politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Meanwhile LAB’s Scottish tICM have 3% CON lead while Populu
Comments
-
Yes, I agree. For the full 5 years, and who knows, by the end of that period crossover might even be unambiguously in evidence.RodCrosby said:
Bottom line, either Ed does the SNP's bidding or goes cap-in-hand to the Tories.Polruan said:
No seriously. Not rogue backbenchers, the Tory party. One step away from grand coalition territory. The conversation goes something like this "I need to put this eminently reasonable bill before the house to ensure that we continue to collect income tax and pensioners don't freeze to death, but in order to vote for it, the SNP are holding the people of Britain to ransom and insisting on fully devolved free prescriptions funding by a local income tax and selling deep-fried Trident to the Russians so I call on the Tories to support a bill to implement stuff they agree with and prevent the evil Scots doing...." [continues for 94 mins]RodCrosby said:
What you appear to be saying is the only alternative would be for a Labour PM to rely on Tory MPs to pass his legislation.
Good Luck in finding those MPs...
What happens then? SNP join Tories to vote no confidence, new election, almost certain loss of SNP seats, not least because they currently have all of them.... which they won't do. Or Tories set out their conditions for backing a bill, or SNP moderate their demands. Policy eBay basically, but let's not pretend the Nats are the only bidders in town.
"Weak Ed Miliband will be at the mercy of the evil Tories" - maybe Lynton should try that one next?
Either way, the Tories will be happy for the farce to run for as long as possible.0 -
i cannot beleive it's as what the mail is saying....Slackbladder said:MikeK said:"Policy to End Racism" - End Whiteness by having State run Interracial breeding Programs #WhiteGenocide #tcot #UKIP pic.twitter.com/jiRCQyLJ1V
— Horus the Avenger (@eurorabbit) April 23, 2015
Just shows how nuts and how really fascist the Greens and Nuttily Bennet really are.
It isn't true.
MikeK's fallen for a hoax, As Abraham Lincoln said, you shouldn't believe everything you read on the internet.
Someone photoshopped it, here's the real article, note the date and time matches the hoax.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3028833/Government-pay-72-week-says-Green-s-Bennett-admits-280billion-plan-years-happen.html0 -
LOL!Sean_F said:MikeK said:"Policy to End Racism" - End Whiteness by having State run Interracial breeding Programs #WhiteGenocide #tcot #UKIP pic.twitter.com/jiRCQyLJ1V
— Horus the Avenger (@eurorabbit) April 23, 2015
Just shows how nuts and how really fascist the Greens and Nuttily Bennet really are.
Is this for real?
I can't find it on the website. The alleged author hasn't tweeted the story either. Google finds nothing.
I call bullshit.0 -
Sadly, that was also my first thought ! But I hope this is not true.Polruan said:
Still, it's generous of them to help to prop up the Labour vote in Lab/Con marginals at this late stage.Pulpstar said:Can someone link me to what Bennett has actually said, I feel (hope) the Daily Mail may be distorting the position somewhat.
0 -
The least remarked upon story of the day for me in Nigel Farage suggesting his supporters vote tory in Lab/tory marginals. Even where he is running a candidate...!?!0
-
Next Old Firm derby could have added spice if the DUP are giving tacit confidence to Dave.Richard_Nabavi said:
More to the point, so will the SNP. It's heads they win, tails they don't lose.RodCrosby said:Bottom line, either Ed does the SNP's bidding or goes cap-in-hand to the Tories.
Either way, the Tories will be happy for the farce to run for as long as possible.0 -
Good lord you people are gullible. Or just completely divorced from reality. Or a mix of the two.0
-
It's BS0
-
LOL @ George Osborne - these places have anything in common?
George Osborne @George_Osborne
We'll start talks with South West LEPs to look at creating new Enterprise Zones in places like Bristol, Bath, Cheltenham, Wells, Yeovil0 -
Does anyone have insight into whether the centre of gravity will change for the LibDems given expected losses ? Are the MPs likely to lose disproportionately from any faction of the party ?Bob__Sykes said:
Problem is she's not just demolishing Labour seats in Scotland - probably - but decimating the number of potential "Coalition Pt II" LD-held seats as well. Cameron needs LD seats to either stay LD or go Tory, not transfer to Labour or the SNP.Richard_Nabavi said:
LOL!ThomasNashe said:
It's getting embarrassing. Nicola's best friend really needs to take her to one side and say, 'Look, Nicola. I'm afraid Ed just doesn't fancy you. You're a beautiful girl - there'll be plenty of other better guys than him ... He's just not worth it.'Richard_Nabavi said:
Labour don't need to do any deals with the SNP. The SNP have said they'll support them in confidence votes, come hell or high water.Slackbladder said:alex thomson @alextomo
Ed Balls : absolutely no deals with the SNP formal or informal.
So, if the polls are correct then what?? A supremely weak labour minority government?
Or another election?
Of course, actually governing day-to-day on that basis would be a total nightmare, but that's a different point.
I must see I'm jolly pleased that Labour hasn't got anyone anything like as good as Nicola. If Labour was led by someone as articulate, clear, calm and savvy as she was in her Today interview this morning, they'd be miles ahead of the Tories. She even manages to Tory-bash without personalising it. A class act.0 -
Who says its repeal means a return to the prerogative anyway? It would surely vest simply as an executive power.Scott_P said:
There must be a mechanism to create new prerogative powers, surely?RodCrosby said:Apparently, the FPTA can't simply be repealed, since it's impossible to revive prerogative powers, once they've gone.
0 -
i cannot beleive it's as what the mail is saying....Some of the policy on the Green party website is very old, but I don't think any of it dates from the 1930s.Slackbladder said:MikeK said:"Policy to End Racism" - End Whiteness by having State run Interracial breeding Programs #WhiteGenocide #tcot #UKIP pic.twitter.com/jiRCQyLJ1V
— Horus the Avenger (@eurorabbit) April 23, 2015
Just shows how nuts and how really fascist the Greens and Nuttily Bennet really are.0 -
Someone said it was no coincidence that Dave flagged up in his interview with Marr that a Lab/SNP alliance would stop road building/improvements in the South West.Tissue_Price said:LOL @ George Osborne - these places have anything in common?
George Osborne @George_Osborne
We'll start talks with South West LEPs to look at creating new Enterprise Zones in places like Bristol, Bath, Cheltenham, Wells, Yeovil0 -
Golden area for the Tories. Golden area for my Blue book down there too I hope.Tissue_Price said:LOL @ George Osborne - these places have anything in common?
George Osborne @George_Osborne
We'll start talks with South West LEPs to look at creating new Enterprise Zones in places like Bristol, Bath, Cheltenham, Wells, Yeovil0 -
Nope. Once they're taken away from the Crown, they can't be given back, except by statute, in which they are statutory powers, not prerogative. And that is problematic.Scott_P said:
There must be a mechanism to create new prerogative powers, surely?RodCrosby said:Apparently, the FPTA can't simply be repealed, since it's impossible to revive prerogative powers, once they've gone.
0 -
Labour will lose, the Tories will lose, the Libdems will lose, the Green Party will lose, UKIP will win 3 or 4 seats, pretend that's great, but actually will have lost, PC will lose, no change in NI.SeanT said:
Exactly.Philip_Thompson said:If the result of the election is Tories most seats (and an English majority), Lab second but EICIPM because of SNP ... who thinks that government would last a full five years.
Say what you want of the coalition, the Tories and LD's have worked together competently for a full five years. I simply can't see that happening next term if EICIPM - regardless of the fixed term act.
Ed will crawl to a plurality, but he will be the weakest PM with the worst mandate in modern British history, and dependant on the "goodwill" of a separatist party determined on forever destroying Labour in its heartland - and halfway to doing that. Sturgeon will have him by the cullions. She'll milk the English taxpaper.
And Ed cannot do a "formal" deal with a party that wants to kill Labour in its homeland, he would be signing SLAB's death warrant.
So he will edge along a cliffpath, and by the 2016 Holyrood elections he will fall over and we'll have a second GE.
The only happy people will be the Scots, sucking up the largesse, which, ironically, makes them less likely to vote want indy or desire a referendum, so even the Nats lose out in the end.
An election where EVERYONE loses. Wow.
So basically the SNP are the only winners.0 -
There are some interesting discussions on this. Some say the prerogative will be restored if the legislation is repealed, others say that it can't be. It'll be tested in the courts, no doubt.Scott_P said:
There must be a mechanism to create new prerogative powers, surely?RodCrosby said:Apparently, the FPTA can't simply be repealed, since it's impossible to revive prerogative powers, once they've gone.
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2015/01/stalemate-legal-mechanics-having-two-general-elections-year
Also, mods, you missed a comment on the last thread...........0 -
Osborne >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Lynton.0
-
I Picked this up on twitter and it looks pretty genuine to me. She also boasted to the Jewish Chronicle, a few days ago that she wants a complete boycott of Israel (par for the course for a lefty), but she also wants to boycott all Jewish Artists and Scientists if they come from or were born in Israel. You know were it goes from there.rcs1000 said:@MikeK
I can't find that story on the Daily Mail website, do you have a link?0 -
Ed's going to lose all bar one of his seats in Scotland and still become PM? Pull the other one.0
-
Over their last 4 polls ICM are forecasting swings of:
South 4.8%
Mids 3.3%
North 4.9%
Wales 2.5%
Scot -13.8%
UK 2.15%
0 -
Why bother?RobD said:
There are some interesting discussions on this. Some say the prerogative will be restored if the legislation is repealed, others say that it can't be. It'll be tested in the courts, no doubt.Scott_P said:
There must be a mechanism to create new prerogative powers, surely?RodCrosby said:Apparently, the FPTA can't simply be repealed, since it's impossible to revive prerogative powers, once they've gone.
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2015/01/stalemate-legal-mechanics-having-two-general-elections-year
Also, mods, you missed a comment on the last thread...........
Prerogative is just a source of power, it doesn't define it. You can still statutorily invest the power to dissolve parliament in the Prime Minister or even the Crown if you wanted to.0 -
Mike, do us all a favour and provide links to reputable news sources in future.MikeK said:I Picked this up on twitter and it looks pretty genuine to me.
0 -
https://www.betfair.com/exchange/politics/market?id=1.116758783AndyJS said:Ed's going to lose all bar one of his seats in Scotland and still become PM? Pull the other one.
Ed Miliband freely available to lay at 1.7.
Scotland is a side show to next PM - even the SW is to some degree mind. I'm not ruling Ed in, or out - just saying...0 -
Yvette having a bad day accordingly to the usually sympathetic Twitter.0
-
This is like the computer Civilisation, where empires are carving up new territory for themselves. The red's fighting a war on two fronts, whilst the yellow liberal democracy has collasped, with various empires hoovering up easy wins.
0 -
SNP deliberately creating chaos for a Lab min. govt would be counterproductive. They do not wish to alienate the growing support from former Lab and Con supporters. Yes, they'll play politics and make life difficult - but the SNP won't risk creating economic or constitutional chaos.0
-
It would no longer be a true royal prerogative, if it was defined by statute. Prerogative is the residual power that the crown retains which hasn't been legislated for.Grandiose said:
Why bother?RobD said:
There are some interesting discussions on this. Some say the prerogative will be restored if the legislation is repealed, others say that it can't be. It'll be tested in the courts, no doubt.Scott_P said:
There must be a mechanism to create new prerogative powers, surely?RodCrosby said:Apparently, the FPTA can't simply be repealed, since it's impossible to revive prerogative powers, once they've gone.
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2015/01/stalemate-legal-mechanics-having-two-general-elections-year
Also, mods, you missed a comment on the last thread...........
Prerogative is just a source of power, it doesn't define it. You can still statutorily invest the power to dissolve parliament in the Prime Minister or even the Crown if you wanted to.0 -
I wouldn't be especially surprised to see a near-repeat of 2010 except that the Scotch hillbillies get a share similar to the drop in the beard-and-sandals vote.FalseFlag said:Desperate times for Labour, could slip lower than 32 if their vote doesn't turnout. Will likely see the Conservatives add another point or two as well.
Even with gerrymandered constituencies and the rise of UKIP they are still a million miles from a majority.0 -
Is this really true ? Or has someone making fun of The Mail.surbiton said:
Eugenics? The Greens really are Class A lunatics.TheWatcher said:MikeK said:"Policy to End Racism" - End Whiteness by having State run Interracial breeding Programs #WhiteGenocide #tcot #UKIP pic.twitter.com/jiRCQyLJ1V
— Horus the Avenger (@eurorabbit) April 23, 2015
Just shows how nuts and how really fascist the Greens and Nuttily Bennet really are.
I've read a number of opinion pieces in newspapers effectively supporting such trends and it is clearly a theme in television advertisements. Like all good satire it plays on an underlying truth.
Goobacks.
0 -
Yeah, like the Onion or the Daily MashTissue_Price said:
Mike, do us all a favour and provide links to reputable news sources in future.MikeK said:I Picked this up on twitter and it looks pretty genuine to me.
0 -
That's my point. You wouldn't need to try and make it a "proper prerogative", it would be entirely unnecessary to do so.RobD said:
It would no longer be a true royal prerogative, if it was defined by statute. Prerogative is the residual power that the crown retains which hasn't been legislated for.Grandiose said:
Why bother?RobD said:
There are some interesting discussions on this. Some say the prerogative will be restored if the legislation is repealed, others say that it can't be. It'll be tested in the courts, no doubt.Scott_P said:
There must be a mechanism to create new prerogative powers, surely?RodCrosby said:Apparently, the FPTA can't simply be repealed, since it's impossible to revive prerogative powers, once they've gone.
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2015/01/stalemate-legal-mechanics-having-two-general-elections-year
Also, mods, you missed a comment on the last thread...........
Prerogative is just a source of power, it doesn't define it. You can still statutorily invest the power to dissolve parliament in the Prime Minister or even the Crown if you wanted to.0 -
It isn't true.TheScreamingEagles said:
i cannot beleive it's as what the mail is saying....Slackbladder said:MikeK said:"Policy to End Racism" - End Whiteness by having State run Interracial breeding Programs #WhiteGenocide #tcot #UKIP pic.twitter.com/jiRCQyLJ1V
— Horus the Avenger (@eurorabbit) April 23, 2015
Just shows how nuts and how really fascist the Greens and Nuttily Bennet really are.
MikeK's fallen for a hoax, As Abraham Lincoln said, you shouldn't believe everything you read on the internet.
Someone photoshopped it, here's the real article, note the date and time matches the hoax.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3028833/Government-pay-72-week-says-Green-s-Bennett-admits-280billion-plan-years-happen.html
Yes it seems I've fallen for a hoax and I apologise to all PBers for being so easily taken in.
However the original article is bonkers enough and I make no apologies for calling the Greens Fascist and Totalitarian in every way.
0 -
It is one of the handful of constituencies I didn't bet on. I have no regrets about not betting on it either. I do have regrets not betting on another 3 constituencies now though, most notably Murphys. I have 50 constituency bets on.calum said:
This is my only constituency bet - I only play the long odds bets. I think if he wasn't a Cabinet minister, he would be safe. However, as he was a member of the Cabinet which stood idly by for months before helping the oil industry, undoubtedly cost jobs and investment, will have lost him a good few %.Pulpstar said:Carmichael is in trouble on this poll's numbers !
What's particularly sad about all of this, is that the Coalition delayed helping the oil industry under the naïve impression that it would some how damage the SNP. Good riddance to the lot of them in my book - I look forward to the pathetic scrabbling around for H of L seats, I can already see the DT/DM rabid headlines about the new Scottish invasion of the H of L.
The Political gloating and the Press and Media gloating about men and women losing their jobs didn't go unnoticed though. The affected families will no doubt have reacted with disgust. I am looking forward to the unholy scramble for H of L seats though, there will be a lot ex MPs looking for their reward for propping up the Union, spongers the lot of them.0 -
They might risk it, but there are a few areas they might come a cropper.Daniel said:SNP deliberately creating chaos for a Lab min. govt would be counterproductive. They do not wish to alienate the growing support from former Lab and Con supporters. Yes, they'll play politics and make life difficult - but the SNP won't risk creating economic or constitutional chaos.
What happens if Labour and Tories offer FFA and the SNP vote against?
Nicola's constitutional rhetoric will also bump up against reality. If Dave can't command a majority with 280 seats, Ed can't either with 260. She says that means neither of them can be PM. Then she says a minority Government (which doesn't command a majority, strangely enough) can't be voted down.0 -
Anything else to add?Grandiose said:Yvette having a bad day accordingly to the usually sympathetic Twitter.
0 -
A Labour minority Gov't won't b a constitutional crisis, and the SNP believe in the monarchy (Leanne Wood and the Greens don't mind), so can't see where "constitutional crisis" is coming from.
I think you mean a crisis for the Labour and Conservatives, Labour in particular.0 -
"When the facts change I change my opinions. What do you do?"surbiton said:
THe election literature was clear. Only we can stop the Tories. The b@stards !!!Philip_Thompson said:
How is it a betrayal for a centre party to work with the centre-right party that won the most seats at the election?surbiton said:
I have already voted LABOUR. May even have elected a Tory by default. But it is worth it. The bloody betrayal....Roger said:Felix "Maybe this will prompt some of the orange bookers to join the Cons"
I hope so. This'll be the first election that I can remember where I wouldn't vote Lib Dem to keep out a Tory. If many Labour voters feel the same is should be quite different from previous elections
Even now Ed Davey has the gall to send me , at least, 5 letters saying only he can stop the Conservative.
Really, you s.o.b - You are the Tory !
Especially when before the election the centre party said they'd expect to work with whoever had most seats.
What do you think was betrayed?0 -
Despite everything ElectionForecast is putting Con + LD + DUP + UKIP on 319 seats. Just a slight change would bump that up to 323, and I've no doubt those four would find a way to come together to stop the SNP running the country:
http://www.electionforecast.co.uk/
The LDs and the DUP isn't a combination many people would have placed money on a few months ago.0 -
Really? Remember that all they care about is breaking up the UK, constitutional chaos is their USP!Daniel said:SNP deliberately creating chaos for a Lab min. govt would be counterproductive. They do not wish to alienate the growing support from former Lab and Con supporters. Yes, they'll play politics and make life difficult - but the SNP won't risk creating economic or constitutional chaos.
0 -
Now you see why FPTP is bonkers? Sensible, grown-up politician, like in most of Europe, would have sorted out their coalition deals well in advance of the election, and voters would largely know what the options were.SeanT said:
Exactly.Philip_Thompson said:If the result of the election is Tories most seats (and an English majority), Lab second but EICIPM because of SNP ... who thinks that government would last a full five years.
Say what you want of the coalition, the Tories and LD's have worked together competently for a full five years. I simply can't see that happening next term if EICIPM - regardless of the fixed term act.
Ed will crawl to a plurality, but he will be the weakest PM with the worst mandate in modern British history, and dependant on the "goodwill" of a separatist party determined on forever destroying Labour in its heartland - and halfway to doing that. Sturgeon will have him by the cullions. She'll milk the English taxpaper.
And Ed cannot do a "formal" deal with a party that wants to kill Labour in its homeland, he would be signing SLAB's death warrant.
So he will edge along a cliffpath, and by the 2016 Holyrood elections he will fall over and we'll have a second GE.
The only happy people will be the Scots, sucking up the largesse, which, ironically, makes them less likely to vote want indy or desire a referendum, so even the Nats lose out in the end.
An election where EVERYONE loses. Wow.
Instead, these idiots cling to the FPTP random number generator, hoping it throws out a majority (for them), uncaring whether it might throw out dangerous rubbish instead...0 -
Two Polls today Populus EICIPM
ICM toss up who would be PM0 -
That is the media - they want a Labour government and won't risk splitting the left.FrancisUrquhart said:Are the Lib Dem even running this GE? You see very very little about any annoucements in the media.
0 -
No, let's have more please!Tissue_Price said:
Mike, do us all a favour and provide links to reputable news sources in future.MikeK said:I Picked this up on twitter and it looks pretty genuine to me.
0 -
Ed Miliband being propped up by the SNP is such a bad outcome for English Labour that I wouldn't be surprised if the likes of David Blunkett actually speak out against it on election night itself. (I know he isn't standing this time).0
-
Is that the equivalent of "what's new?"TheWatcher said:
Anything else to add?Grandiose said:Yvette having a bad day accordingly to the usually sympathetic Twitter.
Anyway big moment for her, if Labour get into power.0 -
''She'll milk the English taxpaper.''
Any English party that conspires in that is surely committing electoral suicide south of the border.
And after this election labour will be an English party. Ed may be writing cheques his English MPs refuse to cash.0 -
Who gets to breed with Natalie Bennett then?
Step forward Sunil.. Do your duty.0 -
Yes it seems I've fallen for a hoax and I apologise to all PBers for being so easily taken in.MikeK said:
It isn't true.TheScreamingEagles said:
i cannot beleive it's as what the mail is saying....Slackbladder said:MikeK said:"Policy to End Racism" - End Whiteness by having State run Interracial breeding Programs #WhiteGenocide #tcot #UKIP pic.twitter.com/jiRCQyLJ1V
— Horus the Avenger (@eurorabbit) April 23, 2015
Just shows how nuts and how really fascist the Greens and Nuttily Bennet really are.
MikeK's fallen for a hoax, As Abraham Lincoln said, you shouldn't believe everything you read on the internet.
Someone photoshopped it, here's the real article, note the date and time matches the hoax.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3028833/Government-pay-72-week-says-Green-s-Bennett-admits-280billion-plan-years-happen.html
However the original article is bonkers enough and I make no apologies for calling the Greens Fascist and Totalitarian in every way.
The best hoaxes and spoofs are the ones that might just be plausible.0 -
EMOMNBPM?bigjohnowls said:Two Polls today Populus EICIPM
ICM toss up who would be PM
0 -
No, curious as to what she's done.Grandiose said:
Is that the equivalent of "what's new?"TheWatcher said:
Anything else to add?Grandiose said:Yvette having a bad day accordingly to the usually sympathetic Twitter.
Anyway big moment for her, if Labour get into power.0 -
It'll either be Con Minority or Con-LD; UKIP and DUP won't be in the Government. #Justsayingforbettingpurposes.AndyJS said:Despite everything ElectionForecast is putting Con + LD + DUP + UKIP on 319 seats. Just a slight change would bump that up to 323, and I've no doubt those four would find a way to come together to stop the SNP running the country:
http://www.electionforecast.co.uk/
The LDs and the DUP isn't a combination many people would have placed money on a few months ago.0 -
Success at last. Bob Worcester is following me on Twitter.0
-
That's an astute point, but I strongly suspect that the Nats will find a way to engineer plenty of things which they can portray as the beastly English being nasty to Scotland.SeanT said:It's brilliant for Scottish voters (hence the Nat landslide) but is it brilliant for SNP strategists who want independence? Very debatable.
0 -
A fair point. I presume there isn't some reason why this can't be done?Grandiose said:
That's my point. You wouldn't need to try and make it a "proper prerogative", it would be entirely unnecessary to do so.RobD said:
It would no longer be a true royal prerogative, if it was defined by statute. Prerogative is the residual power that the crown retains which hasn't been legislated for.Grandiose said:
Why bother?RobD said:
There are some interesting discussions on this. Some say the prerogative will be restored if the legislation is repealed, others say that it can't be. It'll be tested in the courts, no doubt.Scott_P said:
There must be a mechanism to create new prerogative powers, surely?RodCrosby said:Apparently, the FPTA can't simply be repealed, since it's impossible to revive prerogative powers, once they've gone.
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2015/01/stalemate-legal-mechanics-having-two-general-elections-year
Also, mods, you missed a comment on the last thread...........
Prerogative is just a source of power, it doesn't define it. You can still statutorily invest the power to dissolve parliament in the Prime Minister or even the Crown if you wanted to.0 -
Would the Lib Dem membership vote for that, even if Clegg were to recommend it to them?AndyJS said:Despite everything ElectionForecast is putting Con + LD + DUP + UKIP on 319 seats. Just a slight change would bump that up to 323, and I've no doubt those four would find a way to come together to stop the SNP running the country:
http://www.electionforecast.co.uk/
The LDs and the DUP isn't a combination many people would have placed money on a few months ago.0 -
They'll take the red boxes, surely. That vs irrelevance? A no brainer.CuthbertBede said:
Would the Lib Dem membership vote for that, even if Clegg were to recommend it to them?AndyJS said:Despite everything ElectionForecast is putting Con + LD + DUP + UKIP on 319 seats. Just a slight change would bump that up to 323, and I've no doubt those four would find a way to come together to stop the SNP running the country:
http://www.electionforecast.co.uk/
The LDs and the DUP isn't a combination many people would have placed money on a few months ago.0 -
That view, unfortunately, comes from reading certain judicial dicta as if they were statutes, and attempting to apply them in circumstances alien to the facts of the cases before the courts. To revive the prerogative to dissolve Parliaments, Parliament need simply pass a two clause bill. The first clause would repeal the 2011 Act as if it had never been passed without prejudice to anything done under it. The second would declare that the prerogative to dissolve Parliaments exists as it had done on the date the 2011 Act entered into force. No court in the land would hold that such a statute had not had the effect of reviving the prerogative power.RodCrosby said:Nope. Once they're taken away from the Crown, they can't be given back, except by statute, in which they are statutory powers, not prerogative. And that is problematic.
0 -
She was on Daily Politics as it covered Home Affairs. Theresa May attracted relatively little commentary, which is just as surprising. In short it was:TheWatcher said:
No, curious as to what she's done.Grandiose said:
Is that the equivalent of "what's new?"TheWatcher said:
Anything else to add?Grandiose said:Yvette having a bad day accordingly to the usually sympathetic Twitter.
Anyway big moment for her, if Labour get into power.
Cooper: Crime is rising.
May: It's down a third.
Cooper: Sexual offences against children are up.
May: People coming forward to uncover the abuse in Rotherham and other Labour Councils.
May was evasive on the HRA and ECHR.0 -
LOL.Daniel said:SNP deliberately creating chaos for a Lab min. govt would be counterproductive. They do not wish to alienate the growing support from former Lab and Con supporters. Yes, they'll play politics and make life difficult - but the SNP won't risk creating economic or constitutional chaos.
It's not like that's what they exist to do, or anything.
This is a party that sympathised with Nazism. Alongside that, what's a little economic or constitutional chaos?
0 -
What have you got against Sunil?Casino_Royale said:Who gets to breed with Natalie Bennett then?
Step forward Sunil.. Do your duty.
And Mike, no apologies necessary. We've all bought into hoaxes from time to time. Well I certainly have.0 -
To say nothing as to how UKIP are ignored or suppressed by the MSM, unless it meets with their desire to harm the party.weejonnie said:
That is the media - they want a Labour government and won't risk splitting the left.FrancisUrquhart said:Are the Lib Dem even running this GE? You see very very little about any annoucements in the media.
0 -
It remains fascinating what will happen if the forecasts turn true and all parties (except the SNP) basically lose the election.AndyJS said:Ed's going to lose all bar one of his seats in Scotland and still become PM? Pull the other one.
A Labour minority government relying on the SNP? Despite the party probably only making a net gain of only 15 or maybe 20 seats and finishing second to the Tories? Maybe it's just wishful thinking on my part but how would this happen without Labour losing a quarter of their English support overnight?
But on the other hand how could Cameron carry on if his party lost say 30 seats? Would he be turfed out by his party before he even managed to test the will of the House in a vote?0 -
So we'd invoke a statute to revive a prerogative power. Basically a statutory power, because that second act is going to provide a basis for invoking the power. Again, entirely unnecessary. Work out what we understood the prerogative power to be (whether power was in the executive or the Crown, or both, in what combination) and do that.Life_ina_market_town said:
That view, unfortunately, comes from reading certain judicial dicta as if they were statutes, and attempting to apply them in circumstances alien to the facts of the cases before the courts. To revive the prerogative to dissolve Parliaments, Parliament need simply pass a two clause bill. The first clause would repeal the 2011 Act as if it had never been passed without prejudice to anything done under it. The second would declare that the prerogative to dissolve Parliaments exists as it had done on the date the 2011 Act entered into force. No court in the land would hold that such a statute had not had the effect of reviving the prerogative power.RodCrosby said:Nope. Once they're taken away from the Crown, they can't be given back, except by statute, in which they are statutory powers, not prerogative. And that is problematic.
0 -
Cool avatarGhedebrav said:
I can't imagine they would - the political scene is more fragmented with a variety of Quebec-based parties at provincial level (for example, the Quebec Liberal Party - federalists, not seperatists, and entirely independent of the Canadian Liberals - hold a solid majority in the provincial government) so there are many ways for Quebecois to express their nationhood at the ballot box.Lennon said:
Is there any read-across from Canada that we can see? Have the Bloc Quebecois ever got close to a clean sweep in the past?Daniel said:I genuinely believe the SNP could take all the seats in Scotland; that reality would put the fear of God into both Labour and the Conservatives. Attempting to shut the nationalists out of the process would probably result in demands for independence.
Plus there are entrenched and enfranchised groups of yellow-dog opposition to BQ, not least the significant Anglo minority and 'les autres' e.g. Italian-Canadians, Portuguese-Canadians.0 -
The outcome is only bad if it alienates English Labour voters or leads other voters to coalesce around a single opposition.AndyJS said:Ed Miliband being propped up by the SNP is such a bad outcome for English Labour that I wouldn't be surprised if the likes of David Blunkett actually speak out against it on election night itself. (I know he isn't standing this time).
But I suspect you are right: when Ed delivers a result that sees Labour stand still or go slightly backwards there will be more than enough MPs and senior figures ready to say that Labour should stick to opposition and, by strong implication get a new leader. This is what happened in 2010.
A weak Tory government, dependent on the LDs and the DUP, is not a nightmare scenario from a Labour perspective.
0 -
The one bit you have left out of your analysis is an English Nationalist backlash. UKIP and the Conservatives are already trying to act as the mouthpiece for this backlash, and if they are both in Opposition to a Labour government reliant on SNP support they will have some difficulty in deciding whether Brussels or Edinburgh is the primary residence of the spawn of Satan.SeanT said:The SNP will win big, and he happy, but there is a potential sting in the tail for them, too.
A lot of their indy propaganda was centred on the idea that Scots have no influence at Westminster, voters in SE England decide everything, Scots never get the government they want, let us be free of Westmonster wahey.
Well, here's an election which proves that's nonsense. Scots are about to be THE most influential voters at Westminster, their very own Scottish National party will decide who is prime minister in England, their MPs will be able to extract an incredibly good deal for Scots voters, as they vote on English matters, even those devolved to Scotland.
It's brilliant for Scottish voters (hence the Nat landslide) but is it brilliant for SNP strategists who want independence? Very debatable.
Of course it's possible that England will be so ecstatically pleased by the experience of a Labour government pushed leftwards by Sturgeon that it will lead to a revival of the Left in England that will heal the political division between England and Scotland, thus demolishing the SNP claim that only independence will save them from the Tories... but I have my doubts.
An English Nationalist backlash, if it happens, mishandled by supposedly Unionist politicians on all sides, will help the SNP win a second referendum.0 -
I've had a private bet that more than 200 MP's will lose their seats in this GE. The most ever, I believe.0
-
Of course May was evasive on that subject, given the Conservatives' policy is a mix of the disingenuous and the absurd.Grandiose said:May was evasive on the HRA and ECHR.
0 -
Kermit?Casino_Royale said:Who gets to breed with Natalie Bennett then?
Step forward Sunil.. Do your duty.0 -
Kelvin Mackenzie is doing his best to push the SNP surge through the 60% barrier. I think even Katie Hopkins wouldn't have gone this far:
" Kelvin MacKenzie sparked outrage on after he said Scots living in England should be shipped back to Edinburgh as "McBoat people". In a rant in the Sun newspaper, MacKenzie used the humanitarian crisis in the Mediterranean to take yet another pop at Scotland, or “Jockestan”.
MacKenzie, the Tory paper's former editor, said: “Get those Libyan people smugglers to bring their boats to the Thames and we will load up all the Jocks and drop them off in Edinburgh.”
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/load-up-jocks-drop-edinburgh-5591890
0 -
"We can't collapse the government because that will let the dastardly Tories in, and you know they'll clear the highlands and eat all your babies. Of course, if we were independent..."SeanT said:
Of course the Nats will try and do that, but when the SNP so clearly have the Labour government by the knackers, and can topple it at any moment, that's a much harder sell.Richard_Nabavi said:
That's an astute point, but I strongly suspect that the Nats will find a way to engineer plenty of things which they can portray as the beastly English being nasty to Scotland.SeanT said:It's brilliant for Scottish voters (hence the Nat landslide) but is it brilliant for SNP strategists who want independence? Very debatable.
"Ooh, the English government is being horrible to us."
"Well collapse the government, then".
"Er...."0 -
A quote from Bella Caledonia today that made me laugh
"Breaking Up Britain was always too big a job for Scotland. When you want a thing done properly, send for the Tories."0 -
Lol!Peter_the_Punter said:
What have you got against Sunil?Casino_Royale said:Who gets to breed with Natalie Bennett then?
Step forward Sunil.. Do your duty.
And Mike, no apologies necessary. We've all bought into hoaxes from time to time. Well I certainly have.
Tbh, the fact a few very perceptive and level-headed posters weren't sure if it was true or not speaks volumes about the Greens.0 -
They're in a bit of a mess but there's no reason what they want cannot be achieved in an orderly way.Life_ina_market_town said:
Of course May was evasive on that subject, given the Conservatives' policy is a mix of the disingenuous and the absurd.Grandiose said:May was evasive on the HRA and ECHR.
0 -
A few more votes ship to UKIP this afternoon
We can't deport a man with 78 convictions to Libya because he is an alcoholic, and alcohol is banned in Libya.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/11565686/Foreign-criminal-can-stay-in-Britain-because-he-is-an-alcoholic.html
Surely alcohol is banned in our prisons too, no?0 -
"New TNS Scotland poll has SNP with 32% lead"
As Amy says in the 'Big Bang Theory' ... "Nicola eats EdM for breakfast and defaecates* Jim Murphy."
*I used British spelling.0 -
There shoul dbe two tick boxes: Laugh / CrySandpit said:A few more votes ship to UKIP this afternoon
We can't deport a man with 78 convictions to Libya because he is an alcoholic, and alcohol is banned in Libya.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/11565686/Foreign-criminal-can-stay-in-Britain-because-he-is-an-alcoholic.html
Surely alcohol is banned in our prisons too, no?0 -
The parliamentary party, yes. But they'll have to hold a special conference and gain a two-thirds majority of the reps from the local parties and that's where it might fall down.AndyJS said:
They'll take the red boxes, surely. That vs irrelevance? A no brainer.CuthbertBede said:
Would the Lib Dem membership vote for that, even if Clegg were to recommend it to them?AndyJS said:Despite everything ElectionForecast is putting Con + LD + DUP + UKIP on 319 seats. Just a slight change would bump that up to 323, and I've no doubt those four would find a way to come together to stop the SNP running the country:
http://www.electionforecast.co.uk/
The LDs and the DUP isn't a combination many people would have placed money on a few months ago.
It'll get very messy for them if over half want a coalition (even relying on the illiberal DUP and UKIP), but they don't cross the two-thirds mark.0 -
*hopes wife isn't reading*
Just realised I'd be castrated under that Green policy. Shame. If they'd lined up Myleene Klass for me I might have been tempted to vote for them.0 -
'It's not easy being green...'RodCrosby said:
Kermit?Casino_Royale said:Who gets to breed with Natalie Bennett then?
Step forward Sunil.. Do your duty.0 -
The previous position was indeed very simple. Parliament expired five years after it first met. Any time before then, the Crown had a quite literally unfettered power to dissolve it. One of the dangers of a new statutory power would be if its exercise were declared amenable to judicial review.Grandiose said:So we'd invoke a statute to revive a prerogative power. Basically a statutory power, because that second act is going to provide a basis for invoking the power. Again, entirely unnecessary. Work out what we understood the prerogative power to be (whether power was in the executive or the Crown, or both, in what combination) and do that.
0 -
For the SNP to be powerful, it is necessary only that the factions of English politics keep hating each other.
If they joined together, the SNP would be powerless.0 -
Send him to Scotland - the SNP will have him in Tripoli by sundown.Sandpit said:A few more votes ship to UKIP this afternoon
We can't deport a man with 78 convictions to Libya because he is an alcoholic, and alcohol is banned in Libya.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/11565686/Foreign-criminal-can-stay-in-Britain-because-he-is-an-alcoholic.html
Surely alcohol is banned in our prisons too, no?
0 -
But not against Tories or Labour in the UK. This gives an impession, to put it mildly, that Tories and Labour were only too happy with FPTP till it bit them instead of the LDs et al.Ghedebrav said:
The NI parties haven't returned even double-figures in MPs, let alone the 40-50 that polling suggests for SNP. In a hung parliament, even if they aren't part of a governing deal, that's an enormously powerful bloc, wielding power in enormous disproportion to their electoral base (in terms of actual numbers of voters).Carnyx said:
All the SNP have to do is to stand in every rUK constituency in the next election and thereafter.Ghedebrav said:I maintain that part of the fallout of this most peculiar election will be a popular debate on democratic representation. That the SNP could return 50-odd MPs from a popular vote of only 5% - vs the Greens who'll get one seat (if they're lucky) on a similar vote share, UKIP, who'll get 3-5 on more than twice as many votes will seem, to say the least, unbalanced.
Of course, this is a longstanding issue - but the SNP bring it into very sharp and easily understandable focus.
If it has been such an issue, why has it not been raised before? DUP, UUP, SF, and so on have been around for decades.
And if they stood in every UK constituency they'd still be overrepresented in parliament, proportionate to their national share, against UKIP, the Greens and probably the LDs.
0 -
Yes, think I have £15-£20 on this at 10-1 with Ladbrokes.SeanT said:Can you get a bet on all three "main" parties - LibLabCon - having new leaders by the end of 2016?
@Antifrank has tipped this one up too.0 -
How many people are in a position to "lose" their seat, having won before? Must be 50 people standing down? That leaves six hundred. A third of those is a bold prediction. Say 40 norther of the border, 20 other Libdem losses... still 140 to go!Pulpstar said:
You think Labour will end up with 340 seats ?!!!MikeK said:I've had a private bet that more than 200 MP's will lose their seats in this GE. The most ever, I believe.
0 -
Good afternoon, everyone.
Mr. CD13, reasonably sure it's defecates*, or at least that is a British variant.0 -
It's probably banned in Scottish prisons but tolerated in English ones.Sandpit said:A few more votes ship to UKIP this afternoon
We can't deport a man with 78 convictions to Libya because he is an alcoholic, and alcohol is banned in Libya.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/11565686/Foreign-criminal-can-stay-in-Britain-because-he-is-an-alcoholic.html
Surely alcohol is banned in our prisons too, no?0 -
Socrates, late of this parish, favoured STV with three-member constituencies.SeanT said:It needs to go. Rightwingers should drop their sentimental attachment to it, and start thinking about the best form of PR.
It's an interesting compromise as the three-member limit still favours large parties able to win broad support, but it does sweep away the majority of the perversities associated with FPTP. I think it fails the Liverpool test though, ie, does it make it worthwhile for the Tories to campaign in Liverpool?0 -
You say that as if a second referendum would be a bad thing. The Scots came up with the wrong result last year and therefore should be encouraged (if not forced) to have another go as soon as practicable. The body politic has been for too long gnawed by the cankering tooth of Scots' grievances. Better have it out.OblitusSumMe said:... will help the SNP win a second referendum.
0 -
As TTIP is being conducted at the European level, how exactly are they going to stop it?SeanT said:Is this a hoax??
https://twitter.com/stuart_w64/status/592682729923342337
SNP candidate openly hopes to "implode" the UK economy, to assist indy?
0 -
Doesn't say that at all - just what a lot of PBers say, that the UK economy is going down the U-bend. Just wait till it happens and then go for indy.SeanT said:Is this a hoax??
https://twitter.com/stuart_w64/status/592682729923342337
SNP candidate openly hopes to "implode" the UK economy, to assist indy?
0 -
Damaging UK economy will also, unsurprisingly, damage the Scottish economy.0
