Julian Huppert on twitter re: the cycling debate today.
"Strong turnout for the #cyclingdebate with 140 people ready to hear 3 main parties outline their plans for cycling "
UKIP not showing up ?
I don't think they were invited.
"With the General Election fast approaching, the UK Cycling Alliance - which includes CTC - has invited cycling leads in political parties ... Lead transport spokespeople from the Conservatives, Labour and Liberal Democrat political parties will debate their manifesto points on cycling and its infrastructure at the first ever ‘Big Cycling Debate.' "
@MaxPB A small proportion of that spend is for the study of bird flight paths to mitigate the impact before they get planning permission. A frivolous waste of profit, but there you go, not everyone has your hard headed business sense.
You are clearly a tortured soul. No self-respecting liberal elite would be seen dead in a TGI Fridays, or an out-of-town multiplex for that matter. At least you didn't admit to 10-pin bowling.
Has convinced me to vote Tory and not Lib Dem in May.
@georgeeaton: Tim Farron tells me that Lib Dems will have to side with Labour if they win more seats but Tories win more votes. http://bit.ly/1AOuKHH
Please - have you actually read the piece not the spin ?
"Let’s say the Tories get more votes and Labour win more seats, which is quite possible, we may think that morally we should put the Tories in but they won’t have enough seats, we won’t have a choice. Last time round, us plus Labour was 11 short of a majority of one, so a majority where we’d have had to rely on Jeremy Corbyn voting through the Budget, things like that, for instance, so 11 short even of that level of a majority, so it wasn’t an option.”
Farron believes (with some justification if the polls are accurate) that even if the Conservatives are marginally ahead on votes they will be so far adrift on seats as to make a Coalition as unlikely as was any arrangement with Labour in 2010.
That is NOT saying the LDs will "have to side" with Labour - merely that the arithmetic will probably preclude siding with the Conservatives.
If, on the other hand, we get a result akin to 2010, there's no reason why the Coalition couldn't continue.
Julian Huppert on twitter re: the cycling debate today.
"Strong turnout for the #cyclingdebate with 140 people ready to hear 3 main parties outline their plans for cycling "
UKIP not showing up ?
I don't think they were invited.
"With the General Election fast approaching, the UK Cycling Alliance - which includes CTC - has invited cycling leads in political parties ... Lead transport spokespeople from the Conservatives, Labour and Liberal Democrat political parties will debate their manifesto points on cycling and its infrastructure at the first ever ‘Big Cycling Debate.' "
Also, Dave needs to move on defence spending. Recommit to Trident, commit to the 2% target for the next Parliament and begin increasing the size of our conventional and unified forces. The equipment budget has grown too much at the expense of conventional forces. What's the use of having all of this fancy equipment without the means to project it. Our military is becoming a glorified police force under the current government and it hasn't gone unnoticed amongst our partners in NATO.
You are clearly a tortured soul. No self-respecting liberal elite would be seen dead in a TGI Fridays, or an out-of-town multiplex for that matter. At least you didn't admit to 10-pin bowling.
I've been ten pin bowling there as well. Since I were a lad, I've been visiting here.
This is finest cinema in the country, has twenty top screens, including the UK's largest IMAX screen. Also has a decent clientèle so no chavs or plebs here.
And I can see as many movies as I want to, all for £19.40 a month.
Julian Huppert on twitter re: the cycling debate today.
"Strong turnout for the #cyclingdebate with 140 people ready to hear 3 main parties outline their plans for cycling "
UKIP not showing up ?
A comment on the CTC link suggests OfCom's major/minor party ruling is not helping UKIP here.
"In organising the debate the UK Cycling Alliance has liaised extensively with the Electoral Commission to ensure that we adhere to the strict rules in the run up to a General Election and to ensure that we fulfill our aim for the event which is to put the main UK parties on the spot about what they will do to improve conditions for cycling if they get into government in May.
There are very strict Electoral Commission rules about which political parties should be invited to an election debate and by including one minor party we would have to include all others that have representation in the UK Parliament, potentially 11 plus parties, which would make an audience participative debate in the space of one our hour impossible to manage.
While we appreciate that "minor" parties should be included at the debate and have had one request so far, we are limited in how we can shape the event. Including one additional party alongside the three parties with the largest representations in Westminster alone isn’t an option.
However, we will be asking each party to send us their main points and will show this on our websites to ensure that voters from across the country are aware of party positions on active travel."
1) Ofcom rules only apply to TV and Radio so why they have referred to them I have no idea 2) We are not yet in the campaign period so they do not apply 3) I thought UKIP have major party status anyway 4) Ofcom rules requires that all major parties be given an opportunity to respond on an issue 5) However in reality I do not think Ofcom rules apply to this. I suspect Electoral commission guidelines regarding Hustings do (see Page 7):
Has convinced me to vote Tory and not Lib Dem in May.
@georgeeaton: Tim Farron tells me that Lib Dems will have to side with Labour if they win more seats but Tories win more votes. http://bit.ly/1AOuKHH
Please - have you actually read the piece not the spin ?
"Let’s say the Tories get more votes and Labour win more seats, which is quite possible, we may think that morally we should put the Tories in but they won’t have enough seats, we won’t have a choice. Last time round, us plus Labour was 11 short of a majority of one, so a majority where we’d have had to rely on Jeremy Corbyn voting through the Budget, things like that, for instance, so 11 short even of that level of a majority, so it wasn’t an option.”
Farron believes (with some justification if the polls are accurate) that even if the Conservatives are marginally ahead on votes they will be so far adrift on seats as to make a Coalition as unlikely as was any arrangement with Labour in 2010.
That is NOT saying the LDs will "have to side" with Labour - merely that the arithmetic will probably preclude siding with the Conservatives.
If, on the other hand, we get a result akin to 2010, there's no reason why the Coalition couldn't continue.
He should rule out putting into power a party that finished second in share of the vote.
Have you and he forgotten the Democrat part of Liberal Democrat?
Let's assume Dave and Ed both get around 280 seats +/- and that the yellow peril and nits get around 30 each +/- what then happens? And I mean what then happens to the markets and Sterling not who gets to be PM. The pound is awful strong right now but I can't see that surviving May if things pan out as every poll suggests they will. We're in for a period of political chaos - and that can't be good for the FTSE of the pound I'd have thought.
EDIT "1 in 3 voters might vote UKIP" was from ComRes. I think YouGov have always been around 1 in 4.
I suspect, it is your activists and candidates that is likely drive away support.
Polling shows that UKIP are considered the most extreme, least fit to govern, and have candidates more likely to have racist/extreme views.
In the recent ComRes/ITV poll the anti-UKIP sentiment looked more like class prejudice than anything to do with UKIP's candidates.
Indeed after a couple of tame urban liberal academics have been poncing around the country for nearly two years peddling propaganda that UKIP voters are 'old white thick and poor'.
The level of sneering from the Torygraph and other Tory propaganda outlets (not to mention the usual urban liberal suspects) was stomach churning. It was clearly a dog whistle that these were people 'not like them'.
So you chose to ignore my other post about 'unguarded comments' so you could link that redundant observation anyway. I would have picked the original candidate for Clacton myself. I thought he did a particularly good job of showing himself up for no good purpose. You are not very good at this are you?
If you like I could link all the Tory stuff slagging off Cameron, the Labour stuff slagging off Miliband or the Libdem stuff slagging off Clegg if you like? However there are few things more verminous than urban liberal snobbery and their co-ordinated attacks on other parts of society. It is a disease that needs to be snuffed out!
Great place, although it's best if you're outdoors for the rest of the day.
Ha! No, but I did once invent a dish called "whirled peas by beet in the meat" (pea and mint pesto with a lamb steak stuffed with a spicy beetroot relish)
Julian Huppert on twitter re: the cycling debate today.
"Strong turnout for the #cyclingdebate with 140 people ready to hear 3 main parties outline their plans for cycling "
UKIP not showing up ?
I don't think they were invited.
"With the General Election fast approaching, the UK Cycling Alliance - which includes CTC - has invited cycling leads in political parties ... Lead transport spokespeople from the Conservatives, Labour and Liberal Democrat political parties will debate their manifesto points on cycling and its infrastructure at the first ever ‘Big Cycling Debate.' "
Julian Huppert on twitter re: the cycling debate today.
"Strong turnout for the #cyclingdebate with 140 people ready to hear 3 main parties outline their plans for cycling "
UKIP not showing up ?
A comment on the CTC link suggests OfCom's major/minor party ruling is not helping UKIP here.
"In organising the debate the UK Cycling Alliance has liaised extensively with the Electoral Commission to ensure that we adhere to the strict rules in the run up to a General Election and to ensure that we fulfill our aim for the event which is to put the main UK parties on the spot about what they will do to improve conditions for cycling if they get into government in May.
There are very strict Electoral Commission rules about which political parties should be invited to an election debate and by including one minor party we would have to include all others that have representation in the UK Parliament, potentially 11 plus parties, which would make an audience participative debate in the space of one our hour impossible to manage.
While we appreciate that "minor" parties should be included at the debate and have had one request so far, we are limited in how we can shape the event. Including one additional party alongside the three parties with the largest representations in Westminster alone isn’t an option.
However, we will be asking each party to send us their main points and will show this on our websites to ensure that voters from across the country are aware of party positions on active travel."
1) Ofcom rules only apply to TV and Radio so why they have referred to them I have no idea 2) We are not yet in the campaign period so they do not apply 3) I thought UKIP have major party status anyway 4) Ofcom rules requires that all major parties be given an opportunity to respond on an issue 5) However in reality I do not think Ofcom rules apply to this. I suspect Electoral commission guidelines regarding Hustings do (see Page 7):
Has convinced me to vote Tory and not Lib Dem in May.
@georgeeaton: Tim Farron tells me that Lib Dems will have to side with Labour if they win more seats but Tories win more votes. http://bit.ly/1AOuKHH
Please - have you actually read the piece not the spin ?
"Let’s say the Tories get more votes and Labour win more seats, which is quite possible, we may think that morally we should put the Tories in but they won’t have enough seats, we won’t have a choice. Last time round, us plus Labour was 11 short of a majority of one, so a majority where we’d have had to rely on Jeremy Corbyn voting through the Budget, things like that, for instance, so 11 short even of that level of a majority, so it wasn’t an option.”
Farron believes (with some justification if the polls are accurate) that even if the Conservatives are marginally ahead on votes they will be so far adrift on seats as to make a Coalition as unlikely as was any arrangement with Labour in 2010.
That is NOT saying the LDs will "have to side" with Labour - merely that the arithmetic will probably preclude siding with the Conservatives.
If, on the other hand, we get a result akin to 2010, there's no reason why the Coalition couldn't continue.
He should rule out putting into power a party that finished second in share of the vote.
Have you and he forgotten the Democrat part of Liberal Democrat?
From the point of view of striking the best deal, the sensible thing must be to keep one's options open.
If I were a Lib Dem, I wouldn't strike any deal that didn't include PR for local elections.
Let's assume Dave and Ed both get around 280 seats +/- and that the yellow peril and nits get around 30 each +/- what then happens? And I mean what then happens to the markets and Sterling not who gets to be PM. The pound is awful strong right now but I can't see that surviving May if things pan out as every poll suggests they will. We're in for a period of political chaos - and that can't be good for the FTSE of the pound I'd have thought.
Correct.
Amazingly, there is still time to take corrective action. I was expecting the financial markets to wake up to the risks at around the end of 2014.
Julian Huppert on twitter re: the cycling debate today.
"Strong turnout for the #cyclingdebate with 140 people ready to hear 3 main parties outline their plans for cycling "
UKIP not showing up ?
A comment on the CTC link suggests OfCom's major/minor party ruling is not helping UKIP here.
"In organising the debate the UK Cycling Alliance has liaised extensively with the Electoral Commission to ensure that we adhere to the strict rules in the run up to a General Election and to ensure that we fulfill our aim for the event which is to put the main UK parties on the spot about what they will do to improve conditions for cycling if they get into government in May.
There are very strict Electoral Commission rules about which political parties should be invited to an election debate and by including one minor party we would have to include all others that have representation in the UK Parliament, potentially 11 plus parties, which would make an audience participative debate in the space of one our hour impossible to manage.
While we appreciate that "minor" parties should be included at the debate and have had one request so far, we are limited in how we can shape the event. Including one additional party alongside the three parties with the largest representations in Westminster alone isn’t an option.
However, we will be asking each party to send us their main points and will show this on our websites to ensure that voters from across the country are aware of party positions on active travel."
1) Ofcom rules only apply to TV and Radio so why they have referred to them I have no idea 2) We are not yet in the campaign period so they do not apply 3) I thought UKIP have major party status anyway 4) Ofcom rules requires that all major parties be given an opportunity to respond on an issue 5) However in reality I do not think Ofcom rules apply to this. I suspect Electoral commission guidelines regarding Hustings do (see Page 7):
6) Those guidelines allow organisations to pick and choose who they invite.
That explanation sounds like nonsense....
Postscript 7) And the Electoral Commission will have absolutely nothing to do with the Ofcom rules. There are very strong demarcation lines between them.
Julian Huppert on twitter re: the cycling debate today.
"Strong turnout for the #cyclingdebate with 140 people ready to hear 3 main parties outline their plans for cycling "
UKIP not showing up ?
I don't think they were invited.
"With the General Election fast approaching, the UK Cycling Alliance - which includes CTC - has invited cycling leads in political parties ... Lead transport spokespeople from the Conservatives, Labour and Liberal Democrat political parties will debate their manifesto points on cycling and its infrastructure at the first ever ‘Big Cycling Debate.' "
@MaxPB A small proportion of that spend is for the study of bird flight paths to mitigate the impact before they get planning permission. A frivolous waste of profit, but there you go, not everyone has your hard headed business sense.
Why don't they just do one major study on the question whether you can make omelettes without breaking eggs, and rely on that in future cases?
Alternatively, generate electricity the way God intended by digging up coal and burning the bloody stuff.
@MaxPB A small proportion of that spend is for the study of bird flight paths to mitigate the impact before they get planning permission. A frivolous waste of profit, but there you go, not everyone has your hard headed business sense.
Why don't they just do one major study on the question whether you can make omelettes without breaking eggs
Let's assume Dave and Ed both get around 280 seats +/- and that the yellow peril and nits get around 30 each +/- what then happens? And I mean what then happens to the markets and Sterling not who gets to be PM. The pound is awful strong right now but I can't see that surviving May if things pan out as every poll suggests they will. We're in for a period of political chaos - and that can't be good for the FTSE of the pound I'd have thought.
Correct.
Amazingly, there is still time to take corrective action. I was expecting the financial markets to wake up to the risks at around the end of 2014.
For me the easiest way to sort Sterling is to buy gold. Maybe time to buy another load...
@Ishmael_X Sod the environment, we need to make money so we can pass on an inheritance to our offspring so they will be able to cope with the state of the world we have left them. BTW? where do you suggest we dig this coal up from? Or do we import the cheap soft stuff from abroad?
He should rule out putting into power a party that finished second in share of the vote.
Have you and he forgotten the Democrat part of Liberal Democrat?
That's absurd. Why would the Party do that ? If Labour finished one vote behind the Conservatives nationally, that would exclude them from office and presumably the same if the Conservatives finished one vote behind Labour.
Given all parties are minorities in form or another, I don't understand the second part of your comment at all.
Holy hell, you're still going to persist after your direct lie was caught?
You said "I never at any time said that leaving the EU would give a BoP surplus." Today.
You said "The balance of payments deficit we have with the EU of over £80 billion a year is a fact. That we would have a balance of payments surplus were it not for our trade with the EU is a fact." Yesterday.
There is no spin on that, there is no mis-interpretation. You directly lied and contradicted yourself.
Nope there is just a complete inability of you to understand English. At no time did I say leaving the EU would make that BoP deficit disappear. You just made that up. My point,which I have made many times before on here and which you seem to be the only person incapable of understanding is that membership of the EU had hindered rather than helped our BoP deficit and that we have seen it worsen substantially whilst our BoP with the rest of the world has improved. I have used real numbers to illustrate that whilst you have simply plucked figures out of the sir with no basis in fact. In short I am consistent and use facts to back up my position whilst you make stuff up and use it to smear people.
@Ishmael_X Sod the environment, we need to make money so we can pass on an inheritance to our offspring so they will be able to cope with the state of the world we have left them. BTW? where do you suggest we dig this coal up from? Or do we import the cheap soft stuff from abroad?
I thought our offspring were going to be swept away by rising ocean levels if we don't start tidal generation. Make your mind up.
Yes I've seen that before. Frankly given the offences occurred 15 years ago I get the sense that that was a rather fabricated excuse and those spitting the dummy were unhappy for other reasons. These things happen especially when an organisation is thrown into the spotlight the way UKIP has been over the last two years. I'm sure there are plenty of such goings on in other parties (the goings on in Ashford Labour around Harriet Yeo who is now supporting UKIP for example). However they don't get the same sort of sensational media treatment despite her being a former Chair of Labour's NEC.
Fareham is interesting though because only three candidates seem to have been selected. Both the Tories and UKIP have still to find someone.
That is all very well, you say, but what if the leaders were holiday destinations? Well, I am glad you asked. Mr Cameron, according to our groups, would be “somewhere suave, like Monaco”, or quite possibly “an offshore island to store your money in”.
Mr Farage would simply be “Blighty!”, probably Margate or Southend because “they adore him down there” or (the view from Muswell Hill) “Benidorm.
Somewhere tacky and loud with egg and chips”. Mr Clegg would be somewhere “nice and inoffensive”, or possibly, since he must feel beleaguered, a distant location like the Caribbean “where people don’t know him so he won’t get hassled all the time”.
Mr Miliband? A place “where the traffic is terrible, because he doesn’t have any sense of direction.” Alternatively “the Moon, his own little world,” or more charitably “somewhere misunderstood – a really nice place but no-one goes there.”
That is all very well, you say, but what if the leaders were holiday destinations? Well, I am glad you asked. Mr Cameron, according to our groups, would be “somewhere suave, like Monaco”, or quite possibly “an offshore island to store your money in”.
Mr Farage would simply be “Blighty!”, probably Margate or Southend because “they adore him down there” or (the view from Muswell Hill) “Benidorm.
Somewhere tacky and loud with egg and chips”. Mr Clegg would be somewhere “nice and inoffensive”, or possibly, since he must feel beleaguered, a distant location like the Caribbean “where people don’t know him so he won’t get hassled all the time”.
Mr Miliband? A place “where the traffic is terrible, because he doesn’t have any sense of direction.” Alternatively “the Moon, his own little world,” or more charitably “somewhere misunderstood – a really nice place but no-one goes there.”
His Lordship needs to get the comedy out of the actual figures before tryting to relocate it elsewhere.
That is all very well, you say, but what if the leaders were holiday destinations? Well, I am glad you asked. Mr Cameron, according to our groups, would be “somewhere suave, like Monaco”, or quite possibly “an offshore island to store your money in”.
Mr Farage would simply be “Blighty!”, probably Margate or Southend because “they adore him down there” or (the view from Muswell Hill) “Benidorm.
Somewhere tacky and loud with egg and chips”. Mr Clegg would be somewhere “nice and inoffensive”, or possibly, since he must feel beleaguered, a distant location like the Caribbean “where people don’t know him so he won’t get hassled all the time”.
Mr Miliband? A place “where the traffic is terrible, because he doesn’t have any sense of direction.” Alternatively “the Moon, his own little world,” or more charitably “somewhere misunderstood – a really nice place but no-one goes there.”
The focus group comments that Lord Ashcroft provides about Milliband are laugh out loud funny.
That is all very well, you say, but what if the leaders were holiday destinations? Well, I am glad you asked. Mr Cameron, according to our groups, would be “somewhere suave, like Monaco”, or quite possibly “an offshore island to store your money in”.
Mr Farage would simply be “Blighty!”, probably Margate or Southend because “they adore him down there” or (the view from Muswell Hill) “Benidorm.
Somewhere tacky and loud with egg and chips”. Mr Clegg would be somewhere “nice and inoffensive”, or possibly, since he must feel beleaguered, a distant location like the Caribbean “where people don’t know him so he won’t get hassled all the time”.
Mr Miliband? A place “where the traffic is terrible, because he doesn’t have any sense of direction.” Alternatively “the Moon, his own little world,” or more charitably “somewhere misunderstood – a really nice place but no-one goes there.”
The focus group comments that Lord Ashcroft provides about Milliband are laugh out loud funny.
If you suggest a good comparison topic via twitter he obliges, as one or two posters have discovered.
Holy hell, you're still going to persist after your direct lie was caught?
You said "I never at any time said that leaving the EU would give a BoP surplus." Today.
You said "The balance of payments deficit we have with the EU of over £80 billion a year is a fact. That we would have a balance of payments surplus were it not for our trade with the EU is a fact." Yesterday.
There is no spin on that, there is no mis-interpretation. You directly lied and contradicted yourself.
Can you not read or understand what you've written?
Leaving the EU is NOT THE SAME as stopping all trade with the EU. Richard never said we would stop all trade with the EU.
But IF we did stop all EU trade our BoP WOULD be £80bn better
If your[???] claiming an implied non-sequitur feel free. It doesn't make his ramblings any more coherent or relevant.
I'm saying that you're entirely misrepresenting the points that Richard has made.
Either wilfully, so you're a typically duplicitous Europhile, or just because you're a bit dim.
I thought the former, I'm now leaning towards the latter.
No, I am stating the pretty obvious conclusion of your argument.
Either Tyndall is quoting the figure in support of his argument that the UK should leave the EU or he is introducing a non-sequitur to imply he has supporting facts when they are completely unrelated to his argument.
BTW, I'm not a Europhile, I'm pretty much 50:50 between EFTA and EU membership. There's good arguments for both providing strong benefits.
Ha.!! The idea that you are not a Eurofanatic is as believable as those figures you keep making up. I am coming to the conclusion that you are psychologically incapable of telling the truth about anything.
Ashcroft's pollster is up and down more than a tart's drawers! In fact thats what I will refer to Ashcroft's polls as. 'The Tart's Drawers'.
Rightly, he says look at the trend.
Since the start of the year, Lord A has produced 4 Conservative leads, 2 Labour leads, and 2 ties. That's an average Conservative lead of 1%, so far this year. That is out of line with internet panels, but in line with other telephone surveys. An average of all 13 telephone surveys this year puts the Conservatives 1% ahead.
I'm glad Suella Fernandes got a seat. She is a really nice person.
Yes, she is, and I thought she was impressive on the couple of occasions when I met her. The only thing is that I think she might have been better suited to a seat in the London area.
Just gonna repeat this. Variation inside moe which this is, is good & shows sampling's working well.
YG's problem's this. MS says they have 300k registered but I've done 2 VI polls in 3 days, first of my life & they're bloody long. You get 2 GE q's, general then constituency specific, then 10-15 mins of other q's about all kinds of stuff some of it badly phrased and boring as shit. LIke q's all about Heathrow as an experience y'day. ONly boring turds like me are gonna be arsed to go through that crap.
I reckon it's clear whatever YG say to deny this: <3000 people bother to fill em in. Same old 3k of people complete the long VI surveys = small sample pool, same old people, same old result day in day out.
Let's assume Dave and Ed both get around 280 seats +/- and that the yellow peril and nits get around 30 each +/- what then happens? And I mean what then happens to the markets and Sterling not who gets to be PM. The pound is awful strong right now but I can't see that surviving May if things pan out as every poll suggests they will. We're in for a period of political chaos - and that can't be good for the FTSE of the pound I'd have thought.
Correct.
Amazingly, there is still time to take corrective action. I was expecting the financial markets to wake up to the risks at around the end of 2014.
For me the easiest way to sort Sterling is to buy gold. Maybe time to buy another load...
A lot of the FTSE 100 earnings are overseas so a plunging pound means soaring dollar earnings.
For me the easiest way to sort Sterling is to buy gold. Maybe time to buy another load...
Well, that's more a bet on gold than on sterling, and historically gold has been a rather poor hedge against economic trouble.
Gold was awful when Yugoslavia collapsed - the exchange rate of gold coins to food was appalling. If you want to hedge against TSC (total societal collapse), then you need shotgun shells, bottled water and wine.
Ashcroft's pollster is up and down more than a tart's drawers! In fact thats what I will refer to Ashcroft's polls as. 'The Tart's Drawers'.
Rightly, he says look at the trend.
Since the start of the year, Lord A has produced 4 Conservative leads, 2 Labour leads, and 2 ties. That's an average Conservative lead of 1%, so far this year. That is out of line with internet panels, but in line with other telephone surveys. An average of all 13 telephone surveys this year puts the Conservatives 1% ahead.
Thats one worth noting 'cos I rate phone pollsters much more than onliners. Current psn could be narrow tory lead.
@Ishmael_X Why are they talking about having to raise the height of the London flood barrier? Architectural enhancement of the "riverscape"?
Make your mind up. You want anti-warming measures like barrages, but when someone proposes building one it becomes a capitalist plot to enrich the hedge funds and cheat our grandchildren. The "I'm going on a protest, dunno what it's about" mentality.
Ashcroft's pollster is up and down more than a tart's drawers! In fact thats what I will refer to Ashcroft's polls as. 'The Tart's Drawers'.
Rightly, he says look at the trend.
Since the start of the year, Lord A has produced 4 Conservative leads, 2 Labour leads, and 2 ties. That's an average Conservative lead of 1%, so far this year. That is out of line with internet panels, but in line with other telephone surveys. An average of all 13 telephone surveys this year puts the Conservatives 1% ahead.
And a 1% lead would give which Party most seats, SeanF?
Comments
A small proportion of that spend is for the study of bird flight paths to mitigate the impact before they get planning permission.
A frivolous waste of profit, but there you go, not everyone has your hard headed business sense.
Great place, although it's best if you're outdoors for the rest of the day.
"Let’s say the Tories get more votes and Labour win more seats, which is quite possible, we may think that morally we should put the Tories in but they won’t have enough seats, we won’t have a choice. Last time round, us plus Labour was 11 short of a majority of one, so a majority where we’d have had to rely on Jeremy Corbyn voting through the Budget, things like that, for instance, so 11 short even of that level of a majority, so it wasn’t an option.”
Farron believes (with some justification if the polls are accurate) that even if the Conservatives are marginally ahead on votes they will be so far adrift on seats as to make a Coalition as unlikely as was any arrangement with Labour in 2010.
That is NOT saying the LDs will "have to side" with Labour - merely that the arithmetic will probably preclude siding with the Conservatives.
If, on the other hand, we get a result akin to 2010, there's no reason why the Coalition couldn't continue.
This is finest cinema in the country, has twenty top screens, including the UK's largest IMAX screen. Also has a decent clientèle so no chavs or plebs here.
And I can see as many movies as I want to, all for £19.40 a month.
2) We are not yet in the campaign period so they do not apply
3) I thought UKIP have major party status anyway
4) Ofcom rules requires that all major parties be given an opportunity to respond on an issue
5) However in reality I do not think Ofcom rules apply to this. I suspect Electoral commission guidelines regarding Hustings do (see Page 7):
http://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0007/105946/sp-hustings-rp-npc-ca.pdf
6) Those guidelines allow organisations to pick and choose who they invite.
That explanation sounds like nonsense....
Have you and he forgotten the Democrat part of Liberal Democrat?
Besides, I can bribe Sunil in better ways, I mean, I could threaten to put up threads on nothing but AV and Scotland for the rest of the week.
God, I don't have to spend all my time on here reading your posts do I?
Genuinely missed it.
This is what UKIP is like in my area:
http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/news/local/ukip-parliamentary-candidate-leaves-over-chairman-s-criminal-record-1-6546275
Apologies for duff editing.
Be interesting to see if that one shows up the Electoral Commission donation figures.
If I were a Lib Dem, I wouldn't strike any deal that didn't include PR for local elections.
"Works for me!"
Well said, I divide the fauna of the world into two groups ... edible and non edible (although the latter group dwindles if you're very hungry).
In fact, I do the same to the flora now I come to think about it. Can you eat the Amazonian rainforest? Can you just save the edible bits?
Amazingly, there is still time to take corrective action. I was expecting the financial markets to wake up to the risks at around the end of 2014.
Postscript 7) And the Electoral Commission will have absolutely nothing to do with the Ofcom rules. There are very strong demarcation lines between them.
Alternatively, generate electricity the way God intended by digging up coal and burning the bloody stuff.
Basically Pulpstar wants me to vote Lab for "professional" reasons
http://enormo-haddock.blogspot.co.uk/2015/03/testing-thoughts.html
Sod the environment, we need to make money so we can pass on an inheritance to our offspring so they will be able to cope with the state of the world we have left them.
BTW? where do you suggest we dig this coal up from? Or do we import the cheap soft stuff from abroad?
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B_GjqtFXEAAn0XW.jpg
Given all parties are minorities in form or another, I don't understand the second part of your comment at all.
"Seriously, why do they bother with these bill-boards?"
Usually because some PR guy convinces them that his cousin can do a fantastic vote pulling ad.
The market economy?
I have altered the deal, pray I don't alter it any further.
An England footballer has been arrested on suspicion of having sex with a 14 year old girl.
7 point swing.
Just don't know who for...
Con 34 (+2) Lab 31 (-5) LD 7 (NC) UKIP 14 (+3) Greens 7 (-1)
Why are they talking about having to raise the height of the London flood barrier? Architectural enhancement of the "riverscape"?
But just remember:
As The Good Lord Giveth The Good Lord Taketh
Amen!
Fareham is interesting though because only three candidates seem to have been selected. Both the Tories and UKIP have still to find someone.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2930136/Ukip-plunged-crisis-row-campaign-chief-s-criminal-past-leads-election-candidate-quitting.html
Lab -5 on the week = LOL.
Mr Farage would simply be “Blighty!”, probably Margate or Southend because “they adore him down there” or (the view from Muswell Hill) “Benidorm.
Somewhere tacky and loud with egg and chips”. Mr Clegg would be somewhere “nice and inoffensive”, or possibly, since he must feel beleaguered, a distant location like the Caribbean “where people don’t know him so he won’t get hassled all the time”.
Mr Miliband? A place “where the traffic is terrible, because he doesn’t have any sense of direction.” Alternatively “the Moon, his own little world,” or more charitably “somewhere misunderstood – a really nice place but no-one goes there.”
http://www.conservativehome.com/parliament/2015/02/suella-fernandes-selected-as-the-conservative-candidate-for-fareham.html
Before that she'd been a runner-up in a number of selections.
"Ashcroft's pollster is up and down more than a tart's drawers! "
But with a disturbingly familiar emission of bodily fluids where PB is concerned?
Any one for Ed Miliband's Red eyes and "We warned you once."
Last week a clear outlier, masking clear Blue water now between Labour and the Tories.
I feckin' well hope!
I've posted y'day why I may have sussed YG's static problem.
Good tory poll but within moe despite dramatic looking swing back.
11th Jan: Con +6
18th Jan: Con +1
25th Jan: Tie
1st Feb: Tie
8th Feb: Con +3
15th Feb: Lab +1
22nd Feb: Lab +4
1st Mar: Con +3
Underlying position therefore is no change.
Since the start of the year, Lord A has produced 4 Conservative leads, 2 Labour leads, and 2 ties. That's an average Conservative lead of 1%, so far this year. That is out of line with internet panels, but in line with other telephone surveys. An average of all 13 telephone surveys this year puts the Conservatives 1% ahead.
More than that and Dave is PM - which is prize no 1.
Less than that and it would look very difficult to last for 5 years.
It's all good entertainment and keeps Tories like you happy for a few days but meaningless on most other levels.
The only reason we are getting to hear about it is because he thinks a "gagging order" is when he asks for a blow job.
YG's problem's this. MS says they have 300k registered but I've done 2 VI polls in 3 days, first of my life & they're bloody long. You get 2 GE q's, general then constituency specific, then 10-15 mins of other q's about all kinds of stuff some of it badly phrased and boring as shit. LIke q's all about Heathrow as an experience y'day. ONly boring turds like me are gonna be arsed to go through that crap.
I reckon it's clear whatever YG say to deny this: <3000 people bother to fill em in. Same old 3k of people complete the long VI surveys = small sample pool, same old people, same old result day in day out.
Also much of the risk is priced in.
for his taste
Among those who've definitely made up their minds, the Tories lead 38/32