you don't even live in Scotland.Mick_Pork said:
Ye think he's seen the polls? He just might at that. Shame so many of the PB tories and scottish tory surgers are still trapped in their bubble.Tykejohnno said:
Lord Ashcroft @LordAshcroft
Just listening to the No campaign to Scottish independence I might even be tempted to vote YES.
#ChasnMick0 -
It is a fairly underhand piece of work, even for the DM. The 'reporter' in question has deleted all his past tweets and stated that he returned the food, along with a donation.OldKingCole said:O/t
For a start, the headline is inaccurate (dishonest?????). It says "no questions asked" whereas in fact, as the story makes plain, the reporter had his story carefully worked out, so that he could lie convincingly to the CAB worker.
Trussell Trust has seen a surge in donations today, so some good has come out of it.0 -
Here you go Alan. > http://www.alcoholics-anonymous.org.uk/Alanbrooke said:
Mick quit blagging you don't even live in Scotland.Mick_Pork said:
Ye think he's seen the polls? He just might at that. Shame so many of the PB tories and scottish tory surgers are still trapped in their bubble.Tykejohnno said:
Lord Ashcroft @LordAshcroft
Just listening to the No campaign to Scottish independence I might even be tempted to vote YES.
#ChasnMick
For when you eventually sober up obviously.0 -
Mick, wrong one, we're love bombing remember ?Mick_Pork said:
Here you go Alan. > http://www.alcoholics-anonymous.org.uk/Alanbrooke said:
Mick quit blagging you don't even live in Scotland.Mick_Pork said:
Ye think he's seen the polls? He just might at that. Shame so many of the PB tories and scottish tory surgers are still trapped in their bubble.Tykejohnno said:
Lord Ashcroft @LordAshcroft
Just listening to the No campaign to Scottish independence I might even be tempted to vote YES.
#ChasnMick
For when you eventually sober up obviously.0 -
Arf!
@LordAshcroft: Fascinating Survation poll in Eastleigh: UKIP 32% CON 28% LDEM 27% LAB 12%
@LordRennard: .. and the margin error on 500 sample is? And were candidates identified and people reminded of last result etc.?
@LordAshcroft: ...not my poll...direct your questions to Survation...0 -
There's a nice blog about it by one of the leftish indy bloggers in my patch:AramintaMoonbeamQC said:
It is a fairly underhand piece of work, even for the DM. The 'reporter' in question has deleted all his past tweets and stated that he returned the food, along with a donation.OldKingCole said:O/t
For a start, the headline is inaccurate (dishonest?????). It says "no questions asked" whereas in fact, as the story makes plain, the reporter had his story carefully worked out, so that he could lie convincingly to the CAB worker.
Trussell Trust has seen a surge in donations today, so some good has come out of it.
http://beestonia.wordpress.com/author/beestonia/
0 -
Really weird sentence at the end of an 'Eastleigh News' story about the Survation poll. It says:
"Members of the Political Betting site say Ladbrokes in Eastleigh are currently offering 4/1 on Ukip winning here in 2015"
Why not "Ladbrokes are currently offering 4/1 on UKIP winning the seat in 2015", or even better spend 10 second looking it up and put the actual latest odds.
http://www.eastleighnews.co.uk/2014/04/ukip-top-general-election-poll-in-eastleigh/0 -
Pandering isn't hard TBH. Bit of a long set-up for a damp squib like this but the journo knows Dacre will happily pay all expenses and time put in for this kind of stuff.AramintaMoonbeamQC said:
It is a fairly underhand piece of work, even for the DM. The 'reporter' in question has deleted all his past tweets and stated that he returned the food, along with a donation.OldKingCole said:O/t
For a start, the headline is inaccurate (dishonest?????). It says "no questions asked" whereas in fact, as the story makes plain, the reporter had his story carefully worked out, so that he could lie convincingly to the CAB worker.
Trussell Trust has seen a surge in donations today, so some good has come out of it.
There was the amusing case of the twin setup recently which is where we are right now with an increasingly desperate press.A Sunday Times sting ends up with the stingers being stung...
Of course the one bunch almost guaranteed to fall for a set-up are MPs as they keep imagining slighlty odd looking people offering them wodges of cash for basically nothing is perfectly normal. Hence the continuing expenses farces.
This is one of those crazy things that can happen to undercover journalists engaging in a spot of subterfuge.
Two Sunday Times investigative reporters, Jonathan Calvert and Heidi Blake, set out to discover whether it was possible to purchase a Bulgarian baby.
But their advert was spotted by a Bulgarian TV station, Nova, and its reporter then stung the stingers, so to speak.
The result is the six-minute segment above aired by Nova, and now available here on YouTube in which Bulgarian reporter, Veronika Dimitrova, plays them along while they are covertly filming her.
http://www.theguardian.com/media/greenslade/2014/apr/17/sundaytimes-bulgaria
Greenslade does add this at the end interestingly.I'm sure this episode has nothing to do with gossip sweeping the Sunday Times that the Insight department is to be wound up.
He's quite right on both counts. The rumours were getting loud nor is this the first time they have been heard. Difference is this time around the climate has never been less friendly and cut-throat.
Over the years, going back at least until the mid-1980s, there have been rumours about the demise of Insight. It always survives, however.
0 -
Why do lefties get so offended by a reporter showing how easy it is to rip off food banks?0
-
To respond to notme - no, I don't agree that the tightening of benefits has been "pretty minor" or comprable to plans of the last government (though I'm critical of them in this area too) - the issue is often not so much the awards themselves but the interminable delays in deciding, especially for PiP. cf http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/apr/11/iain-duncan-smith-pip-payments-punish-poor-ill-dying
Whether this is due to complexity, understaffing or lack of interest is something that people can reasonably debate. That it's a scandal is not really in dispute, and blaming food banks for failing to impose sufficient scrutiny is a ridiculous distraction.0 -
It is strange that the story has only 11 moderated comments after it.0
-
Newspapers tend to feed the prejudices of their readers. Judging by some of the letters to the DT I would guess they are subscribers which the paper feels should be published - there can't be any other reason! So although that "following" may be correct in general, the constant publishing of "outrage" and "scandal", hyped to sell newspapers, leads to a general negative view by the public on all matters of politics and our institutions, benefiting the likes of ukip.CarlottaVance said:
That was very much Brooks' testimony at Leveson too.....anotherDave said:
There was a Radio 4 series/doccy on the power of the press a few years ago. The key point made by the newspaper bods was that papers follow public opinion, they don't lead it.Mick_Pork said:
Broadsheets will either be kept alive by online (freemium models, paywalls etc.) or from a benefactor with very deep pockets They could rely on loss offsetting before from their tabloid arms but that won't be viable for very much longer as you seem to have missed the part where the decline in hard copy readership is across the board and irreversible.CarlottaVance said:
Ah, shifting the goalposts!Mick_Pork said:
Top Mail online story.CarlottaVance said:
The 4 million people who read it?Mick_Pork said:Seriously? Who gives a sh*t what Dacre and his obsequious idiots are ranting about on a daily basis.
Not all of them are reading it to be offended by it.....
The print edition is still out-read four to one vs the Guardian and ten-to one vs the Independent.......which do you think will be around longest?
You're predicating a political influence that flies in the face of every new election result and every year that passes. The tory friendly press launched a blitzkrieg on Farage and the kippers before last May and will almost certainly do so again.
How did that turn out?
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/96/UK_opinion_polling_2010-2015.png
0 -
Whilst we're on the Daily Mail, this story seems to cover so many bases...
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2608675/Shamed-Co-op-boss-quizzed-cover-child-sex-Cyril-Smith-school-Flowers-targeted-QC-suppressed-reports-exposing-horrific-sweet-shop-paedophiles.html
Seems rather weak, but any link with Labour figures rather makes Simon Danzcuk's campaign seem even more partisan.0 -
Ten seconds, more like ten weeks - you ever tried finding a price with Laddy's ?!Quincel said:Really weird sentence at the end of an 'Eastleigh News' story about the Survation poll. It says:
"Members of the Political Betting site say Ladbrokes in Eastleigh are currently offering 4/1 on Ukip winning here in 2015"
Why not "Ladbrokes are currently offering 4/1 on UKIP winning the seat in 2015", or even better spend 10 second looking it up and put the actual latest odds.
http://www.eastleighnews.co.uk/2014/04/ukip-top-general-election-poll-in-eastleigh/0 -
JJ, I am no expert on the SHS versus the EHSJosiasJessop said:
"Who wouldn’t want to live in a nation with such aspirations?”malcolmg said:Looks like folks at home are listening to Sean
From Cornwall, in The Western Morning News :
“The facts speak for themselves. The Scottish Parliament already promotes more people-friendly and socialist policies than its counterpart in Westminster. It has a more efficient health service, a more enlightened education system, a pledge to create a non-nuclear defence force, and a commitment to re-nationalise essential industries and utilities. Who wouldn’t want to live in a nation with such aspirations?”
Read more: http://www.westernmorningnews.co.uk/Scottish-independence-affect-South-West/story-20986178-detail/story.html#ixzz2zQZzlDpk
Anyone who realises that nationalisation (even of just 'essential industries and utilities') does not necessarily mean better or cheaper services, as has been shown many times in the past. Nationalisation and privatisation are tools; when misused they often make things much worse.
What's the evidence for a 'more efficient health service'? That's a genuine question: is there some study I've missed?0 -
Nick, obviously you object to the welfare cuts. So how would you recommend balancing the budget, the deficit on which is still around ~£100bn p.a. IIRC?NickPalmer said:To respond to notme - no, I don't agree that the tightening of benefits has been "pretty minor" or comprable to plans of the last government (though I'm critical of them in this area too) - the issue is often not so much the awards themselves but the interminable delays in deciding, especially for PiP. cf http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/apr/11/iain-duncan-smith-pip-payments-punish-poor-ill-dying
Whether this is due to complexity, understaffing or lack of interest is something that people can reasonably debate. That it's a scandal is not really in dispute, and blaming food banks for failing to impose sufficient scrutiny is a ridiculous distraction.
0 -
The secret to finding prices on Ladbrokes site is to use the search facility and type in the name of a "runner" or something from the market. Up pops the market quickly.BobaFett said:
Ten seconds, more like ten weeks - you ever tried finding a price with Laddy's ?!Quincel said:Really weird sentence at the end of an 'Eastleigh News' story about the Survation poll. It says:
"Members of the Political Betting site say Ladbrokes in Eastleigh are currently offering 4/1 on Ukip winning here in 2015"
Why not "Ladbrokes are currently offering 4/1 on UKIP winning the seat in 2015", or even better spend 10 second looking it up and put the actual latest odds.
http://www.eastleighnews.co.uk/2014/04/ukip-top-general-election-poll-in-eastleigh/
0 -
Why do righties feel the need to defend the Mail?AndyJS said:Why do lefties get so offended by a reporter showing how easy it is to rip off food banks?
0 -
Investigations into this whole era have the potential to damage all parties and establishment in the way expenses did. Watson for a while was pushing one particular angle that unsurprisingly is alleged to implicate his opponents, I don't know if Danzcuk is being slightly less partisan in attempts to undercover the truth behind what are shocking allegations.JosiasJessop said:Whilst we're on the Daily Mail, this story seems to cover so many bases...
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2608675/Shamed-Co-op-boss-quizzed-cover-child-sex-Cyril-Smith-school-Flowers-targeted-QC-suppressed-reports-exposing-horrific-sweet-shop-paedophiles.html
Seems rather weak, but any link with Labour figures rather makes Simon Danzcuk's campaign seem even more partisan.
I have to say though I am always uncomfortable with politicians going around interviewing potential victims / witnesses and writing a book, rather than if they uncover evidence passing it over to the police.
0 -
That's a helpful tip. But first I have to find the search facility.MikeSmithson said:
The secret to finding prices on Ladbrokes site is to use the search facility and type in the name of a "runner" or something from the market. Up pops the market quickly.BobaFett said:
Ten seconds, more like ten weeks - you ever tried finding a price with Laddy's ?!Quincel said:Really weird sentence at the end of an 'Eastleigh News' story about the Survation poll. It says:
"Members of the Political Betting site say Ladbrokes in Eastleigh are currently offering 4/1 on Ukip winning here in 2015"
Why not "Ladbrokes are currently offering 4/1 on UKIP winning the seat in 2015", or even better spend 10 second looking it up and put the actual latest odds.
http://www.eastleighnews.co.uk/2014/04/ukip-top-general-election-poll-in-eastleigh/0 -
There will be travel from NO to DK before they get to YES as well though Alan. Data shows the DK's tend to lean 2:1 to YES. I think as we see that large parts of the initial NO lead were just people saying status Quo before they started looking at the pros and cons.Alanbrooke said:
Well I can't think of too much Indyref wise which happened in January. If it's "now on my radar syndrome" you'd see it in a declining number of DKs.SeanT said:
No. Don't buy that. Too simplistic. Voters don't suddenly realise 'there is an election this year' in January, then change their minds who to vote for.Alanbrooke said:
I could be as simple as realising the Indyref is this year so minds are more concentrated.SeanT said:
There is a fascinating factoid buried in that FT poll tracker. YES started gaining, crucially, in mid January, a while before the Osborne currency speech, and a while after the SNP White Paper.malcolmg said:
If not blind then senile, living in a dream world.SeanT said:Fpt
MarkSenior said:
» show previous quotes
"I know facts are not your strong point but the last 12 polls from all pollsters have shown the following ( all in comparison with the previous poll from the same pollster )
5 have shown a decrease in the NO lead
3 have shown no change in the lead at all
4 have shown an increase in the No lead
There is no narrowing of the lead , the position is static because most people have made up their minds and did so ages ago . All you are seeing is MofE variations from poll to poll "
Mark, I wish you were right, but you are completely, delusionally wrong.
Here is the FT's independence poll tracker, which doesn't even include the latest ICM.
http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/2a5bdce0-c4a4-11e3-b2fb-00144feabdc0.html
I presume you aren't blind, so you can see what I can see. On present trends YES will overtake NO in the summer, and win fairly easily in September.
So something happened then, in mid January, to change the campaign. What was it? If it was something NO did, they need to do the reverse; if it was something YES did, NO need to counter it.
But what was it?0 -
maybe malc, but we're also at the flirting stage when the DKs jump back and forth a bit. The polls won't start to harden until July or August. I'm still on No, the most interesting poll of the last 2 weeks was the 60-40 one against having another referendum any time soon, I suspect that's closer to the mark on what Scots think of this one.malcolmg said:
There will be travel from NO to DK before they get to YES as well though Alan. Data shows the DK's tend to lean 2:1 to YES. I think as we see that large parts of the initial NO lead were just people saying status Quo before they started looking at the pros and cons.Alanbrooke said:
Well I can't think of too much Indyref wise which happened in January. If it's "now on my radar syndrome" you'd see it in a declining number of DKs.SeanT said:
No. Don't buy that. Too simplistic. Voters don't suddenly realise 'there is an election this year' in January, then change their minds who to vote for.Alanbrooke said:
I could be as simple as realising the Indyref is this year so minds are more concentrated.SeanT said:
There is a fascinating factoid buried in that FT poll tracker. YES started gaining, crucially, in mid January, a while before the Osborne currency speech, and a while after the SNP White Paper.malcolmg said:
If not blind then senile, living in a dream world.SeanT said:Fpt
MarkSenior said:
» show previous quotes
"I know facts are not your strong point but the last 12 polls from all pollsters have shown the following ( all in comparison with the previous poll from the same pollster )
5 have shown a decrease in the NO lead
3 have shown no change in the lead at all
4 have shown an increase in the No lead
There is no narrowing of the lead , the position is static because most people have made up their minds and did so ages ago . All you are seeing is MofE variations from poll to poll "
Mark, I wish you were right, but you are completely, delusionally wrong.
Here is the FT's independence poll tracker, which doesn't even include the latest ICM.
http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/2a5bdce0-c4a4-11e3-b2fb-00144feabdc0.html
I presume you aren't blind, so you can see what I can see. On present trends YES will overtake NO in the summer, and win fairly easily in September.
So something happened then, in mid January, to change the campaign. What was it? If it was something NO did, they need to do the reverse; if it was something YES did, NO need to counter it.
But what was it?0 -
Because lefties will always jump at any chance to attack the Mail, and then over-exaggerate their case throwing in casual abuse left, right and centre?MikeSmithson said:
Why do righties feel the need to defend the Mail?AndyJS said:Why do lefties get so offended by a reporter showing how easy it is to rip off food banks?
I don't read the Mail. But if there's one thing that tempts me to leap to its defence, it's the sort of people who attack it and how they attack it.
Of course, The Sun or even The Express don't get anything like the same flak. I think it annoys lefties how continuingly successful and influential the Mail is. They really would rather it shut down and went out of business, using any means possible.
0 -
Tucked away near the top is a small search magnifying glass icon. It's not obvious but then nothing is on the Ladbrokes site. Vantifrank said:
That's a helpful tip. But first I have to find the search facility.MikeSmithson said:
The secret to finding prices on Ladbrokes site is to use the search facility and type in the name of a "runner" or something from the market. Up pops the market quickly.BobaFett said:
Ten seconds, more like ten weeks - you ever tried finding a price with Laddy's ?!Quincel said:Really weird sentence at the end of an 'Eastleigh News' story about the Survation poll. It says:
"Members of the Political Betting site say Ladbrokes in Eastleigh are currently offering 4/1 on Ukip winning here in 2015"
Why not "Ladbrokes are currently offering 4/1 on UKIP winning the seat in 2015", or even better spend 10 second looking it up and put the actual latest odds.
http://www.eastleighnews.co.uk/2014/04/ukip-top-general-election-poll-in-eastleigh/0 -
It's amazing how bad the Civil Service can be at administration - something you would have thought was in its DNA. Also Atos is undeniably overstretched, it is having difficulty recruiting staff (they get death threats) and I believe has requested early release from its contract to do ESA assessments. However it's hard to know who else could do the work, or how you can award disability benefits without conducting medical assessments.NickPalmer said:To respond to notme - no, I don't agree that the tightening of benefits has been "pretty minor" or comprable to plans of the last government (though I'm critical of them in this area too) - the issue is often not so much the awards themselves but the interminable delays in deciding, especially for PiP. cf http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/apr/11/iain-duncan-smith-pip-payments-punish-poor-ill-dying
Whether this is due to complexity, understaffing or lack of interest is something that people can reasonably debate. That it's a scandal is not really in dispute, and blaming food banks for failing to impose sufficient scrutiny is a ridiculous distraction.
0 -
Re: Scottish independence
Alex Salmond really must be pissing himself laughing. The "Better Together" campaign couldn't have played into his hands more if they tried (the refusal to put "devo-max" on the ballot paper, the laughable scaremongering on the currency, the unattractive personalities at the top of the BT campaign, the enlisting of hated big-business fat cats and "Eurocrats" to try and support their argument, the general woeful quality of all the UK parties' policies which makes staying in the UK seem more pointless, etc.).
That's the thing about today's generation of politicians -- everyone agrees they're more unprincipled and less charismatic than previous generations, but I honestly think they're worse at basic politics and tactics too. Any fool outside of the Westminster bubble would've been able to tell you that most of those moves were terrible ideas.0 -
I couldn't give a toss about the Mail or its story. That Christian charity is something that they think their readers want to see attacked on Easter Sunday either says a lot about the Mail, its readers or probably both.
We are a rich country. That there has been an explosion in people having to rely on charity to eat is an outrage, the embodiment of a broken system as presided over by both parties. That people choose to attack the starving to make a political point doesn't surprise me one bit. Nor does the alleged Christian faith of IDS and Cameron. And Blair for that matter. Politicians should be very careful spouting their faith when their policies are directly contradictory - Nicholls and Welsby unite in their condemnation of government policies. Ordinarily I can't support the churches intervening in politics - unless politicians claim to be men of faith. No politician or political party can wash its hands in faith and survive without coming across as gross hypocrites - they really should have learned from the American examples where so many Christian politicians appear to have Bibles that consist solely of a few pages from Genesis, Leviticus and Revelation.0 -
Let's face it, it's a bit of a non-story. If you go into a CAB and give them a detailed, carefully-constructed lie you can get... some free food and pointers to other organisations who can help you. BFD.AndyJS said:Why do lefties get so offended by a reporter showing how easy it is to rip off food banks?
0 -
Blimey, Rennard criticising someone's over interpretation of poll findings. One can only hope that UKIP doesn't put it on a bar chart.0
-
As I said, the food bank issue is not mostly caused by low benefits. It's by it taking SIX MONTHS to find out whether you'll get help or not. When I went to a briefing on this, the non-political organisers said the majority of their customers were not people who'd been turned down, but simply people who had run out of money while awaiting a decision. Often poor credit risks and in cities often without helpful family networks, they had only three options:Casino_Royale said:
Nick, obviously you object to the welfare cuts. So how would you recommend balancing the budget, the deficit on which is still around ~£100bn p.a. IIRC?
* Wonga-level loans, digging deeper into debt
* Food banks
* Crime
Understaffing the offices that decide is a false economy. It's stupid. It's cruel. And it's completely ridiculous to blame the food banks for it.
0 -
"Charity tries to help man pleading poverty to feed his family for a couple of days". It's hardly All The President's Men, is it?0
