politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Two new polls for the EP2014 elections have Ukip leads of 9
Comments
-
Section 16 of the Defamation Act 2013 provides, in effect, that none of the preceding provisions of the Act apply in relation to a cause of action which accrued before the commencement of the Act. Subsection (7) provides that section 11 (which removes the presumption in favour of jury trial in defamation trials) does not apply in relation to proceedings instituted before the commencement of that section. The Act was brought into force in full on 1 January 2014.AveryLP said:M'Lud, you are defending English & Welsh law again and leaving poor old "British Justice" to fend for herself.
What influence has the 2013 Defamation Act had on this case. I understand it removed "the presumption in favour of a jury trial" but does this mean that a judge rather than twelve good and true will decide on the matter of whether Andrew Mitchell uttered the word "pleb"?
If my thinking is right then British Justice really has been fed to the dogs.
Thus both the actions will be governed under the old law. Hence NGN have pleaded justification and a Reynolds defence (see Mitchell v NGN [2013] EWCA Civ 1537 at [3], per Lord Dyson MR). Both of those defences have been abolished by the 2013 Act (see sections 2 and 4 respectively). So in theory, there will be a presumption in favour of a jury trial in both actions. However, there has been a decided trend against jury trials in defamation cases, so it is probable that both actions will be tried by a Puisne Judge sitting alone.
Nevertheless, the point still stands. Would you prefer the verdict of a properly-directed jury which has heard all the evidence, or that of the man on the street? As for "British justice", why taint the high standards of English common law with Scottish barbarisms...0 -
@Morris_Dancer
"Mr. Llama, are you Patrick Mercer disguise?"
No, I am not! As you well know. I do, however, have several things in common with the gallant and honourable gentleman including an utter contempt for the current occupant of No.10.0 -
Mr. Isam, we'll see. I think Miliband's a proper EU-phile, and that the system's weighted enough in his favour that he'll need to work hard to avoid being at least the leader of the largest party after the election.
UKIP's broad and shallow electoral approach will do more harm than good, come the General Election.0 -
UKIP get 51% - that would indeed be a moving of the tectonic plates!
Steady on. Think back to the Cleggasm and ponder on where that party is just a few years later.0 -
You honestly think that if Labour get a majority, they will do anything other than point and laugh at UKIP?isam said:You honestly think that UKIP success wont push Labour policy don't you?
Get real.
0 -
I seem to recall they are now in power, sharing a coalition government with the Tories?taffys said:UKIP get 51% - that would indeed be a moving of the tectonic plates!
Steady on. Think back to the Cleggasm and ponder on where that party is just a few years later.0 -
Sad news about Bob Hoskins. I'm a huge fan of the 1986 film Mona Lisa, starring Bob and Cathy Tyson.0
-
They'll be blowing Les Raspberries as we're fully integrated into the Euro.MarqueeMark said:
You honestly think that if Labour get a majority, they will do anything other than point and laugh at UKIP?isam said:You honestly think that UKIP success wont push Labour policy don't you?
Get real.
Referendum? Nein chance.0 -
Yes, plurality. Amazing to think that almost every other person will be voting UKIP. It shows that the British have a very healthy ability to critically assess the media which is great.MarqueeMark said:
In the plurality, surely? If UKIP get 51% - that would indeed be a moving of the tectonic plates!Blueberry said:Feels great to be in the majority after so long.
0 -
Bercow was a breath of fresh air to begin with, but I think it's time for someone else now.MikeSmithson said:
Bercow cut Cameron off before he'd finished an answer. When Dave said "I haven't finished" Bercow said "You have now". He was just bumptious throughout. I wonder how long he's go in the job?Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Smithson, what did Bercow do wrong?
0 -
Who said they're getting a majority?MarqueeMark said:
You honestly think that if Labour get a majority, they will do anything other than point and laugh at UKIP?isam said:You honestly think that UKIP success wont push Labour policy don't you?
Get real.
We'll see0 -
Mitchell is being sued for slander (and libel where the allegation was made on television). 'Mr Rowland sues Mr Mitchell in respect of Mr Mitchell's allegation that Mr Rowland had lied in making his allegations against Mr Mitchell' (Mitchell v NGN; Rowland v Mitchell [2014] EWHC 879 (QB), per Tugendhat J at [1]).JosiasJessop said:I'd also like to see exactly what Rowland's complaint is, and what Mitchell is being sued for.
0 -
Perhaps PMQ's should take on the rules of "Just a Minute" with a Nicholas Parsons style speaker?0
-
It looks like they will if UKIP split the Tory vote.isam said:
Who said they're getting a majority?MarqueeMark said:
You honestly think that if Labour get a majority, they will do anything other than point and laugh at UKIP?isam said:You honestly think that UKIP success wont push Labour policy don't you?
Get real.
We'll see0 -
Yes, this really is the oddest piece of self-deception. Even people like Sean Fear and Richard Tyndall seem to have fallen into it. The logic is so utterly barmy that one has to wonder what exactly is going on.MarqueeMark said:
You honestly think that if Labour get a majority, they will do anything other than point and laugh at UKIP?isam said:You honestly think that UKIP success wont push Labour policy don't you?
Get real.
One more time... the UKIP idea is that, by damaging the Conservatives and putting Ed Miliband into No 10, that they can force Ed Miliband to do something which is totally against his political beliefs, which would be unpopular in his party, which is opposed by the unions and by his fellow left-wing parties in the rest of Europe, and which is a no-win for him either way. Oh, and which would close down the issue which divides the right, and thereby reduce his chance of a second term.
Run the logic past us one more time, Kippers. How exactly does the pressure on Miliband operate?
0 -
The rise of UKIP is Labour's best chance of a majority, and you are being disingenuous to suggest otherwise.isam said:
Who said they're getting a majority?
We'll see
As I have said many times, is UKIP is the F*cking For Virginity Party - they will cause the destruction of all they say they are trying to preserve and protect.
Nigel Farage is the EU's useful idiot.
0 -
@MarqueeMark; @Richard_Nabavi
Who would you vote for if you were in Eastleigh at the next General Election ?0 -
Technological Advances.....In the old days two cops would have held you while the others took shots at kicking you in the nuts. This seems far more civilized
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/video/2014/apr/30/pc-lee-birch-firing-taser-naked-man-video0 -
Tories, of course. They should have a reasonable chance there.Pulpstar said:@MarqueeMark; @Richard_Nabavi
Who would you vote for if you were in Eastleigh at the next General Election ?0 -
Plus it's a bit like when Dave appoints yet another OE. It's a gift for Lab. Imagine the story they will create around opposing anything that UKIP supports, whatever it is. In fact pleas for a referendum may be tainted by the time that Axl Rose gets through with them.Richard_Nabavi said:
Yes, this really is the oddest piece of self-deception. Even people like Sean Fear and Richard Tyndall seem to have fallen into it. The logic is so utterly barmy that one has to wonder what exactly is going on.MarqueeMark said:
You honestly think that if Labour get a majority, they will do anything other than point and laugh at UKIP?isam said:You honestly think that UKIP success wont push Labour policy don't you?
Get real.
One more time... the UKIP idea is that, by damaging the Conservatives and putting Ed Miliband into No 10, that they can force Ed Miliband to do something which is totally against his political beliefs, which would be unpopular in his party, which is opposed by the unions and by his fellow left-wing parties in the rest of Europe, and which is a no-win for him either way. Oh, and which would close down the issue which divides the right, and thereby reduce his chance of a second term.
Run the logic past us one more time, Kippers. How exactly does the pressure on Miliband operate?
The reality is that I get the long game, I get the pressure group agitating but what I don't get is the belief that a vote for UKIP if you were a Cons is anything other than a helping hand to EdM and a Lab govt for the next few years if not a generation.0 -
It looks like they will if UKIP split the Tory vote.
Perhaps that is why UKIP are going so hard at the labour vote. They know they are vulnerable to the 'vote Nige - get Ed charge'.
If UKIP an show they are hurting Labour too, that might persuade some converters to stick with them.0 -
I have already put my money where my mouth is on this one, as you well know!Richard_Nabavi said:
Yes, this really is the oddest piece of self-deception. Even people like Sean Fear and Richard Tyndall seem to have fallen into it. The logic is so utterly barmy that one has to wonder what exactly is going on.MarqueeMark said:
You honestly think that if Labour get a majority, they will do anything other than point and laugh at UKIP?isam said:You honestly think that UKIP success wont push Labour policy don't you?
Get real.
One more time... the UKIP idea is that, by damaging the Conservatives and putting Ed Miliband into No 10, that they can force Ed Miliband to do something which is totally against his political beliefs, which would be unpopular in his party, which is opposed by the unions and by his fellow left-wing parties in the rest of Europe, and which is a no-win for him either way. Oh, and which would close down the issue which divides the right, and thereby reduce his chance of a second term.
Run the logic past us one more time, Kippers. How exactly does the pressure on Miliband operate?
UKIP have already forced David Cameron to do something that is totally against his political beliefs, get out of the bubble and open your mind Richard
Labour will dance to the UKIP tune if the snowball keeps snowballing
If you like, lets double our bet on Labour offering an EU referendum in their manifesto.
I've no time for insulting people just because we disagree on political theory, money talks!
0 -
It may be against what Cam wants but it is exactly what a non-trivial proportion of his backbenchers and constituents want. What do Lab backbenchers want wrt EU?isam said:
I have already put my money where my mouth is on this one, as you well know!Richard_Nabavi said:
Yes, this really is the oddest piece of self-deception. Even people like Sean Fear and Richard Tyndall seem to have fallen into it. The logic is so utterly barmy that one has to wonder what exactly is going on.MarqueeMark said:
You honestly think that if Labour get a majority, they will do anything other than point and laugh at UKIP?isam said:You honestly think that UKIP success wont push Labour policy don't you?
Get real.
One more time... the UKIP idea is that, by damaging the Conservatives and putting Ed Miliband into No 10, that they can force Ed Miliband to do something which is totally against his political beliefs, which would be unpopular in his party, which is opposed by the unions and by his fellow left-wing parties in the rest of Europe, and which is a no-win for him either way. Oh, and which would close down the issue which divides the right, and thereby reduce his chance of a second term.
Run the logic past us one more time, Kippers. How exactly does the pressure on Miliband operate?
UKIP have already forced David Cameron to do something that is totally against his political beliefs, get out of the bubble and open your mind Richard
Labour will dance to the UKIP tune if the snowball keeps snowballing
If you like, lets double our bet on Labour offering an EU referendum in their manifesto.
I've no time for insulting people just because we disagree on political theory, money talks!0 -
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA...isam said:Richard_Nabavi said:
Yes, this really is the oddest piece of self-deception. Even people like Sean Fear and Richard Tyndall seem to have fallen into it. The logic is so utterly barmy that one has to wonder what exactly is going on.MarqueeMark said:
You honestly think that if Labour get a majority, they will do anything other than point and laugh at UKIP?isam said:You honestly think that UKIP success wont push Labour policy don't you?
Get real.
One more time... the UKIP idea is that, by damaging the Conservatives and putting Ed Miliband into No 10, that they can force Ed Miliband to do something which is totally against his political beliefs, which would be unpopular in his party, which is opposed by the unions and by his fellow left-wing parties in the rest of Europe, and which is a no-win for him either way. Oh, and which would close down the issue which divides the right, and thereby reduce his chance of a second term.
Run the logic past us one more time, Kippers. How exactly does the pressure on Miliband operate?
Labour will dance to the UKIP tune if the snowball keeps snowballing
And Eck will force the Royal Navy to buy ships built in Scotland in the event of independence.
0 -
Except that they don't need to wait a generation. Unlike (say) the Greens - where the pressure-group line makes sense - the Kippers, if they really do want us to leave the EU, have an unprecedented opportunity, a nailed-on certainty of an In/Out referendum by the end of 2017 if enough of them they lend their votes to the Tories in 2015. And they are deliberately setting out to sabotage this.TOPPING said:The reality is that I get the long game, I get the pressure group agitating but what I don't get is the belief that a vote for UKIP if you were a Cons is anything other than a helping hand to EdM and a Lab govt for the next few years if not a generation.
Has there ever been a barmier large-scale political party in the history of modern democracy?0 -
I am sure we have been here before, Mr. Navabi, and probably will be again and again and again over the next year or so. However, I'll plug on.
Suppose back in the early 1900s people who were trying to get the Labour Party off the ground listened to the Liberals who were telling them, "Stop, give up, otherwise you'll let the Conservatives in again. OK the Liberals don't actually represent your views but we are nearer than anyone else except the new party which can never be elected".
UKIP may well contain a few fruitcakes, loonies and closet racists but I doubt they have more of them than any other party. They may well take votes that might otherwise have gone to the Conservatives. They may well have an ill-formed, incomplete and indeed contradictory agenda for government. Their leader may well be a buffoon who spends his life three-parts pissed. However, they offer something that no other party does - the impression that they are on the side of the common man.0 -
The cold weather in the US this winter did last a lot longer than the cold weather in the UK in the winter of 2010/11, but you are underplaying the severity of December 2010 in the UK: it was the second coldest December in the Central England Temperature series since 1659.SouthamObserver said:
There's winter and there's Polar Vortex. There can't have been much construction or any other outdoor work going on in the NE and mid-west for most of the first quarter of this year. Distribution will also have been badly hit. It was not a few days of snow and ice, it was month after month.Slackbladder said:
I'm sure some posters will come to be pouring scorn on that, as they did with Osborne when it was winter over 2011/12SouthamObserver said:
All the feedback I was getting last week while I was there was that things were getting a lot better. Given the winter they have had the weather may well be a factor.MaxPB said:US GDP growth of 0.1%, oh dear. Things may become a little hairy for a while if the US economy doesn't pick up again.
That is a seriously exceptionally cold month, and would have had a temporary impact on the UK economy.
Where there is a difference is that the cold weather in the US persisted for the entire winter, whereas the winter of 2010/11 in the UK wasn't exceptionally cold as a whole (much milder than 1979/80 for example), because January was near-average and February was notably warm.0 -
Cameron demands Lisbon referendumisam said:
I have already put my money where my mouth is on this one, as you well know!Richard_Nabavi said:
Yes, this really is the oddest piece of self-deception. Even people like Sean Fear and Richard Tyndall seem to have fallen into it. The logic is so utterly barmy that one has to wonder what exactly is going on.MarqueeMark said:
You honestly think that if Labour get a majority, they will do anything other than point and laugh at UKIP?isam said:You honestly think that UKIP success wont push Labour policy don't you?
Get real.
One more time... the UKIP idea is that, by damaging the Conservatives and putting Ed Miliband into No 10, that they can force Ed Miliband to do something which is totally against his political beliefs, which would be unpopular in his party, which is opposed by the unions and by his fellow left-wing parties in the rest of Europe, and which is a no-win for him either way. Oh, and which would close down the issue which divides the right, and thereby reduce his chance of a second term.
Run the logic past us one more time, Kippers. How exactly does the pressure on Miliband operate?
UKIP have already forced David Cameron to do something that is totally against his political beliefs, get out of the bubble and open your mind Richard
Labour will dance to the UKIP tune if the snowball keeps snowballing
If you like, lets double our bet on Labour offering an EU referendum in their manifesto.
I've no time for insulting people just because we disagree on political theory, money talks!
2 June 2009
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8078637.stm
Did UKIP make him do that? No.
He was only prevented from carrying it out because all countries ratified the treaty before the GE.
But it was Labour who signed the treaty. And they would do another in a heartbeat, once UKIP let them back into power.
0 -
Yes, you put it very well, that is exactly what they offer - an impression without any substance. Nothing to do with the EU, where if they were serious they'd be organising themselves to prepare and communicate the Out case for the 2017 referendum, and making sure the referendum happened by voting Conservative.HurstLlama said:However, they offer something that no other party does - the impression that they are on the side of the common man.
As the great antifrank perceptively said many months ago, the nearest parallel is Italy's Five Star Movement.0 -
Kippers don't believe an In/Out referendum is nailed on at all with Cameron in charge. He's broken his promise on that topic once and they (and I, as it happens) see no guarantee he wouldn't do so again. The only way to guarantee a referendum is to make it impossible for one or ideally both parties to win an election without providing one. The only way to do that is to maximise the UKIP vote. If the Tories lose 2015 because of UKIP there will be enourmous pressure for them to ditch Cameron and replace him with a firm Eurosceptic who never wavers on the issue at all. Then when that man (presumably a man, though you never know) eventually is PM the referendum will happen.Richard_Nabavi said:
Except that they don't need to wait a generation. Unlike (say) the Greens - where the pressure-group line makes sense - the Kippers, if they really do want us to leave the EU, have an unprecedented opportunity, a nailed-on certainty of an In/Out referendum by the end of 2017 if enough of them they lend their votes to the Tories in 2015. And they are deliberately setting out to sabotage this.TOPPING said:The reality is that I get the long game, I get the pressure group agitating but what I don't get is the belief that a vote for UKIP if you were a Cons is anything other than a helping hand to EdM and a Lab govt for the next few years if not a generation.
Has there ever been a barmier large-scale political party in the history of modern democracy?
The promise of a man who has made the same promise and lied before is not enough to get Kippers voting for a party they don't trust. And why should it be?0 -
Conservative. I want a referendum on the EU.Pulpstar said:@MarqueeMark; @Richard_Nabavi
Who would you vote for if you were in Eastleigh at the next General Election ?0 -
"HA HA HA HA HA HA HA..."TheWatcher said:
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA...isam said:Richard_Nabavi said:
Yes, this really is the oddest piece of self-deception. Even people like Sean Fear and Richard Tyndall seem to have fallen into it. The logic is so utterly barmy that one has to wonder what exactly is going on.MarqueeMark said:
You honestly think that if Labour get a majority, they will do anything other than point and laugh at UKIP?isam said:You honestly think that UKIP success wont push Labour policy don't you?
Get real.
One more time... the UKIP idea is that, by damaging the Conservatives and putting Ed Miliband into No 10, that they can force Ed Miliband to do something which is totally against his political beliefs, which would be unpopular in his party, which is opposed by the unions and by his fellow left-wing parties in the rest of Europe, and which is a no-win for him either way. Oh, and which would close down the issue which divides the right, and thereby reduce his chance of a second term.
Run the logic past us one more time, Kippers. How exactly does the pressure on Miliband operate?
Labour will dance to the UKIP tune if the snowball keeps snowballing
And Eck will force the Royal Navy to buy ships built in Scotland in the event of independence.
You would have said the same this time last year if I had said UKIP were getting double the Tory score in the EU polls with a double digit lead
Do you want to bet about Labour offering a referendum in their manifesto?
I'm game, how much? You can have 1/2 that they dont
0 -
They aren't sabotaging anything. They're playing to win. The reason the SNP have a fair chance of victory in September is because they've won two elections, and built up a huge network of MSPs and Councillors. Had they agreed to stop contesting elections, in return for a promise from one of the Unionist parties of a referendum on Scottish independence, they'd have far less chance of winning.Richard_Nabavi said:
Except that they don't need to wait a generation. Unlike (say) the Greens - where the pressure-group line makes sense - the Kippers, if they really do want us to leave the EU, have an unprecedented opportunity, a nailed-on certainty of an In/Out referendum by the end of 2017 if enough of them they lend their votes to the Tories in 2015. And they are deliberately setting out to sabotage this.TOPPING said:The reality is that I get the long game, I get the pressure group agitating but what I don't get is the belief that a vote for UKIP if you were a Cons is anything other than a helping hand to EdM and a Lab govt for the next few years if not a generation.
Has there ever been a barmier large-scale political party in the history of modern democracy?
So it is with UKIP.
0 -
No, he didn't.Quincel said:
Kippers don't believe an In/Out referendum is nailed on at all with Cameron in charge. He's broken his promise on that topic once ...Richard_Nabavi said:
Except that they don't need to wait a generation. Unlike (say) the Greens - where the pressure-group line makes sense - the Kippers, if they really do want us to leave the EU, have an unprecedented opportunity, a nailed-on certainty of an In/Out referendum by the end of 2017 if enough of them they lend their votes to the Tories in 2015. And they are deliberately setting out to sabotage this.TOPPING said:The reality is that I get the long game, I get the pressure group agitating but what I don't get is the belief that a vote for UKIP if you were a Cons is anything other than a helping hand to EdM and a Lab govt for the next few years if not a generation.
Has there ever been a barmier large-scale political party in the history of modern democracy?
0 -
"Yes, you put it very well, that is exactly what they offer - an impression without any substance. Nothing to do with the EU, where if they were serious they'd be organising themselves to prepare and communicate the Out case for the 2017 referendum, and making sure the referendum happened by voting Conservative."
Yes, a sensible party should definitely be working to re-elect a government proven to be untrustworthy on EU issues, even if that meant putting themselves back a decade in future elections, leaving themselves up the creek without a paddle - or even a boat - if the referendum didn't happen.0 -
Yes, it's UKIP's fault the Tories are too useless to get re-elected.Next said:
Cameron demands Lisbon referendumisam said:
I have already put my money where my mouth is on this one, as you well know!Richard_Nabavi said:
Yes, this really is the oddest piece of self-deception. Even people like Sean Fear and Richard Tyndall seem to have fallen into it. The logic is so utterly barmy that one has to wonder what exactly is going on.MarqueeMark said:
You honestly think that if Labour get a majority, they will do anything other than point and laugh at UKIP?isam said:You honestly think that UKIP success wont push Labour policy don't you?
Get real.
One more time... the UKIP idea is that, by damaging the Conservatives and putting Ed Miliband into No 10, that they can force Ed Miliband to do something which is totally against his political beliefs, which would be unpopular in his party, which is opposed by the unions and by his fellow left-wing parties in the rest of Europe, and which is a no-win for him either way. Oh, and which would close down the issue which divides the right, and thereby reduce his chance of a second term.
Run the logic past us one more time, Kippers. How exactly does the pressure on Miliband operate?
UKIP have already forced David Cameron to do something that is totally against his political beliefs, get out of the bubble and open your mind Richard
Labour will dance to the UKIP tune if the snowball keeps snowballing
If you like, lets double our bet on Labour offering an EU referendum in their manifesto.
I've no time for insulting people just because we disagree on political theory, money talks!
2 June 2009
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8078637.stm
Did UKIP make him do that? No.
He was only prevented from carrying it out because all countries ratified the treaty before the GE.
But it was Labour who signed the treaty. And they would do another in a heartbeat, once UKIP let them back into power.0 -
Prevented from carrying it out? Nonsense. Cameron could have held a referendum on it in 2010/11 and unratified or withdrawn if we'd voted so. The original EEC referendum was after joining, that didn't cause problems then and it wouldn't do so now. He only made that promise in the first place because he knew it was highly likely the treaty would be ratified pre-election and he'd be able to claim the EU-moral high ground without having to do anything.Next said:
Cameron demands Lisbon referendumisam said:
I have already put my money where my mouth is on this one, as you well know!Richard_Nabavi said:
Yes, this really is the oddest piece of self-deception. Even people like Sean Fear and Richard Tyndall seem to have fallen into it. The logic is so utterly barmy that one has to wonder what exactly is going on.MarqueeMark said:
You honestly think that if Labour get a majority, they will do anything other than point and laugh at UKIP?isam said:You honestly think that UKIP success wont push Labour policy don't you?
Get real.
One more time... the UKIP idea is that, by damaging the Conservatives and putting Ed Miliband into No 10, that they can force Ed Miliband to do something which is totally against his political beliefs, which would be unpopular in his party, which is opposed by the unions and by his fellow left-wing parties in the rest of Europe, and which is a no-win for him either way. Oh, and which would close down the issue which divides the right, and thereby reduce his chance of a second term.
Run the logic past us one more time, Kippers. How exactly does the pressure on Miliband operate?
UKIP have already forced David Cameron to do something that is totally against his political beliefs, get out of the bubble and open your mind Richard
Labour will dance to the UKIP tune if the snowball keeps snowballing
If you like, lets double our bet on Labour offering an EU referendum in their manifesto.
I've no time for insulting people just because we disagree on political theory, money talks!
2 June 2009
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8078637.stm
Did UKIP make him do that? No.
He was only prevented from carrying it out because all countries ratified the treaty before the GE.
But it was Labour who signed the treaty. And they would do another in a heartbeat, once UKIP let them back into power.0 -
It's illogical to assume that if you vote against a Conservative candidate, you therefore intend that Labour should win.Richard_Nabavi said:
Yes, this really is the oddest piece of self-deception. Even people like Sean Fear and Richard Tyndall seem to have fallen into it. The logic is so utterly barmy that one has to wonder what exactly is going on.MarqueeMark said:
You honestly think that if Labour get a majority, they will do anything other than point and laugh at UKIP?isam said:You honestly think that UKIP success wont push Labour policy don't you?
Get real.
One more time... the UKIP idea is that, by damaging the Conservatives and putting Ed Miliband into No 10, that they can force Ed Miliband to do something which is totally against his political beliefs, which would be unpopular in his party, which is opposed by the unions and by his fellow left-wing parties in the rest of Europe, and which is a no-win for him either way. Oh, and which would close down the issue which divides the right, and thereby reduce his chance of a second term.
Run the logic past us one more time, Kippers. How exactly does the pressure on Miliband operate?
It would be like Labour condemning people for voting Green or Lib Dem, and claiming that they intend the Conservatives to win.
0 -
I'm confused.MarqueeMark said:
You honestly think that if Labour get a majority, they will do anything other than point and laugh at UKIP?isam said:You honestly think that UKIP success wont push Labour policy don't you?
Get real.
Many right-leaning posters to this site are convinced that it was William Hague's courageous campaigning that prevented Blair from taking Britain into the Euro - rather than, say, Brown's opposition from the Treasury. This at a time when Blair had a huge majority in the Commons on >40% of the vote.
Now some right-leaning posters would have us believe that Miliband is such a toweringly strong political figure that if he became PM with a majority of two dozen on 35% of the vote he could ignore the massive electoral breakthrough of a new party on an explicitly anti-EU agenda.
He would bend. He would have to. Apart from anything else there are Eurosceptic MPs on the Labour benches too.0 -
The last thing the Kippers want is a referendum - like Newark they are frit they would lose. Even worse they might win and not have anything to moan about anymore.0
-
And who believes that Labour would actually DELIVER on any referendum pledge? Because if they do, then I have some nice bridges across the Thames I can sell them cheap....isam said:
Do you want to bet about Labour offering a referendum in their manifesto?
I'm game, how much? You can have 1/2 that they dont
0 -
To highlight the difference between your viewpoint and that of Richard Nabavi's - it is what do you think UKIP are for / are trying to achieve? Richard appears to think that they ONLY care about leaving the EU, and thus that the approach being taken is sub-optimal. You appear to think that they care about a much wider collection of things, leading to them aiming to effectively be a party in their own right potentially replacing the Tories. Which approach is most appropriate depends on what the 'ultimate' goal is, and the ultimate goal in politics is usually power.HurstLlama said:I am sure we have been here before, Mr. Navabi, and probably will be again and again and again over the next year or so. However, I'll plug on.
Suppose back in the early 1900s people who were trying to get the Labour Party off the ground listened to the Liberals who were telling them, "Stop, give up, otherwise you'll let the Conservatives in again. OK the Liberals don't actually represent your views but we are nearer than anyone else except the new party which can never be elected".
UKIP may well contain a few fruitcakes, loonies and closet racists but I doubt they have more of them than any other party. They may well take votes that might otherwise have gone to the Conservatives. They may well have an ill-formed, incomplete and indeed contradictory agenda for government. Their leader may well be a buffoon who spends his life three-parts pissed. However, they offer something that no other party does - the impression that they are on the side of the common man.
0 -
Politics of the madhouse.Quincel said:
If the Tories lose 2015 because of UKIP there will be enourmous pressure for them to ditch Cameron and replace him with a firm Eurosceptic who never wavers on the issue at all. Then when that man (presumably a man, though you never know) eventually is PM the referendum will happen.Richard_Nabavi said:
Except that they don't need to wait a generation. Unlike (say) the Greens - where the pressure-group line makes sense - the Kippers, if they really do want us to leave the EU, have an unprecedented opportunity, a nailed-on certainty of an In/Out referendum by the end of 2017 if enough of them they lend their votes to the Tories in 2015. And they are deliberately setting out to sabotage this.TOPPING said:The reality is that I get the long game, I get the pressure group agitating but what I don't get is the belief that a vote for UKIP if you were a Cons is anything other than a helping hand to EdM and a Lab govt for the next few years if not a generation.
Has there ever been a barmier large-scale political party in the history of modern democracy?
How many years are you prepared to wait? The UK will be so firmly integrated into the EU in a generation or so, post a Labour victory, that it will be too late anyway.
0 -
@Quincel - In that case they are even barmier then I said. There is not a snowflakes' chance in hell of the referendum promise being reneged on, if there's a Conservative majority. The fact that to convince themselves that there is, they have to rewrite history and pretend that Cameron committed to a retrospective referendum is further evidence of their barminess. As I've pointed out before, not a single journalist or serious observer ever thought that Cameron had done so at the time, and there were multiple speeches and interviews discussing the question of what might happen if it were ratified under Labour - in every single one of which, it was made clear, long before ratification, that there was no such commitment.
In any case, how exactly does putting Labour into power help?0 -
Yes it's either the long game we hate you all we're differentRichard_Nabavi said:
Except that they don't need to wait a generation. Unlike (say) the Greens - where the pressure-group line makes sense - the Kippers, if they really do want us to leave the EU, have an unprecedented opportunity, a nailed-on certainty of an In/Out referendum by the end of 2017 if enough of them they lend their votes to the Tories in 2015. And they are deliberately setting out to sabotage this.TOPPING said:The reality is that I get the long game, I get the pressure group agitating but what I don't get is the belief that a vote for UKIP if you were a Cons is anything other than a helping hand to EdM and a Lab govt for the next few years if not a generation.
Has there ever been a barmier large-scale political party in the history of modern democracy?
or
our only aim is an in/out referendum (assuming the manifesto won't contain a commitment to out only).
Which latter makes no sense as you say.
In reality they are going through birthing pains and that's fine but as their flagship policy contains such a contradiction it is even more important for them to develop a range of policies about health, education, defence, the deficit, etc. I doubt they will to a required level of coherence and therefore IMO normal service will be resumed with UKIP as NOTA and lower support at GE2015.
I mean I adore and trust the Great British Public but even they couldn't bring themselves to vote for a party which has one policy they can't deliver, but which another party can, and no other policies besides that one.
0 -
No top down reorganisation of the NHS. No cuts to the winter fuel allowance. Child benefit would remain untouched. Cameron would be a liberal Conservative Prime Minister. VAT will not increase. A bigger army for a safer Britain.
And yet UKIP should abandon their hopes as a political party because Cameron has promised he'll hold a referendum.0 -
Noticed the relative absence of Labour posters are on this thread? How quiet they are?Sean_F said:
It's illogical to assume that if you vote against a Conservative candidate, you therefore intend that Labour should win.Richard_Nabavi said:
Yes, this really is the oddest piece of self-deception. Even people like Sean Fear and Richard Tyndall seem to have fallen into it. The logic is so utterly barmy that one has to wonder what exactly is going on.MarqueeMark said:
You honestly think that if Labour get a majority, they will do anything other than point and laugh at UKIP?isam said:You honestly think that UKIP success wont push Labour policy don't you?
Get real.
One more time... the UKIP idea is that, by damaging the Conservatives and putting Ed Miliband into No 10, that they can force Ed Miliband to do something which is totally against his political beliefs, which would be unpopular in his party, which is opposed by the unions and by his fellow left-wing parties in the rest of Europe, and which is a no-win for him either way. Oh, and which would close down the issue which divides the right, and thereby reduce his chance of a second term.
Run the logic past us one more time, Kippers. How exactly does the pressure on Miliband operate?
It would be like Labour condemning people for voting Green or Lib Dem, and claiming that they intend the Conservatives to win.
They're watching, laughing and rubbing their hands in expectation, as the Right splits.0 -
Incidentally, if any reputable credit-worthy punters want a bet on this, I'm happy to offer £1000, perhaps more, at Evens that the referendum promise will be honoured, by the end of 2017, if there's a Conservative majority in 2015, bet void if no majority.0
-
Do you want to bet that they will offer one?MarqueeMark said:
And who believes that Labour would actually DELIVER on any referendum pledge? Because if they do, then I have some nice bridges across the Thames I can sell them cheap....isam said:
Do you want to bet about Labour offering a referendum in their manifesto?
I'm game, how much? You can have 1/2 that they dont
Or too scared like the others I have challenged to put money where mouth is?0 -
If UKIP do achieve 38% of the vote, perhaps the Conservatives should stand down in seats where they're in danger of splitting the centre-right vote.0
-
So only 32 times better grown than the US. Not bad for an heir-to-a-baronetcy.0
-
Yes, posters of a political stripe shrinking from posting is famously due to the fact they're so happy about things. It must also be why Labour are the main force for a cross-party anti-UKIP campaign.TheWatcher said:Noticed the relative absence of Labour posters are on this thread? How quiet they are?
They're watching, laughing and rubbing their hands in expectation, as the Right splits.0 -
I think he will honour it if he gets a majority, so not for me.Richard_Nabavi said:Incidentally, if any reputable credit-worthy punters want a bet on this, I'm happy to offer £1000, perhaps more, at Evens that the referendum promise will be honoured, by the end of 2017, if there's a Conservative majority in 2015, bet void if no majority.
But how about doubling our Labour referendum pledge bet?
0 -
Yes, I'd be happy to do that.isam said:
I think he will honour it if he gets a majority, so not for me.Richard_Nabavi said:Incidentally, if any reputable credit-worthy punters want a bet on this, I'm happy to offer £1000, perhaps more, at Evens that the referendum promise will be honoured, by the end of 2017, if there's a Conservative majority in 2015, bet void if no majority.
But how about doubling our Labour referendum pledge bet?
0 -
It is a sad day on PB when political discussion is replaced by a betting pissing competition.0
-
Kippers thought we were too closely integrated many years ago, but still think we could withdraw now. Trying to achieve your goals by doing anything other than maximising your votes and elected officials is what's mad.TheWatcher said:
Politics of the madhouse.Quincel said:
If the Tories lose 2015 because of UKIP there will be enourmous pressure for them to ditch Cameron and replace him with a firm Eurosceptic who never wavers on the issue at all. Then when that man (presumably a man, though you never know) eventually is PM the referendum will happen.Richard_Nabavi said:
Except that they don't need to wait a generation. Unlike (say) the Greens - where the pressure-group line makes sense - the Kippers, if they really do want us to leave the EU, have an unprecedented opportunity, a nailed-on certainty of an In/Out referendum by the end of 2017 if enough of them they lend their votes to the Tories in 2015. And they are deliberately setting out to sabotage this.TOPPING said:The reality is that I get the long game, I get the pressure group agitating but what I don't get is the belief that a vote for UKIP if you were a Cons is anything other than a helping hand to EdM and a Lab govt for the next few years if not a generation.
Has there ever been a barmier large-scale political party in the history of modern democracy?
How many years are you prepared to wait? The UK will be so firmly integrated into the EU in a generation or so, post a Labour victory, that it will be too late anyway.0 -
I'm actually an Anarchist-Tory - I really quite it enjoy it when the pre-ordained scheme of things falls to bits. So I do find much to enjoy in the rise of UKIP.
But the delusion amongst UKIP supporters is extraordinary. I just hope there are enough blood pressure meds in the country from May 2015, because if - God forbid - Ed Miliband does get in to power, there is going to be such a wailing and a gnashing of teeth as this country has not seen in a long time, from those very people who caused him to be elected on an insane notion that they could make Labour "bend in the political wind".
"But he can't do THAT....!!!!! Make it stop!!!'
UKIP Buyer's Remorse will be a thing to behold. They really will have something to moan about. And it won't be David Cameron and his reduced band of Conservative MPs. No, they will be standing on the sidelines, hands on hips, saying "we f*cking TOLD YOU SO...."
0 -
:-) With these poll leads wouldn't that be most of them... (including Witney)Sean_F said:If UKIP do achieve 38% of the vote, perhaps the Conservatives should stand down in seats where they're in danger of splitting the centre-right vote.
Also, and I appreciate that Euro Elections and GE are different, but what happens in the scenario that UKIP keep a Poll lead from the Euros through to the GE and are still denied a place in the debates?0 -
However, two thirds of 2010 Conservatives (67%) now saying they would vote Ukip say that they are likely to stay with their new party for the General Election.
http://www.itv.com/news/2014-04-30/1-4-ukip-voters-unlikely-to-stick-with-party-after-euros/0 -
It's a great day. It means that the second half of the site's name is for once of some relevance.SimonStClare said:It is a sad day on PB when political discussion is replaced by a betting pissing competition.
0 -
Putting Labour into power guarantees the Tories never doubt the threat or seriousness of UKIP ever again.Richard_Nabavi said:@Quincel - In that case they are even barmier then I said. There is not a snowflakes' chance in hell of the referendum promise being reneged on, if there's a Conservative majority. The fact that to convince themselves that there is, they have to rewrite history and pretend that Cameron committed to a retrospective referendum is further evidence of their barminess. As I've pointed out before, not a single journalist or serious observer ever thought that Cameron had done so at the time, and there were multiple speeches and interviews discussing the question of what might happen if it were ratified under Labour - in every single one of which, it was made clear, long before ratification, that there was no such commitment.
In any case, how exactly does putting Labour into power help?
And how about Cameron's promise to hold a referendum if any substantial transfer of powers took place this parliament? As far as Kippers are concerned either he's broken that promise or he has a very different idea of substantial powers than they do. Either way, why keep him in power?0 -
@antifrank - I take it that you don't think my offer is terribly generous
0 -
Alot of days it is a pissing competition with no betting at all thoughSimonStClare said:It is a sad day on PB when political discussion is replaced by a betting pissing competition.
0 -
Haven't received any Euro leaflets here yet, but I will be getting 600 later...
The local candidate has broken his hip and so I am dishing them out in Upminster!0 -
@BBCJLandale: Nigel Farage pulls out of Swansea walkabout after 10 Socialist Workers come to protest. Security risk say UKIP. No bottle say protestors.0
-
Err, he's passed the Act, as he promised. He even managed to do so when in coalition with our Europhile LibDem friends. It's another good example of the Kippers looking at an apple and deciding it must be a bacon butty because Cameron called it an apple.Quincel said:And how about Cameron's promise to hold a referendum if any substantial transfer of powers took place this parliament? As far as Kippers are concerned either he's broken that promise or he has a very different idea of substantial powers than they do. Either way, why keep him in power?
0 -
I'll be polite and say that I don't think your offer is terribly generous. I could put it slightly stronger than that.Richard_Nabavi said:@antifrank - I take it that you don't think my offer is terribly generous
0 -
Touché - LOLPulpstar said:
Alot of days it is a pissing competition with no betting at all thoughSimonStClare said:It is a sad day on PB when political discussion is replaced by a betting pissing competition.
0 -
Well, it would be Tories own ####ing fault for standing by an electoral system that allows this sort of thing to happen. Had they listened to UKIP and backed AV, we wouldn't have been here. David Cameron from the get-go has pissed off his own supporters, whether they've been eurosceptics, civil libertarians, or traditionalist Tories.MarqueeMark said:I'm actually an Anarchist-Tory - I really quite it enjoy it when the pre-ordained scheme of things falls to bits. So I do find much to enjoy in the rise of UKIP.
But the delusion amongst UKIP supporters is extraordinary. I just hope there are enough blood pressure meds in the country from May 2015, because if - God forbid - Ed Miliband does get in to power, there is going to be such a wailing and a gnashing of teeth as this country has not seen in a long time, from those very people who caused him to be elected on an insane notion that they could make Labour "bend in the political wind".
"But he can't do THAT....!!!!! Make it stop!!!'
UKIP Buyer's Remorse will be a thing to behold. They really will have something to moan about. And it won't be David Cameron and his reduced band of Conservative MPs. No, they will be standing on the sidelines, hands on hips, saying "we f*cking TOLD YOU SO...."0 -
A nift at 2s! ConfirmedRichard_Nabavi said:
Yes, I'd be happy to do that.isam said:
I think he will honour it if he gets a majority, so not for me.Richard_Nabavi said:Incidentally, if any reputable credit-worthy punters want a bet on this, I'm happy to offer £1000, perhaps more, at Evens that the referendum promise will be honoured, by the end of 2017, if there's a Conservative majority in 2015, bet void if no majority.
But how about doubling our Labour referendum pledge bet?0 -
I will offer you the usual gold sovereign bet - that a Labour Govt. will not have undertaken an in-out referendum across the UK (whatever countries that then comprises) on membership of the European Union by 31st December 2017.isam said:
Do you want to bet that they will offer one?
Or too scared like the others I have challenged to put money where mouth is?
Too scared to take it?
0 -
No, well quite. I wasn't trying to be generous, but, if you listen to the Kippers, they seem to have convinced themselves that it's a nailed-on certainty that Cameron will somehow renege on the commitment. Nuts.antifrank said:
I'll be polite and say that I don't think your offer is terribly generous. I could put it slightly stronger than that.Richard_Nabavi said:@antifrank - I take it that you don't think my offer is terribly generous
0 -
@Richard_Nabavi; @Isam Are you chaps betting on what Labour will put in their manifesto (EU referendum) or what they'll actually do in the event they get a majority ?0
-
perhaps the Conservatives should stand down in seats where they're in danger of splitting the centre-right vote.
UKIP are a centre right party??? Really?? Promising to protect benefits in Wythenshaw?? Promising to hammer growing firms by banning immigration and exacerbating skill shortages?? Promising to stoke up a wage inflation spiral??
0 -
The manifestoPulpstar said:@Richard_Nabavi; @Isam Are you chaps betting on what Labour will put in their manifesto (EU referendum) or what they'll actually do in the event they get a majority ?
0 -
We're in a very silly season. Personally I think Nigel Farage made a serious mistake this morning in not standing in Newark, because in all likelihood that by-election now will bring a close to the UKIPalpyse rather than have a decent chance of sustaining it. But I recognise that's a minority view.Richard_Nabavi said:
No, well quite. I wasn't trying to be generous, but, if you listen to the Kippers, they seem to have convinced themselves that it's a nailed-on certainty that Cameron will somehow renege on the commitment. Nuts.antifrank said:
I'll be polite and say that I don't think your offer is terribly generous. I could put it slightly stronger than that.Richard_Nabavi said:@antifrank - I take it that you don't think my offer is terribly generous
Still, I'm enjoying the carnival atmosphere.0 -
Who has said it is nailed-on? I think Cameron would probably keep his commitment if he had a majority, but there's a sizable risk that something else would happen. Perhaps some serious tragic event could cause him to delay it, as "now would not be the appropriate time". Perhaps the Germans say they are open to more renegotiation but need a few more years. There are also reasons why the referendum could fail to happen, even if UKIP did refuse to stand at the next election. The Tories might not get a majority. The Tories might get a majority but Cameron gets removed from leadership for some reason, and his replacement isn't bound by the pledge. It's all too high risk to put the entire fate of the eurosceptic movement on it. If UKIP didn't stand at the next election, they'd never recover.Richard_Nabavi said:
No, well quite. I wasn't trying to be generous, but, if you listen to the Kippers, they seem to have convinced themselves that it's a nailed-on certainty that Cameron will somehow renege on the commitment. Nuts.antifrank said:
I'll be polite and say that I don't think your offer is terribly generous. I could put it slightly stronger than that.Richard_Nabavi said:@antifrank - I take it that you don't think my offer is terribly generous
0 -
Promising to reintroduce the spare room subsidy ??taffys said:perhaps the Conservatives should stand down in seats where they're in danger of splitting the centre-right vote.
UKIP are a centre right party??? Really?? Promising to protect benefits in Wythenshaw?? Promising to hammer growing firms by banning immigration and exacerbating skill shortages?? Promising to stoke up a wage inflation spiral??
They are the most left wing party out there.0 -
And yet despite what they'd see as a substantial transfer of powers I see no referendum.Richard_Nabavi said:
Err, he's passed the Act, as he promised. He even managed to do so when in coalition with our Europhile LibDem friends. It's another good example of the Kippers looking at an apple and deciding it must be a bacon butty because Cameron called it an apple.Quincel said:And how about Cameron's promise to hold a referendum if any substantial transfer of powers took place this parliament? As far as Kippers are concerned either he's broken that promise or he has a very different idea of substantial powers than they do. Either way, why keep him in power?
0 -
So now mass immigration is needed to prevent a wage inflation spiral? I thought we had central bank monetary targeting for that.taffys said:perhaps the Conservatives should stand down in seats where they're in danger of splitting the centre-right vote.
UKIP are a centre right party??? Really?? Promising to protect benefits in Wythenshaw?? Promising to hammer growing firms by banning immigration and exacerbating skill shortages?? Promising to stoke up a wage inflation spiral??0 -
@antifrank - He certainly made a mistake in not squashing the speculation straightaway. In fact he even seemed to encourage it, which was very silly. And it's not as though there wasn't plenty of warning of the possibility of this coming up, so he hasn't even got the excuse of being caught unawares.
As to whether he should have taken the risk, I'm not surprised that he didn't take it. It would have been a 'Double or Quits' bet. On balance you might be right that it would have been a risk worth taking - assuming of course that he's serious about changing the political landscape.0 -
Like!Pulpstar said:
Alot of days it is a pissing competition with no betting at all thoughSimonStClare said:It is a sad day on PB when political discussion is replaced by a betting pissing competition.
0 -
@Socrates - Yeah, yeah, a whole raft of excuses to cover up the fact that UKIP don't actually want a referendum.0
-
What odds you offering?MarqueeMark said:
I will offer you the usual gold sovereign bet - that a Labour Govt. will not have undertaken an in-out referendum across the UK (whatever countries that then comprises) on membership of the European Union by 31st December 2017.isam said:
Do you want to bet that they will offer one?
Or too scared like the others I have challenged to put money where mouth is?
Too scared to take it?0 -
It's all too high risk to put the entire fate of the eurosceptic movement on it.
As opposed to the risk of letting ed miliband in by voting UKIP. No risk there.
What a ludicrous comment.0 -
ComRes UNS
UKIP 32 (+19)
Lab 21 (+8)
Con 12 (-14)
LD 2 (-9)
Grn* 0 (-2)
SNP 2 (nc)
Plaid 1 (nc)
* no Green figure given
UKIP first or joint first in seats in every region, including Scotland and Wales...0 -
The leader of a party who is accused of being a one man band, who comes from from London/Kent, parachuting himself into a Nottinghamshire seat in a blaze of publicity whilst saying he represents "A People's Army"Richard_Nabavi said:@antifrank - He certainly made a mistake in not squashing the speculation straightaway. In fact he even seemed to encourage it, which was very silly. And it's not as though there wasn't plenty of warning of the possibility of this coming up, so he hasn't even got the excuse of being caught unawares.
As to whether he should have taken the risk, I'm not surprised that he didn't take it. It would have been a 'Double or Quits' bet. On balance you might be right that it would have been a risk worth taking - assuming of course that he's serious about changing the political landscape.
Yeah that would have played out well0 -
@Richard_Nabavi , @isam
I suspect the Labour party manifesto will 'promise a referendum' "in the event of a further transfer of powers to Brussels", or words to that effect.
I hope your settlement criteria clearly indicates who has won and lost should this be the case.0 -
At what point (in theory) does UKIP's rise begin decreasing the SNP seats because they are taking so many?RodCrosby said:ComRes UNS
UKIP 32 (+18)
Lab 21 (+8)
Con 12 (-14)
LD 2 (-9)
Grn* 0 (-2)
SNP 2 (nc)
Plaid 1 (nc)
* no Green figure given
UKIP first or joint first in seats in every region, including Scotland and Wales...
A short term risk for sure, but if UKIP get a pair of MPs and continued momentum then their long term future is barely risked at all.taffys said:It's all too high risk to put the entire fate of the eurosceptic movement on it.
As opposed to the risk of letting ed miliband in by voting UKIP. No risk there.
What a ludicrous comment.
0 -
That wouldn't count as a referendum promise for the purposes of this bet. The bet is on them changing their current position and promising an In/Out referendum in the next parliament.Pulpstar said:@Richard_Nabavi , @isam
I suspect the Labour party manifesto will 'promise a referendum' "in the event of a further transfer of powers to Brussels", or words to that effect.
I hope your settlement criteria clearly indicates who has won and lost should this be the case.
0 -
Surprising if Scotland gets two UKIP. One maybe but two? The ComRes poll in the header has SNP 35% and UKIP 7% - I know, subsample of 186, online and all that. But that is a massive difference.RodCrosby said:ComRes UNS
UKIP 32 (+18)
Lab 21 (+8)
Con 12 (-14)
LD 2 (-9)
Grn* 0 (-2)
SNP 2 (nc)
Plaid 1 (nc)
* no Green figure given
UKIP first or joint first in seats in every region, including Scotland and Wales...0 -
TNS-BRMB UNS
UKIP 30 (+17)
Lab 22 (+9)
Con 11 (-14)
LD 4 (-7)
Grn* 0 (-2)
SNP 2 (nc)
Plaid 1 (nc)
* no Green figure given
UKIP first or joint first in seats in every region, except the North East...0 -
If that is the case then you're on the correct side of the bet I suspect !Richard_Nabavi said:
That wouldn't count as a referendum promise for the purposes of this bet. The bet is on them changing their current position and promising an In/Out referendum in the next parliament.Pulpstar said:@Richard_Nabavi , @isam
I suspect the Labour party manifesto will 'promise a referendum' "in the event of a further transfer of powers to Brussels", or words to that effect.
I hope your settlement criteria clearly indicates who has won and lost should this be the case.0 -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glasgow_Hillhead_by-election,_1982isam said:The leader of a party who is accused of being a one man band, who comes from from London/Kent, parachuting himself into a Nottinghamshire seat in a blaze of publicity whilst saying he represents "A People's Army"
Yeah that would have played out well
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crosby_by-election,_1981
0 -
Interesting LD figure - surprised that on just 10% of the vote they get as many as 4 seats... Which ones? Presumably 1 SE, 1 Lon + ?RodCrosby said:TNS-BRMB UNS
UKIP 30 (+17)
Lab 22 (+9)
Con 11 (-14)
LD 4 (-7)
Grn* 0 (-2)
SNP 2 (nc)
Plaid 1 (nc)
* no Green figure given
UKIP first or joint first in seats in every region, except the North East...0 -
Were they accused of being a one man band then?Richard_Nabavi said:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glasgow_Hillhead_by-election,_1982isam said:The leader of a party who is accused of being a one man band, who comes from from London/Kent, parachuting himself into a Nottinghamshire seat in a blaze of publicity whilst saying he represents "A People's Army"
Yeah that would have played out well
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crosby_by-election,_19810 -
That's certainly true.Socrates said:
Well, it would be Tories own ####ing fault for standing by an electoral system that allows this sort of thing to happen. Had they listened to UKIP and backed AV, we wouldn't have been here. David Cameron from the get-go has pissed off his own supporters, whether they've been eurosceptics, civil libertarians, or traditionalist Tories.MarqueeMark said:I'm actually an Anarchist-Tory - I really quite it enjoy it when the pre-ordained scheme of things falls to bits. So I do find much to enjoy in the rise of UKIP.
But the delusion amongst UKIP supporters is extraordinary. I just hope there are enough blood pressure meds in the country from May 2015, because if - God forbid - Ed Miliband does get in to power, there is going to be such a wailing and a gnashing of teeth as this country has not seen in a long time, from those very people who caused him to be elected on an insane notion that they could make Labour "bend in the political wind".
"But he can't do THAT....!!!!! Make it stop!!!'
UKIP Buyer's Remorse will be a thing to behold. They really will have something to moan about. And it won't be David Cameron and his reduced band of Conservative MPs. No, they will be standing on the sidelines, hands on hips, saying "we f*cking TOLD YOU SO...."
Just imagine what the result of the next general election would look like under AV, with the latest ICM figures (with changes from GE2010 in brackets):
Con 32% (-5)
Lab 37% (+7)
LD 12% (-12)
UKIP 11% (+8)
Cameron's referendum pledge would probably be pretty good for UKIP second preferences, and with a bit of swing-back it would probably put them over the line. Miliband was certainly lucky he wasn't able to win the AV referendum.0 -
Not sure UKIP will poll over 10% in Scotland, whilst they will utterly pile up the votes in East and Southeast regions.Quincel said:
At what point (in theory) does UKIP's rise begin decreasing the SNP seats because they are taking so many?RodCrosby said:ComRes UNS
UKIP 32 (+18)
Lab 21 (+8)
Con 12 (-14)
LD 2 (-9)
Grn* 0 (-2)
SNP 2 (nc)
Plaid 1 (nc)
* no Green figure given
UKIP first or joint first in seats in every region, including Scotland and Wales...
A short term risk for sure, but if UKIP get a pair of MPs and continued momentum then their long term future is barely risked at all.taffys said:It's all too high risk to put the entire fate of the eurosceptic movement on it.
As opposed to the risk of letting ed miliband in by voting UKIP. No risk there.
What a ludicrous comment.
0
