The fact that you choose to use a name that Osborne stopped using when he was a teenager leads me to believe that, regardless of their performance, you would have a negative view of Cameron and Osborne.
Why don't you run along and find a nice bridge to sit under?
Console yourself with that if you like. This administration will go down as one of the most incompetent since the 1970s. It is just a pity that its partisans don't yet appreciate this, and remove the clique which runs the Tory party. I have almost come round to the view that anything, even God help us, an Ed Miliband premiership, would be better than this.
Tell me, what have they done which is really incompetent?
There is plenty of bad politics - things like the pasty tax - which don't matter in the big scheme of things. On balance they have navigated a treacherous path tolerably well. They are only part of the way through clearing up the Brownian stables, but there was one hell of a mess left behind.
The impression of incompetence took hold last year I think. That history may judge this premiership more kindly will not console many come 2015.
I'd agree with that: there is a perception of incompetence. Carl was speaking about actualities though, and I responded in kind.
That's fair enough, although perceived or actual, the outcome remains the same for your lot unfortunately. I'm not sure there's time to stage enough of a recovery to reverse that perception - it would likely be interpreted as happening 'in spite of' rather than 'because of' their efforts.
A shame, as although I've turned against Cameron and co, I'd like to be optimistic about their efforts.
I agree KLE4.
I think the Tory problem was they tried to do too much, too soon. Too long in opposition, too keen for power, once they got there they were like kids in a sweet shop. From Cameron and Osborne down.
All their pet projects and ideological fantasies and little schemes that had been encouraged by various think tanks and interest groups as power grew closer, it all came pouring out.
It has led to very, very poor Government.
A period in reflective opposition, forgetting that Thatcher and Blair ever existed and moving into the 21st Century, will be good for the Tory Party.
Maybe so, although Labour getting back in so soon and so easily after developing a lot of bad habits and arrogance that 13 years in power breeds, is probably not good for the country. It will only reinforce their bad habits.
@toadmeister: If UKIP overtake Labour in Thursday's poll, that will be the story, not the votes they've taken from the Tories. Bad news for Milishambles
the problem is the political class opening the borders against the wishes of the public
Before the enactment of the British Nationality Act 1948, a British subject could enter this country and work freely, without let or hindrance. In 1947, approximately a third of the world's population were British subjects. Isn't the reality that over the last seventy-five years, the politicians of both parties have actually closed the borders, and instituted a highly restrictive system of immigration control. Both parties intend to close the border yet further. I have only one question: why wasn't I consulted about this decision to close the border?
Over the last 75 years the number of British subjects on Earth has significantly decreased
If I were King-Emperor I would reconstitute the Empire/Commonwealth as a fully democratic federation, with a central Imperial Senate.
If only you'd persuaded the powers that were in 1763 at the end of the Seven Years War. Then it might've worked. The USA would've remained part of the Crown and WW 1 and 2 wouldn't have happened much later as nobody would've taken us on..... Discuss
Alternate history time! How about the 1776 Potomac Compromise - the 13 Colonies get representation at Westminster in exchange for remaining loyal subjects of King Sunil - I mean King George, ooops!
1776 was way too late. You'd need to have a decent offer to the colonists back in the 1760s.
My point exactly. Once the French threat had gone in 1763 the 13 colonies got all self interested about tax and representation as they knew they could throw the emergency French phrase book away.
@toadmeister: If UKIP overtake Labour in Thursday's poll, that will be the story, not the votes they've taken from the Tories. Bad news for Milishambles
The projected national vote share will have Labour way ahead of UKIP (and in front of Con ) if the actual votes cast are what ConRes sugget. And the national equivalent usually get more coverage than the actual votes cast (or not?)
the problem is the political class opening the borders against the wishes of the public
Before the enactment of the British Nationality Act 1948, a British subject could enter this country and work freely, without let or hindrance. In 1947, approximately a third of the world's population were British subjects. Isn't the reality that over the last seventy-five years, the politicians of both parties have actually closed the borders, and instituted a highly restrictive system of immigration control. Both parties intend to close the border yet further. I have only one question: why wasn't I consulted about this decision to close the border?
Over the last 75 years the number of British subjects on Earth has significantly decreased
If I were King-Emperor I would reconstitute the Empire/Commonwealth as a fully democratic federation, with a central Imperial Senate.
If only you'd persuaded the powers that were in 1763 at the end of the Seven Years War. Then it might've worked. The USA would've remained part of the Crown and WW 1 and 2 wouldn't have happened much later as nobody would've taken us on..... Discuss
Alternate history time! How about the 1776 Potomac Compromise - the 13 Colonies get representation at Westminster in exchange for remaining loyal subjects of King Sunil - I mean King George, ooops!
I like to wind up my American friends by saying to them we call the Fourth of July, the day The British decided we'd much rather have India than America.
The fact that you choose to use a name that Osborne stopped using when he was a teenager leads me to believe that, regardless of their performance, you would have a negative view of Cameron and Osborne.
Why don't you run along and find a nice bridge to sit under?
Console yourself with that if you like. This administration will go down as one of the most incompetent since the 1970s. It is just a pity that its partisans don't yet appreciate this, and remove the clique which runs the Tory party. I have almost come round to the view that anything, even God help us, an Ed Miliband premiership, would be better than this.
Tell me, what have they done which is really incompetent?
There is plenty of bad politics - things like the pasty tax - which don't matter in the big scheme of things. On balance they have navigated a treacherous path tolerably well. They are only part of the way through clearing up the Brownian stables, but there was one hell of a mess left behind.
The impression of incompetence took hold last year I think. That history may judge this premiership more kindly will not console many come 2015.
I'd agree with that: there is a perception of incompetence. Carl was speaking about actualities though, and I responded in kind.
That's fair enough, although perceived or actual, the outcome remains the same for your lot unfortunately. I'm not sure there's time to stage enough of a recovery to reverse that perception - it would likely be interpreted as happening 'in spite of' rather than 'because of' their efforts.
A shame, as although I've turned against Cameron and co, I'd like to be optimistic about their efforts.
I agree KLE4.
I think the Tory problem was they tried to do too much, too soon. Too long in opposition, too keen for power, once they got there they were like kids in a sweet shop. From Cameron and Osborne down.
All their pet projects and ideological fantasies and little schemes that had been encouraged by various think tanks and interest groups as power grew closer, it all came pouring out.
It has led to very, very poor Government.
A period in reflective opposition, forgetting that Thatcher and Blair ever existed and moving into the 21st Century, will be good for the Tory Party.
Maybe so, although Labour getting back in so soon and so easily after developing a lot of bad habits and arrogance that 13 years in power breeds, is probably not good for the country. It will only reinforce their bad habits.
I think Labour have learned a lot of lessons from their time in power, which is one of the reasons they've recovered so remarkably. So they should do a better job when they get back in soon.
The fact that you choose to use a name that Osborne stopped using when he was a teenager leads me to believe that, regardless of their performance, you would have a negative view of Cameron and Osborne.
Why don't you run along and find a nice bridge to sit under?
Console yourself with that if you like. This administration will go down as one of the most incompetent since the 1970s. It is just a pity that its partisans don't yet appreciate this, and remove the clique which runs the Tory party. I have almost come round to the view that anything, even God help us, an Ed Miliband premiership, would be better than this.
Tell me, what have they done which is really incompetent?
There is plenty of bad politics - things like the pasty tax - which don't matter in the big scheme of things. On balance they have navigated a treacherous path tolerably well. They are only part of the way through clearing up the Brownian stables, but there was one hell of a mess left behind.
The impression of incompetence took hold last year I think. That history may judge this premiership more kindly will not console many come 2015.
I'd agree with that: there is a perception of incompetence. Carl was speaking about actualities though, and I responded in kind.
That's fair enough, although perceived or actual, the outcome remains the same for your lot unfortunately. I'm not sure there's time to stage enough of a recovery to reverse that perception - it would likely be interpreted as happening 'in spite of' rather than 'because of' their efforts.
A shame, as although I've turned against Cameron and co, I'd like to be optimistic about their efforts.
I agree KLE4.
I think the Tory problem was they tried to do too much, too soon. Too long in opposition, too keen for power, once they got there they were like kids in a sweet shop. From Cameron and Osborne down.
All their pet projects and ideological fantasies and little schemes that had been encouraged by various think tanks and interest groups as power grew closer, it all came pouring out.
It has led to very, very poor Government.
A period in reflective opposition, forgetting that Thatcher and Blair ever existed and moving into the 21st Century, will be good for the Tory Party.
Maybe so, although Labour getting back in so soon and so easily after developing a lot of bad habits and arrogance that 13 years in power breeds, is probably not good for the country. It will only reinforce their bad habits.
I think Labour have learned a lot of lessons from their time in power, which is one of the reasons they've recovered so remarkably. So they should do a better job when they get back in soon.
Hopefully!
Hopefully indeed. I've not seen any indication they've learned a lesson from their mistakes, just that they felt they needed a PR facelift and make sure they stand back while the Tories implode.
@toadmeister: If UKIP overtake Labour in Thursday's poll, that will be the story, not the votes they've taken from the Tories. Bad news for Milishambles
I'm looking forward to your rent-a-torytweet spam on the day Miliband kicks Cameron out of office, Scott.
Not as entertaining as an original thought or comment from you would be though. Just one. You must have one?
the problem is the political class opening the borders against the wishes of the public
Before the enactment of the British Nationality Act 1948, a British subject could enter this country and work freely, without let or hindrance. In 1947, approximately a third of the world's population were British subjects. Isn't the reality that over the last seventy-five years, the politicians of both parties have actually closed the borders, and instituted a highly restrictive system of immigration control. Both parties intend to close the border yet further. I have only one question: why wasn't I consulted about this decision to close the border?
Over the last 75 years the number of British subjects on Earth has significantly decreased
If I were King-Emperor I would reconstitute the Empire/Commonwealth as a fully democratic federation, with a central Imperial Senate.
If only you'd persuaded the powers that were in 1763 at the end of the Seven Years War. Then it might've worked. The USA would've remained part of the Crown and WW 1 and 2 wouldn't have happened much later as nobody would've taken us on..... Discuss
Alternate history time! How about the 1776 Potomac Compromise - the 13 Colonies get representation at Westminster in exchange for remaining loyal subjects of King Sunil - I mean King George, ooops!
I like to wind up my American friends by saying to them we call the Fourth of July, the day The British decided we'd much rather have India than America.
Rogan josh v grits: no brainer
Look at this way, letting America go, allowed Sunil and myself to become British citizens.
the problem is the political class opening the borders against the wishes of the public
Before the enactment of the British Nationality Act 1948, a British subject could enter this country and work freely, without let or hindrance. In 1947, approximately a third of the world's population were British subjects. Isn't the reality that over the last seventy-five years, the politicians of both parties have actually closed the borders, and instituted a highly restrictive system of immigration control. Both parties intend to close the border yet further. I have only one question: why wasn't I consulted about this decision to close the border?
Over the last 75 years the number of British subjects on Earth has significantly decreased
If I were King-Emperor I would reconstitute the Empire/Commonwealth as a fully democratic federation, with a central Imperial Senate.
If only you'd persuaded the powers that were in 1763 at the end of the Seven Years War. Then it might've worked. The USA would've remained part of the Crown and WW 1 and 2 wouldn't have happened much later as nobody would've taken us on..... Discuss
Alternate history time! How about the 1776 Potomac Compromise - the 13 Colonies get representation at Westminster in exchange for remaining loyal subjects of King Sunil - I mean King George, ooops!
I like to wind up my American friends by saying to them we call the Fourth of July, the day The British decided we'd much rather have India than America.
Rogan josh v grits: no brainer
Look at this way, letting America go, allowed Sunil and myself to become British citizens.
Much better than Rogan Josh.
I don't know; You're both great and all, but I've had some really good Rogan Josh in my time. Though I'm more a Jalfrezi man actually.
The fact that you choose to use a name that Osborne stopped using when he was a teenager leads me to believe that, regardless of their performance, you would have a negative view of Cameron and Osborne.
Why don't you run along and find a nice bridge to sit under?
Console yourself with that if you like. This administration will go down as one of the most incompetent since the 1970s. It is just a pity that its partisans don't yet appreciate this, and remove the clique which runs the Tory party. I have almost come round to the view that anything, even God help us, an Ed Miliband premiership, would be better than this.
Tell me, what have they done which is really incompetent?
There is plenty of bad politics - things like the pasty tax - which don't matter in the big scheme of things. On balance they have navigated a treacherous path tolerably well. They are only part of the way through clearing up the Brownian stables, but there was one hell of a mess left behind.
The impression of incompetence took hold last year I think. That history may judge this premiership more kindly will not console many come 2015.
I'd agree with that: there is a perception of incompetence. Carl was speaking about actualities though, and I responded in kind.
That's fair enough, although perceived or actual, the outcome remains the same for your lot unfortunately. I'm not sure there's time to stage enough of a recovery to reverse that perception - it would likely be interpreted as happening 'in spite of' rather than 'because of' their efforts.
A shame, as although I've turned against Cameron and co, I'd like to be optimistic about their efforts.
I agree KLE4.
I think the Tory problem was they tried to do too much, too soon. Too long in opposition, too keen for power, once they got there they were like kids in a sweet shop. From Cameron and Osborne down.
All their pet projects and ideological fantasies and little schemes that had been encouraged by various think tanks and interest groups as power grew closer, it all came pouring out.
It has led to very, very poor Government.
A period in reflective opposition, forgetting that Thatcher and Blair ever existed and moving into the 21st Century, will be good for the Tory Party.
Maybe so, although Labour getting back in so soon and so easily after developing a lot of bad habits and arrogance that 13 years in power breeds, is probably not good for the country. It will only reinforce their bad habits.
I think Labour have learned a lot of lessons from their time in power, which is one of the reasons they've recovered so remarkably. So they should do a better job when they get back in soon.
Hopefully!
Hopefully indeed. I've not seen any indication they've learned a lesson from their mistakes, just that they felt they needed a PR facelift and make sure they stand back while the Tories implode.
What would you expect to see though?
Labour's situation has been tricky. Thanks to the Coalition dynamic, suddenly they were handed tons of votes and the potential to win again on a plate, so couldn't afford introspection.
But on the other hand, they couldn't continue with the Blair / Brown discredited 20th Century New Labour that voters had tired of, and had to change.
Miliband has tip-toed this tightrope pretty well, I'd say. After all, they're heading back to power shortly after a massive electoral drubbing.
The Con to Lab swing is probably in line with expectations. The Con-LD swing is almost nothing, possibly meaning the results would depend on local circumstances.
The interesting feature is the very high UKIP score which will make Thursday/Friday very interesting as it can potentially produce some stunning results in some places.
Sober analysis by andrea as usual. That four-way tie in the southwest is quite remarkable and we could see some truly bizarre results. I have to say that my canvassing doesn't suggest that Labour is more or less doubling its vote share over 2009 but most of our marginals are against entrenched LibDems.
Off the top of my head: *“a Britain held aloft by the march of the makers” *Abandonment of deficit reduction *Control orders/TPIMs/(e)TPIMS *Forests *Lansley submitting 1800 amendments to his own Bill *Scrapping an aircraft carrier & Libya *Giveaways to special interest groups while there is allegedly no money left Shall I go on?
Is that it? You seriously have the nerve to call this government 'the most incompetent since the 1970s' on the basis of that? That is close to insane. In order:
- Ludicrous obsession with one phrase from a speech - you could easily find anything worse from any politician anywhere in the world - Untrue, and even if it were true, it's hardly 'incompetence': every single economy in Europe has seen forecasts slashed - Something you disagree with. Not incompetence. - Forests? Come off it - how trivial an example can you find? - Political shenanigans caused by the LibDems changing their minds. That's hung parliaments for you, but the reorganisation happened all the same. - They were stuffed on the aircraft carrier by the last lot. Libya was a notable success. - Come off it - this government has done less in the way of giveaways to special interest groups of any government in the last 50 years.
By any conceivable standard, that list pales into insignificance compared even just with the last lot (let alone governments of the seventies): Iraq, NHS database, Rural Payments Agency, screwing up financial supervision, giving up the EU veto on financial regulation, the first bank run in 150 years, running a big deficit in the biggest boom in tax revenues in living memory, net immigration 2 million with no serious housebuilding, misjudging the impact of the EU accession states by two orders of magnitude, GP contracts, wrecking what used to be the best private-sector pensions in Europe, doubling expenditure on education with nothing much to show for it, HIPs, ID Cards, super-casinos, undoing the Major NHS internal market then re-introducing it - etc etc. I could go on!
@Carl: You said "I think the Tory problem was they tried to do too much, too soon."
The problem was that they didn't pay attention to the detail before they enacted any of their policies. You need to sweat the small stuff. They should have learnt that lesson from Mrs T - really test stuff out, think about it, get it right, not come out with some vague idea and then duck when all the problems with it are hurled at you without you having any coherent, consistent or, indeed, any answers.
See the "humungous conservatory" policy, for instance.
As for Labour - the Bourbons of Britain - they've learnt nothing at all. They will experiment at our expense - again - when/if they are returned to power.
Allegra Stratton sadly talking crap on Newsnight, saying that the county council elections "aren't very important" as far as the general election is concerned.
Of course a lot of the most important marginal seats are in small or medium-sized towns which are indeed holding elections on Thursday.
The fact that you choose to use a name that Osborne stopped using when he was a teenager leads me to believe that, regardless of their performance, you would have a negative view of Cameron and Osborne.
Why don't you run along and find a nice bridge to sit under?
Console yourself with that if you like. This administration will go down as one of the most incompetent since the 1970s. It is just a pity that its partisans don't yet appreciate this, and remove the clique which runs the Tory party. I have almost come round to the view that anything, even God help us, an Ed Miliband premiership, would be better than this.
Tell me, what have they done which is really incompetent?
There is plenty of bad politics - things like the pasty tax - which don't matter in the big scheme of things. On balance they have navigated a treacherous path tolerably well. They are only part of the way through clearing up the Brownian stables, but there was one hell of a mess left behind.
The impression of incompetence took hold last year I think. That history may judge this premiership more kindly will not console many come 2015.
I'd agree with that: there is a perception of incompetence. Carl was speaking about actualities though, and I responded in kind.
That's fair enough, although perceived or actual, the outcome remains the same for your lot unfortunately. I'm not sure there's time to stage enough of a recovery to reverse that perception - it would likely be interpreted as happening 'in spite of' rather than 'because of' their efforts.
A shame, as although I've turned against Cameron and co, I'd like to be optimistic about their efforts.
I agree KLE4.
I think the Tory problem was they tried to do too much, too soon. Too long in opposition, too keen for power, once they got there they were like kids in a sweet shop. From Cameron and Osborne down.
All their pet projects and ideological fantasies and little schemes that had been encouraged by various think tanks and interest groups as power grew closer, it all came pouring out.
It has led to very, very poor Government.
A period in reflective opposition, forgetting that Thatcher and Blair ever existed and moving into the 21st Century, will be good for the Tory Party.
Maybe so, although Labour getting back in so soon and so easily after developing a lot of bad habits and arrogance that 13 years in power breeds, is probably not good for the country. It will only reinforce their bad habits.
I think Labour have learned a lot of lessons from their time in power, which is one of the reasons they've recovered so remarkably. So they should do a better job when they get back in soon.
Hopefully!
Hopefully indeed. I've not seen any indication they've learned a lesson from their mistakes, just that they felt they needed a PR facelift and make sure they stand back while the Tories implode.
What would you expect to see though?
Labour's situation has been tricky. Thanks to the Coalition dynamic, suddenly they were handed tons of votes and the potential to win again on a plate, so couldn't afford introspection.
But on the other hand, they couldn't continue with the Blair / Brown discredited 20th Century New Labour that voters had tired of, and had to change.
Miliband has tip-toed this tightrope pretty well, I'd say. After all, they're heading back to power shortly after a massive electoral drubbing.
I'd expected to see what we have seen occur - I just would have preferred, unrealistically I know, they be a little bolder with change and not play it so safe because they know caution will see them home easily enough.
I think being in power for so long leads to bad attitudes and laziness, and since they haven't had to work hard to get back in, that will remain.
the problem is the political class opening the borders against the wishes of the public
Before the enactment of the British Nationality Act 1948, a British subject could enter this country and work freely, without let or hindrance. In 1947, approximately a third of the world's population were British subjects. Isn't the reality that over the last seventy-five years, the politicians of both parties have actually closed the borders, and instituted a highly restrictive system of immigration control. Both parties intend to close the border yet further. I have only one question: why wasn't I consulted about this decision to close the border?
Over the last 75 years the number of British subjects on Earth has significantly decreased
If I were King-Emperor I would reconstitute the Empire/Commonwealth as a fully democratic federation, with a central Imperial Senate.
If only you'd persuaded the powers that were in 1763 at the end of the Seven Years War. Then it might've worked. The USA would've remained part of the Crown and WW 1 and 2 wouldn't have happened much later as nobody would've taken us on..... Discuss
Alternate history time! How about the 1776 Potomac Compromise - the 13 Colonies get representation at Westminster in exchange for remaining loyal subjects of King Sunil - I mean King George, ooops!
I like to wind up my American friends by saying to them we call the Fourth of July, the day The British decided we'd much rather have India than America.
Rogan josh v grits: no brainer
Look at this way, letting America go, allowed Sunil and myself to become British citizens.
Much better than Rogan Josh.
I don't know; You're both great and all, but I've had some really good Rogan Josh in my time. Though I'm more a Jalfrezi man actually.
I see you're trying to "curry" favour with us PB Tories?
the problem is the political class opening the borders against the wishes of the public
Before the enactment of the British Nationality Act 1948, a British subject could enter this country and work freely, without let or hindrance. In 1947, approximately a third of the world's population were British subjects. Isn't the reality that over the last seventy-five years, the politicians of both parties have actually closed the borders, and instituted a highly restrictive system of immigration control. Both parties intend to close the border yet further. I have only one question: why wasn't I consulted about this decision to close the border?
Over the last 75 years the number of British subjects on Earth has significantly decreased
If I were King-Emperor I would reconstitute the Empire/Commonwealth as a fully democratic federation, with a central Imperial Senate.
If only you'd persuaded the powers that were in 1763 at the end of the Seven Years War. Then it might've worked. The USA would've remained part of the Crown and WW 1 and 2 wouldn't have happened much later as nobody would've taken us on..... Discuss
Alternate history time! How about the 1776 Potomac Compromise - the 13 Colonies get representation at Westminster in exchange for remaining loyal subjects of King Sunil - I mean King George, ooops!
I like to wind up my American friends by saying to them we call the Fourth of July, the day The British decided we'd much rather have India than America.
Rogan josh v grits: no brainer
Look at this way, letting America go, allowed Sunil and myself to become British citizens.
Much better than Rogan Josh.
Although you have to remember the EIC dates from 1600, long before any Tea Party in Massachusetts!
the problem is the political class opening the borders against the wishes of the public
Before the enactment of the British Nationality Act 1948, a British subject could enter this country and work freely, without let or hindrance. In 1947, approximately a third of the world's population were British subjects. Isn't the reality that over the last seventy-five years, the politicians of both parties have actually closed the borders, and instituted a highly restrictive system of immigration control. Both parties intend to close the border yet further. I have only one question: why wasn't I consulted about this decision to close the border?
Over the last 75 years the number of British subjects on Earth has significantly decreased
If I were King-Emperor I would reconstitute the Empire/Commonwealth as a fully democratic federation, with a central Imperial Senate.
If only you'd persuaded the powers that were in 1763 at the end of the Seven Years War. Then it might've worked. The USA would've remained part of the Crown and WW 1 and 2 wouldn't have happened much later as nobody would've taken us on..... Discuss
Alternate history time! How about the 1776 Potomac Compromise - the 13 Colonies get representation at Westminster in exchange for remaining loyal subjects of King Sunil - I mean King George, ooops!
I like to wind up my American friends by saying to them we call the Fourth of July, the day The British decided we'd much rather have India than America.
Rogan josh v grits: no brainer
Look at this way, letting America go, allowed Sunil and myself to become British citizens.
Much better than Rogan Josh.
I don't know; You're both great and all, but I've had some really good Rogan Josh in my time. Though I'm more a Jalfrezi man actually.
I see you're trying to "curry" favour with us PB Tories?
You have seen through my ploy, clearly - today is appease the Tory day, tomorrow is Ed M is great day. And I cannot top a pun like that, so, good night all.
Some Lewisham gossip..:Vicky was one of the Unite officers who officially complained about Charlie Whelan's bullying behavior against them a few years ago.....
Electoral success. I'm talking primarily about his charisma and communication skills. Scottish Labour haven't had a leader as good as him since Donald Dewar.
But of course there's also the fact that he's been proactive about trying to win more powers for Wales, whereas with Scottish Labour it's (at best) a case of "oh, must we?"
There's Greenwich coming up at one point. But I guess Len Duvall will be hard to beat.
There're rumours that Lewisham West may be up for grabs too....and Dulwich.... Brent Central should have the right demographics for Dora but also probably strong competition.
On the ComRes poll: It's very hard to interpret those numbers, because we don't really have direct comparison. It's not clear whether the demographic weightings they apply are appropriate to these particular elections, and there's no past-voting correction.
With that proviso, the UKIP figure of 22% certainly looks very good for them, although we shouldn't forget that they scored 16% in those seats they contested in 2009, so the rise may not be quite as dramatic as it appears at first sight. Obviously, simply by going for so many more seats than last time (they put up candidates in only around 25% of contests in 2009), they will hugely increase their total vote share, but not necessarily win very many first places. The complication is that changes in the LibDem share also need to be taken into account; this could mitigate the damage for the Tories, given that the LibDems were in second place to the Tories in 770 of the seats.
, although we shouldn't forget that they scored 16% in those seats they contested in 2009, so the rise may not be quite as dramatic as it appears at first sight.
"The pound posted its biggest monthly gain versus the dollar since October 2011....."
Not against the Euro unfortunately. It's gone down in the last month and significantly down on eighteen months ago. Could our near perfect chancellor's personal propagandist be choosing his numbers selectively?
Not propaganda at all, Roger.
I thought it only fair to PBers to quote Sterling against currencies which are likely to survive the year.
On the ComRes poll: It's very hard to interpret those numbers, because we don't really have direct comparison. It's not clear whether the demographic weightings they apply are appropriate to these particular elections, and there's no past-voting correction.
With that proviso, the UKIP figure of 22% certainly looks very good for them, although we shouldn't forget that they scored 16% in those seats they contested in 2009, so the rise may not be quite as dramatic as it appears at first sight. Obviously, simply by going for so many more seats than last time (they put up candidates in only around 25% of contests in 2009), they will hugely increase their total vote share, but not necessarily win very many first places. The complication is that changes in the LibDem share also need to be taken into account; this could mitigate the damage for the Tories, given that the LibDems were in second place to the Tories in 770 of the seats.
Overall, this is very hard to read indeed.
My hunch is that the UKIP VI polling carries the same group that boosted the Cleggasm in 2010. Polling responders who are all mouth and no trousers.
The typical protest voter who much prefers to shake his walking stick at a television screen than risk hypothermia by taking a walk to a polling station.
Knock 6-8% off the UKIP bulge to get to the real size of their vote.
If they want to race it over the Tour this year, Wiggo will be destroyed by Froome.
That's the common consensus but you have to respect the man and his view that he might be strong enough to win it. He turned himself from a track specialist to a grand tour gc contender - who is to say that he hasnt done the training to turn himself into the better climber he would need to be to have a chance this year? (I wouldnt back it myself!)
On the ComRes poll: It's very hard to interpret those numbers, because we don't really have direct comparison. It's not clear whether the demographic weightings they apply are appropriate to these particular elections, and there's no past-voting correction.
With that proviso, the UKIP figure of 22% certainly looks very good for them, although we shouldn't forget that they scored 16% in those seats they contested in 2009, so the rise may not be quite as dramatic as it appears at first sight. Obviously, simply by going for so many more seats than last time (they put up candidates in only around 25% of contests in 2009), they will hugely increase their total vote share, but not necessarily win very many first places. The complication is that changes in the LibDem share also need to be taken into account; this could mitigate the damage for the Tories, given that the LibDems were in second place to the Tories in 770 of the seats.
Overall, this is very hard to read indeed.
My hunch is that the UKIP VI polling carries the same group that boosted the Cleggasm in 2010. Polling responders who are all mouth and no trousers.
The typical protest voter who much prefers to shake his walking stick at a television screen than risk hypothermia by taking a walk to a polling station.
Knock 6-8% off the UKIP bulge to get to the real size of their vote.
the problem is the political class opening the borders against the wishes of the public
Before the enactment of the British Nationality Act 1948, a British subject could enter this country and work freely, without let or hindrance. In 1947, approximately a third of the world's population were British subjects. Isn't the reality that over the last seventy-five years, the politicians of both parties have actually closed the borders, and instituted a highly restrictive system of immigration control. Both parties intend to close the border yet further. I have only one question: why wasn't I consulted about this decision to close the border?
Over the last 75 years the number of British subjects on Earth has significantly decreased
If I were King-Emperor I would reconstitute the Empire/Commonwealth as a fully democratic federation, with a central Imperial Senate.
If only you'd persuaded the powers that were in 1763 at the end of the Seven Years War. Then it might've worked. The USA would've remained part of the Crown and WW 1 and 2 wouldn't have happened much later as nobody would've taken us on..... Discuss
Alternate history time! How about the 1776 Potomac Compromise - the 13 Colonies get representation at Westminster in exchange for remaining loyal subjects of King Sunil - I mean King George, ooops!
I like to wind up my American friends by saying to them we call the Fourth of July, the day The British decided we'd much rather have India than America.
My wife doesn't appreciate the fact that I have a "American Rebellion" themed party every 4th July...
the problem is the political class opening the borders against the wishes of the public
Before the enactment of the British Nationality Act 1948, a British subject could enter this country and work freely, without let or hindrance. In 1947, approximately a third of the world's population were British subjects. Isn't the reality that over the last seventy-five years, the politicians of both parties have actually closed the borders, and instituted a highly restrictive system of immigration control. Both parties intend to close the border yet further. I have only one question: why wasn't I consulted about this decision to close the border?
Over the last 75 years the number of British subjects on Earth has significantly decreased
If I were King-Emperor I would reconstitute the Empire/Commonwealth as a fully democratic federation, with a central Imperial Senate.
If only you'd persuaded the powers that were in 1763 at the end of the Seven Years War. Then it might've worked. The USA would've remained part of the Crown and WW 1 and 2 wouldn't have happened much later as nobody would've taken us on..... Discuss
Alternate history time! How about the 1776 Potomac Compromise - the 13 Colonies get representation at Westminster in exchange for remaining loyal subjects of King Sunil - I mean King George, ooops!
I like to wind up my American friends by saying to them we call the Fourth of July, the day The British decided we'd much rather have India than America.
Rogan josh v grits: no brainer
Look at this way, letting America go, allowed Sunil and myself to become British citizens.
Much better than Rogan Josh.
Although you have to remember the EIC dates from 1600, long before any Tea Party in Massachusetts!
Trivia: the profit share from the EIC was used to foiund the Universities of Westminster and Buckingham. So it did some good after all...
Mary has been cooling on Ed for some time. It began when he never bothered with the great policy reversal his aides had been briefing her about, and which she obligingly spun - immigration, Europe etc. Then he really got her goat with the press regulation lark. She must be bored with it all now as this article is an obvious p*ss take.
"The pound posted its biggest monthly gain versus the dollar since October 2011....."
Not against the Euro unfortunately. It's gone down in the last month and significantly down on eighteen months ago. Could our near perfect chancellor's personal propagandist be choosing his numbers selectively?
Not propaganda at all, Roger.
I thought it only fair to PBers to quote Sterling against currencies which are likely to survive the year.
I discussed the strong likelihood that we could see US markets topping out here, having remained bullish since my last update. As for GBPUSD, I called a while back for the 1.56 area, when we were down at the 1.4831 low. That's looking pretty good for an important turn lower. USD has some strong resistance at the 84 area on its own weighted index (USDXY) - clear that and we really should see the bull run get going. USDJPY didn't quite make 101 (just below 100) as I thought last time I made my comments, now looking at Yen strength short term, with the Nikkei looking to have topped out too just below the 14,000 level. Absolteuly critical rest of week across many markets now - a convincing break of 1600 on the S&P would set us up for a move into the high 1600's - don't see that happening as we're bumping up against 1597 for the 3rd time (11th April, yesterday and today). Expecting that France could well surprise on the negative side at some point in May - lets see.
Mary has been cooling on Ed for some time. It began when he never bothered with the great policy reversal his aides had been briefing her about, and which she obligingly spun - immigration, Europe etc. Then he really got her goat with the press regulation lark. She must be bored with it all now as this article is an obvious p*ss take.
"The pound posted its biggest monthly gain versus the dollar since October 2011....."
Not against the Euro unfortunately. It's gone down in the last month and significantly down on eighteen months ago. Could our near perfect chancellor's personal propagandist be choosing his numbers selectively?
Not propaganda at all, Roger.
I thought it only fair to PBers to quote Sterling against currencies which are likely to survive the year.
I discussed the strong likelihood that we could see US markets topping out here, having remained bullish since my last update. As for GBPUSD, I called a while back for the 1.56 area, when we were down at the 1.4831 low. That's looking pretty good for an important turn lower. USD has some strong resistance at the 84 area on its own weighted index (USDXY) - clear that and we really should see the bull run get going. USDJPY didn't quite make 101 (just below 100) as I thought last time I made my comments, now looking at Yen strength short term, with the Nikkei looking to have topped out too just below the 14,000 level. Absolteuly critical rest of week across many markets now - a convincing break of 1600 on the S&P would set us up for a move into the high 1600's - don't see that happening as we're bumping up against 1597 for the 3rd time (11th April, yesterday and today). Expecting that France could well surprise on the negative side at some point in May - lets see.
Good morning Sunil! Sorry I couldn't see you and chums at Dirty Dicks a couple of weeks ago. Its a bit of a trek up from Ms Nokes' patch unfortunately! Work rather busy, and studying for insolvency exams to get my career path prepared for the great bust ahead. Its simply amazing to see the widespread complacency right now in the financial markets, with seemingly not a care in the world. But that in itself is a highly necessary condition before we can get the event of a lifetime underway.
Just watching Ronnie O'Sullivan demolish Bingham - its a great joy to see Ronnie on this form again. Will be mighty difficult to stop him getting a 5th world crown. Judd Trump is the biggest danger, but I'm still backing a focused Ronnie to pull off one of the great sporting comebacks.
"Ronnie to pull off one of the great sporting comebacks"
Bit of a stretch given that he's the reigning world champion! I see that Stephen Hendry is tipping Ding Junhui. He's probably wrong, but in many ways that would be the best result for the sport.
Ding has got a nailbiter to get through against Hawkins tomorrow from 9-7 behind! If, and its a big if, he gets through that, then I think he will beat Walden in the semi-final presumably. Don't see Ding matching Ronnie (or failing Ronnie, Judd) in the final on Ronnie's current focused form today.
Good morning Sunil! Sorry I couldn't see you and chums at Dirty Dicks a couple of weeks ago. Its a bit of a trek up from Ms Nokes' patch unfortunately! Work rather busy, and studying for insolvency exams to get my career path prepared for the great bust ahead. Its simply amazing to see the widespread complacency right now in the financial markets, with seemingly not a care in the world. But that in itself is a highly necessary condition before we can get the event of a lifetime underway.
Hi hunchman, that's OK. DD's was good and I think you may have enjoyed it! I still watch Keiser on RT, if only for entertainment value! He still thinks gold is the way forward.
@JamesKelly What do you make of Salmond's plan to go along with GBP as the currency of an independent Scotland? I can see why Salmond is adopting this approach - almost the 'independent lite' option if you like, to try and get as many people on board as possible, before striking out for their own currency at some point further down the line once independence has been secured. Short term cost is the risk of upsetting some of the more radical elements within the SNP. It also leads to some difficult questions from the 'no' campaign on what exactly the point of independence is, given the experience of small nation states in the Euro. Also, I get the impression that Salmond is somewhat wary of the additional scrutiny there would be on Scotiish finances by going it alone with their own currency. So, on balance I think Salmond, his usual canny self, has played the percentages on this one well
Good morning Sunil! Sorry I couldn't see you and chums at Dirty Dicks a couple of weeks ago. Its a bit of a trek up from Ms Nokes' patch unfortunately! Work rather busy, and studying for insolvency exams to get my career path prepared for the great bust ahead. Its simply amazing to see the widespread complacency right now in the financial markets, with seemingly not a care in the world. But that in itself is a highly necessary condition before we can get the event of a lifetime underway.
Hi hunchman, that's OK. DD's was good and I think you may have enjoyed it! I still watch Keiser on RT, if only for entertainment value! He still thinks gold is the way forward.
Thanks Sunil. Well gold is the currency that the free market would choose, rather than our mandated fiat currencies in circulation today. If you look at the prices of commodities in terms of gold, then they've been much more stable that the wild fluctuations in terms of fiat currencies. Arguably, a lot of the great periods of growth in economic history have come when gold (or silver) has been used as money. Silver would be impossible IMHO to use as money today, given its industrial uses. I don't share Keiser's analysis that gold will go to the moon. What he's missing, and a lot of gold bugs miss this, is that gold is priced in USD, and the supply of USD is made up on money and credit, with the latter about to implode. Technically, gold should be somewhere under $500 when this decline is said and done from $1915. And I'm expecting the Dow: Gold ratio to be lower than the July 1932 bottom in the great depression when the ratio was 4/3rds (Dow 40, Gold around 30). That gives you some idea of just how far the Dow has got to fall in nominal terms. And before anyone says that's not possible, look at Cyprus. Their stockmarket topped at around 5500 in 2007, and last time I looked was trading in the 90's. Yes the 90's. It dipped below 100 after it reopened with the banks about 6 weeks ago. That's a 98.2% decline. And I think the rest of the world will look very much like Greece and Cyprus in 3 years time when all said and done.
"What do you make of Salmond's plan to go along with GBP as the currency of an independent Scotland? I can see why Salmond is adopting this approach - almost the 'independent lite' option if you like, to try and get as many people on board as possible, before striking out for their own currency at some point further down the line once independence has been secured."
I don't think that's the plan. It's been a long, long time since the SNP last proposed a Scottish currency. They want to be part of a wider currency zone - obviously it would have been much preferable if the eurozone hadn't got into so much difficulty, but as it is sterling is the better bet for the foreseeable future.
"What do you make of Salmond's plan to go along with GBP as the currency of an independent Scotland? I can see why Salmond is adopting this approach - almost the 'independent lite' option if you like, to try and get as many people on board as possible, before striking out for their own currency at some point further down the line once independence has been secured."
I don't think that's the plan. It's been a long, long time since the SNP last proposed a Scottish currency. They want to be part of a wider currency zone - obviously it would have been much preferable if the eurozone hadn't got into so much difficulty, but as it is sterling is the better bet for the foreseeable future.
Sterling will be as horrid as the Euro given what's coming up though. I can well understand Salmond's caution though. If he was really radical, he'd go for a gold backed independent currency, but that's not going to happen until the current financial order has been tossed to one side in the oncoming storm. One way or another, its going to be fascinating to see how this all develops. If GBP tumbles under parity against the US Dollar like I expect, then arguably Salmond will be emboldened to go ahead with their own currency.
@AndyJS Those figures are looking pretty stable. Unless Swan can pull a massive rabbit out of the hat in the Commonwealth Budget, this ALP administration is doomed.
Comments
Hopefully!
Survation. Fieldwork 26-28 April: (Westminster VI) LAB 36% (-2) CON 29% (-2) UKIP 16% (+2) LD 12% (+2) AP 8% (+1) Change since 26/01 (MOS)
Not as entertaining as an original thought or comment from you would be though. Just one. You must have one?
Much better than Rogan Josh.
Government 41%
Labour 36%
Labour's situation has been tricky. Thanks to the Coalition dynamic, suddenly they were handed tons of votes and the potential to win again on a plate, so couldn't afford introspection.
But on the other hand, they couldn't continue with the Blair / Brown discredited 20th Century New Labour that voters had tired of, and had to change.
Miliband has tip-toed this tightrope pretty well, I'd say. After all, they're heading back to power shortly after a massive electoral drubbing.
- Ludicrous obsession with one phrase from a speech - you could easily find anything worse from any politician anywhere in the world
- Untrue, and even if it were true, it's hardly 'incompetence': every single economy in Europe has seen forecasts slashed
- Something you disagree with. Not incompetence.
- Forests? Come off it - how trivial an example can you find?
- Political shenanigans caused by the LibDems changing their minds. That's hung parliaments for you, but the reorganisation happened all the same.
- They were stuffed on the aircraft carrier by the last lot. Libya was a notable success.
- Come off it - this government has done less in the way of giveaways to special interest groups of any government in the last 50 years.
By any conceivable standard, that list pales into insignificance compared even just with the last lot (let alone governments of the seventies): Iraq, NHS database, Rural Payments Agency, screwing up financial supervision, giving up the EU veto on financial regulation, the first bank run in 150 years, running a big deficit in the biggest boom in tax revenues in living memory, net immigration 2 million with no serious housebuilding, misjudging the impact of the EU accession states by two orders of magnitude, GP contracts, wrecking what used to be the best private-sector pensions in Europe, doubling expenditure on education with nothing much to show for it, HIPs, ID Cards, super-casinos, undoing the Major NHS internal market then re-introducing it - etc etc. I could go on!
The problem was that they didn't pay attention to the detail before they enacted any of their policies. You need to sweat the small stuff. They should have learnt that lesson from Mrs T - really test stuff out, think about it, get it right, not come out with some vague idea and then duck when all the problems with it are hurled at you without you having any coherent, consistent or, indeed, any answers.
See the "humungous conservatory" policy, for instance.
As for Labour - the Bourbons of Britain - they've learnt nothing at all. They will experiment at our expense - again - when/if they are returned to power.
Of course a lot of the most important marginal seats are in small or medium-sized towns which are indeed holding elections on Thursday.
Marco Rubio 18%
Jeb Bush 16%
Chris Christie 14%
Rick Santorum 9%
Someone else 21%
Unsure 21%
I think being in power for so long leads to bad attitudes and laziness, and since they haven't had to work hard to get back in, that will remain.
http://thekingofblingisback.blogspot.co.uk/
If the BBC ever have him on another show (except Crimewatch) then I'll be inspired to write my first ever email of complaint!
Some Lewisham gossip..:Vicky was one of the Unite officers who officially complained about Charlie Whelan's bullying behavior against them a few years ago.....
I thought bullying behaviour was compulsory from senior Unite officers! I cant imagine her clash with Charlie will hold her back in any way.
Oh no, I wasn't suggesting that. She won all wards nominations.
One of the other complainers was John Cryer.
' but if Scottish Labour had someone of the calibre of Carwyn Jones it would be a different proposition.'
What has he achieved?
The Froome/Wiggins spat is getting messier
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/othersports/cycling/10029172/Chris-Froomes-fiancee-reveals-fury-over-Bradley-Wiggins-Tour-de-France-claim.html
We might as well give her the nomination now. Next to focus on is Simon Hughes' seat! And where will Val end up now? And what of Dora?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AR8D2yqgQ1U
"What has he achieved?"
Electoral success. I'm talking primarily about his charisma and communication skills. Scottish Labour haven't had a leader as good as him since Donald Dewar.
But of course there's also the fact that he's been proactive about trying to win more powers for Wales, whereas with Scottish Labour it's (at best) a case of "oh, must we?"
I prefer Gold.
There's Greenwich coming up at one point. But I guess Len Duvall will be hard to beat.
There're rumours that Lewisham West may be up for grabs too....and Dulwich....
Brent Central should have the right demographics for Dora but also probably strong competition.
With that proviso, the UKIP figure of 22% certainly looks very good for them, although we shouldn't forget that they scored 16% in those seats they contested in 2009, so the rise may not be quite as dramatic as it appears at first sight. Obviously, simply by going for so many more seats than last time (they put up candidates in only around 25% of contests in 2009), they will hugely increase their total vote share, but not necessarily win very many first places. The complication is that changes in the LibDem share also need to be taken into account; this could mitigate the damage for the Tories, given that the LibDems were in second place to the Tories in 770 of the seats.
Overall, this is very hard to read indeed.
Take a bow Toby Young.
I thought it only fair to PBers to quote Sterling against currencies which are likely to survive the year.
The typical protest voter who much prefers to shake his walking stick at a television screen than risk hypothermia by taking a walk to a polling station.
Knock 6-8% off the UKIP bulge to get to the real size of their vote.
http://www.electiongame.co.uk/south-shields/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JauM9NPaNBA&
Pothead politics WTF ?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/ed-miliband/10027963/Labour-is-betting-everything-on-its-new-brand-of-pothole-politics.html
I discussed the strong likelihood that we could see US markets topping out here, having remained bullish since my last update. As for GBPUSD, I called a while back for the 1.56 area, when we were down at the 1.4831 low. That's looking pretty good for an important turn lower. USD has some strong resistance at the 84 area on its own weighted index (USDXY) - clear that and we really should see the bull run get going. USDJPY didn't quite make 101 (just below 100) as I thought last time I made my comments, now looking at Yen strength short term, with the Nikkei looking to have topped out too just below the 14,000 level. Absolteuly critical rest of week across many markets now - a convincing break of 1600 on the S&P would set us up for a move into the high 1600's - don't see that happening as we're bumping up against 1597 for the 3rd time (11th April, yesterday and today). Expecting that France could well surprise on the negative side at some point in May - lets see.
I like the top posting Stark Dawning.
Very Usenet.
Only? I doubt if even the Beatles in their prime could have beaten the pop genius that was "Give it up" by KC and the Sunshine Band.
I noted that you were spot on Cable, hunchman. It appears quite a few traders caught a cold shorting the pound over the past few weeks.
Isn't Spain a bigger short term worry than France?
Bit of a stretch given that he's the reigning world champion! I see that Stephen Hendry is tipping Ding Junhui. He's probably wrong, but in many ways that would be the best result for the sport.
I don't think that's the plan. It's been a long, long time since the SNP last proposed a Scottish currency. They want to be part of a wider currency zone - obviously it would have been much preferable if the eurozone hadn't got into so much difficulty, but as it is sterling is the better bet for the foreseeable future.
http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/2013/05/01/bludgertrack-55-0-45-0-to-coalition/
Those figures are looking pretty stable. Unless Swan can pull a massive rabbit out of the hat in the Commonwealth Budget, this ALP administration is doomed.