politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Dave should remember this polling before he decides to with
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Dave should remember this polling before he decides to withdraw from the debates
Amid increasing signs that the Conservatives would pull the plug on televised leaders’ debates if Mr Farage was included, the UKIP leader said he would be prepared to challenge efforts to stop him taking part in the courts.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
I hope for everyone's sake that turns out to be nonsense, or just UKIP wishful thinking. If there are leaders' debates including Farage but excluding Salmond just THREE MONTHS before the independence referendum, that would be absolutely bloody outrageous.
My perspective runs completely counter to the article. I think that Ed Miliband would be disadvantaged by the longer set-piece interview as he would be forced to explain in depth Labour policies which would lay them open to the kind of scruting they might not survive.
Cameron would have to defend in depth the record of the Government and it wouldn't be easy but I suspect he would be in a better position.
The other possibility is that given the large amount of media exposure he already gets, many voters are tired of David Cameron and aren't really going to listen to anything he says while Ed MIliband has the advantage (as did Clegg in 2010) of being relatively "new" to people so he might derive some benefit from that.
Fine, just so long as a debate reflecting the English political system isn't inflicted on a Scottish audience.
Worried that political discourse is too well-informed and intelligent? Tired of the media not having quite enough power when it comes to biased reporting, manipulated presentation and helpfully edited news clips?
Don't worry, debates are here to help!
I might sound like a broken record on this, but I'm still bloody right.
Yes, Cameron would look a coward. No, there is no serious case for Salmond or Farage or whichever communist is presently leading the Greens to have a seat at such a debate.
The leaders debates will be as informative and edifying as Byzantine emperors dancing for the titillation of the Greens and Blues.
What planet do you live on, MD? Do you seriously think that Natalie Bennett is a communist? As we know from our own experience, there are far more Osborne fans in the Green Party than there are communists.
Mercedes are under investigation for a potentially naughty test with Pirelli. Red Bull and Ferrari complained, but now Ferrari are subject to a similar investigation:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/22741087
Anyway, if they intend not to do the debates, they need to say so now and take the hit in 2013, not 2015. Two years of semi-publicly agonising over it will do them no good whatever.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2334287/Nigel-Evans-Commons-Deputy-Speaker-facing-fourth-sexual-assault-claim-male-intern-claims-groped-bar.html
Dave on debates before the 2010 election would be interesting to revisit.
Does the term 'mutually exclusive' have any meaning in the Tory wing of the Green party?
I liked your article in the Times travel section today about the Rota Vincentina in Portugal.
Your favourite fiction is that the term 'PB Tory' is broader than 'Tory'. In fact, it's much, much narrower.
" In 1997, incumbent UK Prime Minister John Major called Opposition Leader Tony Blair a chicken for not debating. To press the point the Conservative Party employed someone to wear a chicken suit and follow Mr Blair. Mr Blair was leading in the polls and did not want to risk that lead.
In 2001, Prime Minister Blair again refused to debate, and was labelled a chicken by Opposition Leader William Hague. Again, Mr Blair did not want to risk his standing. "
In 2005..........
I keep hearing its superb - but the idea of watching wise-guys machoing each other for hours on end may be too much even for me... and I watched Goodfellas twice back to back at the movies...
Leaving aside the lack of reasonable argument for UKIP having a seat, let's say all others (parties and media) want one, and Cameron doesn't. Can't he just say "Yes, but only if the Greens have a seat. And the SNP. And Plaid." It'd dilute the impact of Farage.
There's also the very real issue for Labour that UKIP could be a problem for them in northern England. Just as the middle class isn't the property of the Conservatives, neither is the working class the property of Labour.
UKIP's not an echo of the Conservative Party of the Past, but a challenge to the whole Establishment.
Seeing that they've now said their fear is that Ed Miliband will come over well, it will be doubly damaging to them if they do rule themselves out. Not only will it make Cameron look weak, but it will also now make Miliband look capable, as that will be the reasoning the media reports. If they were a talented group of strategists, I would say this means that they are therefore definitely going to commit to the debates. However, they have proved to be this incompetent before, so they could still do it.
Which is scarcely the sole preserve of the far left.
"Seven of the soldiers have already been identified through the military identification tags they wore. According to official records, these soldiers were killed in combat between March 28 and April 5.
Investigations have already begun to find the descendants of the men.
In cases where the family does not want to recover the body, the soldiers will be buried in the Fleury military cemetery under a white cross.
Where no identification can be made the bones will be kept at the the Douaumont ossuary, a memorial containing the remains of soldiers who died on the battlefield during the Battle of Verdun
During the 300 days of the Battle of Verdun, which lasted from February 21 1916 to December 19 1916, approximately 230,000 men died on a battlefield covering less than eight square miles.
Most were killed by artillery.
The battle became known in German as Die Hölle von Verdun, or in French as L'Enfer de Verdun. Both names translate to English as 'the Hell of Verdun'.
It was the longest and one of the most devastating battles in the First World War and the history of warfare.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2334354/Archaeologists-unearth-bones-20-French-First-World-War-dead-chance-discovery-hikers-forest-Verdun.html#ixzz2UyxILWay
Cameron does not have the political capital Blair has.
Whereas Teflon Tony managed to avoid any bad stuff sticking for years on end, Cast Iron Cameron is a magnet for trouble.
Hardly. I'm talking about the far right, among others. And the Liberals of the 19th Century referred to the Tories as "the stupid party" - for opposing free trade.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wf_IIbT8HGk
I believe what you actually saw was me pointing out that the one thing more pointless than trolling was posting cat videos on a political betting forum.
I'm fond of cats myself, and I find it mildly disturbing that I share that love with PB's Queen of Pointlessness.
On topic: if Cameron's team pull the plug on this now his people have briefed that "Save" Ed "Is Crap" Miliband is actually pretty endearing on the telly, they are even more dim than even I dared imagine.
Betting PostBacked Radwanska to beat Ivanovic 2-0 at 2.9. She's won the last 5 encounters between the pair 2-0.
The Greens aren't far left. And not just because they have a PB Tory in one of their branches.
There were some tremendous battles elsewhere in europe such as Tannenberg in Prussia, Caporetto in Italy, or the Brusilov offensive in what is now the Ukraine. This long forgotton battle was a rare Russian success and destroyed Austria-Hungary as a fighting force, as well as inventing the stormtroop tactics that evolved into Blitzkreig. All of these battles had a scale of losses that were equal to the Somme or Paschendaele, but our first war memories are mostly of the Western Front.
The numbers in Verdun and elsewhere are staggering. The only thing they remind me of are the naval battles in the First Punic War. About 290,000 men took part in the Battle of Ecnomus.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/01/syria-hague-arms-intervention-military?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter
"Less than a quarter of the public believes that the government should arm the rebels in Syria, according to a poll in the wake of Britain's support for the lifting of an arms embargo.
Just 24% back giving weapons or military supplies to the forces fighting President Bashar al-Assad's army, although more than half (58%) would support offering humanitarian aid.
Last week the European Union lifted its arms embargo on Syria, with foreign secretary William Hague claiming that the policy was denying rebels the right to defend themselves when they were "having every weapon that's ever been devised dropped on them".
A number of European states, led by Austria, continued to oppose lifting the embargo, but Britain insisted that it should be allowed to expire on Friday. Hague, in a concerted move with France designed to force Assad to the negotiating table, said that the decision gave the UK and others flexibility in responding to a worsening situation.
But an Opinium/Observer poll published today suggests that public opinion would not be behind any military intervention, no matter how hands-off.
I find myself really uncomfortable with the idea of drones bombing third-world places like some one-sided video game form of warfare. I don't know the answer, but this feels wrong to me on a visceral level. I've no ethical issue with waging wars - but to have it so one-sided?
They also committed themselves to increase the size of the state and tax revenues accordingly, when for the three main parties it was about the scale of cuts.
Sounds pretty good. I'd be a bit concerned about the gender equality laws unless there was also a requirement for 40% of board members to be male. But on the whole that's a programme I'd be comfortable voting for if I lived in England.
That the climate isn't playing ball, and their *scientists* are losing credibility post Climategate just proves that even telling a Really Big Lie doesn't work for very long in the face of the reality.
And on that note - I'm off to enjoy the evening sun, dickies tweeting noisily, a pizza and Supernatural S3.
Dear God. Don't wanna be vendetta-ish, but IIRC Chaucer will be turning in his grave re language butchery.
I really liked Liotta so clearly its horses for courses, but he's very long in the tooth nowadays.
There are many advantages to drones and remote controlled killer robots, one being that the operators may make more calm and reasoned decisions, and can take advice in a way that was impossible in earlier wars.
The key to success with drone strikes is the quality of information on which they are based. Is this a wedding or a Taliban conference? It may be hard to tell the difference sometimes, and indeed the two may be the same event in some cases.
It's dehumanising to my mind.
Given you say that I'm the Queen of Pointlessness - I find your posts most odd.
- You pro-actively cite me without any reason re cat videos, yet don't mention those relating to cricket or tennis or F1 or in fact anything else
- You then miss the irony of me posting a cat video which any could see as a *joke* on you
- You then decide to respond to posts by me about other subjects that you'd surely ignore if you weren't bothered as you say
You reveal yourself on every occasion. Go haunt someone else if you really care as little as you do.
Exclusive: Better Together unveil "most convincing leaflet yet". #IndyRef https://twitter.com/AndrewRBarr/status/340480269226229761/photo/1
"You pro-actively cite me without any reason re cat videos"
Of course there was a reason. You asked a question ("is there anything more pointless than trolling?") and I helpfully supplied an answer.
"You then miss the irony of me posting a cat video which any could see as a *joke* on you"
As you're a "libertarian with a fiscal conservative twist" who claims to have voted Labour in 1997, 2001 and 2005, I can only defer to you as the ultimate authority in irony.
"You then decide to respond to posts by me about other subjects that you'd surely ignore if you weren't bothered as you say"
I tried very hard to comprehend that sentence but unfortunately my brain turned to mush.
"Go haunt someone else if you really care as little as you do."
That was Edmund's riposte to you, wasn't it?
For extra points, compare the upland area of the Monadhliath Mountains with the Trent Valley.
http://www.savemonadhliathmountains.com/
Sopranos is excellent. It gets under the skin of an everyday gangster family and is acutely well observed. Second only to The Wire with West Wing a close third.
Debates? Yep he has to have one. With Farage. He can give it as much "he has no MPs" as he likes but the public ain't in the mood for that excuse. It's why they are voting UKIP in the first place - not to be lectured about what is right or wrong or good or bad for them.
I wanted to post on the true horrors of WW1,which still gives me sleepless nights.
I have regularly climbed in the Dolomites,following the old Via Ferrata routes,set up by the Italians in WW1,and it is truly spine chilling. The routes are extremely difficult,and as such there are many artifacts,tunnels,trenches,barbed wire etc,still intact.
One obscure tunnel I got into had an inscription,carved into the wall"One day the whole world will visit and see how we fought",well hardly the world,but I found it.
The fighting was truly barbaric,and almost mediaevil in its brutality.
I have a piece of WW1 barbed wire in my house to remind me,maybe more should visit,it would help prevent future wars.
Both coalition partners attacking the opposition.
I think the conservative focus groups are correct in saying Ed Milliband comes across better in a longer forum.
it would be amazing if EdM didn't come over well - he has grown up in politics, indeed was imbibing it at the teat.
In 2010 people feared the nasty Cons but realised Lab were useless hence their agreement with Nick as he stole the debates.
Now, there are undoubtedbly issues with Europe, right of centre, right of right, etc but the economy is demonstrably improving and relatively is better than our neighbours across the channel if not the pond (and why would it be?).
So Dave has a very firm line in the Cons rescuing the UK from Labour's profligacy. If he sticks to that he won't suffer and may gain.
Extraordinary.
He is still learning improving at QT, as must be the case due to Cameron not wanting to be there every week.
His major platform speeches are also improving.
His one to one`s especially on the radio are problematic.
However his longer answering questions from an audience, seems to be his best forum to project himself in a good light.
Chris Deerin @chrisdeerin 23m
Best country on earth: 'Far-Right Extremists Chased Through London by Women Dressed as Badgers' http://goo.gl/wF9IT ht @gabrielmilland
Can you imagine Thatcher or Blair doing this, they'd up their game and by sheer force of personality overcome their opponents.
Probably some of the best I have ever seen.
I think all opposition leaders struggle when pinned down on policies.
Cameron made a big impression with me, due to his commitment to the NHS, which was undoubtedly reinforced in that he used it for his severley disabled son.
Then to commit to no top down reorganistation was a serious breach of trust.
Also Brown for example with his stupid policy of giving free bus passes tv licences heating allowances etc to all, got an opposition leader to say he would do the same.
This was just one example.
The revelation raises the prospect that Mercer could be subjected to a criminal investigation, the first into an MP since the act was introduced. Those found guilty under the act can be subject to prison sentences running up to 10 years if the case goes to a full trial.
A potential defence against any charge could be parliamentary privilege – the right of MPs to ask questions without fear of being subject to legal action.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2013/jun/01/patrick-mercer
Neil Henderson @hendopolis 6m
INDEPENDENT: Lobbying scandal gripes as peers are snared #tomorrowspaperstoday #bbcpapers pic.twitter.com/xzU9lM8Q9U
https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/340916030731862017/photo/1
They are supposed to be balanced, right?
The Observer understands that at least one MP is preparing a complaint that could spark a Met probe into whether Mercer has broken the law, amid allegations that he tabled parliamentary questions on behalf of a lobbying firm paying him thousands of pounds.
My wild stab in the dark for the complaining MP.
John Mann
Mercer (allegedly) has done wrong. Assuming the stories are true, it's good that he has resigned the whip & there is a strong case he should quit now as an MP. But what's the point of involving the police?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_battles_by_casualties
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0210v8b
Farage (currently) entirely deserves a place in the debates. Assuming UKIP don't somehow vanish from the radar he will and should be involved. It's reasonable to think that such a thing may hurt the Tories electoral chances, but that's the price that has to be paid for democracy.
If I step back a bit it seems to me that all of the current politicians are fiddling while Rome burns, and I'd love for there to be some bright light on the horizon. We are, I fear, consigned to this false battle between "spend" and "spend a little less". The Farage's and Clegg's of this world just exist to steal the shiny stuff magpie-like. 'New Labour', Labour, all of the left brands have so infected the debate that rationality has long departed.
EdM couldn't have dreamed a better script.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/cameron-may-duck-tv-election-debates-8347742.html