politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » It looks like mentioning Ed’s name is no longer a drag for
Options
Comments
-
Bob you can apologise for rewriting history now.RodCrosby said:
And so you reveal your ignorance of UNS.BobaFett said:
Sorry, bet=forecastBobaFett said:
Absolute rubbish. Check the thread on the night. Even Rod himself has freely admitted on here he made an in-play UNS bet which was wrong. I stuck to my guns.saddened said:
Why are you trying to rewrite history? Rod said there may be value in betting that Labour could come third. He didn't make a prediction, he pointed out the value in a bet. That bet failed to come off by a narrow margin. What you do is carp after the event.BobaFett said:Cough. As I said on here yesterday.
After my Euros home run (vs WrongCrosby) you can just call me Nostradamus.
I don't know whether he actually bet on it.
I explained it all clearly on the night. After the first result, UNS showed Labour coming third, narrowly. I told people to keep an eye on the running aggregate vote changes, to see if this held. It was nip and tuck for a while. I informed people when the forecast showed Labour ahead again.
I've done this kind of thing for as long as I've been posting on PB. It's not a firm forecast, more a running public information service.
And it wasn't that somehow I'd forgotten Scotland and London were strong Labour areas (look up the meaning of UNS again), but rather that those areas had large increases in turnout, which finally cemented Labour's small national vote lead versus the Tories.
And I didn't bet in-play.0 -
It's a mash up of policies. They've decided on the '35% Nation'.dyedwoolie said:
Expectation management gone madTheWatcher said:
As mentioned down thread, Labour List has published an article suggesting that they are putting some effort into fighting for the seat.OblitusSumMe said:
This is a by-election. By-elections are different. They are a chance to really put pressure on the Government. They are a chance to demonstrate in a real election that your party is a winner.BobaFett said:
I'm not arguing that Labour is doomed if they don't manage to win the seat, but they need to put on a good show - and then they can forget about Newark for the general election.
Labour don't really want to cede all the media space to yet another good electoral performance by UKIP.
Which seems at odds with what has been posted here.0 -
Perhaps Labour want UKIP to triumph nationwide. They clearly aren't in a position to win in 2015, so perhaps they prefer UKIP to the Tories. Their core vote certainly seem to.0
-
It's a 2 nation strategy. The Socialist republics of London and Scotland they are afterTheWatcher said:
It's a mash up of policies. They've decided on the '35% Nation'.dyedwoolie said:
Expectation management gone madTheWatcher said:
As mentioned down thread, Labour List has published an article suggesting that they are putting some effort into fighting for the seat.OblitusSumMe said:
This is a by-election. By-elections are different. They are a chance to really put pressure on the Government. They are a chance to demonstrate in a real election that your party is a winner.BobaFett said:
I'm not arguing that Labour is doomed if they don't manage to win the seat, but they need to put on a good show - and then they can forget about Newark for the general election.
Labour don't really want to cede all the media space to yet another good electoral performance by UKIP.
Which seems at odds with what has been posted here.0 -
Good point - except that Labour started on 6.0% in Newbury in the 1992GE and on 12.1% in Christchurch. Both very clear third places.TheScreamingEagles said:
Then again Labour finishing third and getting 2% and 2.7% in the Newbury and Christchurch by-elections in 1993 whilst the Lib Dems won didn't impede them in 1997.OblitusSumMe said:
This is a by-election. By-elections are different. They are a chance to really put pressure on the Government. They are a chance to demonstrate in a real election that your party is a winner.BobaFett said:
I'm not arguing that Labour is doomed if they don't manage to win the seat, but they need to put on a good show - and then they can forget about Newark for the general election.
Labour don't really want to cede all the media space to yet another good electoral performance by UKIP.
In Newark, at the 2010GE - a historically bad election for Labour - they still managed to come second with 22.3%, with the Lib Dems - that famed source of new voters for Miliband's Labour party - on a tempting 20.0%, ripe for squeezing.
The comparison to make is with somewhere like Wirral South by-election. If Labour had left the field clear for the Lib Dems to win that by-election from third then it would be equivalent to Labour soft-pedalling in Newark.0 -
Well if they had he money to rent in the private market then nothing to stop them at all. But if they are in social housing then they would have to apply like anyone else.HurstLlama said:
Yes, but are you going to say that refugees once settled can never move? If not what is to stop them once they have their right to remain ticket upping sticks and joining the compatriots in another area of the country (and claiming housing benefit there).isam said:
IF councils were only allowed a max of 5% of social housing for refugees, there would be more refugees in places like Witney and less in the inner cities. Maybe then we really would start being "One Nation" and politicians could say what they think is best for the whole country, rather than pandering to the ethnic or social backgrounds of particular constituencies ....Socrates said:
Yes, that was my instinct a little bit too. On the other hand, it would just be a "nudge" incentive rather than compulsion. I also wondered how open it was to abuse to people pretending to be one ethnic group or another. How do they verify ethnicity in things like minority scholarships in the US?isam said:
It sounds a bit statist for people that are supposed to be libertarians.. although I have never said I was one, and we shouldnt let dogma get in the way of whats best for social harmony
A nice idea, but it wouldn't work.
It would be great for some Somalian refugees if they got to live in Oxfordshire or the Cotswolds by virtue of this policy I just thought up! I shouldnt think they would want to move
I have little doubt it would be better for an inclusive society as well0 -
Lib Dem crisis: Scotland Yard urged to probe Lord Oakeshott's cash-for-peerages claims
Scotland Yard was today urged to investigate a bombshell claim by a Liberal Democrat peer that his party has been embroiled in a cash-for-peerages scandal.
Lord Oakeshott made the extraordinary allegation as he stormed out of the Lib-Dems yesterday after a failed bid to spark a coup to topple Nick Clegg.
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/lib-dem-crisis-scotland-yard-urged-to-probe-lord-oakeshotts-cashforpeerages-claims-9452216.html0 -
isam said:
Well if they had he money to rent in the private market then nothing to stop them at all. But if they are in social housing then they would have to apply like anyone else.HurstLlama said:
Yes, but are you going to say that refugees once settled can never move? If not what is to stop them once they have their right to remain ticket upping sticks and joining the compatriots in another area of the country (and claiming housing benefit there).isam said:
IF councils were only allowed a max of 5% of social housing for refugees, there would be more refugees in places like Witney and less in the inner cities. Maybe then we really would start being "One Nation" and politicians could say what they think is best for the whole country, rather than pandering to the ethnic or social backgrounds of particular constituencies ....Socrates said:
Yes, that was my instinct a little bit too. On the other hand, it would just be a "nudge" incentive rather than compulsion. I also wondered how open it was to abuse to people pretending to be one ethnic group or another. How do they verify ethnicity in things like minority scholarships in the US?isam said:
It sounds a bit statist for people that are supposed to be libertarians.. although I have never said I was one, and we shouldnt let dogma get in the way of whats best for social harmony
A nice idea, but it wouldn't work.
It would be great for some Somalian refugees if they got to live in Oxfordshire or the Cotswolds by virtue of this policy I just thought up! I shouldnt think they would want to move
I have little doubt it would be better for an inclusive society as well
It would be great if I got to live in the Cotswolds. But thems the breaks.
0 -
The Municipal Borough of Wembley covered every part of the London Borough of Brent that was North of the River Brent.
That's Fryent, Queensbury, Northwick Park, Kenton, Preston, Sudbury, Alperton, Stonebridge, Wembley Central, Tokyngton, and half of Welsh Harp.0 -
Very good points.OblitusSumMe said:
Good point - except that Labour started on 6.0% in Newbury in the 1992GE and on 12.1% in Christchurch. Both very clear third places.TheScreamingEagles said:
Then again Labour finishing third and getting 2% and 2.7% in the Newbury and Christchurch by-elections in 1993 whilst the Lib Dems won didn't impede them in 1997.OblitusSumMe said:
This is a by-election. By-elections are different. They are a chance to really put pressure on the Government. They are a chance to demonstrate in a real election that your party is a winner.BobaFett said:
I'm not arguing that Labour is doomed if they don't manage to win the seat, but they need to put on a good show - and then they can forget about Newark for the general election.
Labour don't really want to cede all the media space to yet another good electoral performance by UKIP.
In Newark, at the 2010GE - a historically bad election for Labour - they still managed to come second with 22.3%, with the Lib Dems - that famed source of new voters for Miliband's Labour party - on a tempting 20.0%, ripe for squeezing.
The comparison to make is with somewhere like Wirral South by-election. If Labour had left the field clear for the Lib Dems to win that by-election from third then it would be equivalent to Labour soft-pedalling in Newark.0 -
Relocate them to Liverpool, one of the least culturally diverse places in the UK, and spread the magic around. It would provide a welcome, and much needed boost to the local education standards as well.isam said:
Well if they had he money to rent in the private market then nothing to stop them at all. But if they are in social housing then they would have to apply like anyone else.HurstLlama said:
Yes, but are you going to say that refugees once settled can never move? If not what is to stop them once they have their right to remain ticket upping sticks and joining the compatriots in another area of the country (and claiming housing benefit there).isam said:
IF councils were only allowed a max of 5% of social housing for refugees, there would be more refugees in places like Witney and less in the inner cities. Maybe then we really would start being "One Nation" and politicians could say what they think is best for the whole country, rather than pandering to the ethnic or social backgrounds of particular constituencies ....Socrates said:
Yes, that was my instinct a little bit too. On the other hand, it would just be a "nudge" incentive rather than compulsion. I also wondered how open it was to abuse to people pretending to be one ethnic group or another. How do they verify ethnicity in things like minority scholarships in the US?isam said:
It sounds a bit statist for people that are supposed to be libertarians.. although I have never said I was one, and we shouldnt let dogma get in the way of whats best for social harmony
A nice idea, but it wouldn't work.
It would be great for some Somalian refugees if they got to live in Oxfordshire or the Cotswolds by virtue of this policy I just thought up! I shouldnt think they would want to move
I have little doubt it would be better for an inclusive society as well0 -
It all smacks of shoring up and not losing ground, not aiming for power.OblitusSumMe said:
Good point - except that Labour started on 6.0% in Newbury in the 1992GE and on 12.1% in Christchurch. Both very clear third places.TheScreamingEagles said:
Then again Labour finishing third and getting 2% and 2.7% in the Newbury and Christchurch by-elections in 1993 whilst the Lib Dems won didn't impede them in 1997.OblitusSumMe said:
This is a by-election. By-elections are different. They are a chance to really put pressure on the Government. They are a chance to demonstrate in a real election that your party is a winner.BobaFett said:
I'm not arguing that Labour is doomed if they don't manage to win the seat, but they need to put on a good show - and then they can forget about Newark for the general election.
Labour don't really want to cede all the media space to yet another good electoral performance by UKIP.
In Newark, at the 2010GE - a historically bad election for Labour - they still managed to come second with 22.3%, with the Lib Dems - that famed source of new voters for Miliband's Labour party - on a tempting 20.0%, ripe for squeezing.
The comparison to make is with somewhere like Wirral South by-election. If Labour had left the field clear for the Lib Dems to win that by-election from third then it would be equivalent to Labour soft-pedalling in Newark.
0 -
Good idea, might cheer the miserable scousers up a bit too, always whining about this and that.TheWatcher said:
Relocate them to Liverpool, one of the least culturally diverse places in the UK, and spread the magic around. Would provide a welcome, and much needed boost to the education standards as well.isam said:
Well if they had he money to rent in the private market then nothing to stop them at all. But if they are in social housing then they would have to apply like anyone else.HurstLlama said:
Yes, but are you going to say that refugees once settled can never move? If not what is to stop them once they have their right to remain ticket upping sticks and joining the compatriots in another area of the country (and claiming housing benefit there).isam said:
IF councils were only allowed a max of 5% of social housing for refugees, there would be more refugees in places like Witney and less in the inner cities. Maybe then we really would start being "One Nation" and politicians could say what they think is best for the whole country, rather than pandering to the ethnic or social backgrounds of particular constituencies ....Socrates said:
Yes, that was my instinct a little bit too. On the other hand, it would just be a "nudge" incentive rather than compulsion. I also wondered how open it was to abuse to people pretending to be one ethnic group or another. How do they verify ethnicity in things like minority scholarships in the US?isam said:
It sounds a bit statist for people that are supposed to be libertarians.. although I have never said I was one, and we shouldnt let dogma get in the way of whats best for social harmony
A nice idea, but it wouldn't work.
It would be great for some Somalian refugees if they got to live in Oxfordshire or the Cotswolds by virtue of this policy I just thought up! I shouldnt think they would want to move
I have little doubt it would be better for an inclusive society as well
0 -
There's also quite a difference between stepping aside for the Lib Dems, who at the time were certainly 'Labour Lite', and stepping aside for UKIP.OblitusSumMe said:
Good point - except that Labour started on 6.0% in Newbury in the 1992GE and on 12.1% in Christchurch. Both very clear third places.TheScreamingEagles said:
Then again Labour finishing third and getting 2% and 2.7% in the Newbury and Christchurch by-elections in 1993 whilst the Lib Dems won didn't impede them in 1997.OblitusSumMe said:
This is a by-election. By-elections are different. They are a chance to really put pressure on the Government. They are a chance to demonstrate in a real election that your party is a winner.BobaFett said:
I'm not arguing that Labour is doomed if they don't manage to win the seat, but they need to put on a good show - and then they can forget about Newark for the general election.
Labour don't really want to cede all the media space to yet another good electoral performance by UKIP.
In Newark, at the 2010GE - a historically bad election for Labour - they still managed to come second with 22.3%, with the Lib Dems - that famed source of new voters for Miliband's Labour party - on a tempting 20.0%, ripe for squeezing.
The comparison to make is with somewhere like Wirral South by-election. If Labour had left the field clear for the Lib Dems to win that by-election from third then it would be equivalent to Labour soft-pedalling in Newark.
If this were 1996 Labour would probably be winning Newark in a by-election (though, as NickP has noted, not actually winning it in 1997, since the seat Fiona Jones won was different).
It's patently not 1996; so what Labour should do here is very nuanced, given the conflicting issues surrounding UKIP, the chance to possibly hit the Tories (though they're 80%ish and rising to hold the seat), Tory morale, Labour morale etc.
In the end it looks like they're going to do neither one thing nor the other, which may well help the Tories to win, but is probably the best way to hold the conflicting parts of the Shadow Cabinet together and maintain their own morale.0 -
Or by keeping Ed, a One per cent Strategy.......TheWatcher said:
It's a mash up of policies. They've decided on the '35% Nation'.
0 -
So, ed, you're predicted to get 15.7% in our exit poll for this critical GE, where do you go from here?
Well, David, we have moved up considerably from our performance in the 2009 European elections and I think this shows the people are hungry for change. Right up and down the country hard working squeezed middle persons have told me they want to see a Labour government in their great grandchildren's lifetime. I take comfort in that.
Now, if you'll excuse me, I need to be photographed eating soup with my fingers.0 -
:-)dyedwoolie said:Perhaps Labour want UKIP to triumph nationwide. They clearly aren't in a position to win in 2015, so perhaps they prefer UKIP to the Tories. Their core vote certainly seem to.
0 -
Liverpool invented cultural diversity, nincompoop.TheWatcher said:
Relocate them to Liverpool, one of the least culturally diverse places in the UK, and spread the magic around. Would provide a welcome, and much needed boost to the education standards as well.isam said:
Well if they had he money to rent in the private market then nothing to stop them at all. But if they are in social housing then they would have to apply like anyone else.HurstLlama said:
Yes, but are you going to say that refugees once settled can never move? If not what is to stop them once they have their right to remain ticket upping sticks and joining the compatriots in another area of the country (and claiming housing benefit there).isam said:
IF councils were only allowed a max of 5% of social housing for refugees, there would be more refugees in places like Witney and less in the inner cities. Maybe then we really would start being "One Nation" and politicians could say what they think is best for the whole country, rather than pandering to the ethnic or social backgrounds of particular constituencies ....Socrates said:
Yes, that was my instinct a little bit too. On the other hand, it would just be a "nudge" incentive rather than compulsion. I also wondered how open it was to abuse to people pretending to be one ethnic group or another. How do they verify ethnicity in things like minority scholarships in the US?isam said:
It sounds a bit statist for people that are supposed to be libertarians.. although I have never said I was one, and we shouldnt let dogma get in the way of whats best for social harmony
A nice idea, but it wouldn't work.
It would be great for some Somalian refugees if they got to live in Oxfordshire or the Cotswolds by virtue of this policy I just thought up! I shouldnt think they would want to move
I have little doubt it would be better for an inclusive society as well0 -
Of course you did , you took all those slaves to The Americas.RodCrosby said:
Liverpool invented cultural diversity, nincompoop.TheWatcher said:
Relocate them to Liverpool, one of the least culturally diverse places in the UK, and spread the magic around. Would provide a welcome, and much needed boost to the education standards as well.isam said:
Well if they had he money to rent in the private market then nothing to stop them at all. But if they are in social housing then they would have to apply like anyone else.HurstLlama said:
Yes, but are you going to say that refugees once settled can never move? If not what is to stop them once they have their right to remain ticket upping sticks and joining the compatriots in another area of the country (and claiming housing benefit there).isam said:
IF councils were only allowed a max of 5% of social housing for refugees, there would be more refugees in places like Witney and less in the inner cities. Maybe then we really would start being "One Nation" and politicians could say what they think is best for the whole country, rather than pandering to the ethnic or social backgrounds of particular constituencies ....Socrates said:
Yes, that was my instinct a little bit too. On the other hand, it would just be a "nudge" incentive rather than compulsion. I also wondered how open it was to abuse to people pretending to be one ethnic group or another. How do they verify ethnicity in things like minority scholarships in the US?isam said:
It sounds a bit statist for people that are supposed to be libertarians.. although I have never said I was one, and we shouldnt let dogma get in the way of whats best for social harmony
A nice idea, but it wouldn't work.
It would be great for some Somalian refugees if they got to live in Oxfordshire or the Cotswolds by virtue of this policy I just thought up! I shouldnt think they would want to move
I have little doubt it would be better for an inclusive society as well0 -
Everton and Liverpool supporters do not count as separate cultures.RodCrosby said:
Liverpool invented cultural diversity, nincompoop.TheWatcher said:
Relocate them to Liverpool, one of the least culturally diverse places in the UK, and spread the magic around. Would provide a welcome, and much needed boost to the education standards as well.isam said:
Well if they had he money to rent in the private market then nothing to stop them at all. But if they are in social housing then they would have to apply like anyone else.HurstLlama said:
Yes, but are you going to say that refugees once settled can never move? If not what is to stop them once they have their right to remain ticket upping sticks and joining the compatriots in another area of the country (and claiming housing benefit there).isam said:
IF councils were only allowed a max of 5% of social housing for refugees, there would be more refugees in places like Witney and less in the inner cities. Maybe then we really would start being "One Nation" and politicians could say what they think is best for the whole country, rather than pandering to the ethnic or social backgrounds of particular constituencies ....Socrates said:
Yes, that was my instinct a little bit too. On the other hand, it would just be a "nudge" incentive rather than compulsion. I also wondered how open it was to abuse to people pretending to be one ethnic group or another. How do they verify ethnicity in things like minority scholarships in the US?isam said:
It sounds a bit statist for people that are supposed to be libertarians.. although I have never said I was one, and we shouldnt let dogma get in the way of whats best for social harmony
A nice idea, but it wouldn't work.
It would be great for some Somalian refugees if they got to live in Oxfordshire or the Cotswolds by virtue of this policy I just thought up! I shouldnt think they would want to move
I have little doubt it would be better for an inclusive society as well
But if you mean the centuries of sectarianism, then fair point.0 -
Why do we still think Ed is crap? Ed is most certainly NOT crap and I put it to you that the reason he is so vilified by the evil right-wing media is that he is merely misunderstood!
Ed is magnificently charismatic and eloquent. He is a splendidly inspiring and passionate standard-bearer for the Progressive tradition in our great nation. Yes, indeed! One Nation! He is a magnificent orator, and his performance at Conference last year must surely have been the greatest by any Labour Party leader, or indeed, any party leader. And his repertoire of jokes would put even Harry Hill to shame!
Yes, we all knew that UKIP would win the Euro election, ahead of the glorious Labour Party, but that is UKIP's raison d'etre - a protest vote against the European status quo. Contrast, however, with the Local Elections held the same day. Under Ed's fabulous stewardship, Labour added hundreds of Council seats, even outside London!
Ed is a breath of fresh air, a refreshing, progressive alternative to that smarmy, posh-boy Cameron!
0 -
Vince Cable not having a great time, is he? A particularly unhelpful picture of him on the main BBC news front page today, looking about as shifty as it is possible to look.
Time to back a Tory win in Twickenham on the basis that the 163 year old Cable will call it a day in 2015....?0 -
Time for the LDs to shuffle their pack ?MarqueeMark said:Vince Cable not having a great time, is he? A particularly unhelpful picture of him on the main BBC news front page today, looking about as shifty as it is possible to look.
Time to back a Tory win in Twickenham on the basis that the 163 year old Cable will call it a day in 2015....?
Promote Danny to biz secretary to raise his profile and try and save his seat ?
Who knows he might even achieve something in the role - so far Vince has done nowt.0 -
A quick trawl of the web; Bristol 77.9% White British, Nottingham 65.4% White British, Leeds 81.1% White British, Manchester 66.7% White British E&OERodCrosby said:
Liverpool invented cultural diversity, nincompoop.TheWatcher said:
Relocate them to Liverpool, one of the least culturally diverse places in the UK, and spread the magic around. Would provide a welcome, and much needed boost to the education standards as well.isam said:
Well if they had he money to rent in the private market then nothing to stop them at all. But if they are in social housing then they would have to apply like anyone else.HurstLlama said:
Yes, but are you going to say that refugees once settled can never move? If not what is to stop them once they have their right to remain ticket upping sticks and joining the compatriots in another area of the country (and claiming housing benefit there).isam said:
IF councils were only allowed a max of 5% of social housing for refugees, there would be more refugees in places like Witney and less in the inner cities. Maybe then we really would start being "One Nation" and politicians could say what they think is best for the whole country, rather than pandering to the ethnic or social backgrounds of particular constituencies ....Socrates said:
Yes, that was my instinct a little bit too. On the other hand, it would just be a "nudge" incentive rather than compulsion. I also wondered how open it was to abuse to people pretending to be one ethnic group or another. How do they verify ethnicity in things like minority scholarships in the US?isam said:
It sounds a bit statist for people that are supposed to be libertarians.. although I have never said I was one, and we shouldnt let dogma get in the way of whats best for social harmony
A nice idea, but it wouldn't work.
It would be great for some Somalian refugees if they got to live in Oxfordshire or the Cotswolds by virtue of this policy I just thought up! I shouldnt think they would want to move
I have little doubt it would be better for an inclusive society as well
And Liverpool's what, 91%?0 -
I've never really understood the Cable phenomenon, it seems to date from his notorious Stalin reference which wasn't particularly funny or inciteful and yet as a result Cable has been elevated into some variety of political Titan. I mean he has shown time and again that he is a duplicitous rogue whose only loyalty is to his own hyper inflated ego.MarqueeMark said:Vince Cable not having a great time, is he? A particularly unhelpful picture of him on the main BBC news front page today, looking about as shifty as it is possible to look.
Time to back a Tory win in Twickenham on the basis that the 163 year old Cable will call it a day in 2015....?0 -
It certainly played its part in ensuring that the Southern parts of North America did not become a sterile white monoculture.RodCrosby said:
Liverpool invented cultural diversity, nincompoop.TheWatcher said:
Relocate them to Liverpool, one of the least culturally diverse places in the UK, and spread the magic around. Would provide a welcome, and much needed boost to the education standards as well.isam said:
Well if they had he money to rent in the private market then nothing to stop them at all. But if they are in social housing then they would have to apply like anyone else.HurstLlama said:
Yes, but are you going to say that refugees once settled can never move? If not what is to stop them once they have their right to remain ticket upping sticks and joining the compatriots in another area of the country (and claiming housing benefit there).isam said:
IF councils were only allowed a max of 5% of social housing for refugees, there would be more refugees in places like Witney and less in the inner cities. Maybe then we really would start being "One Nation" and politicians could say what they think is best for the whole country, rather than pandering to the ethnic or social backgrounds of particular constituencies ....Socrates said:
Yes, that was my instinct a little bit too. On the other hand, it would just be a "nudge" incentive rather than compulsion. I also wondered how open it was to abuse to people pretending to be one ethnic group or another. How do they verify ethnicity in things like minority scholarships in the US?isam said:
It sounds a bit statist for people that are supposed to be libertarians.. although I have never said I was one, and we shouldnt let dogma get in the way of whats best for social harmony
A nice idea, but it wouldn't work.
It would be great for some Somalian refugees if they got to live in Oxfordshire or the Cotswolds by virtue of this policy I just thought up! I shouldnt think they would want to move
I have little doubt it would be better for an inclusive society as well
0 -
I've never understood the Cable-hating often seen on pbc!ToryJim said:
I've never really understood the Cable phenomenonMarqueeMark said:Vince Cable not having a great time, is he? A particularly unhelpful picture of him on the main BBC news front page today, looking about as shifty as it is possible to look.
Time to back a Tory win in Twickenham on the basis that the 163 year old Cable will call it a day in 2015....?0 -
http://www.itv.com/news/update/2014-05-29/poll-ukip-could-lose-older-vote-at-general-election/
"Whilst 44% of people aged 65 and over say they could see themselves voting Ukip in a European Parliament election, only 33% say they would do the same in a General Election, according an ITV News poll carried out by ComRes."
"The data suggests that many older voters will switch away from the eurosceptic party in 2015 with less than three quarters of Ukip voters in the 2014 European elections saying they could see themselves doing the same in a General Election."
"ComRes interviewed 2,060 British adults online between 23rd and 26th May - this data was weighted to be representative of all GB adults aged 18 and over."0 -
Your lefty (London-based?) friend didnt think he might be part of the metropolitan elite himself?SeanT said:As a measure of how angry people are, out there, a lefty friend told me yesterday that if he lived in France he'd vote Front National - just to annoy the metropolitan elite.
0 -
Betfair :
Lab maj : 3.25
Con maj : 3.9
NOM : 2.22
0 -
Perhaps a list of Vince's stunning achievements as biz secretary would placate the doubters ?Neil said:
I've never understood the Cable-hating often seen on pbc!ToryJim said:
I've never really understood the Cable phenomenonMarqueeMark said:Vince Cable not having a great time, is he? A particularly unhelpful picture of him on the main BBC news front page today, looking about as shifty as it is possible to look.
Time to back a Tory win in Twickenham on the basis that the 163 year old Cable will call it a day in 2015....?0 -
Just another London fanny detached from the real worldNeil said:
Your lefty (London-based?) friend didnt think he might be part of the metropolitan elite himself?SeanT said:As a measure of how angry people are, out there, a lefty friend told me yesterday that if he lived in France he'd vote Front National - just to annoy the metropolitan elite.
0 -
Liberal-right masters, surely?SeanT said:As a measure of how angry people are, out there, a lefty friend told me yesterday that if he lived in France he'd vote Front National - just to annoy the metropolitan elite.
Troublin' times for our liberal-left masters.
The right is in government, and runs most of the media including the BBC. As William Hague wondered about Tony Blair, that Oxford-educated ex-barrister Prime Minister, "who does he think is the Establishment?"0 -
More faces than Toom Turnip, couldn't lead a conga around the town clock etcmalcolmg said:
Just another London fanny detached from the real worldNeil said:
Your lefty (London-based?) friend didnt think he might be part of the metropolitan elite himself?SeanT said:As a measure of how angry people are, out there, a lefty friend told me yesterday that if he lived in France he'd vote Front National - just to annoy the metropolitan elite.
0 -
It does surprise because in a wider sense Cable has ensured that the SDP wing of the LibDems have not only stayed on board the Coalition project but were enthusiastic about it from the start. Indeed it was Cable who effectively vetoed any potential coalition with Labour during their short lived negotiations in May 2010.Neil said:
I've never understood the Cable-hating often seen on pbc!ToryJim said:
I've never really understood the Cable phenomenonMarqueeMark said:Vince Cable not having a great time, is he? A particularly unhelpful picture of him on the main BBC news front page today, looking about as shifty as it is possible to look.
Time to back a Tory win in Twickenham on the basis that the 163 year old Cable will call it a day in 2015....?
Others in the Cable orbit like Steve Webb have also been highly prominent Coalition stalwarts as has, to much surprise, Simon Hughes both before and after he joined the government.
0 -
Get rid of Ed Davey while they are at it. He is UKIP's best recruiting sergeant in the south-west, with his personal crusade to stick a wind turbine on every hilltop. He could go and spend more time with his constituency. It looks like it needs a bit of nurturing.... ;-)TGOHF said:
Time for the LDs to shuffle their pack ?
Promote Danny to biz secretary to raise his profile and try and save his seat ?
Who knows he might even achieve something in the role - so far Vince has done nowt.
0 -
Margaret Curran on eh - I wonder if a certain topic might get raised ?MrJones said:
Did Piers Morgan have a sex change or do they have five guests now?marke09 said:Tonights QT panel includes David Willets MP Margaret Curran MP Louise Bours Piers Morgan and Joey Barton
http://footballtaxhavens.wordpress.com/2014/05/28/shadow-secretary-of-state-for-scotland-margaret-curran-creates-a-shadow-over-transfer-of-wsha-public-land-to-celtic/
0 -
Well, he privatised the Royal Mail, which is more than Lord Mandelson was able to manage, and he put in place the big hike in tuition fees...TGOHF said:Perhaps a list of Vince's stunning achievements as biz secretary would placate the doubters ?
0 -
internal conflicts. the blue labour people are being outvoted (or outscreeched).isam said:
Surprised more hasnt been made of this from Sadiq KhanCD13 said:
Ed.s going through the motions a little with ex-Labour Ukip voters ... "Yes, we're listening and we understand your pain, but ..."
Listening is OK, but Gordon Listened to Mrs Duffy, and as soon as she was out of earshot ... "She's a bigoted woman."
Probably a step forward to listen but not likely to be too effective on its own. So I suspect it will soon be back to demonisation. Interesting times indeed.
...
good
0 -
Supporters of tuition fees and Royal Mail privatisation should be cheering for Vince from here until election day!TGOHF said:
Perhaps a list of Vince's stunning achievements as biz secretary would placate the doubters ?Neil said:
I've never understood the Cable-hating often seen on pbc!ToryJim said:
I've never really understood the Cable phenomenonMarqueeMark said:Vince Cable not having a great time, is he? A particularly unhelpful picture of him on the main BBC news front page today, looking about as shifty as it is possible to look.
Time to back a Tory win in Twickenham on the basis that the 163 year old Cable will call it a day in 2015....?0 -
Probably not, although as the BBC would say "prices from other bookmakers are available".Stuart_Dickson said:
- "always assuming Ladbrokes re-introduce their constituency markets at odds akin to those previously on offer."peter_from_putney said:
Very interesting Jack - on these numbers, compared with the the 2010 GE result, the Tories win a net 11 seats, Labour win a net 10 seats and the LibDems lose a net 25 seats.JackW said:BREAKING WIND NEWS **** BREAKING WIND NEWS **** BREAKING WIND NEWS ****
The breaking news is that WIND is reporting to the JNN the contents of the latest ARSE 2015 General Election Projection :
Con 317 .. Lab 268 .. LibDem 32 .. SNP 8 .. PC 2 .. NI 18 .. Ukip 3 .. Respect 0 .. Green 1 .. Ind 0 .. Speaker 1
Conservatives 9 seats short of a majority.
Notes :
Highest Con seat number .. Lowest LibDem seat number.
.......................................................................................
WIND - Whimsical Independent News Division
JNN - Jacobite News Network
ARSE - Anonymous Random Selection of Electors
Unless I'm missing something, these figures only work if the net loss of Tory seats to Labour is limited to around a mere handful.
As I've suggested before, such an outcome appears to provide a whole range of attractive betting opportunities on would-be held Tory seats, always assuming Ladbrokes re-introduce their constituency markets at odds akin to those previously on offer.
Not gonna happen.
Incidentally, having recently introduced his own political betting blog, it's odd that Shadsy hasn't as yet reinstated Ladbrokes' constituency markets .... perhaps he's broken his abacus. Although in this computer driven age one would have thought that it would be possible to alter odds by a few percentage points, or whatever in all of about a thousandth of a second.
0 -
This explain so much of why Ed is crap.
http://www.independent.co.uk/incoming/ed-miliband-its-always-a-good-idea-not-to-read-the-newspapers-9452549.html
Totally out of touch & depending on aides to tell him the "truth" - geez
Ed Miliband doesn’t read British papers, has a “decidedly mixed record” with Twitter and on the whole prefers American political news.
In a frank interview, the Labour leader admitted that he tries to ignore the latest news from Westminster – instead relying on aides to brief him.
He doesn’t get newspapers delivered to his home and – unlike most politicians – doesn’t turn the television screen in his Westminster office on to rolling news channels.0 -
O/T
Is this worth one of Avery's yellow boxes :-)
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/10861170/Drugs-and-prostitution-add-10bn-a-year-to-UK-economy.html0 -
Remember that London has a far greater population than Scotland, fannies or not.malcolmg said:
Just another London fanny detached from the real worldNeil said:
Your lefty (London-based?) friend didnt think he might be part of the metropolitan elite himself?SeanT said:As a measure of how angry people are, out there, a lefty friend told me yesterday that if he lived in France he'd vote Front National - just to annoy the metropolitan elite.
0 -
Proper bitch slap on twitter
Michael Crick @MichaelLCrick 35m
Tories v worried over numbers at autumn conf - Shapps urging members "bring a friend" or relative to conference "even if not a Party member"
Grant Shapps MP @grantshapps 12m
@MichaelLCrick In fact twice the members coming compared to same time last year, but keen for more - thx for advert http://www.conservativepartyconference.org.uk/confhome.aspx
Michael Crick @MichaelLCrick 5m
@grantshapps Great. Perhaps you could bring your old friend Corinne Stockheath. We're all dying to meet her0 -
Totally out of touch & depending on aides to tell him the "truth" - geezmegalomaniacs4u said:This explain so much of why Ed is crap.
http://www.independent.co.uk/incoming/ed-miliband-its-always-a-good-idea-not-to-read-the-newspapers-9452549.html
Ed Miliband doesn’t read British papers, has a “decidedly mixed record” with Twitter and on the whole prefers American political news.
In a frank interview, the Labour leader admitted that he tries to ignore the latest news from Westminster – instead relying on aides to brief him.
He doesn’t get newspapers delivered to his home and – unlike most politicians – doesn’t turn the television screen in his Westminster office on to rolling news channels.
Relies on an American news aggregator and watches baseball.
His 'One Nation' would appear to be the USA.0 -
It's just polishing a turd, though, isn't it?TGOHF said:
Time for the LDs to shuffle their pack ?MarqueeMark said:Vince Cable not having a great time, is he? A particularly unhelpful picture of him on the main BBC news front page today, looking about as shifty as it is possible to look.
Time to back a Tory win in Twickenham on the basis that the 163 year old Cable will call it a day in 2015....?
Promote Danny to biz secretary to raise his profile and try and save his seat ?
Who knows he might even achieve something in the role - so far Vince has done nowt.
Surely the point is that only about one in every 5 to 6,000 or so MPs is a really impressive leader. In the 20th century we had Thatcher and Churchill, and that was it. We had ~20 parliaments x ~600 MPs, so of 12,000 who sat in Parliament over those 100 years we got 2 really effective party leaders (or maybe 3 if you include Blair on the basis of meretricious appeal rather than actual worth).
The moral of this is that really outstanding party leaders are vanishingly rare. For that rare individual to manifest among a party that like the LibDems has only 50 or so MPs is something that would happen around 50/6000ths of the time, i.e. it's a 1 in 100 to 120 Parliaments event / prospect.
A figure of Thatcher's gravitas can thus be expected to occur among the LibDems roughly every 600 years.0 -
Relies on an American news aggregator and watches baseball.TheWatcher said:
Totally out of touch & depending on aides to tell him the "truth" - geezmegalomaniacs4u said:This explain so much of why Ed is crap.
http://www.independent.co.uk/incoming/ed-miliband-its-always-a-good-idea-not-to-read-the-newspapers-9452549.html
Ed Miliband doesn’t read British papers, has a “decidedly mixed record” with Twitter and on the whole prefers American political news.
In a frank interview, the Labour leader admitted that he tries to ignore the latest news from Westminster – instead relying on aides to brief him.
He doesn’t get newspapers delivered to his home and – unlike most politicians – doesn’t turn the television screen in his Westminster office on to rolling news channels.
His 'One Nation' would appear to be the USA.
Perhaps he wishes he was his brother and living in the US :-)0 -
Washington correspondent Justin Webb said that the BBC is so biased against America that deputy director general Mark Byford had secretly agreed to help him to 'correct', it in his reports. Webb added that the BBC treated America with scorn and derision and gave it 'no moral weight'.DecrepitJohnL said:
Liberal-right masters, surely?SeanT said:As a measure of how angry people are, out there, a lefty friend told me yesterday that if he lived in France he'd vote Front National - just to annoy the metropolitan elite.
Troublin' times for our liberal-left masters.
The right is in government, and runs most of the media including the BBC. As William Hague wondered about Tony Blair, that Oxford-educated ex-barrister Prime Minister, "who does he think is the Establishment?"
Former BBC business editor Jeff Randall said he complained to a 'very senior news executive', about the BBC's pro-multicultural stance but was given the reply: 'The BBC is not neutral in multiculturalism: it believes in it and it promotes it.'
Anti-American and pro-multiculturalism are of course, centre-left views, not centre-right views. If you have further doubts, you can ask Peter Sissons:
"I am in no doubt that the majority of BBC staff vote for political parties of the Left. But it’s impossible to do anything but guess at the numbers whose beliefs are on the Right or even Centre-Right. This is because the one thing guaranteed to damage your career prospects at the BBC is letting it be known that you are at odds with the prevailing and deep-rooted BBC attitude towards Life, the Universe, and Everything."0 -
The Chancellor himself was ahead of the EU and ONS when celebrating the economic benefits of drugs and prostitution in *that* photograph.Blue_rog said:O/T
Is this worth one of Avery's yellow boxes :-)
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/10861170/Drugs-and-prostitution-add-10bn-a-year-to-UK-economy.html0 -
Ed should look to the USA..
US Q1 GDP (second reading) -1.0% q/q annualized vs -0.5% expected
3 minutes ago | May 29th, 2014 12:30:09 GMT0 -
Liverpool has the balance right, now.TheWatcher said:
A quick trawl of the web; Bristol 77.9% White British, Nottingham 65.4% White British, Leeds 81.1% White British, Manchester 66.7% White British E&OE
And Liverpool's what, 91%?
But historically, Liverpool was the most diverse place in the Kingdom.
The oldest black community in the country. The oldest Chinese in Europe. 25% Irish by 1850. More Welsh than in Cardiff by 1900. Scots, Scandinavians, Jews, Germans, Greeks, Americans, Portuguese.
"All the races of mankind were there, wonderfully mixed. Imagine an infants class of half-castes, quadroons, octaroons, with all the latitudes and longitudes confused in them...We could see them down there, like a miniature League of Nations assembly gone mad...Although they had mostly been begotten, born and reared in the most pitifully sordid circumstances, nearly all of them were unusually attractive in appearance, like most of oddly mixed blood...Looking at them, you did not think of the riff-raff of the stokeholds and the slatterns of the slums who had served as their parents: they seemed like charming exotic fruits, which indeed they were, of some profound anthropological experiment."
JB Priestley - English Journey (1933)0 -
Totally out of touch & depending on aides to tell him the "truth" - geezmegalomaniacs4u said:This explain so much of why Ed is crap.
http://www.independent.co.uk/incoming/ed-miliband-its-always-a-good-idea-not-to-read-the-newspapers-9452549.html
Ed Miliband doesn’t read British papers, has a “decidedly mixed record” with Twitter and on the whole prefers American political news.
In a frank interview, the Labour leader admitted that he tries to ignore the latest news from Westminster – instead relying on aides to brief him.
He doesn’t get newspapers delivered to his home and – unlike most politicians – doesn’t turn the television screen in his Westminster office on to rolling news channels.
That is bizarre, he really does sound cocooned in an alternate reality bubble.0 -
Britain's public health care system - 'Envy of the world'.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2642605/Mother-died-agonising-pain-days-forced-crawl-hands-knees-beg-painkillers-cries-help-went-unheard.html
Shameful. And it's Staffs again.0 -
That is bizarre, he really does sound cocooned in an alternate reality bubble.ToryJim said:
Totally out of touch & depending on aides to tell him the "truth" - geezmegalomaniacs4u said:This explain so much of why Ed is crap.
http://www.independent.co.uk/incoming/ed-miliband-its-always-a-good-idea-not-to-read-the-newspapers-9452549.html
Ed Miliband doesn’t read British papers, has a “decidedly mixed record” with Twitter and on the whole prefers American political news.
In a frank interview, the Labour leader admitted that he tries to ignore the latest news from Westminster – instead relying on aides to brief him.
He doesn’t get newspapers delivered to his home and – unlike most politicians – doesn’t turn the television screen in his Westminster office on to rolling news channels.
Bizarre? Not watching rolling TV news channels sounds completely normal to me and to be recommended to all politicians (and pbc-ers).0 -
The right runs most of the media including the BBC. Your claims about bias, even if correct, are irrelevant to that. You say anti-Americanism is of the left, yet Blair, Brown and now Ed Miliband were all slated for being too pro-American. Are they not of the "centre-left"?Socrates said:
Washington correspondent Justin Webb said that the BBC is so biased against America that deputy director general Mark Byford had secretly agreed to help him to 'correct', it in his reports. Webb added that the BBC treated America with scorn and derision and gave it 'no moral weight'.DecrepitJohnL said:
Liberal-right masters, surely?SeanT said:As a measure of how angry people are, out there, a lefty friend told me yesterday that if he lived in France he'd vote Front National - just to annoy the metropolitan elite.
Troublin' times for our liberal-left masters.
The right is in government, and runs most of the media including the BBC. As William Hague wondered about Tony Blair, that Oxford-educated ex-barrister Prime Minister, "who does he think is the Establishment?"
Former BBC business editor Jeff Randall said he complained to a 'very senior news executive', about the BBC's pro-multicultural stance but was given the reply: 'The BBC is not neutral in multiculturalism: it believes in it and it promotes it.'
Anti-American and pro-multiculturalism are of course, centre-left views, not centre-right views. If you have further doubts, you can ask Peter Sissons:
"I am in no doubt that the majority of BBC staff vote for political parties of the Left. But it’s impossible to do anything but guess at the numbers whose beliefs are on the Right or even Centre-Right. This is because the one thing guaranteed to damage your career prospects at the BBC is letting it be known that you are at odds with the prevailing and deep-rooted BBC attitude towards Life, the Universe, and Everything."0 -
Presumably the limit would also apply to Scotch refugees?isam said:
Well if they had he money to rent in the private market then nothing to stop them at all. But if they are in social housing then they would have to apply like anyone else.HurstLlama said:
Yes, but are you going to say that refugees once settled can never move? If not what is to stop them once they have their right to remain ticket upping sticks and joining the compatriots in another area of the country (and claiming housing benefit there).isam said:
IF councils were only allowed a max of 5% of social housing for refugees, there would be more refugees in places like Witney and less in the inner cities. Maybe then we really would start being "One Nation" and politicians could say what they think is best for the whole country, rather than pandering to the ethnic or social backgrounds of particular constituencies ....Socrates said:
Yes, that was my instinct a little bit too. On the other hand, it would just be a "nudge" incentive rather than compulsion. I also wondered how open it was to abuse to people pretending to be one ethnic group or another. How do they verify ethnicity in things like minority scholarships in the US?isam said:
It sounds a bit statist for people that are supposed to be libertarians.. although I have never said I was one, and we shouldnt let dogma get in the way of whats best for social harmony
A nice idea, but it wouldn't work.
It would be great for some Somalian refugees if they got to live in Oxfordshire or the Cotswolds by virtue of this policy I just thought up! I shouldnt think they would want to move
I have little doubt it would be better for an inclusive society as well
0 -
what a divvyTheWatcher said:
More faces than Toom Turnip, couldn't lead a conga around the town clock etcmalcolmg said:
Just another London fanny detached from the real worldNeil said:
Your lefty (London-based?) friend didnt think he might be part of the metropolitan elite himself?SeanT said:As a measure of how angry people are, out there, a lefty friend told me yesterday that if he lived in France he'd vote Front National - just to annoy the metropolitan elite.
0 -
Bizarre? Not watching rolling TV news channels sounds completely normal to me and to be recommended to all politicians (and pbc-ers).Neil said:
That is bizarre, he really does sound cocooned in an alternate reality bubble.ToryJim said:
Totally out of touch & depending on aides to tell him the "truth" - geezmegalomaniacs4u said:This explain so much of why Ed is crap.
http://www.independent.co.uk/incoming/ed-miliband-its-always-a-good-idea-not-to-read-the-newspapers-9452549.html
Ed Miliband doesn’t read British papers, has a “decidedly mixed record” with Twitter and on the whole prefers American political news.
In a frank interview, the Labour leader admitted that he tries to ignore the latest news from Westminster – instead relying on aides to brief him.
He doesn’t get newspapers delivered to his home and – unlike most politicians – doesn’t turn the television screen in his Westminster office on to rolling news channels.
Sounds like he doesn't read newspapers either. One wonders if he watches any news/current affairs shows? Maybe he gets all his news from PB?!0 -
London Euro results by borough (in a shitty format)
http://londoneuroelections.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/Borough-Voting-Figures-for-London-160KB-pdf.pdf
UKIP carried Havering, Sutton0 -
-
Sounds like he doesn't read newspapers either. One wonders if he watches any news/current affairs shows? Maybe he gets all his news from PB?!RobD said:
Bizarre? Not watching rolling TV news channels sounds completely normal to me and to be recommended to all politicians (and pbc-ers).Neil said:
That is bizarre, he really does sound cocooned in an alternate reality bubble.ToryJim said:
Totally out of touch & depending on aides to tell him the "truth" - geezmegalomaniacs4u said:This explain so much of why Ed is crap.
http://www.independent.co.uk/incoming/ed-miliband-its-always-a-good-idea-not-to-read-the-newspapers-9452549.html
Ed Miliband doesn’t read British papers, has a “decidedly mixed record” with Twitter and on the whole prefers American political news.
In a frank interview, the Labour leader admitted that he tries to ignore the latest news from Westminster – instead relying on aides to brief him.
He doesn’t get newspapers delivered to his home and – unlike most politicians – doesn’t turn the television screen in his Westminster office on to rolling news channels.
I think he's fed the mcnuggets by his advisors, I doubt they let him near the real meat.0 -
Sounds like he doesn't read newspapers either. One wonders if he watches any news/current affairs shows? Maybe he gets all his news from PB?!RobD said:
Bizarre? Not watching rolling TV news channels sounds completely normal to me and to be recommended to all politicians (and pbc-ers).Neil said:
That is bizarre, he really does sound cocooned in an alternate reality bubble.ToryJim said:
Totally out of touch & depending on aides to tell him the "truth" - geezmegalomaniacs4u said:This explain so much of why Ed is crap.
http://www.independent.co.uk/incoming/ed-miliband-its-always-a-good-idea-not-to-read-the-newspapers-9452549.html
Ed Miliband doesn’t read British papers, has a “decidedly mixed record” with Twitter and on the whole prefers American political news.
In a frank interview, the Labour leader admitted that he tries to ignore the latest news from Westminster – instead relying on aides to brief him.
He doesn’t get newspapers delivered to his home and – unlike most politicians – doesn’t turn the television screen in his Westminster office on to rolling news channels.
He's going to be a narked at the next thread that should be going up soon.
Having some datawrapper issues, grrr0 -
Shameful indeed. Whoever was Health Secretary on April 30th should resign. Or perhaps it is more complicated than that.TheWatcher said:Britain's public health care system - 'Envy of the world'.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2642605/Mother-died-agonising-pain-days-forced-crawl-hands-knees-beg-painkillers-cries-help-went-unheard.html
Shameful. And it's Staffs again.0 -
Is Plod coming for Clegg?
#questionstoanswer0 -
8.1m vs 5.3m (last census-ish) - greater yes, but 'far'?DecrepitJohnL said:
Remember that London has a far greater population than Scotland, fannies or not.malcolmg said:
Just another London fanny detached from the real worldNeil said:
Your lefty (London-based?) friend didnt think he might be part of the metropolitan elite himself?SeanT said:As a measure of how angry people are, out there, a lefty friend told me yesterday that if he lived in France he'd vote Front National - just to annoy the metropolitan elite.
0 -
I think he's fed the mcnuggets by his advisors, I doubt they let him near the real meat.ToryJim said:
Sounds like he doesn't read newspapers either. One wonders if he watches any news/current affairs shows? Maybe he gets all his news from PB?!RobD said:
Bizarre? Not watching rolling TV news channels sounds completely normal to me and to be recommended to all politicians (and pbc-ers).Neil said:
That is bizarre, he really does sound cocooned in an alternate reality bubble.ToryJim said:
Totally out of touch & depending on aides to tell him the "truth" - geezmegalomaniacs4u said:This explain so much of why Ed is crap.
http://www.independent.co.uk/incoming/ed-miliband-its-always-a-good-idea-not-to-read-the-newspapers-9452549.html
Ed Miliband doesn’t read British papers, has a “decidedly mixed record” with Twitter and on the whole prefers American political news.
In a frank interview, the Labour leader admitted that he tries to ignore the latest news from Westminster – instead relying on aides to brief him.
He doesn’t get newspapers delivered to his home and – unlike most politicians – doesn’t turn the television screen in his Westminster office on to rolling news channels.
Mrs Thatcher was the same. Bernard Ingham suggested John Major's problems stemmed from his insistence on reading the papers and reacting to headlines.0 -
That is bizarre, he really does sound cocooned in an alternate reality bubble.ToryJim said:
Totally out of touch & depending on aides to tell him the "truth" - geezmegalomaniacs4u said:This explain so much of why Ed is crap.
http://www.independent.co.uk/incoming/ed-miliband-its-always-a-good-idea-not-to-read-the-newspapers-9452549.html
Ed Miliband doesn’t read British papers, has a “decidedly mixed record” with Twitter and on the whole prefers American political news.
In a frank interview, the Labour leader admitted that he tries to ignore the latest news from Westminster – instead relying on aides to brief him.
He doesn’t get newspapers delivered to his home and – unlike most politicians – doesn’t turn the television screen in his Westminster office on to rolling news channels.
Indeed..that would be of concern to me.
The paper/website I read most of all is the Guardian, because it challenges my views, rather than always agreeing with them.0 -
Many Scots regard export of the golden nectar as nothing short of a scandal but I've never heard those wonderful bottles called "Scotch refugees" !!Bond_James_Bond said:
Presumably the limit would also apply to Scotch refugees?isam said:
Well if they had he money to rent in the private market then nothing to stop them at all. But if they are in social housing then they would have to apply like anyone else.HurstLlama said:
Yes, but are you going to say that refugees once settled can never move? If not what is to stop them once they have their right to remain ticket upping sticks and joining the compatriots in another area of the country (and claiming housing benefit there).isam said:
IF councils were only allowed a max of 5% of social housing for refugees, there would be more refugees in places like Witney and less in the inner cities. Maybe then we really would start being "One Nation" and politicians could say what they think is best for the whole country, rather than pandering to the ethnic or social backgrounds of particular constituencies ....Socrates said:
Yes, that was my instinct a little bit too. On the other hand, it would just be a "nudge" incentive rather than compulsion. I also wondered how open it was to abuse to people pretending to be one ethnic group or another. How do they verify ethnicity in things like minority scholarships in the US?isam said:
It sounds a bit statist for people that are supposed to be libertarians.. although I have never said I was one, and we shouldnt let dogma get in the way of whats best for social harmony
A nice idea, but it wouldn't work.
It would be great for some Somalian refugees if they got to live in Oxfordshire or the Cotswolds by virtue of this policy I just thought up! I shouldnt think they would want to move
I have little doubt it would be better for an inclusive society as well
0 -
He's going to be a narked at the next thread that should be going up soon.TheScreamingEagles said:
Sounds like he doesn't read newspapers either. One wonders if he watches any news/current affairs shows? Maybe he gets all his news from PB?!RobD said:
Bizarre? Not watching rolling TV news channels sounds completely normal to me and to be recommended to all politicians (and pbc-ers).Neil said:
That is bizarre, he really does sound cocooned in an alternate reality bubble.ToryJim said:
Totally out of touch & depending on aides to tell him the "truth" - geezmegalomaniacs4u said:This explain so much of why Ed is crap.
http://www.independent.co.uk/incoming/ed-miliband-its-always-a-good-idea-not-to-read-the-newspapers-9452549.html
Ed Miliband doesn’t read British papers, has a “decidedly mixed record” with Twitter and on the whole prefers American political news.
In a frank interview, the Labour leader admitted that he tries to ignore the latest news from Westminster – instead relying on aides to brief him.
He doesn’t get newspapers delivered to his home and – unlike most politicians – doesn’t turn the television screen in his Westminster office on to rolling news channels.
Having some datawrapper issues, grrr
Can we have a Scottish thread please
? 0 -
Can we have a Scottish thread pleasePulpstar said:
He's going to be a narked at the next thread that should be going up soon.TheScreamingEagles said:
Sounds like he doesn't read newspapers either. One wonders if he watches any news/current affairs shows? Maybe he gets all his news from PB?!RobD said:
Bizarre? Not watching rolling TV news channels sounds completely normal to me and to be recommended to all politicians (and pbc-ers).Neil said:
That is bizarre, he really does sound cocooned in an alternate reality bubble.ToryJim said:
Totally out of touch & depending on aides to tell him the "truth" - geezmegalomaniacs4u said:This explain so much of why Ed is crap.
http://www.independent.co.uk/incoming/ed-miliband-its-always-a-good-idea-not-to-read-the-newspapers-9452549.html
Ed Miliband doesn’t read British papers, has a “decidedly mixed record” with Twitter and on the whole prefers American political news.
In a frank interview, the Labour leader admitted that he tries to ignore the latest news from Westminster – instead relying on aides to brief him.
He doesn’t get newspapers delivered to his home and – unlike most politicians – doesn’t turn the television screen in his Westminster office on to rolling news channels.
Having some datawrapper issues, grrr ?
I'm saving that for the weekend, rumour has it there's a couple of polls out in the field.0 -
That is bizarre, he really does sound cocooned in an alternate reality bubble.ToryJim said:
Totally out of touch & depending on aides to tell him the "truth" - geezmegalomaniacs4u said:This explain so much of why Ed is crap.
http://www.independent.co.uk/incoming/ed-miliband-its-always-a-good-idea-not-to-read-the-newspapers-9452549.html
Ed Miliband doesn’t read British papers, has a “decidedly mixed record” with Twitter and on the whole prefers American political news.
In a frank interview, the Labour leader admitted that he tries to ignore the latest news from Westminster – instead relying on aides to brief him.
He doesn’t get newspapers delivered to his home and – unlike most politicians – doesn’t turn the television screen in his Westminster office on to rolling news channels.
To add to the mystery, how does ho know that 'Polls go up and down' if he is shielded from the daily information that masquerades as news?
Relying on loyal employees to tell you the truth when it is easier to tell you what you want to hear is a debatable strategy and not one that will allow you to absorb all the wisdom that is hidden under the shouty headlines and personality driven trivia.0 -
Does you mother like sewing?0
-
Slated from those even further left, thus confirming my point.DecrepitJohnL said:
The right runs most of the media including the BBC. Your claims about bias, even if correct, are irrelevant to that. You say anti-Americanism is of the left, yet Blair, Brown and now Ed Miliband were all slated for being too pro-American. Are they not of the "centre-left"?Socrates said:
Washington correspondent Justin Webb said that the BBC is so biased against America that deputy director general Mark Byford had secretly agreed to help him to 'correct', it in his reports. Webb added that the BBC treated America with scorn and derision and gave it 'no moral weight'.DecrepitJohnL said:
Liberal-right masters, surely?SeanT said:As a measure of how angry people are, out there, a lefty friend told me yesterday that if he lived in France he'd vote Front National - just to annoy the metropolitan elite.
Troublin' times for our liberal-left masters.
The right is in government, and runs most of the media including the BBC. As William Hague wondered about Tony Blair, that Oxford-educated ex-barrister Prime Minister, "who does he think is the Establishment?"
Former BBC business editor Jeff Randall said he complained to a 'very senior news executive', about the BBC's pro-multicultural stance but was given the reply: 'The BBC is not neutral in multiculturalism: it believes in it and it promotes it.'
Anti-American and pro-multiculturalism are of course, centre-left views, not centre-right views. If you have further doubts, you can ask Peter Sissons:
"I am in no doubt that the majority of BBC staff vote for political parties of the Left. But it’s impossible to do anything but guess at the numbers whose beliefs are on the Right or even Centre-Right. This is because the one thing guaranteed to damage your career prospects at the BBC is letting it be known that you are at odds with the prevailing and deep-rooted BBC attitude towards Life, the Universe, and Everything."
You also seem immune to evidence. A senior political figure in the BBC says that expressing centre-right views dooms your career at the organisation. How is that the right "running" it?0 -
Mrs Thatcher was the same. Bernard Ingham suggested John Major's problems stemmed from his insistence on reading the papers and reacting to headlines.DecrepitJohnL said:
I think he's fed the mcnuggets by his advisors, I doubt they let him near the real meat.ToryJim said:
Sounds like he doesn't read newspapers either. One wonders if he watches any news/current affairs shows? Maybe he gets all his news from PB?!RobD said:
Bizarre? Not watching rolling TV news channels sounds completely normal to me and to be recommended to all politicians (and pbc-ers).Neil said:
That is bizarre, he really does sound cocooned in an alternate reality bubble.ToryJim said:
Totally out of touch & depending on aides to tell him the "truth" - geezmegalomaniacs4u said:This explain so much of why Ed is crap.
http://www.independent.co.uk/incoming/ed-miliband-its-always-a-good-idea-not-to-read-the-newspapers-9452549.html
Ed Miliband doesn’t read British papers, has a “decidedly mixed record” with Twitter and on the whole prefers American political news.
In a frank interview, the Labour leader admitted that he tries to ignore the latest news from Westminster – instead relying on aides to brief him.
He doesn’t get newspapers delivered to his home and – unlike most politicians – doesn’t turn the television screen in his Westminster office on to rolling news channels.
I think you have to strike a balance. You don't want to a leader that's reacting to headlines every five minutes, but at the same time you don't want a leader that's completely cut off from public opinion.
Mrs Thatcher may not have took any notice of headlines, but she had a fine, in-built political antenna and most importantly she understood the aspirational working classes. Of course in the end her political antenna deserted her and she lost touch with the aspirational achievers who took her to power...
But anyway, getting back to the current political scene, Ed Milliband clearly doesn't have Mrs Thatchers political antenna and given the number of "working class" Labour voters that are going to UKIP he obviously can't relate to the strivers (or maybe they can't relate to him)
So here we have a leader with no real political antenna, who can't relate instinctively to the voters and who is intent on cutting himself off from public opinion by ignoring the media.
It's a dangerous combination for Labour.0 -
@TheScreamingEagles
twitter.com/ThePoke/status/471980274587549696/photo/1
Alex Cameron and David Salmond. Bit of a stitch up.0 -
Presumably if YES win 60.45% against NO 39.55% you might consider that a "far greater" win than expected ?Carnyx said:
8.1m vs 5.3m (last census-ish) - greater yes, but 'far'?DecrepitJohnL said:
Remember that London has a far greater population than Scotland, fannies or not.malcolmg said:
Just another London fanny detached from the real worldNeil said:
Your lefty (London-based?) friend didnt think he might be part of the metropolitan elite himself?SeanT said:As a measure of how angry people are, out there, a lefty friend told me yesterday that if he lived in France he'd vote Front National - just to annoy the metropolitan elite.
0 -
Roughly 50% greater than Scotland.Carnyx said:
8.1m vs 5.3m (last census-ish) - greater yes, but 'far'?DecrepitJohnL said:
Remember that London has a far greater population than Scotland, fannies or not.malcolmg said:
Just another London fanny detached from the real worldNeil said:
Your lefty (London-based?) friend didnt think he might be part of the metropolitan elite himself?SeanT said:As a measure of how angry people are, out there, a lefty friend told me yesterday that if he lived in France he'd vote Front National - just to annoy the metropolitan elite.
0 -
If UKIP maintain 3/4 of their vote in the general, that will be a fantastic result for them.TGOHF said:http://www.itv.com/news/update/2014-05-29/poll-ukip-could-lose-older-vote-at-general-election/
"Whilst 44% of people aged 65 and over say they could see themselves voting Ukip in a European Parliament election, only 33% say they would do the same in a General Election, according an ITV News poll carried out by ComRes."
"The data suggests that many older voters will switch away from the eurosceptic party in 2015 with less than three quarters of Ukip voters in the 2014 European elections saying they could see themselves doing the same in a General Election."
"ComRes interviewed 2,060 British adults online between 23rd and 26th May - this data was weighted to be representative of all GB adults aged 18 and over."0 -
And yet the LibDems won the council election in Sutton on the same day. Strange!AndreaParma_82 said:London Euro results by borough (in a shitty format)
http://londoneuroelections.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/Borough-Voting-Figures-for-London-160KB-pdf.pdf
UKIP carried Havering, Sutton0 -
Bleach please nurse!dr_spyn said:@TheScreamingEagles
twitter.com/ThePoke/status/471980274587549696/photo/1
Alex Cameron and David Salmond. Bit of a stitch up.0 -
More Euro votes by local authorities
East
http://www.chelmsford.gov.uk/sites/chelmsford.gov.uk/files/files/files/documents/files/regional results breakdown.pdf
West Midlands
http://www.birmingham.gov.uk/elections/european/2014
East Midlands
http://www.kettering.gov.uk/download/downloads/id/5993/european_elections_2014_-_east_midlands_region_detailed_results
NE
http://www.sunderland.gov.uk/CHttpHandler.ashx?id=15270&p=0&fsize=35kb&ftype=European Parliamentary Election 2014 results - North East region by counting area.PDF
Wales
http://www.pembrokeshire.gov.uk/content.asp?nav=101,1580,2279&parent_directory_id=646#viewresults
South West
http://www.boroughofpoole.com/EasysiteWeb/getresource.axd?AssetID=19042&type=full&servicetype=Attachment0 -
Better together ?RobD said:
Bleach please nurse!dr_spyn said:@TheScreamingEagles
twitter.com/ThePoke/status/471980274587549696/photo/1
Alex Cameron and David Salmond. Bit of a stitch up.0 -
I must commend their photoshop skills though!Pulpstar said:
Better together ?RobD said:
Bleach please nurse!dr_spyn said:@TheScreamingEagles
twitter.com/ThePoke/status/471980274587549696/photo/1
Alex Cameron and David Salmond. Bit of a stitch up.0 -
Thought the same thing - looks hideous but very cleverly done.RobD said:
I must commend their photoshop skills though!Pulpstar said:
Better together ?RobD said:
Bleach please nurse!dr_spyn said:@TheScreamingEagles
twitter.com/ThePoke/status/471980274587549696/photo/1
Alex Cameron and David Salmond. Bit of a stitch up.
0 -
Oh yes, a substantial difference. But 'far' to me is 2x or more. Anyway, lglad to know I'm not missing something important.Sunil_Prasannan said:
Roughly 50% greater than Scotland.Carnyx said:
8.1m vs 5.3m (last census-ish) - greater yes, but 'far'?DecrepitJohnL said:
Remember that London has a far greater population than Scotland, fannies or not.malcolmg said:
Just another London fanny detached from the real worldNeil said:
Your lefty (London-based?) friend didnt think he might be part of the metropolitan elite himself?SeanT said:As a measure of how angry people are, out there, a lefty friend told me yesterday that if he lived in France he'd vote Front National - just to annoy the metropolitan elite.
Presumably if YES win 60.45% against NO 39.55% you might consider that a "far greater" win than expected ?JackW said:
census-ish) - greater yes, but 'far'?
I won't rise to that bait - but will congratulate you on your discernment re Scotch refugees. Such expressions need to be constantly monitored!
0 -
Appreciate that it's only Euro's and that people vote differently, but it is perhaps interesting to note that the Greens beat the Lib Dems in every borough except the following: (Brent, City of London, Kingston, Richmond, Sutton).AndreaParma_82 said:London Euro results by borough (in a shitty format)
http://londoneuroelections.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/Borough-Voting-Figures-for-London-160KB-pdf.pdf
UKIP carried Havering, Sutton0 -
To add to the mystery, how does ho know that 'Polls go up and down' if he is shielded from the daily information that masquerades as news?philiph said:
That is bizarre, he really does sound cocooned in an alternate reality bubble.ToryJim said:
Totally out of touch & depending on aides to tell him the "truth" - geezmegalomaniacs4u said:This explain so much of why Ed is crap.
http://www.independent.co.uk/incoming/ed-miliband-its-always-a-good-idea-not-to-read-the-newspapers-9452549.html
Ed Miliband doesn’t read British papers, has a “decidedly mixed record” with Twitter and on the whole prefers American political news.
In a frank interview, the Labour leader admitted that he tries to ignore the latest news from Westminster – instead relying on aides to brief him.
He doesn’t get newspapers delivered to his home and – unlike most politicians – doesn’t turn the television screen in his Westminster office on to rolling news channels.
Aide to Ed - "Well, the latest poll puts you on 53%, a drop of 1% on yesterdays figures"
0 -
The one on the right looks a bit like Duncan Bannatynedr_spyn said:@TheScreamingEagles
twitter.com/ThePoke/status/471980274587549696/photo/1
Alex Cameron and David Salmond. Bit of a stitch up.0 -
New Thread0
-
On this very thread, you will find posters of the right condemning Miliband's Atlanticism. Even if you are right about anti-Americanism, it has nothing to do with the left.Socrates said:
Slated from those even further left, thus confirming my point.DecrepitJohnL said:
The right runs most of the media including the BBC. Your claims about bias, even if correct, are irrelevant to that. You say anti-Americanism is of the left, yet Blair, Brown and now Ed Miliband were all slated for being too pro-American. Are they not of the "centre-left"?Socrates said:
Washington correspondent Justin Webb said that the BBC is so biased against America that deputy director general Mark Byford had secretly agreed to help him to 'correct', it in his reports. Webb added that the BBC treated America with scorn and derision and gave it 'no moral weight'.DecrepitJohnL said:
Liberal-right masters, surely?SeanT said:As a measure of how angry people are, out there, a lefty friend told me yesterday that if he lived in France he'd vote Front National - just to annoy the metropolitan elite.
Troublin' times for our liberal-left masters.
The right is in government, and runs most of the media including the BBC. As William Hague wondered about Tony Blair, that Oxford-educated ex-barrister Prime Minister, "who does he think is the Establishment?"
Former BBC business editor Jeff Randall said he complained to a 'very senior news executive', about the BBC's pro-multicultural stance but was given the reply: 'The BBC is not neutral in multiculturalism: it believes in it and it promotes it.'
Anti-American and pro-multiculturalism are of course, centre-left views, not centre-right views. If you have further doubts, you can ask Peter Sissons:
"I am in no doubt that the majority of BBC staff vote for political parties of the Left. But it’s impossible to do anything but guess at the numbers whose beliefs are on the Right or even Centre-Right. This is because the one thing guaranteed to damage your career prospects at the BBC is letting it be known that you are at odds with the prevailing and deep-rooted BBC attitude towards Life, the Universe, and Everything."
You also seem immune to evidence. A senior political figure in the BBC says that expressing centre-right views dooms your career at the organisation. How is that the right "running" it?
Those you cite enjoyed (or endured) successful careers at the BBC, did they not? Lord Patten is a former Conservative minister. The BBC's political editor is a Conservative. The more nuanced criticism of the BBC these days seems to be that it is pro-Establishment or pro-government.
0 -
I have no idea why the size of Scotland's population got conflated with London fanny's not living in the real world.Carnyx said:
8.1m vs 5.3m (last census-ish) - greater yes, but 'far'?DecrepitJohnL said:
Remember that London has a far greater population than Scotland, fannies or not.malcolmg said:
Just another London fanny detached from the real worldNeil said:
Your lefty (London-based?) friend didnt think he might be part of the metropolitan elite himself?SeanT said:As a measure of how angry people are, out there, a lefty friend told me yesterday that if he lived in France he'd vote Front National - just to annoy the metropolitan elite.
0
This discussion has been closed.