Skip to content

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The Tories move to win the elder brothers’ vote – a wise mo

SystemSystem Posts: 12,683
edited April 2015 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The Tories move to win the elder brothers’ vote – a wise move?

Embarrassing: Way too personal from Michael Fallon against Ed Miliband via @SamCoatesTimes pic.twitter.com/wU64AVMvCD

Read the full story here


«134

Comments

  • SlackbladderSlackbladder Posts: 9,818
    first!
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 55,908
    I'm an elder brother :)
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 55,908
    Labour 1.6% ahead in part-ELBOW comprising just four polls so far this week.
  • TCPoliticalBettingTCPoliticalBetting Posts: 10,819
    I doubt that Fallon actually said that. Just not his style. He is fronting something that came from either Osborne or Crosby because it would need sign off at their level. Foolish move by Fallon, rules himself out of the Leadership contest.

  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143
    There are probably slightly more elder brothers in the electorate than younger brothers..
  • CD13CD13 Posts: 6,388
    I watched the Scottish debate for a few minutes yesterday. To my untutored eyes, the Green man came across as odd but the Kipper was odder still.

    Jim Murphy has some peculiar affectations but in that crowd, he looked normal. The women performed better and Ruth Davidson held up well.
  • TheWatcherTheWatcher Posts: 5,262
    edited April 2015
    Fallon's really got under Milliband's skin, with a move straight out of the Labour playbook. Interesting and entertaining.
  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 7,382
    edited April 2015
    It all smacks of the Tories moving to desperation mode. Methinks this is all about failing to get cross-over.
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    In that case, how are the LDs feeling? Calling the Samaritans?
    MikeSmithson said:

    It all smacks of the Tories moving to desperation mode.

  • Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,039
    edited April 2015
    @MikeL

    Further to the last thread, the British Election Study estimates turnout by age in 2010 as follows: 
    18-24  51.8%
    25-34  57.3%
    35-44  64.4%
    45-54  67.5%
    55-64  69.8%
    65+    74.7%
    www.parliament.uk/briefing-papers/SN01467.pdf

    So in spite of what I said about the dangers of trying to "un-skew" polls, the YouGov targets do look odd.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 123,767
    On topic, this is aimed at a certain part of the electorate.

    The Con to UKIP switchers.

    Gay Marriage and Defence is one of their priorities.

    A bit like when Labour go for the Toffs, they aren't appealing to whole electorate, just a certain segment.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 32,598
    Plato said:

    I'm all for keeping our nuclear deterrent. I wish the world didn't have them, but we do and in an international game of MAD - I want both our place on the Security Council and our own nukes updated.

    The world is becoming unstable again - it's not as simple as the old Cold War anymore. And given all our Londistan issues - frankly I'm pleased to hear we're getting 4 new subs et al.

    A better ratio between top brass and troops would be good too.

    Luckyguy1983 said:

    Aparently Nigel Farage has backed Trident replacement. If that's so, he can forget (such as it is) my vote. This country will only be on its way back to greatness when we eschew expensive status symbols and get back to sound economics and genuine capability, especially in defence. If UKIP isn't for that, what's the point?

    But how exactly can strategic nuclear weapons (of dubious genuine capability I might add) protect us from something like ISIS? Surely better spent (as you rightly indicate) on conventional forces.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    MikeSmithson said:

    It all smacks of the Tories moving to desperation mode. Methinks this is all about failing to get cross-over.

    According to Dan Hodges this is all part of the plan and was always going to happen
  • TCPoliticalBettingTCPoliticalBetting Posts: 10,819
    MikeSmithson said:

    It all smacks of the Tories moving to desperation mode.

    A ring of truth. Who is so desperate in the Conservatives? Cameron, Osborne and Gove are the people that could see their political careers end in a few weeks time. The others Cabinet Ministers have an eye on the Leadership contest and are still in play, maybe without Fallon?
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @tnewtondunn: Unsure it's wise for Labour to push personal smears line: 1, Makes their next negative attack harder. 2, Only reminds folk of David v Ed.
  • oldpoliticsoldpolitics Posts: 455
    OblitusSumMe said:

    There are probably slightly more elder brothers in the electorate than younger brothers..

    But probably slightly more younger brothers among those who will actually turn out.
  • Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,039
    MikeSmithson said:

    It all smacks of the Tories moving to desperation mode. Methinks this is all about failing to get cross-over.

    Bit early for that Mike. The manifestos haven't even been published yet!
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 23,380
    CD13 said:

    I watched the Scottish debate for a few minutes yesterday. To my untutored eyes, the Green man came across as odd but the Kipper was odder still.

    Jim Murphy has some peculiar affectations but in that crowd, he looked normal. The women performed better and Ruth Davidson held up well.

    Before last night I thought UKIP might win some list seats in next year's Scot election; now - no chance.
  • QuincelQuincel Posts: 4,042
    Plato said:

    In that case, how are the LDs feeling? Calling the Samaritans?

    MikeSmithson said:

    It all smacks of the Tories moving to desperation mode.

    The LDs are much further down the 7 stages of grieving. They accepted their fate or sub-consciously committed to denial several months ago. Both sets of LDs won't be bothered by the polls.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 80,108
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    On topic, this is aimed at a certain part of the electorate.

    The Con to UKIP switchers.

    Gay Marriage and Defence is one of their priorities.

    A bit like when Labour go for the Toffs, they aren't appealing to whole electorate, just a certain segment.

    Coburn moved me out the purple camp last night, Fallon has nudged me back ;)
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    That’s what we’re witnessing today. Sky’s political editor Faisal Islam has spent the morning brandishing a “leaked” copy of the Tory candidates talking points memo. “It only mentions David Cameron 10 times, but it mentions Ed Miliband 99 times,” he’s been telling his audience. The clip of Isabel Webster holding up the Times “Backstabber Miliband” front-page is being repeated on the hour. Ed Miliband’s press conference is leading every bulletin. As is the clip of David Cameron warning of the threat of Ed Miliband and Nicola Sturgeon fighting over the nuclear button.

    The Tories wanted to weaponise Ed Miliband. Today they’ve gone nuclear on him.
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/general-election-2015/politics-blog/11524902/Why-the-Tories-need-to-go-nuclear-on-Ed-Miliband.html
  • PongPong Posts: 4,693
    edited April 2015
    OblitusSumMe said:

    There are probably slightly more elder brothers in the electorate than younger brothers..

    Really?

    I dunno how the stats work on that, but I'd have thought that as we have a birth rate over 2.0 there should be more younger brothers than older ones on the register, no?

    What am I missing? :)
  • IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966
    OblitusSumMe said:

    There are probably slightly more elder brothers in the electorate than younger brothers..

    Rather less. Some families have 5 kids, only one of those if any is the elder brother, all of his siblings if male will be younger brothers. He is also only elder brother while he has someone to be elder brother to.
  • TCPoliticalBettingTCPoliticalBetting Posts: 10,819
    OblitusSumMe said:

    There are probably slightly more elder brothers in the electorate than younger brothers..

    If my younger brother makes it to Mayor I will be pleased for him even though it is the wrong party. I know what it would mean to our parents.
  • GeoffMGeoffM Posts: 6,071
    Luckyguy1983 said:

    Plato said:

    I'm all for keeping our nuclear deterrent. I wish the world didn't have them, but we do and in an international game of MAD - I want both our place on the Security Council and our own nukes updated.

    The world is becoming unstable again - it's not as simple as the old Cold War anymore. And given all our Londistan issues - frankly I'm pleased to hear we're getting 4 new subs et al.

    A better ratio between top brass and troops would be good too.

    Luckyguy1983 said:

    Aparently Nigel Farage has backed Trident replacement. If that's so, he can forget (such as it is) my vote. This country will only be on its way back to greatness when we eschew expensive status symbols and get back to sound economics and genuine capability, especially in defence. If UKIP isn't for that, what's the point?

    But how exactly can strategic nuclear weapons (of dubious genuine capability I might add) protect us from something like ISIS? Surely better spent (as you rightly indicate) on conventional forces.
    That's a very good point. Nuclear weapons are no defence against ISIS because if you nuked the cameljockeys back to the stone age they'd never notice the difference.
  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 6,621
    I would love it, LOVE IT in the manner of Kevin Keegan if David were to pop up now and rubbish his brother's pathetic populism. He could do it in a joint press conference with his dear old mum, who would tearfully describe the family betrayal they've had to live with for 5 years.

    Unlikley, mind you, but I can dream...
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 44,318
    MikeSmithson said:

    It all smacks of the Tories moving to desperation mode. Methinks this is all about failing to get cross-over.

    Not at all. They are covering their bases. Defence is their home territory the last thing they want is for anyone to be left in any doubt about it they can then move on.

    Fallon was actually quite good on the telly. Measured, firm, just what people are looking for in a party (or even leader).

    As for your headline, have you been taking lessons from Katharine Viner? I would say "boost for UKIP". But then my party isn't running along at sub-10%.
  • TCPoliticalBettingTCPoliticalBetting Posts: 10,819
    Anorak said:

    I would love it, LOVE IT in the manner of Kevin Keegan if David were to pop up now and rubbish his brother's pathetic populism. He could do it in a joint press conference with his dear old mum, who would tearfully describe the family betrayal they've had to live with for 5 years.
    Unlikley, mind you, but I can dream...

    Frankly David Miliband has a higher moral code than Ed.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 32,598
    GeoffM said:

    Luckyguy1983 said:

    Plato said:

    I'm all for keeping our nuclear deterrent. I wish the world didn't have them, but we do and in an international game of MAD - I want both our place on the Security Council and our own nukes updated.

    The world is becoming unstable again - it's not as simple as the old Cold War anymore. And given all our Londistan issues - frankly I'm pleased to hear we're getting 4 new subs et al.

    A better ratio between top brass and troops would be good too.

    Luckyguy1983 said:

    Aparently Nigel Farage has backed Trident replacement. If that's so, he can forget (such as it is) my vote. This country will only be on its way back to greatness when we eschew expensive status symbols and get back to sound economics and genuine capability, especially in defence. If UKIP isn't for that, what's the point?

    But how exactly can strategic nuclear weapons (of dubious genuine capability I might add) protect us from something like ISIS? Surely better spent (as you rightly indicate) on conventional forces.
    That's a very good point. Nuclear weapons are no defence against ISIS because if you nuked the cameljockeys back to the stone age they'd never notice the difference.
    Well quite.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 123,767
    Also, there's a reason they've brought up trident now.

    In the opposition debate next week, you know Sturgeon is going to bring up Trident and try and skewer Ed.

    Either Ed whole heartedly endorses trident, and buggers up SLAB or he goes along with the SNP line, which the Tories will flag up, because a Lab/SNP government with a Scotland First approach is utterly toxic for Lab in England.

    As Admiral Ackbar said "It's a trap"
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    It's about being a Big Hitter - along with the other Security Council members. And against those who are also playing in this game like Pakistan or Iran or NK/whomever.

    ISIS is a bit player if brutal. They wouldn't hesitate to use dirty bombs IMO. I certainly wouldn't want to encourage them into trying it on here if we dropped our nuclear deterrent to save a few quid now. It's a *strategic* defense programme - those don't change without very solid reasons over decades.
    Luckyguy1983 said:

    Plato said:

    I'm all for keeping our nuclear deterrent. I wish the world didn't have them, but we do and in an international game of MAD - I want both our place on the Security Council and our own nukes updated.

    The world is becoming unstable again - it's not as simple as the old Cold War anymore. And given all our Londistan issues - frankly I'm pleased to hear we're getting 4 new subs et al.

    A better ratio between top brass and troops would be good too.

    Luckyguy1983 said:

    Aparently Nigel Farage has backed Trident replacement. If that's so, he can forget (such as it is) my vote. This country will only be on its way back to greatness when we eschew expensive status symbols and get back to sound economics and genuine capability, especially in defence. If UKIP isn't for that, what's the point?

    But how exactly can strategic nuclear weapons (of dubious genuine capability I might add) protect us from something like ISIS? Surely better spent (as you rightly indicate) on conventional forces.
  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143
    Pong said:

    OblitusSumMe said:

    There are probably slightly more elder brothers in the electorate than younger brothers..

    Really?

    I dunno how the stats work on that, but I'd have thought that as we have a birth rate over 2.0 there should be more younger brothers than older ones on the register, no?

    What am I missing? :)
    If you have more than two siblings in a family it gets complicated, because the middle sibling can be both an elder and a younger brother. I decided just to cancel those out.

    Elder brothers will tend to die earlier, but they will also qualify to vote earlier too, and I think the latter effect will slightly edge out the other.
  • IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966
    edited April 2015
    Luckyguy1983 said:

    Plato said:

    I'm all for keeping our nuclear deterrent. I wish the world didn't have them, but we do and in an international game of MAD - I want both our place on the Security Council and our own nukes updated.

    The world is becoming unstable again - it's not as simple as the old Cold War anymore. And given all our Londistan issues - frankly I'm pleased to hear we're getting 4 new subs et al.

    A better ratio between top brass and troops would be good too.

    Luckyguy1983 said:

    Aparently Nigel Farage has backed Trident replacement. If that's so, he can forget (such as it is) my vote. This country will only be on its way back to greatness when we eschew expensive status symbols and get back to sound economics and genuine capability, especially in defence. If UKIP isn't for that, what's the point?

    But how exactly can strategic nuclear weapons (of dubious genuine capability I might add) protect us from something like ISIS? Surely better spent (as you rightly indicate) on conventional forces.
    I think the problem is half a billion quid a year doesnt buy you very many conventional forces. An Abrams Tank costs 4.3m quid, so you would get about one tank regiment when you include staff, maintenance and so on, not a lot ;)
  • Danny565Danny565 Posts: 8,091
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Also, there's a reason they've brought up trident now.

    In the opposition debate next week, you know Sturgeon is going to bring up Trident and try and skewer Ed.

    Either Ed whole heartedly endorses trident, and buggers up SLAB or he goes along with the SNP line, which the Tories will flag up, because a Lab/SNP government with a Scotland First approach is utterly toxic for Lab in England.

    As Admiral Ackbar said "It's a trap"

    Would it really bugger up SLAB? In all the "focus groups" and vox pops with Lab->SNP switchers, I don't think I ever remember Trident being cited as a reason.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    TheWatcher said:

    Fallon's really got under Milliband's skin, with a move straight out of the Labour playbook. Interesting and entertaining.

    it's "despicable panicking" shrieks everyone who realises it works....

  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @DPJHodges: Sturgeon just ruled out confidence and supply deal with Labour. Because of Trident.

    @MrHarryCole: Incase u missed, he said twice:"We would not enter confidence and supply agreement with the Labour Party that committed to Trident renewal"

    This suggests they would vote against a Miliband Queen's Speech. Dave is PM...
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    edited April 2015
    Pong said:

    OblitusSumMe said:

    There are probably slightly more elder brothers in the electorate than younger brothers..

    Really?

    I dunno how the stats work on that, but I'd have thought that as we have a birth rate over 2.0 there should be more younger brothers than older ones on the register, no?

    What am I missing? :)
    Girls?

    :p
  • PolruanPolruan Posts: 2,083
    Plato said:

    It's about being a Big Hitter - along with the other Security Council members. And against those who are also playing in this game like Pakistan or Iran or NK/whomever.

    ISIS is a bit player if brutal. They wouldn't hesitate to use dirty bombs IMO. I certainly wouldn't want to encourage them into trying it on here if we dropped our nuclear deterrent to save a few quid now. It's a *strategic* defense programme - those don't change without very solid reasons over decades.

    Luckyguy1983 said:

    Plato said:

    I'm all for keeping our nuclear deterrent. I wish the world didn't have them, but we do and in an international game of MAD - I want both our place on the Security Council and our own nukes updated.

    The world is becoming unstable again - it's not as simple as the old Cold War anymore. And given all our Londistan issues - frankly I'm pleased to hear we're getting 4 new subs et al.

    A better ratio between top brass and troops would be good too.

    Luckyguy1983 said:

    Aparently Nigel Farage has backed Trident replacement. If that's so, he can forget (such as it is) my vote. This country will only be on its way back to greatness when we eschew expensive status symbols and get back to sound economics and genuine capability, especially in defence. If UKIP isn't for that, what's the point?

    But how exactly can strategic nuclear weapons (of dubious genuine capability I might add) protect us from something like ISIS? Surely better spent (as you rightly indicate) on conventional forces.
    But how would a nuclear deterrent work against ISIS or deal with the "Londonistan issue"? Something like "drop the suitcase or we'll hit Whitechapel"?
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 123,767
    Danny565 said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Also, there's a reason they've brought up trident now.

    In the opposition debate next week, you know Sturgeon is going to bring up Trident and try and skewer Ed.

    Either Ed whole heartedly endorses trident, and buggers up SLAB or he goes along with the SNP line, which the Tories will flag up, because a Lab/SNP government with a Scotland First approach is utterly toxic for Lab in England.

    As Admiral Ackbar said "It's a trap"

    Would it really bugger up SLAB? In all the "focus groups" and vox pops with Lab->SNP switchers, I don't think I ever remember Trident being cited as a reason.
    There's Scotland specific polling that shows a replacement for Trident doesn't poll well in Scotland, when you remind them how much it costs.

    In England people are more pro a trident replacement.
  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 6,621
    edited April 2015
    Luckyguy1983 said:

    Plato said:

    I'm all for keeping our nuclear deterrent. I wish the world didn't have them, but we do and in an international game of MAD - I want both our place on the Security Council and our own nukes updated.

    The world is becoming unstable again - it's not as simple as the old Cold War anymore. And given all our Londistan issues - frankly I'm pleased to hear we're getting 4 new subs et al.

    A better ratio between top brass and troops would be good too.

    Luckyguy1983 said:

    Aparently Nigel Farage has backed Trident replacement. If that's so, he can forget (such as it is) my vote. This country will only be on its way back to greatness when we eschew expensive status symbols and get back to sound economics and genuine capability, especially in defence. If UKIP isn't for that, what's the point?

    But how exactly can strategic nuclear weapons (of dubious genuine capability I might add) protect us from something like ISIS? Surely better spent (as you rightly indicate) on conventional forces.
    A strategic deterrent is a guard against future threats. The Norks or Iranians are likley to gain nuclear capability over the next decade (or Pakistan could fall into the arms of fundamentalist Islam) and under your solution we'd have a can of flyspray for the ISIS gnat rather than an RPG for the charging nuclear hippopotamus.

    Also, what Plato said.
  • TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 7,362

    BBC Trending ✔ @BBCtrending

    #BradfordWest started trending online - because of a claim by George Galloway about his opponent's forced marriage http://bbc.in/1GODjEG

  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    Back to *bargaining* if another coalition looks likely?!
    Quincel said:

    Plato said:

    In that case, how are the LDs feeling? Calling the Samaritans?

    MikeSmithson said:

    It all smacks of the Tories moving to desperation mode.

    The LDs are much further down the 7 stages of grieving. They accepted their fate or sub-consciously committed to denial several months ago. Both sets of LDs won't be bothered by the polls.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    TGOHF said:

    it's "despicable panicking" shrieks everyone who realises it works....

    It has also generated a TV clip of Ed saying "Don't play politics with National Security"

    *cough*Syria*cough*
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    Tom Bradby is turning into the Paul Downton of the election campaign.

  • weejonnieweejonnie Posts: 3,820
    edited April 2015
    Pong said:

    OblitusSumMe said:

    There are probably slightly more elder brothers in the electorate than younger brothers..

    Really?

    I dunno how the stats work on that, but I'd have thought that as we have a birth rate over 2.0 there should be more younger brothers than older ones on the register, no?

    What am I missing? :)
    Some younger brothers are under 18 when their older brother is 18 or over.

    (For multiple siblings actual relationships cancel out e.g.

    Three brothers - has two older brothers and two younger brothers.
  • MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053
    Boost for LAB from TNS
    LAB 33% (+1) CON 30% (-3) LD 8% (0) UKIP 19% (+3) GREEN 4% (-1)

    ........and a bounce for UKIP, what could be better than that?
  • TheWatcherTheWatcher Posts: 5,262
    GeoffM said:

    Luckyguy1983 said:

    Plato said:

    I'm all for keeping our nuclear deterrent. I wish the world didn't have them, but we do and in an international game of MAD - I want both our place on the Security Council and our own nukes updated.

    The world is becoming unstable again - it's not as simple as the old Cold War anymore. And given all our Londistan issues - frankly I'm pleased to hear we're getting 4 new subs et al.

    A better ratio between top brass and troops would be good too.

    Luckyguy1983 said:

    Aparently Nigel Farage has backed Trident replacement. If that's so, he can forget (such as it is) my vote. This country will only be on its way back to greatness when we eschew expensive status symbols and get back to sound economics and genuine capability, especially in defence. If UKIP isn't for that, what's the point?

    But how exactly can strategic nuclear weapons (of dubious genuine capability I might add) protect us from something like ISIS? Surely better spent (as you rightly indicate) on conventional forces.
    That's a very good point. Nuclear weapons are no defence against ISIS because if you nuked the cameljockeys back to the stone age they'd never notice the difference.
    ISIS is a red herring in the nuclear debate.
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 14,332
    I like Fallon, but wasn't he a Minister under Thatcher. I can't see him being a credible leadership candidate.
  • MikeLMikeL Posts: 7,810
    Tissue_Price said:

    @MikeL

    Further to the last thread, the British Election Study estimates turnout by age in 2010 as follows:

    18-24  51.8%
    25-34  57.3%
    35-44  64.4%
    45-54  67.5%
    55-64  69.8%
    65+    74.7%
    www.parliament.uk/briefing-papers/SN01467.pdf

    So in spite of what I said about the dangers of trying to "un-skew" polls, the YouGov targets do look odd.
    Many thanks.

    Are the above figures turnout of registered electors or turnout of population? I suspect of registered electors - that is how turnout is reported when we get election results.

    Yet pollsters are polling amongst the whole population. Some reports say only approx 50% of 18 to 24s are on the register.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 55,908
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Also, there's a reason they've brought up trident now.

    In the opposition debate next week, you know Sturgeon is going to bring up Trident and try and skewer Ed.

    Either Ed whole heartedly endorses trident, and buggers up SLAB or he goes along with the SNP line, which the Tories will flag up, because a Lab/SNP government with a Scotland First approach is utterly toxic for Lab in England.

    As Admiral Ackbar said "It's a trap"

    Yebbut Leia said it first in The Empire Strikes Back, just sayin'...
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 30,990
    Was genuinely laughing at this attack this morning. Hilariously bad on so many fronts and no wonder its been universally panned:

    1. Ed is weak. Too weak. But he stabbed his brother in the back. Too strong. Too ruthless.
    2. Can't trust Labour. They might do a coalition deal with a party who won't commit to 4 boats. Like the LibDems. Who the Tories did a coalition deal with and will do again

    But anyway, if the aim was distract away from their carcrash of a day yesterday defending non-doms, perhaps its worked. But a car crash universally panned to distract from a car crash universally panned? Wow, Crosby really must know what he's doing, because to those of us outside Tory towers the campaign is beginning to resemble that little girl giving Cameron the head desk yesterday.
  • IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966
    weejonnie said:

    Pong said:

    OblitusSumMe said:

    There are probably slightly more elder brothers in the electorate than younger brothers..

    Really?

    I dunno how the stats work on that, but I'd have thought that as we have a birth rate over 2.0 there should be more younger brothers than older ones on the register, no?

    What am I missing? :)
    Some younger brothers are under 18 when their older brother is 18 or over.
    Some older brothers are dead of old age while some younger brothers are still alive and voting.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 55,908
    Some more info for @Pulpstar

    Ilford North Tory majority in 2010 GE = 11.5%
    Ilford North Tory majority in 2014 Locals = 2.0%
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    edited April 2015
    Scott_P said:

    @DPJHodges: Sturgeon just ruled out confidence and supply deal with Labour. Because of Trident.

    @MrHarryCole: Incase u missed, he said twice:"We would not enter confidence and supply agreement with the Labour Party that committed to Trident renewal"

    This suggests they would vote against a Miliband Queen's Speech. Dave is PM...

    It suggests nothing of the sort. It says they won't go into a formal supply and confidence deal with Labour. That's different from backing the Queen's Speech.

    They have explicitly ruled out backing a Tory Queen Speech.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    MikeK said:

    Boost for LAB from TNS
    LAB 33% (+1) CON 30% (-3) LD 8% (0) UKIP 19% (+3) GREEN 4% (-1)

    ........and a bounce for UKIP, what could be better than that?

    It would be better for Ukip if it was ICM not TNS.
  • TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 7,362

    tom bradby ✔ @tombradby

    One of the Tories strongest suits is that people view Cameron as essentially decent. But doesn't this attack look cheap and a bit mean?

  • Danny565Danny565 Posts: 8,091
    edited April 2015
    I'm a loony lefty, but I like the idea of keeping Trident. It might be irrational, but I don't want to risk being "naked" in this world where we have a deranged leader in charge of Russia again.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 80,108
    edited April 2015
    If Nuclear weapons are essential to our security -

    How do Germany, Norway, Spain, Italy, Switzerland, Sweden, Finland, Japan all cope ?

    Tbh I reckon the countries with Nuclear programs should at least get some subs back from the Non-Nuclear NATO members.

    In practise if push came to shove we're completely tied down to the USA if WW3 happens anyway.
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    I was really surprised when I saw EdM's reaction. He went on and on. I didn't see the rest of his press conference, but caught that bit and was Whoa He's Irked.
    TGOHF said:

    TheWatcher said:

    Fallon's really got under Milliband's skin, with a move straight out of the Labour playbook. Interesting and entertaining.

    it's "despicable panicking" shrieks everyone who realises it works....

  • IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966
    RochdalePioneers said:

    Was genuinely laughing at this attack this morning. Hilariously bad on so many fronts and no wonder its been universally panned:

    1. Ed is weak. Too weak. But he stabbed his brother in the back. Too strong. Too ruthless.
    2. Can't trust Labour. They might do a coalition deal with a party who won't commit to 4 boats. Like the LibDems. Who the Tories did a coalition deal with and will do again

    But anyway, if the aim was distract away from their carcrash of a day yesterday defending non-doms, perhaps its worked. But a car crash universally panned to distract from a car crash universally panned? Wow, Crosby really must know what he's doing, because to those of us outside Tory towers the campaign is beginning to resemble that little girl giving Cameron the head desk yesterday.

    Arguably a coward stabs someone in the back, someone with moral courage (or even intellectual self-confidence) would duke it out face-to-face.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 123,767
    Danny565 said:

    I'm a loony lefty, but I like the idea of keeping Trident. It might be irrational, but I don't want to risk being "naked" in this world with so many threats, thanks.

    I'm a far right Tory, and I'd be ok with us not replacing Trident.
  • MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053
    Tykejohnno said:


    BBC Trending ✔ @BBCtrending

    #BradfordWest started trending online - because of a claim by George Galloway about his opponent's forced marriage http://bbc.in/1GODjEG

    Oh, Galloway getting attacked left right and centre over a remark about a female muslim. Of course he may be correct in his claims, then he may have made them up. Time will tell.

  • TheWatcherTheWatcher Posts: 5,262
    Pulpstar said:

    If Nuclear weapons are essential to our security -

    How do Germany, Norway, Spain, Italy, Switzerland, Sweden, Finland, Japan all cope ?

    Tbh I reckon the countries with Nuclear programs should at least get some subs back from the Non-Nuclear NATO members.

    In practise if push came to shove we're completely tied down to the USA if WW3 happens anyway.

    Most of those nations host US nuclear weapons, and other forces. There's your answer.
  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 6,621
    RochdalePioneers said:

    Was genuinely laughing at this attack this morning. Hilariously bad on so many fronts and no wonder its been universally panned:

    1. Ed is weak. Too weak. But he stabbed his brother in the back. Too strong. Too ruthless.
    2. Can't trust Labour. They might do a coalition deal with a party who won't commit to 4 boats. Like the LibDems. Who the Tories did a coalition deal with and will do again

    But anyway, if the aim was distract away from their carcrash of a day yesterday defending non-doms, perhaps its worked. But a car crash universally panned to distract from a car crash universally panned? Wow, Crosby really must know what he's doing, because to those of us outside Tory towers the campaign is beginning to resemble that little girl giving Cameron the head desk yesterday.

    And yet everyone in the country is now reminded that Ed's a scheming, unstrustworthy, duplicitious shit-bag. And all the shrieking about smears has just made it tricky for Labour to mount similar attacks. And it's driven a stake through the heart of a Labour/SNP coalition.

    Terrrrrible day for the Tories.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    Tykejohnno said:


    tom bradby ✔ @tombradby

    One of the Tories strongest suits is that people view Cameron as essentially decent. But doesn't this attack look cheap and a bit mean?

    Did he not notice it was Fallon holding the truncheon ?
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    What has Thatcher got to do with it?

    He'd make a Safe Pair Of Hands if Cameron did step down defeated/whilst leadership contest was in progress.
    Mortimer said:

    I like Fallon, but wasn't he a Minister under Thatcher. I can't see him being a credible leadership candidate.

  • IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Danny565 said:

    I'm a loony lefty, but I like the idea of keeping Trident. It might be irrational, but I don't want to risk being "naked" in this world with so many threats, thanks.

    I'm a far right Tory, and I'd be ok with us not replacing Trident.
    Your the liberal metro elite leader of Economical Dry But Not Banging On About Europe and Gays. ;)
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 80,108
    MikeK said:

    Tykejohnno said:


    BBC Trending ✔ @BBCtrending

    #BradfordWest started trending online - because of a claim by George Galloway about his opponent's forced marriage http://bbc.in/1GODjEG

    Oh, Galloway getting attacked left right and centre over a remark about a female muslim. Of course he may be correct in his claims, then he may have made them up. Time will tell.

    Galloway is utterly shameless in the way he plays his cards. I wouldn't vote for him in a million years, but as a backer he knows exactly what he's doing to hold onto Bradford West.
  • DairDair Posts: 6,108
    GeoffM said:

    Luckyguy1983 said:

    Plato said:

    I'm all for keeping our nuclear deterrent. I wish the world didn't have them, but we do and in an international game of MAD - I want both our place on the Security Council and our own nukes updated.

    The world is becoming unstable again - it's not as simple as the old Cold War anymore. And given all our Londistan issues - frankly I'm pleased to hear we're getting 4 new subs et al.

    A better ratio between top brass and troops would be good too.

    Luckyguy1983 said:

    Aparently Nigel Farage has backed Trident replacement. If that's so, he can forget (such as it is) my vote. This country will only be on its way back to greatness when we eschew expensive status symbols and get back to sound economics and genuine capability, especially in defence. If UKIP isn't for that, what's the point?

    But how exactly can strategic nuclear weapons (of dubious genuine capability I might add) protect us from something like ISIS? Surely better spent (as you rightly indicate) on conventional forces.
    That's a very good point. Nuclear weapons are no defence against ISIS because if you nuked the cameljockeys back to the stone age they'd never notice the difference.
    If you're going to resort to pejoratives it would help if you got your racial slurs right. ISIS, predominantly Syrian or Iraqi are Semitic, therefore Ragheads not Cameljockeys.
  • MikeLMikeL Posts: 7,810
    edited April 2015
    FPT:

    MORI reckoned almost exactly a 3:1 ratio between 18-24s and over 65s last time: https://www.ipsos-mori.com/Assets/Docs/Polls/Aggregate for web 210510.pdf

    Thanks Tissue_Price - As soon as you look at those numbers it's obvious that they look far more reasonable.

    And note MORI are using over 65s, not 60s.

    Huge difference from today's YouGov.

  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Danny565 said:

    I'm a loony lefty, but I like the idea of keeping Trident. It might be irrational, but I don't want to risk being "naked" in this world with so many threats, thanks.

    I'm a far right Tory, and I'd be ok with us not replacing Trident.
    You are now a virtual LD now ;)

  • MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053
    TGOHF said:

    MikeK said:

    Boost for LAB from TNS
    LAB 33% (+1) CON 30% (-3) LD 8% (0) UKIP 19% (+3) GREEN 4% (-1)

    ........and a bounce for UKIP, what could be better than that?

    It would be better for Ukip if it was ICM not TNS.
    A bounce is a bounce, is a bounce.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 55,908
    MikeSmithson said:

    It all smacks of the Tories moving to desperation mode. Methinks this is all about failing to get cross-over.



    Ahem!!!

    https://twitter.com/Sunil_P2/status/585149148980187136
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,769
    TheWatcher said:

    Pulpstar said:

    If Nuclear weapons are essential to our security -

    How do Germany, Norway, Spain, Italy, Switzerland, Sweden, Finland, Japan all cope ?

    Tbh I reckon the countries with Nuclear programs should at least get some subs back from the Non-Nuclear NATO members.

    In practise if push came to shove we're completely tied down to the USA if WW3 happens anyway.

    Most of those nations host US nuclear weapons, and other forces. There's your answer.
    That and Japan has nuclear latency - they probably don't have the bomb, but they have all the people and stuff they need to make one in a hurry if they need to. (Needing nuclear weapons basically amounts to falling out with the Americans.)

    There's a lot to be said for this - it's cheaper, and it's less of an outrageous violation of the non-proliferation treaty than the UK's current position.
  • DairDair Posts: 6,108
    Scott_P said:

    @DPJHodges: Sturgeon just ruled out confidence and supply deal with Labour. Because of Trident.

    @MrHarryCole: Incase u missed, he said twice:"We would not enter confidence and supply agreement with the Labour Party that committed to Trident renewal"

    This suggests they would vote against a Miliband Queen's Speech. Dave is PM...

    And they will vote against Dave's Queen Speech. So unless Labour abstains or votes for a Tory Government, it's SNP Minority.

    ASIPM.
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    Dogs...fleas... :wink:
    TGOHF said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Danny565 said:

    I'm a loony lefty, but I like the idea of keeping Trident. It might be irrational, but I don't want to risk being "naked" in this world with so many threats, thanks.

    I'm a far right Tory, and I'd be ok with us not replacing Trident.
    You are now a virtual LD now ;)

  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 123,767
    Indigo said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Danny565 said:

    I'm a loony lefty, but I like the idea of keeping Trident. It might be irrational, but I don't want to risk being "naked" in this world with so many threats, thanks.

    I'm a far right Tory, and I'd be ok with us not replacing Trident.
    Your the liberal metro elite leader of Economical Dry But Not Banging On About Europe and Gays. ;)
    I'm also very strong on defence.

    I'd increase defence spending to 2.5% of GDP and spend the money on the Navy and our conventional forces.

    It is a shame, the RAF really have become the few.
  • MikeLMikeL Posts: 7,810
    edited April 2015
    The whole Trident thing is a charade because if Ed puts it to a vote Con will support it and it'll go through with a majority of approx 400.

    So the SNP are totally irrelevant re Trident.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 80,108
    edited April 2015
    MikeL said:

    The whole Trident thing is a charade because if Ed puts it to a vote Con will support it and it'll go through with a majority of approx 400.

    So the SNP are totally irrelevant re Trident.

    That was my conclusion too, and it would suit all sides.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 32,598
    TheWatcher said:

    Pulpstar said:

    If Nuclear weapons are essential to our security -

    How do Germany, Norway, Spain, Italy, Switzerland, Sweden, Finland, Japan all cope ?

    Tbh I reckon the countries with Nuclear programs should at least get some subs back from the Non-Nuclear NATO members.

    In practise if push came to shove we're completely tied down to the USA if WW3 happens anyway.

    Most of those nations host US nuclear weapons, and other forces. There's your answer.
    So do we. We just pay for ours.
  • Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,039
    MikeL said:

    Tissue_Price said:

    @MikeL

    Further to the last thread, the British Election Study estimates turnout by age in 2010 as follows:

    18-24  51.8%
    25-34  57.3%
    35-44  64.4%
    45-54  67.5%
    55-64  69.8%
    65+    74.7%
    www.parliament.uk/briefing-papers/SN01467.pdf

    So in spite of what I said about the dangers of trying to "un-skew" polls, the YouGov targets do look odd.
    Many thanks.

    Are the above figures turnout of registered electors or turnout of population? I suspect of registered electors - that is how turnout is reported when we get election results.

    Yet pollsters are polling amongst the whole population. Some reports say only approx 50% of 18 to 24s are on the register.
    Turnout in the normal sense: ("Throughout this note turnout is defined where possible as the total number of valid votes as a proportion of the total electorate.")
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    When did the RAF shoot something down? Isn't it all RN airman that do most of this now?
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Indigo said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Danny565 said:

    I'm a loony lefty, but I like the idea of keeping Trident. It might be irrational, but I don't want to risk being "naked" in this world with so many threats, thanks.

    I'm a far right Tory, and I'd be ok with us not replacing Trident.
    Your the liberal metro elite leader of Economical Dry But Not Banging On About Europe and Gays. ;)
    I'm also very strong on defence.

    I'd increase defence spending to 2.5% of GDP and spend the money on the Navy and our conventional forces.

    It is a shame, the RAF really have become the few.
  • SimonStClareSimonStClare Posts: 7,976
    edited April 2015
    RochdalePioneers said:

    Was genuinely laughing at this attack this morning. Hilariously bad on so many fronts and no wonder its been universally panned:

    The lady doth protest too much methinks..!
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 55,908
    Plato said:

    When did the RAF shoot something down? Isn't it all RN airman that do most of this now?

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Indigo said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Danny565 said:

    I'm a loony lefty, but I like the idea of keeping Trident. It might be irrational, but I don't want to risk being "naked" in this world with so many threats, thanks.

    I'm a far right Tory, and I'd be ok with us not replacing Trident.
    Your the liberal metro elite leader of Economical Dry But Not Banging On About Europe and Gays. ;)
    I'm also very strong on defence.

    I'd increase defence spending to 2.5% of GDP and spend the money on the Navy and our conventional forces.

    It is a shame, the RAF really have become the few.
    Tornados and Typhoons are RAF.
  • MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053
    I shall be concentrating on The Masters for the next 4 days. Oh to be among the azaleas now that April's here.

    I will be following the campaign too, from time to time.
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    Do Vanilla @Tim_B - he's a regular team member there and has loads of great anecdotes.

    I don't do golf at all - but Masters Sunday on the radio [R5] is great.
    MikeK said:

    I shall be concentrating on The Masters for the next 4 days. Oh to be among the azaleas now that April's here.

    I will be following the campaign too, from time to time.

  • DairDair Posts: 6,108
    MikeK said:

    Tykejohnno said:


    BBC Trending ✔ @BBCtrending

    #BradfordWest started trending online - because of a claim by George Galloway about his opponent's forced marriage http://bbc.in/1GODjEG

    Oh, Galloway getting attacked left right and centre over a remark about a female muslim. Of course he may be correct in his claims, then he may have made them up. Time will tell.

    Galloway is an utter scumbag.

    The most telling part of his attitude her is that he doesn't make any statement against forced marriage, he merely claims that Shah was 16 not 15 when forced into marriage against her will.

    He genuinely seems to think this makes it all OK.

    As I said, scumbag.
  • IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Indigo said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Danny565 said:

    I'm a loony lefty, but I like the idea of keeping Trident. It might be irrational, but I don't want to risk being "naked" in this world with so many threats, thanks.

    I'm a far right Tory, and I'd be ok with us not replacing Trident.
    Your the liberal metro elite leader of Economical Dry But Not Banging On About Europe and Gays. ;)
    I'm also very strong on defence.

    I'd increase defence spending to 2.5% of GDP and spend the money on the Navy and our conventional forces.

    It is a shame, the RAF really have become the few.
    The role for the RAF is fading fast, projecting power is about carriers, you could almost reduce the RAF to an airspace defense/interdiction force and move all the strike capability to Fleet Air Arm (if we had a few real carriers and support ships). Sadly a Nimitz class carrier costs around $4.5bn, so about twice as much as the whole trident replacement program.
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    Speaking of ISIS telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/france/11525016/Isil-hackers-seize-control-of-Frances-TV5Monde-network-in-unprecedented-attack.html
    Isil hackers seize control of France's TV5Monde network in 'unprecedented' attack
    TV5Monde still unable to broadcast anything but pre-recorded programmes on its 11 channels after "unprecedented" cyber attack as French government denounces "act of terrorism"
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    MikeK said:

    I shall be concentrating on The Masters for the next 4 days. Oh to be among the azaleas now that April's here.

    I will be following the campaign too, from time to time.

    Any bets on ?

    I'm on Speith and Dustin J...

  • Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,039
    MikeL said:

    FPT:

    MORI reckoned almost exactly a 3:1 ratio between 18-24s and over 65s last time: https://www.ipsos-mori.com/Assets/Docs/Polls/Aggregate for web 210510.pdf

    Thanks Tissue_Price - As soon as you look at those numbers it's obvious that they look far more reasonable.

    And note MORI are using over 65s, not 60s.

    Huge difference from today's YouGov.

    "Just for fun" (© Peter Snow) I "unskewed" today's YouGov by using the estimates of turnout from the BES and it turned the 35-34 Lab lead (actually a bit less than 1% due to rounding) into a 36-34 Con lead (though really only about 1.5%). So the net "skew" is about 2.5%.

    I'm not saying this is robust because - amongst other things - YouGov are not weighting to be accurate within age groups. But it's intriguing enough to keep an eye on.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 80,108
    Dair said:

    MikeK said:

    Tykejohnno said:


    BBC Trending ✔ @BBCtrending

    #BradfordWest started trending online - because of a claim by George Galloway about his opponent's forced marriage http://bbc.in/1GODjEG

    Oh, Galloway getting attacked left right and centre over a remark about a female muslim. Of course he may be correct in his claims, then he may have made them up. Time will tell.

    Galloway is an utter scumbag.

    The most telling part of his attitude her is that he doesn't make any statement against forced marriage, he merely claims that Shah was 16 not 15 when forced into marriage against her will.

    He genuinely seems to think this makes it all OK.

    As I said, scumbag.
    The fact that Galloway's tactics will work tells you all you need to know about social attitudes in Bradford West.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 123,767
    Indigo said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Indigo said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Danny565 said:

    I'm a loony lefty, but I like the idea of keeping Trident. It might be irrational, but I don't want to risk being "naked" in this world with so many threats, thanks.

    I'm a far right Tory, and I'd be ok with us not replacing Trident.
    Your the liberal metro elite leader of Economical Dry But Not Banging On About Europe and Gays. ;)
    I'm also very strong on defence.

    I'd increase defence spending to 2.5% of GDP and spend the money on the Navy and our conventional forces.

    It is a shame, the RAF really have become the few.
    The role for the RAF is fading fast, projecting power is about carriers, you could almost reduce the RAF to an airspace defense/interdiction force and move all the strike capability to Fleet Air Arm (if we had a few real carriers and support ships). Sadly a Nimitz class carrier costs around $4.5bn, so about twice as much as the whole trident replacement program.
    You might realise from my screen name, I'm fan of Airborne and Air Assault Troops.

    If we expanded say, The Paras, 16 Air Assault Brigade and 3 Commando Brigade, into 3 full Divisions, I reckon that would make give us more military clout than nuclear weapons.
  • DairDair Posts: 6,108
    Indigo said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Indigo said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Danny565 said:

    I'm a loony lefty, but I like the idea of keeping Trident. It might be irrational, but I don't want to risk being "naked" in this world with so many threats, thanks.

    I'm a far right Tory, and I'd be ok with us not replacing Trident.
    Your the liberal metro elite leader of Economical Dry But Not Banging On About Europe and Gays. ;)
    I'm also very strong on defence.

    I'd increase defence spending to 2.5% of GDP and spend the money on the Navy and our conventional forces.

    It is a shame, the RAF really have become the few.
    The role for the RAF is fading fast, projecting power is about carriers, you could almost reduce the RAF to an airspace defense/interdiction force and move all the strike capability to Fleet Air Arm (if we had a few real carriers and support ships). Sadly a Nimitz class carrier costs around $4.5bn, so about twice as much as the whole trident replacement program.
    Perhaps you should do some reading up on how useful Carriers actually are.

    Here's a clue. Aircraft Carriers have no defence against Ballistic Missiles (1940s technology). None.
  • MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053
    TGOHF said:

    MikeK said:

    I shall be concentrating on The Masters for the next 4 days. Oh to be among the azaleas now that April's here.

    I will be following the campaign too, from time to time.

    Any bets on ?

    I'm on Speith and Dustin J...

    I'm on Speith £50 EW @ 15/1
    and Ernie Els for old times @125/1 £20 EW.
  • rural_voterrural_voter Posts: 2,038
    TheWatcher said:

    Pulpstar said:

    If Nuclear weapons are essential to our security -

    How do Germany, Norway, Spain, Italy, Switzerland, Sweden, Finland, Japan all cope ?

    Tbh I reckon the countries with Nuclear programs should at least get some subs back from the Non-Nuclear NATO members.

    In practise if push came to shove we're completely tied down to the USA if WW3 happens anyway.

    Most of those nations host US nuclear weapons, and other forces. There's your answer.
    Sweden, Switzerland, Ireland, Austria and Finland are neutral; i.e., they do not belong to NATO.

    Sweden and Switzerland rely on large conventional forces and conscription. They assume that no-one would come to their aid if they were attacked; they would fight alone.

    Then there are Australia and New Zealand. Neither comes under 'the NATO umbrella'.

    So, quite a lot of countries seem to consider themselves secure without having nuclear weapons or belonging to NATO.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 40,054
    Indigo said:

    RochdalePioneers said:

    Was genuinely laughing at this attack this morning. Hilariously bad on so many fronts and no wonder its been universally panned:

    1. Ed is weak. Too weak. But he stabbed his brother in the back. Too strong. Too ruthless.
    2. Can't trust Labour. They might do a coalition deal with a party who won't commit to 4 boats. Like the LibDems. Who the Tories did a coalition deal with and will do again

    But anyway, if the aim was distract away from their carcrash of a day yesterday defending non-doms, perhaps its worked. But a car crash universally panned to distract from a car crash universally panned? Wow, Crosby really must know what he's doing, because to those of us outside Tory towers the campaign is beginning to resemble that little girl giving Cameron the head desk yesterday.

    Arguably a coward stabs someone in the back, someone with moral courage (or even intellectual self-confidence) would duke it out face-to-face.

    Like stand in a leadership election?

    I am no EdM fan, but today's attacks on him do seem a touch excessive and ever so slightly hysterical. Weird Wallace turning into a vindictive psychopath. It doesn't quite compute. Still, the soft UKIP focus groups must be telling the Tories they will work.

  • Bob__SykesBob__Sykes Posts: 1,180
    edited April 2015
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Also, there's a reason they've brought up trident now.

    In the opposition debate next week, you know Sturgeon is going to bring up Trident and try and skewer Ed.

    Either Ed whole heartedly endorses trident, and buggers up SLAB or he goes along with the SNP line, which the Tories will flag up, because a Lab/SNP government with a Scotland First approach is utterly toxic for Lab in England.

    As Admiral Ackbar said "It's a trap"

    I really can't see Scotland/Salmond being that big an issue for Labour in England. It might win the Tories a few UKIPpers back, and that in turn might salvage a couple of Tory held marginals from Labour.

    Beyond that, pretty piffling significance I expect.

    It epitomises the dismal awfulness of the Tory non-campaign that those in charge are investing so much in it....
    Scott_P said:

    @DPJHodges: Sturgeon just ruled out confidence and supply deal with Labour. Because of Trident.

    @MrHarryCole: Incase u missed, he said twice:"We would not enter confidence and supply agreement with the Labour Party that committed to Trident renewal"

    This suggests they would vote against a Miliband Queen's Speech. Dave is PM...

    No, because they'll sure as damnit vote down Dave's Queen's Speech. Sturgeon has explicitly said she will lock Cameron out of No 10.

    Ed will serve as a minority PM, I expect, no coalition, no confidence and supply required. He will make do with votes from the Lib Dems and SNP as required, no doubt with concessions, but Trident won't be an issue because it will go through with Tory support.
    Plato said:

    What has Thatcher got to do with it?

    He'd make a Safe Pair Of Hands if Cameron did step down defeated/whilst leadership contest was in progress.

    Mortimer said:

    I like Fallon, but wasn't he a Minister under Thatcher. I can't see him being a credible leadership candidate.

    I expect Cameron will do what Howard did, unless there is a very great chance of a pathetically weak wafer thin Miliband administration that only gets close to the line by cobbling together all of the "others" and the Tories won the popular vote convincingly but fell short on seats. In that scenario, I suspect Cameron may himself be the best "caretaker" the Tories have until a leadership election some time hence.

    Whatever happens, Cameron's time as leader will end in 2015. I am sure of that.
  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143
    Did Saddam put any planes in the air in 2003, or would it have been the time before?
    Plato said:

    When did the RAF shoot something down? Isn't it all RN airman that do most of this now?

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Indigo said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Danny565 said:

    I'm a loony lefty, but I like the idea of keeping Trident. It might be irrational, but I don't want to risk being "naked" in this world with so many threats, thanks.

    I'm a far right Tory, and I'd be ok with us not replacing Trident.
    Your the liberal metro elite leader of Economical Dry But Not Banging On About Europe and Gays. ;)
    I'm also very strong on defence.

    I'd increase defence spending to 2.5% of GDP and spend the money on the Navy and our conventional forces.

    It is a shame, the RAF really have become the few.
  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095
    Its shut down discussion of Non Doms.. which Mike said the Tories had to and quickly.. well.. they did.. Its perfectly fair to be mistrustful of Ed.. I think he is frightening.
This discussion has been closed.

© Vanilla Keystone Theme 2025