politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » David Herdson on Saturday: We might have passed peak UKIP?

P3 imminently underway.

As an aside, Tom Clarkson has annoyed me all season long. To think the cretinous bigwigs got rid of Gary Anderson and replaced him with Clarkson.

david_herdson said:

MaxPB said:

I think after the Lib Dems got beaten into fifth place by the Bus Pass Elvis party they lost all credibility.

That was at a local by-election and as you say, even that caused much embarrassment / laughter (depending on which side, if any, you support). But were it to happen at a Westminster by-election, that would be a different matter altogether. It would be the sort of event that consistently gets referenced in the popular media, HIGNFY and so on, and does serious and lasting damage to the image of a party which is already struggling.

This is getting tedious David. I would have voted Tory in Rochester on Thursday to keep UKIP out. This is what you get with first past the past and your repeated posts don't appear to comprehend how the electoral system works.

MonikerDiCanio said:

malcolmg said:

Baskerville said:

malcolmg said:

CarlottaVance said:

malcolmg said:

Usual southern centric bollox, loony southern party with 2 defectors in parliament is supposed to be big news. Shows how poor and pathetic Tories and Labour are when these half wits have them scared.

What did you think of Sturgeon's cabinet appointments? I posted the results yesterday but not much interest.

seems reasonable pick, just got rid of a few old duffers and promoted some capable women. Will be interesting to see the outcome , her initial tone was very inclusive and will be interesting to see if the other parties (Tories )can get over their bitterness and try to work with her. Lib dems are goners and Labour are too stupid to do anything sensible. I have not been impressed at all by Davidson so far and so will be interesting to see how she plays it. Labour getting crushed can only help the Tories.

Where do you think SLAB's travails will help the Tartan Tories the most? And, what about Davidson so 'unimpresses' you?

I have yet to see her have any original thought, she really is just a puppet of London. She got in by the back door and to me is just a toady. Has fallen into the same mode as Labour and just follows the "SNP bad" routine. You never hear the Tories coming up with anything that would be beneficial for Scotland or any utterance that maybe some of the London policies really are crap for us.
They are happy just to be hangers on, a completely talentless set of muppets.
I cannot think of any Scottish Tory that I could say was a decent person who had any interest whatsoever in Scotland, they are that bad.

Davidson has seen off loser Salmond and she"ll see the back of Sturgeon.

LOL, ever the comedienne

@malcolmg‌

You have a bit better chance being 500 miles away rather than a few miles, hence it is nowhere near London, that was not by chance.

Poor, very poor. London is surrounded by first strike targets if not being one itself. From memory capital cities are themselves not first strike targets because who do you have left to negotiate with?

You're blinded by your prejudice.

malcolmg said:

Baskerville said:

malcolmg said:

CarlottaVance said:

malcolmg said:

Usual southern centric bollox, loony southern party with 2 defectors in parliament is supposed to be big news. Shows how poor and pathetic Tories and Labour are when these half wits have them scared.

What did you think of Sturgeon's cabinet appointments? I posted the results yesterday but not much interest.

seems reasonable pick, just got rid of a few old duffers and promoted some capable women. Will be interesting to see the outcome , her initial tone was very inclusive and will be interesting to see if the other parties (Tories )can get over their bitterness and try to work with her. Lib dems are goners and Labour are too stupid to do anything sensible. I have not been impressed at all by Davidson so far and so will be interesting to see how she plays it. Labour getting crushed can only help the Tories.

Where do you think SLAB's travails will help the Tartan Tories the most? And, what about Davidson so 'unimpresses' you?

I have yet to see her have any original thought, she really is just a puppet of London. She got in by the back door and to me is just a toady. Has fallen into the same mode as Labour and just follows the "SNP bad" routine. You never hear the Tories coming up with anything that would be beneficial for Scotland or any utterance that maybe some of the London policies really are crap for us.
They are happy just to be hangers on, a completely talentless set of muppets.
I cannot think of any Scottish Tory that I could say was a decent person who had any interest whatsoever in Scotland, they are that bad.

Thanks; it's hard to get a clear picture when you only listen to your own side.
Are there specific constituencies where a sharp Labour fall would most help the Conservatives?

Swiss_Bob said:

malcolmg said:

Paul_Mid_Beds said:

foxinsoxuk said:

Swiss_Bob said:

Indigo said:

foxinsoxuk said:

Scrapping Trident would not be unpopular. Even some ex-military friends would be quite happy to see it scrapped in favour of keeping more front line ships, soldiers and planes.

Indeed, but the chances of money like that staying in the defense budget are remote, if they scrapped trident that money would (if we are lucky) pay of some deficit, although the record of doing that isnt good, or more likely disappear into the welfare budget or the health budget, where it would hardly make a ripple.

At a time of Russian resurgence the UK would be mad to scrap it's deterrent.

The Russian navy would park off the Firth of Moray and sit there as a malevolent shadow over the British Govt.

Trident is a weapon designed for cold war Mutual Assured Destruction. The idea is now as obsolete as cavalry. It is designed to be concealed in the deepest ocean to retaliate by laying waste to all the cities of our enemy. Flattening cities does seem a little old school nowadays surely?

The Russians off Moray would be more deterred by having some planes on the UK carriers, and IS could be taken out by cruise missiles much more effectively than 256 MIRV Trident warheads.

Having the ability to turn your opponents capital city into a radioactive hole in the ground at five minutes notice, courtesy of the Royal Navy, dosen't do us any harm when dealing with the likes of Russia and China. To quote Nye Bevan at the 1957 Labour Conference, unilateral nuclear disarmament "would send a British Foreign Secretary naked into the conference-chamber"

Deluded , the Russians and Chinese piss them selves laughing at the UK. They are doing it the easy way and buying the country.

That might well be true on one level. However, laughter often covers fear.

While not trying to pretend that the UK is a great power why If the UK is such an unimportant player on the world stage do they even bother laughing at us?

Edit I spent some time in China. No one laughed, quite the contrary, everyone wanted to talk.

Bob, the UK could not fight their way out of a wet paper poke. Some sense of reality is needed in this country, we are no longer a power never mind a world power. We would struggle to invade Monaco.

Morris_Dancer said:

Miss Plato, the bad second response (anti-Islington prejudice apparently mentioned) of Thornberry aside, I think there's been a dramatic over-reaction to her tweet.

Not a Thornberry fan. Patronising and smug, and shan't be missed, but the manner of her departure is not great. To an extent, Labour have been hoist by their petard, given the shrieking over-reaction to UKIP having a policy not in the little Guardian book of permissible opinions included nonsense like 'euracism'.

You can't shriek like a banshee then complain the neighbours are being too loud.

Correct Morris.

Talk about an over reaction to a tweet.

In the real world banking fraud goes on and on and no one is charged with any offence.
The debt rises beyond anyone's comprehension.
Interest rates have been nearly zero for six years.
Quantitative easing never ends.
Japan has tried all this and never mind a lost decade , it is a lost generation.
We will be following them.

beast_in_black said:

MikeSmithson said:

Socrates said:

They won their 271st seat after the Tories threw the kitchen sink at it. Obviously they're not going anywhere. /s

This is pathetic. The incumbent won rather less well than was being predicted or shown in the polls. This complaint that the Tories threw the kitchen sink at at smacks of desperation. What the hell did you expect them to do?

UKIP has got to learn to stop whingeing.

What is pathetic about it? He is not the one who is whingeing, he is just making an observation that this was not a target seat and the Tories tried their damned hardest to try and win but failed. He was merely stating a couple of facts!

Accusing someone of desperation over that comment is rather strange, now if UKIP lost then yes he would be whingeing, but they didn't. They won.

Mike strongly tipped UKIP to lose in Rochester and is bitter at doing his dough

malcolmg said:

Swiss_Bob said:

malcolmg said:

Paul_Mid_Beds said:

foxinsoxuk said:

Swiss_Bob said:

Indigo said:

foxinsoxuk said:

Scrapping Trident would not be unpopular. Even some ex-military friends would be quite happy to see it scrapped in favour of keeping more front line ships, soldiers and planes.

Indeed, but the chances of money like that staying in the defense budget are remote, if they scrapped trident that money would (if we are lucky) pay of some deficit, although the record of doing that isnt good, or more likely disappear into the welfare budget or the health budget, where it would hardly make a ripple.

At a time of Russian resurgence the UK would be mad to scrap it's deterrent.

The Russian navy would park off the Firth of Moray and sit there as a malevolent shadow over the British Govt.

Trident is a weapon designed for cold war Mutual Assured Destruction. The idea is now as obsolete as cavalry. It is designed to be concealed in the deepest ocean to retaliate by laying waste to all the cities of our enemy. Flattening cities does seem a little old school nowadays surely?

The Russians off Moray would be more deterred by having some planes on the UK carriers, and IS could be taken out by cruise missiles much more effectively than 256 MIRV Trident warheads.

Having the ability to turn your opponents capital city into a radioactive hole in the ground at five minutes notice, courtesy of the Royal Navy, dosen't do us any harm when dealing with the likes of Russia and China. To quote Nye Bevan at the 1957 Labour Conference, unilateral nuclear disarmament "would send a British Foreign Secretary naked into the conference-chamber"

Deluded , the Russians and Chinese piss them selves laughing at the UK. They are doing it the easy way and buying the country.

That might well be true on one level. However, laughter often covers fear.

While not trying to pretend that the UK is a great power why If the UK is such an unimportant player on the world stage do they even bother laughing at us?

Edit I spent some time in China. No one laughed, quite the contrary, everyone wanted to talk.

Bob, the UK could not fight their way out of a wet paper poke. Some sense of reality is needed in this country, we are no longer a power never mind a world power. We would struggle to invade Monaco.

At this point I get to recite one of my favourite observations picked up and used by some retired staff officer pontificating on Sky News.

'The thing about the English (and the Scots, Welsh and Irish) is that they like fighting.'

I would be interested in PBers comments on the similarity of the geography of poorly performing hospitals (as measured by death rates) and UKIP prospects.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-15897345

The match is not perfect (Lowestoft has good figures for example) but it is surprisingly good.

My hypothesis is that these areas are neglected by central government, and are unfashionable places to work, so not chosen by top class staff. The experience of poor NHS services certainly seems to have been a major issue in both Clacton and Rochester, based on the visible campaigns.

It perhaps merits looking at UKIP prospects for betting purposes at places like Crewe or Nuneaton with alarming figures.

FPT.Having just flicked through this thread and following the zeitgeist of white van man and his flags I couldn't help but notice that some on here now think the Tory lady from Rochester was the ideal choice and it was just the champagne socialist snobs and yound Tory zealots who couldn't see it.

Well I'm sorry but she came accross as a sneering half cooked moron. I understand that someone from the highlands might not understand the nuances of English accents but there is no excuse for anyone else.

In advertising there are very specific voices and accents which people use for particular products. Seductive trustworthy honest dishonest sharp stupid simple etc etc. It is something that is understood by our subconscious. Anyone wanting to sell insurance for example is not going to seek out Kelly Tolhurst but might well use the soft Edinburgh accent of Alastaire Darling.

So enough of this inverted snobbery. Ed's was crass enough yesterday but let's not make ourselves look ridiculous by following him.

CarlottaVance said:

malcolmg said:

CarlottaVance said:

malcolmg said:

CarlottaVance said:

foxinsoxuk said:

CarlottaVance said:

FPT:

foxinsoxuk said:

JackW said:

foxinsoxuk said:

JackW said:

OldKingCole said:

JackW said:

Some of our more excitable PBers and media commentaterate need a heavy dose of reality - it was a by-election you plonkers !!

Nigel Farage Will Never Be Prime Minister

Just could, though, and the thought gives me the shudders, be king-maker.

A tad difficult to be kingmaker with only a handful of seats.

Westminster effect and the irony of FPTP coming to the aid of the LibDems will see Nick Clegg laughing all the way to the Deputy PM's office.

Funny old world.

The SNP would not support a Tory government, but would they support a Miliband one?.

Sturgeon said yes provided they got Devo ultra and moved Trident. That'll go down a treat with White Van Man (but may wash in London Labour, where half the members are.....)

Scrapping Trident would not be unpopular.

Keeping it would be more popular:

https://yougov.co.uk/news/2013/07/16/public-support-nuclear-weapons/

Only in certain areas and certainly not where people are cursed by having it on their doorstep.

No.

Scotland:

Trident Replacement: 16
Cheaper Deterrent: 35
No Nukes: 40

So a majority in Scotland are still in favour of a nuclear deterrent......

the cheaper deterrent would not be parked outside Glasgow though ( probably would actually ).

It would - for brevity I omitted the full details but the "cheaper deterrent" was 2 subs vs 4. While the Scots clearly are the most anti-nuke, it's still a minority view in Scotland.

Not often I am right , but wrong again. I have to go and buy lots of rolls and square sausage , get this hangover sorted.

Swiss_Bob said:

malcolmg said:

Swiss_Bob said:

malcolmg said:

Paul_Mid_Beds said:

foxinsoxuk said:

Swiss_Bob said:

Indigo said:

foxinsoxuk said:

Scrapping Trident would not be unpopular. Even some ex-military friends would be quite happy to see it scrapped in favour of keeping more front line ships, soldiers and planes.

At a time of Russian resurgence the UK would be mad to scrap it's deterrent.

The Russian navy would park off the Firth of Moray and sit there as a malevolent shadow over the British Govt.

Trident is a weapon designed for cold war Mutual Assured Destruction. The idea is now as obsolete as cavalry. It is designed to be concealed in the deepest ocean to retaliate by laying waste to all the cities of our enemy. Flattening cities does seem a little old school nowadays surely?

The Russians off Moray would be more deterred by having some planes on the UK carriers, and IS could be taken out by cruise missiles much more effectively than 256 MIRV Trident warheads.

Having the ability to turn your opponents capital city into a radioactive hole in the ground at five minutes notice, courtesy of the Royal Navy, dosen't do us any harm when dealing with the likes of Russia and China. To quote Nye Bevan at the 1957 Labour Conference, unilateral nuclear disarmament "would send a British Foreign Secretary naked into the conference-chamber"

Deluded , the Russians and Chinese piss them selves laughing at the UK. They are doing it the easy way and buying the country.

That might well be true on one level. However, laughter often covers fear.

While not trying to pretend that the UK is a great power why If the UK is such an unimportant player on the world stage do they even bother laughing at us?

Edit I spent some time in China. No one laughed, quite the contrary, everyone wanted to talk.

Bob, the UK could not fight their way out of a wet paper poke. Some sense of reality is needed in this country, we are no longer a power never mind a world power. We would struggle to invade Monaco.

At this point I get to recite one of my favourite observations picked up and used by some retired staff officer pontificating on Sky News.

'The thing about the English (and the Scots, Welsh and Irish) is that they like fighting.'

Yes but we are at the punch drunk stage now, time to get real.

malcolmg said:

You have a bit better chance being 500 miles away rather than a few miles, hence it [Trident] is nowhere near London, that was not by chance.

You're right, it's not by chance.

But perhaps that is more to do with easy access to the Atlantic than it is to do with any conspiracy theories you might advance?

Yorkcity said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Miss Plato, the bad second response (anti-Islington prejudice apparently mentioned) of Thornberry aside, I think there's been a dramatic over-reaction to her tweet.

Not a Thornberry fan. Patronising and smug, and shan't be missed, but the manner of her departure is not great. To an extent, Labour have been hoist by their petard, given the shrieking over-reaction to UKIP having a policy not in the little Guardian book of permissible opinions included nonsense like 'euracism'.

You can't shriek like a banshee then complain the neighbours are being too loud.

Correct Morris.

Talk about an over reaction to a tweet.

In the real world banking fraud goes on and on and no one is charged with any offence.
The debt rises beyond anyone's comprehension.
Interest rates have been nearly zero for six years.
Quantitative easing never ends.
Japan has tried all this and never mind a lost decade , it is a lost generation.
We will be following them.

Quite right.

''At that election, the Loonies won 418 votes; in Rochester, the Lib Dems won 349.''

But in the general election will Conservaives and Labourites vote LD to stop UKIP where the LDs hold a seat?
If there is an unofficial pact that coalition parners do not contest each other where they hold a seat then the LD seat count might well hold up. They could of course take it further where they are the best challenger to Labour.
Now that the supposed, alleged, boil of nasty right wing extremism has been sucked out by UKIP, who are keen to put socialist after theit nationalist tag, then voters can see a clear point to voting Tory. A general election is a totally different thing to where you have a by election with a defector who is still esentially a different flavour of tory.

Re: White Van Man and his/her ilk.

In the community where I am currently living, over the last five years, there has been an increasing number of people who have moved from employment to self-employment, either as sole traders or a limited company. (Hence some of GO's current problems).

These are a mix of electricians, plumbers, small builders and IT people. All require their own transport of sorts (usually a van/estate car) as public transport is sparse.

I have been privileged to have been able to help these people (always free of charge) to set up their own business, train them (and often their wife/partner) to do their own accounts, VAT and HMRC returns, get bank overdrafts and loans etc. All have been successful and many are now employers as their business has grown.

As I have got to know them more, it has become apparent that they have certain characteristics. All are proud of their skills and of doing a good job for their clients. They are quite contemptuous of the low standards and expectations they see in the local schools, NHS and Councils.

How do they vote, well certainly not Labour (in power) or LD and my feeling is they are part of the DNV - but could well support UKIP in 2015.

Hello folks from a rather cloudy Colombo...

Congrats to UKIP for winning R&S. Is there any Tory seat safe from attack now? Labour may not be surging ahead but the Tories are in total disarray - Not that you would know that from reading the usual BS from the nasty Tory trolls on here.

Ed Milliband still on course to be PM - though it's getting closer by the day.

Morris_Dancer said:

P3 imminently underway.

As an aside, Tom Clarkson has annoyed me all season long. To think the cretinous bigwigs got rid of Gary Anderson and replaced him with Clarkson.

P3... brings back memories of my last office job. P1 (personnel) 1= starter form P2 change in salary or grade P3 = exit door.

MonikerDiCanio said:

Yorkcity said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Miss Plato, the bad second response (anti-Islington prejudice apparently mentioned) of Thornberry aside, I think there's been a dramatic over-reaction to her tweet.

Not a Thornberry fan. Patronising and smug, and shan't be missed, but the manner of her departure is not great. To an extent, Labour have been hoist by their petard, given the shrieking over-reaction to UKIP having a policy not in the little Guardian book of permissible opinions included nonsense like 'euracism'.

You can't shriek like a banshee then complain the neighbours are being too loud.

Correct Morris.

Talk about an over reaction to a tweet.

In the real world banking fraud goes on and on and no one is charged with any offence.
The debt rises beyond anyone's comprehension.
Interest rates have been nearly zero for six years.
Quantitative easing never ends.
Japan has tried all this and never mind a lost decade , it is a lost generation.
We will be following them.

EdM's overreaction to Thornberry's humorous tweet was deranged, he's absolutely unfit to be PM.

But it was the kipperati taking yet another opportunity to give us their dog whistle about the 'WWC' who went ballistic.
If Ed had a brain he would have reacted to that.

Thornberry is a fool - I don't need tweets to tell me that.

Miss Plato, ah, I remember that. Homeland is rather enjoyable.

Mr. Root, a few chaps will be P45 after the race this weekend.

MonikerDiCanio said:

Yorkcity said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Miss Plato, the bad second response (anti-Islington prejudice apparently mentioned) of Thornberry aside, I think there's been a dramatic over-reaction to her tweet.

Not a Thornberry fan. Patronising and smug, and shan't be missed, but the manner of her departure is not great. To an extent, Labour have been hoist by their petard, given the shrieking over-reaction to UKIP having a policy not in the little Guardian book of permissible opinions included nonsense like 'euracism'.

You can't shriek like a banshee then complain the neighbours are being too loud.

Correct Morris.

Talk about an over reaction to a tweet.

In the real world banking fraud goes on and on and no one is charged with any offence.
The debt rises beyond anyone's comprehension.
Interest rates have been nearly zero for six years.
Quantitative easing never ends.
Japan has tried all this and never mind a lost decade , it is a lost generation.
We will be following them.

EdM's overreaction to Thornberry's humorous tweet was deranged, he's absolutely unfit to be PM.

I am not some anti Milliband person like some on here like jonny Jimmy because they say he looks weird etc.
However his reaction to a tweet causes concern.
Blair sacked Mandelson once in a media frenzy with out knowing the facts.
Milliband needs to be more circumspect.

malcolmg said:

foxinsoxuk said:

Plato said:

May I recommend a mug of hot water with at least a spoon of sugar in it.

It will give you a little chirp up and won't kick start your stomach or rest of your body into something unpleasant. Then have another one. Then a banana or something similarly bland. That'll stop you feeling so spaced out.

I used to get evil hangovers [it took me two days to recover from Charlie's wedding to Di] - then somehow I crossed the plonk barrier and very rarely get them or helicopters. And never ill no matter how much is glugged.

Good luck and my sympathies. Oh - and if you've a sore head - drink lots and lots of water. I don't know how it works - but it will somehow wash out the pounding/karate chopped neck.

Casino_Royale said:

Morris_Dancer said:

FPT: Mr. Royale, even *I* [who hardly ever drinks] know that happens! Your comment reminds me a bit of Sir Edric, or a skit I wrote somewhere or other about a Viking waking up with a headache after drinking his own weight in mead, and reaching the inevitable conclusion Saxon sorcery was to blame.

Have some food and drink some water.

I never learn my lesson, do I?

Didn't order any food at the pub. Didn't feel like any at the station. Hungry when I got back home, but nothing in the fridge or freezer. And by then all the takeaways had closed.

Cue giving up and going straight to bed, hoping I'd feel better in the morning.

I don't.

Hair of the dog! May I recommend Guinness on cornflakes?

(This is not a prescription to be taken regularly, but suits occasional lazy mornings after the night before. It is when you can drink 5 pints and feel no ill effects that you are drinking too much)

Is that 5 pints with the cornflakes or the night before

Wouldn't the cornflakes get soggy?

richardDodd said:

Trident I see the usual lunatics are calling for it to be dismantled and the money saved to go to the NHS and increased welfare payments..They must never read the news..catch up time.

There is a Pyschopath in charge in the Kremlin ..who orders near over flights of the UK every day and is about to invade his neighbours.
Ther is a large ..well armed, bunch of medieval savages rampaging through the middle east, trying to get their hands on some nuclear weapons..and vowing to use them ..to wipe us all out
.
If either group succeeds then there will not be an an NHS or any benefits of any kind to anyone.

So a good time to ditch our Nuclear deterrant...wowsa.

Not quite. I advocated scrapping Trident and spending the money on frontline ships, planes and troops, all rather more effective deterrents against the foes you describe.

Apart from that, spot on!

logical_song said:

TGOHF said:

Swiss_Bob said:

TGOHF said:

Didn't take long...

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-30157507


Newly-elected UKIP MP Mark Reckless has accused party leader Nigel Farage of a policy U-turn over EU migration.

In an interview with the Times, the Rochester and Strood MP says: "The policy changed on Wednesday and I'm a bit sore about how I came out of that."

Re Reckless on Sky at 1100. Maybe he's resigning :-)

Perhaps half of all Kipper MPs have signed a letter regaring the leader....

For future reference, how does one get rid of a UKIP leader?

"Poison their beer" (Ruddigore)

logical_song said:

isam said:

logical_song said:

isam said:

beast_in_black said:

MikeSmithson said:

Socrates said:

They won their 271st seat after the Tories threw the kitchen sink at it. Obviously they're not going anywhere. /s

This is pathetic. The incumbent won rather less well than was being predicted or shown in the polls. This complaint that the Tories threw the kitchen sink at at smacks of desperation. What the hell did you expect them to do?

UKIP has got to learn to stop whingeing.

What is pathetic about it? He is not the one who is whingeing, he is just making an observation that this was not a target seat and the Tories tried their damned hardest to try and win but failed. He was merely stating a couple of facts!

Accusing someone of desperation over that comment is rather strange, now if UKIP lost then yes he would be whingeing, but they didn't. They won.

Mike strongly tipped UKIP to lose in Rochester and is bitter at doing his dough

Come on ISAM.
http://www1.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2014/11/19/rochester-betting-although-ukip-looks-a-near-certainty-there-are-still-some-interesting-markets/

What?

To explain, you said "Mike strongly tipped UKIP to lose in Rochester "
The link had Mike saying "Although UKIP looks a near certainty"

Does that make it clearer?

Oh it crossed my mind you might mean that, but I didn't think you could be that stupid

isam said:

logical_song said:

isam said:

logical_song said:

isam said:

beast_in_black said:

MikeSmithson said:

Socrates said:

They won their 271st seat after the Tories threw the kitchen sink at it. Obviously they're not going anywhere. /s

This is pathetic. The incumbent won rather less well than was being predicted or shown in the polls. This complaint that the Tories threw the kitchen sink at at smacks of desperation. What the hell did you expect them to do?

UKIP has got to learn to stop whingeing.

What is pathetic about it? He is not the one who is whingeing, he is just making an observation that this was not a target seat and the Tories tried their damned hardest to try and win but failed. He was merely stating a couple of facts!

Accusing someone of desperation over that comment is rather strange, now if UKIP lost then yes he would be whingeing, but they didn't. They won.

Mike strongly tipped UKIP to lose in Rochester and is bitter at doing his dough

Come on ISAM.
http://www1.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2014/11/19/rochester-betting-although-ukip-looks-a-near-certainty-there-are-still-some-interesting-markets/

What?

To explain, you said "Mike strongly tipped UKIP to lose in Rochester "
The link had Mike saying "Although UKIP looks a near certainty"

Does that make it clearer?

Oh it crossed my mind you might mean that, but I didn't think you could be that stupid

Insults rather than addressing the point, typical.

The 'champagne socialist sneering at you' is now a fully fledged and well identified concept, if today's papers are anything to go by.

A few times on these threads I have mentioned that Steven Kinnock might be vulnerable to a Nugee type assault in Aberavon....

logical_song said:

isam said:

logical_song said:

isam said:

logical_song said:

isam said:

beast_in_black said:

MikeSmithson said:

Socrates said:

They won their 271st seat after the Tories threw the kitchen sink at it. Obviously they're not going anywhere. /s

This is pathetic. The incumbent won rather less well than was being predicted or shown in the polls. This complaint that the Tories threw the kitchen sink at at smacks of desperation. What the hell did you expect them to do?

UKIP has got to learn to stop whingeing.

What is pathetic about it? He is not the one who is whingeing, he is just making an observation that this was not a target seat and the Tories tried their damned hardest to try and win but failed. He was merely stating a couple of facts!

Accusing someone of desperation over that comment is rather strange, now if UKIP lost then yes he would be whingeing, but they didn't. They won.

Mike strongly tipped UKIP to lose in Rochester and is bitter at doing his dough

Come on ISAM.
http://www1.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2014/11/19/rochester-betting-although-ukip-looks-a-near-certainty-there-are-still-some-interesting-markets/

What?

To explain, you said "Mike strongly tipped UKIP to lose in Rochester "
The link had Mike saying "Although UKIP looks a near certainty"

Does that make it clearer?

Oh it crossed my mind you might mean that, but I didn't think you could be that stupid

Insults rather than addressing the point, typical.

"Does that make it clearer?" wasn't an insult? It seemed rather patronising and smug, but maybe that's just your way

Mike said anything over 6/4 on the Tories was value, and right from the off advised backing against UKIP... He also constantly linked to polls that said UKIP might be in trouble... they won easily

He accepted defeat when they were 1/33 as you linked to, but so what?

MikeSmithson said:

david_herdson said:

MaxPB said:

I think after the Lib Dems got beaten into fifth place by the Bus Pass Elvis party they lost all credibility.

That was at a local by-election and as you say, even that caused much embarrassment / laughter (depending on which side, if any, you support). But were it to happen at a Westminster by-election, that would be a different matter altogether. It would be the sort of event that consistently gets referenced in the popular media, HIGNFY and so on, and does serious and lasting damage to the image of a party which is already struggling.

This is getting tedious David. I would have voted Tory in Rochester on Thursday to keep UKIP out. This is what you get with first past the past and your repeated posts don't appear to comprehend how the electoral system works.

OGH, David is right that if that had happened the Lib Dems would have been openly mocked. The reasons why LD 2010 voters went elsewhere, would be drowned out by the mocking.

isam said:

logical_song said:

isam said:

logical_song said:

isam said:

logical_song said:

isam said:

beast_in_black said:

MikeSmithson said:

Socrates said:

They won their 271st seat after the Tories threw the kitchen sink at it. Obviously they're not going anywhere. /s

This is pathetic. The incumbent won rather less well than was being predicted or shown in the polls. This complaint that the Tories threw the kitchen sink at at smacks of desperation. What the hell did you expect them to do?

UKIP has got to learn to stop whingeing.

What is pathetic about it? He is not the one who is whingeing, he is just making an observation that this was not a target seat and the Tories tried their damned hardest to try and win but failed. He was merely stating a couple of facts!

Accusing someone of desperation over that comment is rather strange, now if UKIP lost then yes he would be whingeing, but they didn't. They won.

Mike strongly tipped UKIP to lose in Rochester and is bitter at doing his dough

Come on ISAM.
http://www1.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2014/11/19/rochester-betting-although-ukip-looks-a-near-certainty-there-are-still-some-interesting-markets/

What?

To explain, you said "Mike strongly tipped UKIP to lose in Rochester "
The link had Mike saying "Although UKIP looks a near certainty"

Does that make it clearer?

Oh it crossed my mind you might mean that, but I didn't think you could be that stupid

Insults rather than addressing the point, typical.

"Does that make it clearer?" wasn't an insult? It seemed rather patronising and smug, but maybe that's just your way

Mike said anything over 6/4 on the Tories was value, and right from the off advised backing against UKIP... he accepted defeat when they were 1/33 as you linked to, but so what?

No it wasn't an insult. It was a reaction to you saying 'What' after a quote from you and a link from Mike which completely refuted it.
Mike saying a bet was 'value' is not the same as strongly tipping UKIP to lose, now is it?

MikeSmithson said:

david_herdson said:

MaxPB said:

I think after the Lib Dems got beaten into fifth place by the Bus Pass Elvis party they lost all credibility.

That was at a local by-election and as you say, even that caused much embarrassment / laughter (depending on which side, if any, you support). But were it to happen at a Westminster by-election, that would be a different matter altogether. It would be the sort of event that consistently gets referenced in the popular media, HIGNFY and so on, and does serious and lasting damage to the image of a party which is already struggling.

This is getting tedious David. I would have voted Tory in Rochester on Thursday to keep UKIP out. This is what you get with first past the past and your repeated posts don't appear to comprehend how the electoral system works.

My view is that most people do not have strongly formed views and will find the most agreeable party to support them in voting against what they dislike or fear most. When Farage talks about attracting the labour vote he is after the nastiest most ignorant slice of that vote. He has stumbled into the easy comfort zone of whistling up the hate filled vote;

There is thankfully only a narow prejudiced minority who fall for UKIP. Voting Tory now does not mean that you risk voting for prejudiced bigots. What you do of course is vote for a party which will give you a referendum on the EU.
Reading malcolmg we can see that the SNP is going the other way - falling back into unilateralist, loony left, old religion socialist prejudice.

PS - How strange is it that an admittedly thick labour shadow minister has resigned, but Farage can ally himself with a Polish neo nazi and of course one of his senior MEPs can hurl racial abuse at one of her own voters? All with impunity. I can imagine millions of people voting against UKIP.

Threads like this make me wonder if like the day after the Scottish referendum humiliation and the disappearance of the NATS, May 2015, may see the disappearance of the kippers.

Thornberry might feel hard done by, but tweeting postal vote totals before personal voting started was a greater affront. Given that Kerry McCartney was also a lawyer she ought to have known better. She waz lucky to receive a caution. But ruthless Ed has still to sort out the festering mess in Rotherham.

Indigo said:

YBarddCwsc said:

"Whitevangate is now turning into a political catastrophe for Milliband and Labour 4 days on and still running ...."

That is nothing. Plebgate is still running after 2 years.

Whitevangate and Plebgate are very similar, in that any offence that Mitchell or Thornbury gave should have been remedied by a simple apology. End of. It is the toxic whiff of snobbery that has given both stories enormous mileage.

Plebgate was fanned by New International, the Labour Party (& the Police Federation)

Whitevangate was fanned by News International and the Labour Party.

It is the fact that the Labour handling of the media has been so inept that is the real cause for concern. There is ample pointers that this is going to come under real strain in the General Election.

It plays much worse for Labour because they are the ones that constantly bang on about PC issues and who claim (in the teeth of the evidence) to be the party of the working man. Even if if it were true, (which is strongly disputed) no one would be that surprised if Thrasher Mitchell (public school, tank regiment, banking) was a bit offhand with people, but a Labour MP, especially a Labour MP from "right-on" Islington and with a working class, council estate background is the very personification of someone that is meant to be in touch with ordinary people..

Thornberry's claims to have grown up on a council estate are at odds with cut glass accent. I'd guess that she spent a couple of months of her childhood in council housing during some marital upheaval.

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Bob, if you're not watching already, the qualifying simulations are starting in P3.

Edited extra bit: Ron Dennis still talks like a robot. More human than Miliband, though.

Lol about Ron, and true!

Watching now, will switch over at 1100 for the let down.

Am tucking in to a plate of bacon, with burnt crunchy bits, fried eggs and voluminous amounts of HP. Hope to feel better soon (Re hangovers).

No rosti or polenta though as carbs are bad for you as Dr Fox will agree I'm sure.

The party of public sector privilege" when all the cuts are about the public sector finances.

The fact remains that white van man is getting skinned alive through taxation to fund the fabulous lifestyles of Thornbury and her husband, team Balls, etc.etc.etc. The list is endless.

Perhaps Miliband should have gone on record saying, how dare you sneer at the people who pay for your lifestyle....

chestnut said:

Financier said:

Reckless is quoted as saying, "Labour are party of public-sector privilege."

Ukip won in Rochester because the Labour Party now represents only the public sector elite, according to Mark Reckless......

He declared: ‘The radical tradition, which has stood and spoken for the working class, has found a new home in Ukip.

‘As Labour represents those comfortable at the top of the public sector, it is not Ed Miliband, but Ukip that represents the concerns of most working men and women.’

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2844887/

Will this have any impact in Labour heartlands that rely on public sector employment like the NE and S Wales?

It's a pretty bold attack line.

"The party of public sector privilege" when all the cuts are about the public sector finances.

Deficit figures show that it is pensions, including public sector ones, that Osborne can't get control of.

Then you have the alternative line to the cost of living crisis that on average we are getting wealthier, but it is those sitting in generous final salary pension schemes (mainly public sector) that are most profiting. Automatic, time served, pay progression still exists.

UKIP are going after the people that Labour have ignored.

Mr and Mrs Average who work in the private sector (83%), not the public one (17%).

They aren't multi millionaires (a few thousand people) , but they don't want handouts for empty bedrooms either (a few hundred thousand). They own their own home or are buying it, they drive rather than use state rail.

They are not part of a minority that is agitating for rights, but are part of a majority who are perhaps fed up with hearing about minority rights and having theirs diminished.

The problem for UKIP voters is the same as for other parties. They want to punish others but not suffer themselves.

Go ahead and cut GPs salaries and pensions, and Nurses and Social Workers. All of these are posts that are underfilled at present, yet poor NHS services are a core part of the campaigns in Clacton and Rochester. 25% of GP training posts this year are unfilled already.

Import Romanian GPs and Portuguese nurses to plug the gaps maybe...

MikeSmithson said:

david_herdson said:

MaxPB said:

I think after the Lib Dems got beaten into fifth place by the Bus Pass Elvis party they lost all credibility.

That was at a local by-election and as you say, even that caused much embarrassment / laughter (depending on which side, if any, you support). But were it to happen at a Westminster by-election, that would be a different matter altogether. It would be the sort of event that consistently gets referenced in the popular media, HIGNFY and so on, and does serious and lasting damage to the image of a party which is already struggling.

This is getting tedious David. I would have voted Tory in Rochester on Thursday to keep UKIP out. This is what you get with first past the past and your repeated posts don't appear to comprehend how the electoral system works.

I understand perfectly well how the electoral system works. I also understand how the political media work. Rochester was the Liberals / Lib Dems worst *ever* share of the vote (admittedly, they didn't stand in a lot of elections in the 1950s and 60s); it can't just be written off. After all, they won over 16% in 2010 - they were not starting as mere also-rans.

How you would have voted is your business. As you know, I dislike so-called tactical voting both because it encourages the corrosive oppositionist mind-set (i.e. for people to vote against rather than for something), and it also encourages parties to end up a bucket-vote seeking entities that believe in nothing and stand for nothing but hope to win just because they're not someone else, which is no basis for government - and government is what serious parties aspire to. Once upon a time, the Lib Dems facing a Tory government and a weak Labour opposition would have had a shot at a constituency like R&S.

In any case, you can't have it both ways: either you accept the theory, that electors for an individual in constituencies or the practice, that voters cast their ballots for any number of reasons, which may include tactical votes but also includes national issues: parties, leaders and policies. In fact, the great majority of votes in the great majority of seats are cast on these issues, which is why national swings work if applied properly, why the Lib Dems went up in 2010 and then down in 2010, why UKIP has risen so consistently across much of the country, why the SNP has broken through across Scotland - and so on. These are not down to local factors and run counter to natural tactical voting patterns.

Tactical voting is a feature of the system with all the hallmarks of a bug. It's one reason why FPTP is unfit for purpose and why it needs replacing with a suitable system of PR (open lists being my preference).