politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Tonight’s ComRes phone poll for the Indy sees LAB drop 5 an
Comments
-
That's pretty massive. Another twig on the fire of public cynicism.isam said:By the way, the recall bill was voted down 340-166
0 -
When the Tories last said what they think, Mr Parris insulted an entire constituency.Speedy said:Could this spell the end of spin doctors?
Andrew Hawkins @Andrew_ComRes 1h1 hour ago
ComRes/Independent: 39% say they're attracted to UKIP 'because they say what they think' (up 6 points since April)
0 -
The danger for the Tories is clearly outlined here:
Andrew Hawkins @Andrew_ComRes · 1h 1 hour ago
ComRes/Independent: 54% of Conservative voters think UKIP 'are talking about the things I care about'0 -
Gadflies on the march.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1463248/Howard-rages-at-UKIP-gadflies.html0 -
One thing I will say is, the Tories' win next year could do them a lot of long-term damage like their 1992 win. It really will be a very half-hearted "endorsement" and only because people think their offering is marginally less terrible than Labour's. If Labour get their act together after that, and elect a leader who vaguely resembles the human race and gets some policies which their voters actually like, the dam could really burst over the Tories.0
-
No. It will just mean that the style of spin will become more direct and a slightly wider range of acceptable lines for party hacks to spout will be approved. People prefer what might seem like bluntness or even rudeness over some overly polished line that means nothing, so that's what spin doctors will use, and people want authenticity (unless one's authentic nature coincides with the polished, blank style of current spin, which I think is part of Cameron's problem), so the MPs will need to be given a little more slack, or given a greater variety of lines to use, rather than one rigid approach to stick to like robots. Hell, we're probably already seeing the spinners testing things out, ministers and shadow ministers using blunter language and seeing what sort of political storm their opponents can make of it, and whether it hurt them at all.Speedy said:Could this spell the end of spin doctors?
0 -
It's a measure of how far Labour have fallen and how far UKIP have advanced that we are seriously discussing the prospect of UKIP winning an election covering the whole of South Yorkshire.anotherDave said:
I think the South Yorkshire PCC election is the next result.Artist said:The question is what will the polls look like if/when UKIP return to their normal 12/13% level. I bet Labour and the Conservatives would prefer the Rochester By Election to be over with and UKIP out of the news for a bit.
If UKIP can do it, it embeds them even more firmly in the Second Division of British politics, and knocking on the door of the First. In the 2012 PCC elections, neither UKIP nor the Lib Dems managed a second place, never mind a first. Winning such large constituencies is tough. Out of about 300 MEP elections between 1979 and 1994, the Lib Dems took just two - and South Yorkshire is about twice the size of an old Euro-constituency.
This, however, is the nature of how incremental events condition us. The fact that polls creep up by one or two and then fall back again means we redefine normal in such small amounts that it's only when we stand back that we see the scale of the transformation. And it is massive.
Will it feed though to the GE? That's still unknown. UKIP on 15% will have an indirect effect but will return only a handful of MPs at most. 20% may return it enough to have a serious parliamentary presence. 25% and we could be talking several dozen. Thereafter, they'd really take off. And they could poll 25%. Or they could poll in single figures if it falls apart and the bubble bursts.0 -
British law implies that it is one our government can repeal if they don't like it.edmundintokyo said:
More likely go to a British court and ask it to compel the government to pay the money, as required by British law.
0 -
Can they do that without splitting the party?Danny565 said:One thing I will say is, the Tories' win next year could do them a lot of long-term damage like their 1992 win. It really will be a very half-hearted "endorsement" and only because people think their offering is marginally less terrible than Labour's. If Labour get their act together after that, and elect a leader who vaguely resembles the human race and gets some policies which their voters actually like, the dam could really burst over the Tories.
The achievement of Ed is holing the Brown / Blair wings together. The failure of Ed is that in doing that he can do nothing policy wise.0 -
Maybe, although of course those Tories who have given up on next year are hoping the same thing but in reverse happens with a Labour government elected on such a lukewarm basis. Whoever does lose can surely no longer carry on as they are, it will be at the point that even the political leaderships will realize they are in trouble, so with either an unpopular Cameron then successor government or an unpopular Miliband government, it should really be very simple for either opposition to crush them, perhaps in alliance with others, in 2020. Anyone happy about that now though has clearly given up on their particular side though.Danny565 said:One thing I will say is, the Tories' win next year could do them a lot of long-term damage like their 1992 win. It really will be a very half-hearted "endorsement" and only because people think their offering is marginally less terrible than Labour's. If Labour get their act together after that, and elect a leader who vaguely resembles the human race and gets some policies which their voters actually like, the dam could really burst over the Tories.
Night all.
0 -
The great thing about UKIP is they're such a wild card. Clacton and Heywood were both safe seats on 2010 numbers.david_herdson said:
It's a measure of how far Labour have fallen and how far UKIP have advanced that we are seriously discussing the prospect of UKIP winning an election covering the whole of South Yorkshire.anotherDave said:
I think the South Yorkshire PCC election is the next result.Artist said:The question is what will the polls look like if/when UKIP return to their normal 12/13% level. I bet Labour and the Conservatives would prefer the Rochester By Election to be over with and UKIP out of the news for a bit.
If UKIP can do it, it embeds them even more firmly in the Second Division of British politics, and knocking on the door of the First. In the 2012 PCC elections, neither UKIP nor the Lib Dems managed a second place, never mind a first. Winning such large constituencies is tough. Out of about 300 MEP elections between 1979 and 1994, the Lib Dems took just two - and South Yorkshire is about twice the size of an old Euro-constituency.
This, however, is the nature of how incremental events condition us. The fact that polls creep up by one or two and then fall back again means we redefine normal in such small amounts that it's only when we stand back that we see the scale of the transformation. And it is massive.
Will it feed though to the GE? That's still unknown. UKIP on 15% will have an indirect effect but will return only a handful of MPs at most. 20% may return it enough to have a serious parliamentary presence. 25% and we could be talking several dozen. Thereafter, they'd really take off. And they could poll 25%. Or they could poll in single figures if it falls apart and the bubble bursts.0 -
There are posts here that simply don't follow other posts they are quoting ?0
-
Tory views are not much of a secret for decades now.anotherDave said:
When the Tories last said what they think, Mr Parris insulted an entire constituency.Speedy said:Could this spell the end of spin doctors?
Andrew Hawkins @Andrew_ComRes 1h1 hour ago
ComRes/Independent: 39% say they're attracted to UKIP 'because they say what they think' (up 6 points since April)
That simply reinforced the public view that the Tory party hates the guts of ordinary people.
0 -
My estimate of the true Labour lead, 0.7%
It's not impossible the Tories are already ahead...0 -
It's a club that wants to be a nation thinks its a nation in the making and increasingly is taking on the characteristics of a nation.chestnut said:
I'll quote Salmond, "what are Brussels going to do, invade?"Speedy said:
The problem is that Brussels might play hardball and still demand the money and that plays to UKIP's hands.
The problem for the Tories is no longer the British responce, it's the EU's demands, with every demand UKIP gets a boost.
The EU is a recent fabrication. It is a club, not a nation.
When it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck........0 -
Sure, parliament can repeal laws requiring it to keep international treaties they've signed, but countries with treaty obligations to Britain would respond in kind.chestnut said:
British law implies that it is one our government can repeal if they don't like it.edmundintokyo said:
More likely go to a British court and ask it to compel the government to pay the money, as required by British law.
If you're going down this road you're much better off just leaving the EU, which gets you to the same place in a less chaotic way.0 -
This is part of UKIP's 'charm'.Speedy said:Could this spell the end of spin doctors?
Andrew Hawkins @Andrew_ComRes 1h1 hour ago
ComRes/Independent: 39% say they're attracted to UKIP 'because they say what they think' (up 6 points since April)
Looking like an incompetent shower who could organise a piss-up in a brewery but little else is increasingly preferable to the Establishment's incompetent showers who couldn't manage even the piss-up.
For all I know perhaps the ex-plod UKIP are running in South Yorkshire looks more like the reincarnation of Dixon of Dock Green to the average voter rather than the dismal insider he appears to me.
0 -
except that doesn't really describe most of the UKIP supporters here on PB. One or two, perhaps.Pong said:
Fixed it for ya.another_richard said:
ItsFlightpath said:
So what left wing polices do UKIP follow to attract all these Labour voters? A list would be helpfulanother_richard said:
Beyond a certain point UKIP takes more votes from Labour than the Conservatives.isam said:Ah, the good old days...
April 2013
tim said:
"Mike Smithson @MSmithsonPB 4m
Prof John Curtice predicting that Ukip vote share at GE2015 could be 6-8%
Sounds about right, good enough to kill Dave off if true."
We are certainly beyond that point now.wwcsexually repressed voters that UKIP are attracting not leftwing voters.
UKIP is a coalition of cultural conservatives. Those who want to live in the simple world of right & wrong of their childhood - you'll find them all over the place, in churches, mosques, rotary clubs, working mens clubs etc. Hell, if they weren't so anti-eu, they'd probably mop up the Polish vote, too.
Welcome to politics 2.0.0 -
That is what bothers me about the constituency polls, there are none in safe seats apart from Boston.anotherDave said:
The great think about UKIP is they're such a wild card. Clacton and Heywood were both safe seats on 2010 numbers.david_herdson said:
It's a measure of how far Labour have fallen and how far UKIP have advanced that we are seriously discussing the prospect of UKIP winning an election covering the whole of South Yorkshire.anotherDave said:
I think the South Yorkshire PCC election is the next result.Artist said:The question is what will the polls look like if/when UKIP return to their normal 12/13% level. I bet Labour and the Conservatives would prefer the Rochester By Election to be over with and UKIP out of the news for a bit.
If UKIP can do it, it embeds them even more firmly in the Second Division of British politics, and knocking on the door of the First. In the 2012 PCC elections, neither UKIP nor the Lib Dems managed a second place, never mind a first. Winning such large constituencies is tough. Out of about 300 MEP elections between 1979 and 1994, the Lib Dems took just two - and South Yorkshire is about twice the size of an old Euro-constituency.
This, however, is the nature of how incremental events condition us. The fact that polls creep up by one or two and then fall back again means we redefine normal in such small amounts that it's only when we stand back that we see the scale of the transformation. And it is massive.
Will it feed though to the GE? That's still unknown. UKIP on 15% will have an indirect effect but will return only a handful of MPs at most. 20% may return it enough to have a serious parliamentary presence. 25% and we could be talking several dozen. Thereafter, they'd really take off. And they could poll 25%. Or they could poll in single figures if it falls apart and the bubble bursts.
UKIP could be doing enormous damage in safe seats (Tory seats in particular) that we still don't know about.0 -
Zac Goldsmith defection on the cards?NickPalmer said:
That's pretty massive. Another twig on the fire of public cynicism.isam said:By the way, the recall bill was voted down 340-166
0 -
4 more Green selections, 3 of them women:
Great Grimsby: Vicky Dunn.
Cleethorpes: Carol Thornton.
Brigg & Goole: Natalie Hurst.
Scunthorpe: Martin Dwyer.
The only one of these which had a Green candidate in 2010 was Scunthorpe, where Natalie Hurst was the candidate, polling 396 votes (1.1%).
http://www.grimsbytelegraph.co.uk/Green-Party-announces-Parliamentary-candidates/story-22961815-detail/story.html0 -
Goldsmith will be furious. A chat with Carswell maybe?isam said:
Zac Goldsmith defection on the cards?NickPalmer said:
That's pretty massive. Another twig on the fire of public cynicism.isam said:By the way, the recall bill was voted down 340-166
0 -
When was the last time a country left a union of states in an organised fashion?edmundintokyo said:
Sure, parliament can repeal laws requiring it to keep international treaties they've signed, but countries with treaty obligations to Britain would respond in kind.chestnut said:
British law implies that it is one our government can repeal if they don't like it.edmundintokyo said:
More likely go to a British court and ask it to compel the government to pay the money, as required by British law.
If you're going down this road you're much better off just leaving the EU, which gets you to the same place in a less chaotic way.
Those things rarely happen in an organised way and the breakup always occurs because the poor states demand more money from the rich states. (see Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia, USSR)0 -
If you look at the other questions in that poll you have:another_richard said:
This is part of UKIP's 'charm'.Speedy said:Could this spell the end of spin doctors?
Andrew Hawkins @Andrew_ComRes 1h1 hour ago
ComRes/Independent: 39% say they're attracted to UKIP 'because they say what they think' (up 6 points since April)
Looking like an incompetent shower who could organise a piss-up in a brewery but little else is increasingly preferable to the Establishment's incompetent showers who couldn't manage even the piss-up.
For all I know perhaps the ex-plod UKIP are running in South Yorkshire looks more like the reincarnation of Dixon of Dock Green to the average voter rather than the dismal insider he appears to me.
30% agree that UKIP are the party of common sense.
34% agree that UKIP offer a realistic alternative political vision of Britain.
47% agree that UKIP are talking about the things I care about.0 -
Honestly, my life would be a lot easier with Excel*
*Not true - total bluff0 -
If the pollsters' error margins at the 2014 Euros are replicated, it's a virtual certainty. The minimum overstatement of the Lab-Con lead was 1.5, the maximum was 5.5 (incl ComRes).RodCrosby said:It's not impossible the Tories are already ahead...
A 2010:Now vote ratio has had the Tories ahead in 3 of the last 4 yougovs.
0 -
Not before UKIP show him a constituency poll with Goldsmith being in the lead as a UKIP candidate.AndyJS said:
Goldsmith will be furious. A chat with Carswell maybe?isam said:
Zac Goldsmith defection on the cards?NickPalmer said:
That's pretty massive. Another twig on the fire of public cynicism.isam said:By the way, the recall bill was voted down 340-166
0 -
Yay!
My second i front page.
There must have been a reason why Ms Brisky was grumpy...0 -
I wouldn't be surprised if this is what we choose to do, given a referendum.edmundintokyo said:If you're going down this road you're much better off just leaving the EU, which gets you to the same place in a less chaotic way.
0 -
It should make election night better telly.Speedy said:
That is what bothers me about the constituency polls, there are none in safe seats apart from Boston.anotherDave said:
The great think about UKIP is they're such a wild card. Clacton and Heywood were both safe seats on 2010 numbers.david_herdson said:
It's a measure of how far Labour have fallen and how far UKIP have advanced that we are seriously discussing the prospect of UKIP winning an election covering the whole of South Yorkshire.anotherDave said:
I think the South Yorkshire PCC election is the next result.Artist said:The question is what will the polls look like if/when UKIP return to their normal 12/13% level. I bet Labour and the Conservatives would prefer the Rochester By Election to be over with and UKIP out of the news for a bit.
If UKIP can do it, it embeds them even more firmly in the Second Division of British politics, and knocking on the door of the First. In the 2012 PCC elections, neither UKIP nor the Lib Dems managed a second place, never mind a first. Winning such large constituencies is tough. Out of about 300 MEP elections between 1979 and 1994, the Lib Dems took just two - and South Yorkshire is about twice the size of an old Euro-constituency.
This, however, is the nature of how incremental events condition us. The fact that polls creep up by one or two and then fall back again means we redefine normal in such small amounts that it's only when we stand back that we see the scale of the transformation. And it is massive.
Will it feed though to the GE? That's still unknown. UKIP on 15% will have an indirect effect but will return only a handful of MPs at most. 20% may return it enough to have a serious parliamentary presence. 25% and we could be talking several dozen. Thereafter, they'd really take off. And they could poll 25%. Or they could poll in single figures if it falls apart and the bubble bursts.
UKIP could be doing enormous damage in safe seats (Tory seats in particular) that we still don't know about.
0 -
Shy kippers?anotherDave said:
If you look at the other questions in that poll you have:another_richard said:
This is part of UKIP's 'charm'.Speedy said:Could this spell the end of spin doctors?
Andrew Hawkins @Andrew_ComRes 1h1 hour ago
ComRes/Independent: 39% say they're attracted to UKIP 'because they say what they think' (up 6 points since April)
Looking like an incompetent shower who could organise a piss-up in a brewery but little else is increasingly preferable to the Establishment's incompetent showers who couldn't manage even the piss-up.
For all I know perhaps the ex-plod UKIP are running in South Yorkshire looks more like the reincarnation of Dixon of Dock Green to the average voter rather than the dismal insider he appears to me.
30% agree that UKIP are the party of common sense.
34% agree that UKIP offer a realistic alternative political vision of Britain.
47% agree that UKIP are talking about the things I care about.
0 -
Another Green selection in Carshalton & Wallington, Ross Hemingway.
http://sutton.greenparty.org.uk/news/2014/10/24/sutton-green-party-announces-prospective-parliamentary-candidate-for-carshalton-and-wallington/0 -
The only thing with those numbers that UKIP needs to take off is to be ahead of the Tories in the national polls, after that FPTP takes over and slam realignment.anotherDave said:
If you look at the other questions in that poll you have:another_richard said:
This is part of UKIP's 'charm'.Speedy said:Could this spell the end of spin doctors?
Andrew Hawkins @Andrew_ComRes 1h1 hour ago
ComRes/Independent: 39% say they're attracted to UKIP 'because they say what they think' (up 6 points since April)
Looking like an incompetent shower who could organise a piss-up in a brewery but little else is increasingly preferable to the Establishment's incompetent showers who couldn't manage even the piss-up.
For all I know perhaps the ex-plod UKIP are running in South Yorkshire looks more like the reincarnation of Dixon of Dock Green to the average voter rather than the dismal insider he appears to me.
30% agree that UKIP are the party of common sense.
34% agree that UKIP offer a realistic alternative political vision of Britain.
47% agree that UKIP are talking about the things I care about.0 -
How many Commonwealth countries should I list?Speedy said:
When was the last time a country left a union of states in an organised fashion?edmundintokyo said:
Sure, parliament can repeal laws requiring it to keep international treaties they've signed, but countries with treaty obligations to Britain would respond in kind.chestnut said:
British law implies that it is one our government can repeal if they don't like it.edmundintokyo said:
More likely go to a British court and ask it to compel the government to pay the money, as required by British law.
If you're going down this road you're much better off just leaving the EU, which gets you to the same place in a less chaotic way.
Those things rarely happen in an organised way and the breakup always occurs because the poor states demand more money from the rich states. (see Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia, USSR)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_national_independence_days0 -
UKIP got 1% there in 2010.Speedy said:
Not before UKIP show him a constituency poll with Goldsmith being in the lead as a UKIP candidate.AndyJS said:
Goldsmith will be furious. A chat with Carswell maybe?isam said:
Zac Goldsmith defection on the cards?NickPalmer said:
That's pretty massive. Another twig on the fire of public cynicism.isam said:By the way, the recall bill was voted down 340-166
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/2015guide/richmondpark/0 -
A Union not a Commonwealth.manofkent2014 said:
How many Commonwealth countries should I list?Speedy said:
When was the last time a country left a union of states in an organised fashion?edmundintokyo said:
Sure, parliament can repeal laws requiring it to keep international treaties they've signed, but countries with treaty obligations to Britain would respond in kind.chestnut said:
British law implies that it is one our government can repeal if they don't like it.edmundintokyo said:
More likely go to a British court and ask it to compel the government to pay the money, as required by British law.
If you're going down this road you're much better off just leaving the EU, which gets you to the same place in a less chaotic way.
Those things rarely happen in an organised way and the breakup always occurs because the poor states demand more money from the rich states. (see Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia, USSR)0 -
Greens, Sutton & Cheam: Maeve Tomlinson.
http://sutton.greenparty.org.uk/news/2014/10/27/sutton-green-party-announces-prospective-parliamentary-candidate-for-sutton-and-cheam/0 -
Northern Lincolnshire isn't the best territory for the Greens to bang on about climate change and carbon emissions.AndyJS said:4 more Green selections, 3 of them women:
Great Grimsby: Vicky Dunn.
Cleethorpes: Carol Thornton.
Brigg & Goole: Natalie Hurst.
Scunthorpe: Martin Dwyer.
The only one of these which had a Green candidate in 2010 was Scunthorpe, where Natalie Hurst was the candidate, polling 396 votes (1.1%).
http://www.grimsbytelegraph.co.uk/Green-Party-announces-Parliamentary-candidates/story-22961815-detail/story.html
0 -
UKIPs policy of scrapping Inheritance Tax is a key policy which has been played very low key by the party and in the media so far.It becomes an exocet aimed at the Tory middle class vote if people begin to believe UKIP have a chance of being able to deliver as say part of a coalition.It is imperative UKIP lock in as much as possible of the wwc before they really play this card because of how Labour will paint it but it is a potential game changer imo.0
-
500 Green candidates could cause serious damage to Ed's prospects.0
-
The Greens will probably barely be talking about climate change next year. They'll be talking about fracking and being "the only party against spending cuts".another_richard said:
Northern Lincolnshire isn't the best territory for the Greens to bang on about climate change and carbon emissions.AndyJS said:4 more Green selections, 3 of them women:
Great Grimsby: Vicky Dunn.
Cleethorpes: Carol Thornton.
Brigg & Goole: Natalie Hurst.
Scunthorpe: Martin Dwyer.
The only one of these which had a Green candidate in 2010 was Scunthorpe, where Natalie Hurst was the candidate, polling 396 votes (1.1%).
http://www.grimsbytelegraph.co.uk/Green-Party-announces-Parliamentary-candidates/story-22961815-detail/story.html0 -
Just by standing they automatically take 500 votes mainly from Labour.another_richard said:
Northern Lincolnshire isn't the best territory for the Greens to bang on about climate change and carbon emissions.AndyJS said:4 more Green selections, 3 of them women:
Great Grimsby: Vicky Dunn.
Cleethorpes: Carol Thornton.
Brigg & Goole: Natalie Hurst.
Scunthorpe: Martin Dwyer.
The only one of these which had a Green candidate in 2010 was Scunthorpe, where Natalie Hurst was the candidate, polling 396 votes (1.1%).
http://www.grimsbytelegraph.co.uk/Green-Party-announces-Parliamentary-candidates/story-22961815-detail/story.html0 -
PB is a bubble, like most forums on the internet.dugarbandier said:
except that doesn't really describe most of the UKIP supporters here on PB. One or two, perhaps.Pong said:
Fixed it for ya.another_richard said:
ItsFlightpath said:
So what left wing polices do UKIP follow to attract all these Labour voters? A list would be helpfulanother_richard said:
Beyond a certain point UKIP takes more votes from Labour than the Conservatives.isam said:Ah, the good old days...
April 2013
tim said:
"Mike Smithson @MSmithsonPB 4m
Prof John Curtice predicting that Ukip vote share at GE2015 could be 6-8%
Sounds about right, good enough to kill Dave off if true."
We are certainly beyond that point now.wwcsexually repressed voters that UKIP are attracting not leftwing voters.
UKIP is a coalition of cultural conservatives. Those who want to live in the simple world of right & wrong of their childhood - you'll find them all over the place, in churches, mosques, rotary clubs, working mens clubs etc. Hell, if they weren't so anti-eu, they'd probably mop up the Polish vote, too.
Welcome to politics 2.0.0 -
An awful lot of UKIP-sympathetic voters out there.Luckyguy1983 said:
Shy kippers?anotherDave said:
If you look at the other questions in that poll you have:another_richard said:
This is part of UKIP's 'charm'.Speedy said:Could this spell the end of spin doctors?
Andrew Hawkins @Andrew_ComRes 1h1 hour ago
ComRes/Independent: 39% say they're attracted to UKIP 'because they say what they think' (up 6 points since April)
Looking like an incompetent shower who could organise a piss-up in a brewery but little else is increasingly preferable to the Establishment's incompetent showers who couldn't manage even the piss-up.
For all I know perhaps the ex-plod UKIP are running in South Yorkshire looks more like the reincarnation of Dixon of Dock Green to the average voter rather than the dismal insider he appears to me.
30% agree that UKIP are the party of common sense.
34% agree that UKIP offer a realistic alternative political vision of Britain.
47% agree that UKIP are talking about the things I care about.
It might help UKIP if some Con/Lab MPs started insulting them again.0 -
On S Yorks, actually I think several posters here were saying it'd be UKIP nailed on because of the circumstances of the election, and certainly that was what I was hearing from some Labour sources. Recently they have sounded a bit more optimistic, but whether they've got solid readon for that, who knows?david_herdson said:
It's a measure of how far Labour have fallen and how far UKIP have advanced that we are seriously discussing the prospect of UKIP winning an election covering the whole of South Yorkshire.anotherDave said:
I think the South Yorkshire PCC election is the next result.Artist said:The question is what will the polls look like if/when UKIP return to their normal 12/13% level. I bet Labour and the Conservatives would prefer the Rochester By Election to be over with and UKIP out of the news for a bit.
If UKIP can do it, it embeds them even more firmly in the Second Division of British politics, and knocking on the door of the First. In the 2012 PCC elections, neither UKIP nor the Lib Dems managed a second place, never mind a first. Winning such large constituencies is tough. Out of about 300 MEP elections between 1979 and 1994, the Lib Dems took just two - and South Yorkshire is about twice the size of an old Euro-constituency.
This, however, is the nature of how incremental events condition us. The fact that polls creep up by one or two and then fall back again means we redefine normal in such small amounts that it's only when we stand back that we see the scale of the transformation. And it is massive.
Will it feed though to the GE? That's still unknown. UKIP on 15% will have an indirect effect but will return only a handful of MPs at most. 20% may return it enough to have a serious parliamentary presence. 25% and we could be talking several dozen. Thereafter, they'd really take off. And they could poll 25%. Or they could poll in single figures if it falls apart and the bubble bursts.
I agree that the UKIP factor makes the General Election completely unpredictable! Fascinating stuff, regardless of our personal wishes.0 -
So please explain the specifics of which characteristics differ because the link I attached regarding the independence of states does not differentiate between the Old British Commonwealth Empire and the satellites of the USSR or even the now independent republics of the USSRSpeedy said:
A Union not a Commonwealth.manofkent2014 said:
How many Commonwealth countries should I list?Speedy said:
When was the last time a country left a union of states in an organised fashion?edmundintokyo said:
Sure, parliament can repeal laws requiring it to keep international treaties they've signed, but countries with treaty obligations to Britain would respond in kind.chestnut said:
British law implies that it is one our government can repeal if they don't like it.edmundintokyo said:
More likely go to a British court and ask it to compel the government to pay the money, as required by British law.
If you're going down this road you're much better off just leaving the EU, which gets you to the same place in a less chaotic way.
Those things rarely happen in an organised way and the breakup always occurs because the poor states demand more money from the rich states. (see Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia, USSR)0 -
I think I've got the Bbc on the run!!!
6 hours till Today...0 -
0
-
I assume Labour will easily outpoll UKIP in Sheffield, which is obviously by far the largest settlement in South Yorkshire. I suppose it depends on what happens in the other three council areas.NickPalmer said:
On S Yorks, actually I think several posters here were saying it'd be UKIP nailed on because of the circumstances of the election, and certainly that was what I was hearing from some Labour sources. Recently they have sounded a bit more optimistic, but whether they've got solid readon for that, who knows?david_herdson said:
It's a measure of how far Labour have fallen and how far UKIP have advanced that we are seriously discussing the prospect of UKIP winning an election covering the whole of South Yorkshire.anotherDave said:
I think the South Yorkshire PCC election is the next result.Artist said:The question is what will the polls look like if/when UKIP return to their normal 12/13% level. I bet Labour and the Conservatives would prefer the Rochester By Election to be over with and UKIP out of the news for a bit.
If UKIP can do it, it embeds them even more firmly in the Second Division of British politics, and knocking on the door of the First. In the 2012 PCC elections, neither UKIP nor the Lib Dems managed a second place, never mind a first. Winning such large constituencies is tough. Out of about 300 MEP elections between 1979 and 1994, the Lib Dems took just two - and South Yorkshire is about twice the size of an old Euro-constituency.
This, however, is the nature of how incremental events condition us. The fact that polls creep up by one or two and then fall back again means we redefine normal in such small amounts that it's only when we stand back that we see the scale of the transformation. And it is massive.
Will it feed though to the GE? That's still unknown. UKIP on 15% will have an indirect effect but will return only a handful of MPs at most. 20% may return it enough to have a serious parliamentary presence. 25% and we could be talking several dozen. Thereafter, they'd really take off. And they could poll 25%. Or they could poll in single figures if it falls apart and the bubble bursts.
I agree that the UKIP factor makes the General Election completely unpredictable! Fascinating stuff, regardless of our personal wishes.0 -
Was that A,b, c or D?Pulpstar said:So is this the PCC candidate ?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dixon_of_Dock_Green
Lol, Arf, etc.
0 -
Last post for tonight, compare these 2 yougov polls that have the same CON levels but Labout is 10% lower, one from the beginning of 2013 the other from last week:
http://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/cce8mwzwyp/YG-Archive-Pol-Sun-results-020113.pdf
http://cdn.yougov.com/cumulus_uploads/document/np2h1yezwx/YG-Archive-Pol-Sun-results-221014.pdf
These 2 explain a lot. Look at C2DE's, Labour had twice the CON number in early 2013 (50 vs 25), now they are close (34 vs 26), while UKIP has doubled in that category.0 -
Who knows what might happen should UKIP win Rochester. All the usual suspects in the media (Parris, D'Ancona, Martin, Ganesh, Massie etc etc) will be out in force flapping about like headless chickens and given Ken Clarke's performance today I cannot believe he won't open his enormous beer soaked gob at some point before the election and drive tens of thousands of voters UKIP's way..anotherDave said:
An awful lot of UKIP-sympathetic voters out there.Luckyguy1983 said:
Shy kippers?anotherDave said:
If you look at the other questions in that poll you have:another_richard said:
This is part of UKIP's 'charm'.Speedy said:Could this spell the end of spin doctors?
Andrew Hawkins @Andrew_ComRes 1h1 hour ago
ComRes/Independent: 39% say they're attracted to UKIP 'because they say what they think' (up 6 points since April)
Looking like an incompetent shower who could organise a piss-up in a brewery but little else is increasingly preferable to the Establishment's incompetent showers who couldn't manage even the piss-up.
For all I know perhaps the ex-plod UKIP are running in South Yorkshire looks more like the reincarnation of Dixon of Dock Green to the average voter rather than the dismal insider he appears to me.
30% agree that UKIP are the party of common sense.
34% agree that UKIP offer a realistic alternative political vision of Britain.
47% agree that UKIP are talking about the things I care about.
It might help UKIP if some Con/Lab MPs started insulting them again.
0 -
Now Mr Kent - did it sound like I was going to bed??manofkent2014 said:
Who knows what might happen should UKIP win Rochester. All the usual suspects in the media (Parris, D'Ancona, Ganesh, Massie etc etc) will be out in force flapping about like headless chickens and given Ken Clarke's performance today I cannot believe he won't open his enormous beer soaked gob at some point before the election and drive tens of thousands of voters UKIP's way..anotherDave said:
An awful lot of UKIP-sympathetic voters out there.Luckyguy1983 said:
Shy kippers?anotherDave said:
If you look at the other questions in that poll you have:another_richard said:
This is part of UKIP's 'charm'.Speedy said:Could this spell the end of spin doctors?
Andrew Hawkins @Andrew_ComRes 1h1 hour ago
ComRes/Independent: 39% say they're attracted to UKIP 'because they say what they think' (up 6 points since April)
Looking like an incompetent shower who could organise a piss-up in a brewery but little else is increasingly preferable to the Establishment's incompetent showers who couldn't manage even the piss-up.
For all I know perhaps the ex-plod UKIP are running in South Yorkshire looks more like the reincarnation of Dixon of Dock Green to the average voter rather than the dismal insider he appears to me.
30% agree that UKIP are the party of common sense.
34% agree that UKIP offer a realistic alternative political vision of Britain.
47% agree that UKIP are talking about the things I care about.
It might help UKIP if some Con/Lab MPs started insulting them again.
Rochester's priced in (For the Lurkers)
0 -
A sensible comment but I just wanted to ask what extent of motion is not directly from party to party, but rather from pools of potential voters dipping from aligned (to Lab or Con or whatever) to Don't Knows, and then maybe later from Don't Know to their new destination (UKIP, Green or whoever)?Richard_Nabavi said:I've been saying for months that we shouldn't take too much notice of polls until IndyRef and the conference season were out of the way, but that we should start looking for a Lab->Con swing beginning in November. A few more days to go, but perhaps we are seeing the start of this. Those who thought that the polls of mid-2014 were a good guide to May 2015 were, of course, kidding themselves. On past form, support will shift over the next few months, and most probably towards the governing party. (The LibDems have bizarrely decided to opt out of this bounce by differentiating themselves from the government, and therefore from the government's success on the economy. A big error.)
What I hadn't quite predicted was the nature of the movement which, tentatively at least, we seem to be seeing: a direct Lab->UKIP switch. Further support is probably ebbing away from Labour towards the Greens, the SNP and 'can't be bothered to vote'. I'd further expect a drift back to the Conservatives from the early Con->UKIP switchers as the election comes into focus, especially those who actually want a referendum and for whom the EU is a key issue. As I've said before, the key to the next election is the extent to which current UKIP supporters swing back asymmetrically to the parties they voted for in 2010. With UKIP currently in the high teens, that is a key group - at least as or more important than Mike's fabled LibDem->Lab switchers.
The odds on Con Maj are a snip at the moment; I'm all green, but with hindsight I traded out my pro-Labour position too early. Anyone who hasn't done the latter would be well advised to take advantage of the current odds while they last, IMO, but do your own research.
0 -
If UKIP is still getting the majority of its support from ex tories and if we assume that quite a lot of these are in safe tory seats with massive majorities (bit like the SNP challenge in Scotland against Labour) then I suspect that the tories are already doing nearly as well in the marginal seats as they did in 2010.
At this level of UKIP support they would lose the odd seat but they might well gain some as well by getting more support where it actually counts. Predicting results with polling like this is problematic but the assumption that Labour would get the kind of efficiency they got in 2010 is unwise.
Incidentally, I note that according to ComRes the Tories and Labour together in Scotland have 30% support with Labour on 16%. Just an unweighted subsample but Labour losses north of the border (which could substantially undermine their previous advantage) is looking increasingly nailed on.0 -
An unweighted Scottish subsample??? Did you think you could just slip that in before you went to bed???DavidL said:If UKIP is still getting the majority of its support from ex tories and if we assume that quite a lot of these are in safe tory seats with massive majorities (bit like the SNP challenge in Scotland against Labour) then I suspect that the tories are already doing nearly as well in the marginal seats as they did in 2010.
At this level of UKIP support they would lose the odd seat but they might well gain some as well by getting more support where it actually counts. Predicting results with polling like this is problematic but the assumption that Labour would get the kind of efficiency they got in 2010 is unwise.
Incidentally, I note that according to ComRes the Tories and Labour together in Scotland have 30% support with Labour on 16%. Just an unweighted subsample but Labour losses north of the border (which could substantially undermine their previous advantage) is looking increasingly nailed on.
No such luck DavidL
0 -
Getting ready to watch Monday Night Football - Washington at Dallas.
That stadium is incredible and I've decided I'm going on a road trip to visit it, and the Bonnie and Clyde death site.
http://www.attstadium.com/0 -
In addition, if the European elections are any indication, Labour's increased vote next year (if they actually get an increase) will be disproportionately skewed to the major cities, where they already hold the vast majority of seats and thus will "waste" a lot of those extra votes.DavidL said:If UKIP is still getting the majority of its support from ex tories and if we assume that quite a lot of these are in safe tory seats with massive majorities (bit like the SNP challenge in Scotland against Labour) then I suspect that the tories are already doing nearly as well in the marginal seats as they did in 2010.
At this level of UKIP support they would lose the odd seat but they might well gain some as well by getting more support where it actually counts. Predicting results with polling like this is problematic but the assumption that Labour would get the kind of efficiency they got in 2010 is unwise.0 -
Keep me updated Tim B. I'll try my best to tell you when it's my bedtime...Tim_B said:Getting ready to watch Monday Night Football - Washington at Dallas.
That stadium is incredible and I've decided I'm going on a road trip to visit it, and the Bonnie and Clyde death site.
http://www.attstadium.com/
I'll definitely be Dallas (as if you didn't already know)...
0 -
Blunkett used the word "swamped" in 2012:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/1949863.stm
He used it again today:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2810308/DAVID-BLUNKETT-Yes-specific-parts-Britain-swamped-migrants-politicians-dare-tell-truth.html
The BBC are still talking about Michael Fallon's use of it yesterday.0 -
Thinking of unions of states entered voluntarily in recent history I'm having a hard time thinking of any countries leaving at all. You need a lot of political effort to join one of these unions in the first place, and if there's logic for joining there's generally logic for staying.Speedy said:
When was the last time a country left a union of states in an organised fashion?edmundintokyo said:
Sure, parliament can repeal laws requiring it to keep international treaties they've signed, but countries with treaty obligations to Britain would respond in kind.chestnut said:
British law implies that it is one our government can repeal if they don't like it.edmundintokyo said:
More likely go to a British court and ask it to compel the government to pay the money, as required by British law.
If you're going down this road you're much better off just leaving the EU, which gets you to the same place in a less chaotic way.
Those things rarely happen in an organised way and the breakup always occurs because the poor states demand more money from the rich states. (see Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia, USSR)0 -
Oh no you wont, If you're using a Scottish subsample of 59 people I have a right to use a Yorkshire subsample of 54 that has UKIP on double the vote of the Tories there which would mean that the Tories would lose all their seats in Yorkshire.DavidL said:If UKIP is still getting the majority of its support from ex tories and if we assume that quite a lot of these are in safe tory seats with massive majorities (bit like the SNP challenge in Scotland against Labour) then I suspect that the tories are already doing nearly as well in the marginal seats as they did in 2010.
At this level of UKIP support they would lose the odd seat but they might well gain some as well by getting more support where it actually counts. Predicting results with polling like this is problematic but the assumption that Labour would get the kind of efficiency they got in 2010 is unwise.
Incidentally, I note that according to ComRes the Tories and Labour together in Scotland have 30% support with Labour on 16%. Just an unweighted subsample but Labour losses north of the border (which could substantially undermine their previous advantage) is looking increasingly nailed on.
And with that, Goodnight.
0 -
Observer PC muppet/journo on SKY calling them both "borderline racist"...AndyJS said:Blunkett used the word "swamped" in 2012:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/1949863.stm
He used it again today:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2810308/DAVID-BLUNKETT-Yes-specific-parts-Britain-swamped-migrants-politicians-dare-tell-truth.html
The BBC are still talking about Michael Fallon's use of it yesterday.0 -
Hang on. Tim B - are we even on Monday??? Do you mean next week????
V. naughty.
minus brisky points0 -
Blunkett saying stupid shit is one of those "dog bites man" stories.AndyJS said:Blunkett used the word "swamped" in 2012:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/1949863.stm
He used it again today:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2810308/DAVID-BLUNKETT-Yes-specific-parts-Britain-swamped-migrants-politicians-dare-tell-truth.html
The BBC are still talking about Michael Fallon's use of it yesterday.0 -
Good to know you're a fan of America's Team. The Cowboys are 10 point favoritesJBriskin said:
Keep me updated Tim B. I'll try my best to tell you when it's my bedtime...Tim_B said:Getting ready to watch Monday Night Football - Washington at Dallas.
That stadium is incredible and I've decided I'm going on a road trip to visit it, and the Bonnie and Clyde death site.
http://www.attstadium.com/
I'll definitely be Dallas (as if you didn't already know)...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/America's_Team0 -
A - he really didn'tAndyJS said:Blunkett used the word "swamped" in 2012:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/1949863.stm
He used it again today:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2810308/DAVID-BLUNKETT-Yes-specific-parts-Britain-swamped-migrants-politicians-dare-tell-truth.html
The BBC are still talking about Michael Fallon's use of it yesterday.
B - RE:Fallon - well you just Love that don't you
0 -
I think it's silly language whoever uses it.JBriskin said:
A - he really didn'tAndyJS said:Blunkett used the word "swamped" in 2012:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/1949863.stm
He used it again today:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2810308/DAVID-BLUNKETT-Yes-specific-parts-Britain-swamped-migrants-politicians-dare-tell-truth.html
The BBC are still talking about Michael Fallon's use of it yesterday.
B - RE:Fallon - well you just Love that don't you0 -
Thanks Tim B. Sorry for the minus Brisky points. Luckily Team casio can add them back fairly easily. plus brisky points.Tim_B said:
Good to know you're a fan of America's Team. The Cowboys are 10 point favoritesJBriskin said:
Keep me updated Tim B. I'll try my best to tell you when it's my bedtime...Tim_B said:Getting ready to watch Monday Night Football - Washington at Dallas.
That stadium is incredible and I've decided I'm going on a road trip to visit it, and the Bonnie and Clyde death site.
http://www.attstadium.com/
I'll definitely be Dallas (as if you didn't already know)...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/America's_Team
Anyhoo, don't suppose you know the Gmt k/o?
0 -
My wife's sister lives in Sussex. You guys went back to GMT over the weekend. We go back to standard time next weekend.JBriskin said:
Thanks Tim B. Sorry for the minus Brisky points. Luckily Team casio can add them back fairly easily. plus brisky points.Tim_B said:
Good to know you're a fan of America's Team. The Cowboys are 10 point favoritesJBriskin said:
Keep me updated Tim B. I'll try my best to tell you when it's my bedtime...Tim_B said:Getting ready to watch Monday Night Football - Washington at Dallas.
That stadium is incredible and I've decided I'm going on a road trip to visit it, and the Bonnie and Clyde death site.
http://www.attstadium.com/
I'll definitely be Dallas (as if you didn't already know)...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/America's_Team
Anyhoo, don't suppose you know the Gmt k/o?0 -
Briskin and co analysis (0033)-AndyJS said:
I think it's silly language whoever uses it.JBriskin said:
A - he really didn'tAndyJS said:Blunkett used the word "swamped" in 2012:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/1949863.stm
He used it again today:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2810308/DAVID-BLUNKETT-Yes-specific-parts-Britain-swamped-migrants-politicians-dare-tell-truth.html
The BBC are still talking about Michael Fallon's use of it yesterday.
B - RE:Fallon - well you just Love that don't you
He just wanted to slip in an east coast reference.
0 -
We did. I wasn't trying to confuse you Tim B - I just wanted to know when the game started...Tim_B said:
My wife's sister lives in Sussex. You guys went back to GMT over the weekend. We go back to standard time next weekend.JBriskin said:
Thanks Tim B. Sorry for the minus Brisky points. Luckily Team casio can add them back fairly easily. plus brisky points.Tim_B said:
Good to know you're a fan of America's Team. The Cowboys are 10 point favoritesJBriskin said:
Keep me updated Tim B. I'll try my best to tell you when it's my bedtime...Tim_B said:Getting ready to watch Monday Night Football - Washington at Dallas.
That stadium is incredible and I've decided I'm going on a road trip to visit it, and the Bonnie and Clyde death site.
http://www.attstadium.com/
I'll definitely be Dallas (as if you didn't already know)...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/America's_Team
Anyhoo, don't suppose you know the Gmt k/o?
Anyway, should we be betting on America's team? (Translation for the lurkers - if he says yes they'd need to win by more than 10)
0 -
I think that's right. Anyway Tim B nae shy.0
-
Oh I'll have a wee lookie at Betfair...
For the lurkers...0 -
Well it all looks to be there.
https://www.betfair.com/sport/american-football/event?eventId=27285639
Dallas 3 behind hence Tim B being grumpy.
Team casio obviously trying to translate Asian odd/Tim B/Betfair into English - For the lurkers.
0 -
Redskins ahead by a field goal.
Just saw a commercial for 'Mike Tyson Mysteries' - an animated series with the voice of Mike Tyson as Mike Tyson. It's on something called Adult Swim.
How weird is that?
I have no idea what channel number it is.0 -
Asisan handicap!!!!
That was the word I was thinking of.
Tim B - you seem like an International sort - If I bet on Dallas at (-10.5) does that kinda count as me joining in??0 -
I Think it Does!!!
C'mon Team America!!!!!0 -
I don't think it really counts though - I got 2/1...0
-
I make it a rule not to bet nor give betting advice brisky.JBriskin said:Asisan handicap!!!!
That was the word I was thinking of.
Tim B - you seem like an International sort - If I bet on Dallas at (-10.5) does that kinda count as me joining in??
I have only bet 3 times in my life - once at Kempton Park in the 70s, and twice at my local pub's lottery bet . I won all three and figured that was enough.0 -
It does count!!!
I think.
All very complicated.0 -
Ja ja ja - I'm on Dallas (min bet) - keep me updated.Tim_B said:
I make it a rule not to bet nor give betting advice brisky.JBriskin said:Asisan handicap!!!!
That was the word I was thinking of.
Tim B - you seem like an International sort - If I bet on Dallas at (-10.5) does that kinda count as me joining in??
I have only bet 3 times in my life - once at Kempton Park in the 70s, and twice at my local pub's lottery bet . I won all three and figured that was enough.
0 -
Apparently you can watch the game on something called British Eurosport 2JBriskin said:
Ja ja ja - I'm on Dallas (min bet) - keep me updated.Tim_B said:
I make it a rule not to bet nor give betting advice brisky.JBriskin said:Asisan handicap!!!!
That was the word I was thinking of.
Tim B - you seem like an International sort - If I bet on Dallas at (-10.5) does that kinda count as me joining in??
I have only bet 3 times in my life - once at Kempton Park in the 70s, and twice at my local pub's lottery bet . I won all three and figured that was enough.0 -
One hopes there are some lurkers absolutely loving you right now. Not me though.Tim_B said:
Apparently you can watch the game on something called British Eurosport 2JBriskin said:
Ja ja ja - I'm on Dallas (min bet) - keep me updated.Tim_B said:
I make it a rule not to bet nor give betting advice brisky.JBriskin said:Asisan handicap!!!!
That was the word I was thinking of.
Tim B - you seem like an International sort - If I bet on Dallas at (-10.5) does that kinda count as me joining in??
I have only bet 3 times in my life - once at Kempton Park in the 70s, and twice at my local pub's lottery bet . I won all three and figured that was enough.
0 -
Dallas coughs up the ball on their own 25. Then sack McCoy (Redskins quarterback) for a 2 yard loss, then intercept the ball in their end zone to get back to their 20. Phew0
-
When it comes to a Union of States like the EU I'm having trouble thinking of a similar institution full stop but even so everything has its shelf life and what reason there might have been originally may no longer be valid.edmundintokyo said:
Thinking of unions of states entered voluntarily in recent history I'm having a hard time thinking of any countries leaving at all. You need a lot of political effort to join one of these unions in the first place, and if there's logic for joining there's generally logic for staying.Speedy said:
When was the last time a country left a union of states in an organised fashion?edmundintokyo said:
Sure, parliament can repeal laws requiring it to keep international treaties they've signed, but countries with treaty obligations to Britain would respond in kind.chestnut said:
British law implies that it is one our government can repeal if they don't like it.edmundintokyo said:
More likely go to a British court and ask it to compel the government to pay the money, as required by British law.
If you're going down this road you're much better off just leaving the EU, which gets you to the same place in a less chaotic way.
Those things rarely happen in an organised way and the breakup always occurs because the poor states demand more money from the rich states. (see Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia, USSR)
Furthermore, we have only ever been half-hearted members of this Union who has resisted further unifying steps at every opportunity and we are a long way from actually being fully part of the union. Given I suspect that remaining a member is often because it's just too much trouble to get out then as we haven't really joined properly our exit should be far less of an issue than say a country in the Eurozone.
Generally I would say if there is a major desire to leave then there is usually a good reason for that.0 -
We're on Dallasmanofkent2014 said:
When it comes to a Union of States like the EU I'm having trouble thinking of a similar institution full stop but even so everything has its shelf life and what reason there might have been originally may no longer be valid.edmundintokyo said:
Thinking of unions of states entered voluntarily in recent history I'm having a hard time thinking of any countries leaving at all. You need a lot of political effort to join one of these unions in the first place, and if there's logic for joining there's generally logic for staying.Speedy said:
When was the last time a country left a union of states in an organised fashion?edmundintokyo said:
Sure, parliament can repeal laws requiring it to keep international treaties they've signed, but countries with treaty obligations to Britain would respond in kind.chestnut said:
British law implies that it is one our government can repeal if they don't like it.edmundintokyo said:
More likely go to a British court and ask it to compel the government to pay the money, as required by British law.
If you're going down this road you're much better off just leaving the EU, which gets you to the same place in a less chaotic way.
Those things rarely happen in an organised way and the breakup always occurs because the poor states demand more money from the rich states. (see Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia, USSR)
Furthermore, we have only ever been half-hearted members of this Union who has resisted further unifying steps at every opportunity and we are a long way from actually being fully part of the union. Given I suspect that remaining a member is often because it's just too much trouble to get out then as we haven't really joined properly our exit should be far less of an issue than say a country in the Eurozone.
Generally I would say if there is a major desire to leave then there is usually a good reason for that.
0 -
Dallas fumble for the second time. I don't have a good feeling about this.JBriskin said:
The fix is in Tim B - the fix is in.Tim_B said:Dallas coughs up the ball on their own 25. Then sack McCoy (Redskins quarterback) for a 2 yard loss, then intercept the ball in their end zone to get back to their 20. Phew
0 -
Human error Mr B!!Tim_B said:
Dallas fumble for the second time. I don't have a good feeling about this.JBriskin said:
The fix is in Tim B - the fix is in.Tim_B said:Dallas coughs up the ball on their own 25. Then sack McCoy (Redskins quarterback) for a 2 yard loss, then intercept the ball in their end zone to get back to their 20. Phew
0 -
Redskins have often had Dallas's number in these games.JBriskin said:
Human error Mr B!!Tim_B said:
Dallas fumble for the second time. I don't have a good feeling about this.JBriskin said:
The fix is in Tim B - the fix is in.Tim_B said:Dallas coughs up the ball on their own 25. Then sack McCoy (Redskins quarterback) for a 2 yard loss, then intercept the ball in their end zone to get back to their 20. Phew
0 -
You tell me this when I'm on at minus 10.5!!!!!!!Tim_B said:
Redskins have often had Dallas's number in these games.JBriskin said:
Human error Mr B!!Tim_B said:
Dallas fumble for the second time. I don't have a good feeling about this.JBriskin said:
The fix is in Tim B - the fix is in.Tim_B said:Dallas coughs up the ball on their own 25. Then sack McCoy (Redskins quarterback) for a 2 yard loss, then intercept the ball in their end zone to get back to their 20. Phew
0 -
I told you - I don't do betting advice.JBriskin said:
You tell me this when I'm on at minus 10.5!!!!!!!Tim_B said:
Redskins have often had Dallas's number in these games.JBriskin said:
Human error Mr B!!Tim_B said:
Dallas fumble for the second time. I don't have a good feeling about this.JBriskin said:
The fix is in Tim B - the fix is in.Tim_B said:Dallas coughs up the ball on their own 25. Then sack McCoy (Redskins quarterback) for a 2 yard loss, then intercept the ball in their end zone to get back to their 20. Phew
An interesting wrinkle. The Monday Night Football commentator is the Washington coach's brother, and won a Superbowl with the Tampa Bay Buccaneers. John Gruden0 -
Updated: exact 2009-2010 rerun would see Tories 5.6% ahead on polling day...0
