If the polls go as predicted then the first order of business regardless of who gets in should be another referendum on scottish independence. This time held south of the border. If the scots vote SNP in the numbers showing then I see little reason not to give them what they have voted for
It does not matter if Clegg wins or not. What remains of the Party will ensure that he is not part of the decision process going forward
A more interesting process if he wins his seat though. Makes the setting him aside something that actually have to sack up and do, not just the electorate removing that obstacle.
Conversely, if the Lib Dems are decapitated, how will they make decisions in the wake of an election in a hung Parliament?
Mike said, the MPs elects an interim/deputy leader to deal with things whilst the new leader is elected.
i would have thought he remained party leader even outside the Commons. After all he is party leader at the moment and isn't an MP. Or do the rules say he has to be an MP for some reason? Is the party leader and the leader of the LibDems in parliament the same thing? Or is it two seperate posts currently held by the same person?
Of course in theory he'd remain leader, but in practice he'd have to resign as he wouldn't be able to lead the party in the commons so would have to go. He could be a part of any negotiating team but would be unable to lead it. It becomes a dilemma as the next leader could take the Lib Dems in a very different direction and end up saddled with a deal which is antithetical to their priorities and political direction - not just in terms of party but in what deals they're prepared to do. Ed Davey for example would have very different lines on austerity than Tim Farron - one might veto Tory welfare cuts, the other request a quid pro quo.
I think Clegg would resign, with Cable taking over as a sort of interim leader, as he'd be trusted as the party elder statesman, is Labour leaning so would be trusted by the left of the party but has shown willingness to deal with the Tories, and of course because young cardinals vote for old popes.
I will be emotionally devastated by the end of the union but I am resigned to that. But it doesn't matter whether I would prefer Con break away or not - I merely laid out why I cannot see it happening if it has not already. I don't think an SNP-Lab alliance necessarily need be as destructive as the worst case scenarios put it, though with the sides needing to fight hard at HolyRood very soon it does not encourage a peaceful arrangement to say the least. And that is more pressing. With the SNP winning a landslide the union is already dead - I cannot see them making the mistakes of PQ in Canada - so its about management of the nation in other ways now. I don't think Ed M would be a disastrous PM, I think his hands will be too constrained to be one, but though I am one of those oddballs who did agree with the austerity agenda and was angry the Tories failed in their plan for it, so I do have some trepidation about throwing caution to the wind.
I read this sometimes. But I don't get it.
Why would you be devastated by the end of the Union? Were you devastated by Partition (either)? Were you devastated by the "loss" of Rhodesia? I don't get it.
England is England with English people. Be happy to be English. Stop expecting and requiring other nations to prop up your importance in the world. Be happy with what and who you are, stop requiring Scotland to prop you up.
Guess it depends on whether you see yourself as British first and then English, or English first and then British.
I'm in the latter camp, and am entirely relaxed with the idea of an independent England, or at least Scotland going its own way. The status quo is untenable, but some are in denial and think it will all go away eventually.
British is pretty much a distinct identity of about half of Northern Ireland and a small portion of WCS.
You missed the Olympics ? The nation as one waving what you call "the butchers apron" ?
I've never called the Union Flag the "Butcher's Apron" it belongs to Scotland as much as England and I don't see it as butchery. Do you? Is that your idea of "Britain"?
Team GB isn't a nation. It even includes people who aren't British - such as Cavendish and Kennaugh.
Dair Czechoslovakia was a lumped together produced of the Treaty of Versailles, the Nazis then recreated Slovakia and then Czechoslovakia was reformed as a satellite of the Communists, it was hardly a 300 year entity. Of course the Queen remains Queen of Australia, Canada and New Zealand even now and Wales shows no desire for separation, it barely even backed devolution.
I will be emotionally devastated by the end of the union but I am resigned to that. But it doesn't matter whether I would prefer Con break away or not - I merely laid out why I cannot see it happening if it has not already. I don't think an SNP-Lab alliance necessarily need be as destructive as the worst case scenarios put it, though with the sides needing to fight hard at HolyRood very soon it does not encourage a peaceful arrangement to say the least. And that is more pressing. With the SNP winning a landslide the union is already dead - I cannot see them making the mistakes of PQ in Canada - so its about management of the nation in other ways now. I don't think Ed M would be a disastrous PM, I think his hands will be too constrained to be one, but though I am one of those oddballs who did agree with the austerity agenda and was angry the Tories failed in their plan for it, so I do have some trepidation about throwing caution to the wind.
I read this sometimes. But I don't get it.
Why would you be devastated by the end of the Union? Were you devastated by Partition (either)? Were you devastated by the "loss" of Rhodesia? I don't get it.
England is England with English people. Be happy to be English. Stop expecting and requiring other nations to prop up your importance in the world. Be happy with what and who you are, stop requiring Scotland to prop you up.
Guess it depends on whether you see yourself as British first and then English, or English first and then British.
I'm in the latter camp, and am entirely relaxed with the idea of an independent England, or at least Scotland going its own way. The status quo is untenable, but some are in denial and think it will all go away eventually.
British is pretty much a distinct identity of about half of Northern Ireland and a small portion of WCS.
You missed the Olympics ? The nation as one waving what you call "the butchers apron" ?
I've never called the Union Flag the "Butcher's Apron" it belongs to Scotland as much as England and I don't see it as butchery. Do you? Is that your idea of "Britain"?
Team GB isn't a nation. It even includes people who aren't British - such as Cavendish and Kennaugh.
Keep dancing on the head of a pin. Most Scots like me loved waving the union flag as Sir Chris and Andy Murray contributed to Britains medal haul. Fantastic stuff. Great Britain at its finest.
'I thought Ed was courageous meeting Russell Brand. What I didn't realize was that Brand had a readership bigger than the Sun so not just courageous but astute'
And Brand's been telling them for years that voting is a waste of time & your 'astute' Ed met him after voter registration had closed.
Farage's speech at the EU parliament has received good coverage with all of the broadcasters. What he discussed would have resonated well with a significant number of voters.
Maybe he should have stayed at home and only be mentioned in passing.
Neither Farage nor UKIP were mentioned at all on the BBC1 10pm News.
Cameron and Miliband both got very extensive coverage - first in the headlines and both then featured in two separate reports.
Clegg got one brief soundbite.
Farage - zero.
It's a stitch up that Farage isn't on the main Question Time tomorrow.
And it was a stitch up that Clegg didn't get to be on "The Challengers" debate. Really, the guy that's "won" out of the debates is Miliband as he got to be in 3/3.
"At we don't have to take the trouble to check who has the special status on here of being wrong every time."
I am the kiss of death so wouldn't try to predict what day it is tomorrow.
Certain posters have a reputation for being good psephologists Rod being one of the most respected so I recorded their predictions. My particular favourite is Barnesium (if i've got the name right) the other is Jack. It had to be scientific I didn't include people who just pluck numbers out of their backside.
Re LibDem direction: I've said it before, and I'll say it again: if the LibDems that survive are from the Right of the party (say, Clegg, Laws, Webb, Swinson, Carmichael, Lamb) and the ones that lost are from the Left (say, Hughes and Cable) then the LibDems will not be swinging left.
Conversely, if it's the other way around, the LibDems will return to their position of "Labour-lite".
If the polls go as predicted then the first order of business regardless of who gets in should be another referendum on scottish independence. This time held south of the border. If the scots vote SNP in the numbers showing then I see little reason not to give them what they have voted for
As long as you don't want Scotland to keep paying you £10bn per annum in subsidies, this would be perfect.
I cannot believe that you can seriously not understand such a thing. My identity is English and British. Many people, even in England, don't feel anythingent sentences and have made meur, Mr SeanT.
"British" does not exist. It is a fantasy without any bearing in reality. .
It exists to me. All states, all tribes, are in some sense arbitrary constructs - we are all after all human beings, why put labels on things based on geography, language or history? - and I connect most deeply with the British identity. That you do not think it should have any pull on people does not make it any less real in the minds of the, admittedly diminishing, number who believe in it, anymore than someone suggesting that since everyone in these isles is descended from settlers from the Iberian penninsula 15000 years ago (or whatever the prevailing evidence suggests right now) means Scottish identity is a false thing for you to believe in.
I'm off to bed now, but it is moments like this, when the very idea that someone might actually feel some connection to the wider concept of Britain, as anathema as that might be to you, is reacted to as though it is some aberrant delusion, that shows a little of the nastiness that, funnily enough, the SNP for one are always complaining about going their way (not without cause, it must be said).
I won't say the mask slips, as I would hope such arrogant and belittling dismissal is not at the core of those who react that way to the genuine sentiment of others for the UK, but the brazen dismissal is more disrespectful than if you had said you hated all English people. At least with hatred it might leave open the possibility that you respected them. As it is, what you are saying is that someone cannot reasonably feel affection for Britain because the very idea is bloody stupid, and that shows no respect whatsoever to the views and opinions of others, as it is treating them as invalid.
You will not care at my feeling this, and that is perfectly reasonable (you need not care what some touchy englishman feels), but I strive very hard to be reasonable and see all sides, and I feel sad you have so little respect for others as shown this evening.
Good night all, even to Dair.
P.S I do not mind even slightly if I am mocked for getting touchy or emotional about this; contrary to the beliefs of some, annoying or angering someone else does not mean you have 'won' or the person getting emotional has 'lost'. It might be a silly reaction, but sometimes that is actually appropriate.
If the polls go as predicted then the first order of business regardless of who gets in should be another referendum on scottish independence. This time held south of the border. If the scots vote SNP in the numbers showing then I see little reason not to give them what they have voted for
As long as you don't want Scotland to keep paying you £10bn per annum in subsidies, this would be perfect.
With oil sub $70/barrel and North Sea production down double digits year-over-year, the subsidy is no longer anywhere near £10bn.
I've never called the Union Flag the "Butcher's Apron" it belongs to Scotland as much as England and I don't see it as butchery. Do you? Is that your idea of "Britain"?
Team GB isn't a nation. It even includes people who aren't British - such as Cavendish and Kennaugh.
Keep dancing on the head of a pin. Most Scots like me loved waving the union flag as Sir Chris and Andy Murray contributed to Britains medal haul. Fantastic stuff. Great Britain at its finest.
So refusing to drag Scotland into Irish Republican rhetoric is "dancing on the head of a pin". Do you perhaps understand how that sort of argument is losing you support in Scotland and promoting the SNP?
54% of Scots support the SNP and aren't likely to be waving a Union Flag. Only 55% of people backed the Union and significant numbers of them wouldn't be caught dead with a Union Flag.
I've never called the Union Flag the "Butcher's Apron" it belongs to Scotland as much as England and I don't see it as butchery. Do you? Is that your idea of "Britain"?
Team GB isn't a nation. It even includes people who aren't British - such as Cavendish and Kennaugh.
Keep dancing on the head of a pin. Most Scots like me loved waving the union flag as Sir Chris and Andy Murray contributed to Britains medal haul. Fantastic stuff. Great Britain at its finest.
So refusing to drag Scotland into Irish Republican rhetoric is "dancing on the head of a pin". Do you perhaps understand how that sort of argument is losing you support in Scotland and promoting the SNP?
54% of Scots support the SNP and aren't likely to be waving a Union Flag. Only 55% of people backed the Union and significant numbers of them wouldn't be caught dead with a Union Flag.
You lost the referendum - try again in 2035 - until then get over it and dry your eyes.
I cannot believe that you can seriously not understand such a thing. My identity is English and British. Many people, even in England, don't feel anythingent sentences and have made meur, Mr SeanT.
"British" does not exist. It is a fantasy without any bearing in reality. .
It exists to me. All states, all tribes, are in some sense arbitrary constructs - we are all after all human beings, why put labels on things based on geography, language or history? - and I connect most deeply with the British identity. That you do not think it should have any pull on people does not make it any less real in the minds of the, admittedly diminishing, number who believe in it, anymore than someone suggesting that since everyone in these isles is descended from settlers from the Iberian penninsula 15000 years ago (or whatever the prevailing evidence suggests right now) means Scottish identity is a false thing for you to believe in.
I'm off to bed now, but it is moments like this, when the very idea that someone might actually feel some connection to the wider concept of Britain, as anathema as that might be to you, is reacted to as though it is some aberrant delusion, that shows a little of the nastiness that, funnily enough, the SNP for one are always complaining about going their way (not without cause, it must be said).
I won't say the mask slips, as I would hope such arrogant and belittling dismissal is not at the core of those who react that way to the genuine sentiment of others for the UK, but the brazen dismissal is more disrespectful than if you had said you hated all English people. At least with hatred it might leave open the possibility that you respected them. As it is, what you are saying is that someone cannot reasonably feel affection for Britain because the very idea is bloody stupid, and that shows no respect whatsoever to the views and opinions of others, as it is treating them as invalid.
You will not care at my feeling this, and that is perfectly reasonable (you need not care what some touchy englishman feels), but I strive very hard to be reasonable and see all sides, and I feel sad you have so little respect for others as shown this evening.
Good night all, even to Dair.
P.S I do not mind even slightly if I am mocked for getting touchy or emotional about this; contrary to the beliefs of some, annoying or angering someone else does not mean you have 'won' or the person getting emotional has 'lost'. It might be a silly reaction, but sometimes that is actually appropriate.
If the polls go as predicted then the first order of business regardless of who gets in should be another referendum on scottish independence. This time held south of the border. If the scots vote SNP in the numbers showing then I see little reason not to give them what they have voted for
As long as you don't want Scotland to keep paying you £10bn per annum in subsidies, this would be perfect.
The only people who care about the union by and large are politicians and the politically active the rest of us dont really care one way or the other. If the scottish vote for a party devoted to independence then it is obvious that the union between the rest of us and scotland is at an end. If they bow to the SNP then next election plaid cymru and mebyn kernow get hugely inflated vote shares dues to pork barrelling after seeing what the Scots achieve by voting for nationalists.
If the bulk of the union is to be saved then it is better to excise a minor part before the cancer spreads
I hate Labour, and detect no sympathy for it. I don't know where all these "likes" come from.
Facebook?
I think it's a bit odd myself - I don't have any strong emotional feelings about the party, unless "approval" is a feeling. But it's a consistent finding in every poll on the subject.
I hope you read this because it is of some import.
I don't hate the concept of Britain. It is a good concept. If I had my way, the BBC would exist (with a BBC Trust that actually worked) and Team GB would continue. I don't see any need to break cultural ties.
I'd happily continue to field Team GB in hte Olympics and as seperate countries we could actually have a Team GB football team without the (probably nonsense) about it threatening the home nations.
But that doesn't need us to be the same Nation. We include Mark Cavendish and Peter Kennaugh and win gold medals despite them not being from the UK. The IOC allows multi-national teams.
And here's the thing/ A proper separation would work for both countries but it wouldnt see us departing. We could still be friends and have common cause on all sorts of issues and even team up if we wanted.
Two thoughts occur. One, people asked what the point of them was before they got into power as well, and it was largely wishful thinking from the big two who have long wished for there to be no sizable third party to take away their votes and prevent majorities. So I will admit to, perhaps unfairly, discounting such an argument. As I said, not going into power when the cost is too high does not mean they are ruling it out forever, or that they are not right that the cost would be too high. Some people are seriously saying that Labour would be making a mistake going into power with the SNP, even if it is the only opportunity they have to get into power. And they would be the senior partner in that alliance, numerically at least. Is their reluctance to go into that alliance showing they have no point?
Not an apt comparison with Labour since they've been a permanent feature at the top of politics (either government or opposition) for the last century, a key part of the pendulum. The Liberals aren't like that.
Two, while they might well struggle to get the protest vote back, I don't think that can be assumed. We have seen some quite rapid collapses of party shares in the last few years, and in one case a rapid rise. Now the Tories' demise in Scotland and failure to recover (to the point where winning more than a couple of seats is a possibility at least) shows it can be very hard to come back from that, but if parties are collapsing all around, there remains the possibility a pre-collapsed party could pick up that newly collapsed support. I don't put it as likely, but people have claimed the demise of the LDs before in precious incarnations, and they came back from that. It took decades. Maybe it will take decades again, maybe it will be one recovery too many. But I don't think we can claim it is inevitable, certainly not because they might make a judgement that in these particular circumstances it might not be worthy propping up someone else. As that is what this is really about. Upset that they might not play ball do what someone else wants. Why should they? For plenty on the left, simply denying the Tories a chance at government through their inaction would be point enough.
The demise of the Liberals wasn't badly called, it was real. The Liberals were out of power for the best part of a century. The Greens are the "clean" lefty protest vote now and are exceeding the LDs in many elections and potentially in the popular vote. Why vote for the LDs if they're less credible even than the Greens?
I cannot believe that you can seriously not understand such a thing. My identity is English and British. Many people, even in England, don't feel anythingent sentences and have made meur, Mr SeanT.
"British" does not exist. It is a fantasy without any bearing in reality. .
It exists to me. All states, all tribes, are in some sense arbitrary constructs - we are all after all human beings, why put labels on things based on geography, language or history? - and I connect most deeply with the British identity. That you do not think it should have any pull on people does not make it any less real in the minds of the, admittedly diminishing, number who believe in it, anymore than someone suggesting that since everyone in these isles is descended from settlers from the Iberian penninsula 15000 years ago (or whatever the prevailing evidence suggests right now) means Scottish identity is a false thing for you to believe in.
Reminds me of a Bernard O'Donoghue poem in which he tongue-in-cheekily enquires as to whether Ireland should be "handed back" to Morocco.
If the polls go as predicted then the first order of business regardless of who gets in should be another referendum on scottish independence. This time held south of the border. If the scots vote SNP in the numbers showing then I see little reason not to give them what they have voted for
As long as you don't want Scotland to keep paying you £10bn per annum in subsidies, this would be perfect.
With oil sub $70/barrel and North Sea production down double digits year-over-year, the subsidy is no longer anywhere near £10bn.
Actually no, Scotland still pays £10bn it doesnt get back. It just gets a deficit on the GERS/UK accounts. It';s not changed. It's why Wales is how it is today. Once Wales natural resources ran out, Westminster still filched its wealth till it had no more wealth to give.
All nationalism is right wing and unlovely. Kle4's post is a nice counterbalance to what we've been reading for the last year. I have to say there are more Scots fighting this ugly nationalism than there are English
If the polls go as predicted then the first order of business regardless of who gets in should be another referendum on scottish independence. This time held south of the border. If the scots vote SNP in the numbers showing then I see little reason not to give them what they have voted for
As long as you don't want Scotland to keep paying you £10bn per annum in subsidies, this would be perfect.
With oil sub $70/barrel and North Sea production down double digits year-over-year, the subsidy is no longer anywhere near £10bn.
Actually no, Scotland still pays £10bn it doesnt get back. It just gets a deficit on the GERS/UK accounts. It';s not changed. It's why Wales is how it is today. Once Wales natural resources ran out, Westminster still filched its wealth till it had no more wealth to give.
In the grand scheme of things when we are spending around 700 billion a year 10 billion a year is nothing more than an accounting blip. Keep it for all I care. You claim to be left wing but are more right wing than any tory.....this is nothing more than why should we pay for the poor just because we are better off. You want to keep your money and not share it with regions such as my homeland of cornwall that are much worse off than average than the scots. Screw your champagne socialism
Zen No it is not obvious as Quebec proved in 1995 when it rejected independence despite Quebec nationalists winning over 50 seats in the 1993 general election
I cannot believe that you can seriously not understand such a thing. My identity is English and British. Many people, even in England, don't feel anythingent sentences and have made meur, Mr SeanT.
"British" does not exist. It is a fantasy without any bearing in reality. .
It exists to me. All states, all tribes, are in some sense arbitrary constructs - we are all after all human beings, why put labels on things based on geography, language or history? - and I connect most deeply with the British identity. That you do not think it should have any pull on people does not make it any less real in the minds of the, admittedly diminishing, number who believe in it, anymore than someone suggesting that since everyone in these isles is descended from settlers from the Iberian penninsula 15000 years ago (or whatever the prevailing evidence suggests right now) means Scottish identity is a false thing for you to believe in.
Reminds me of a Bernard O'Donoghue poem in which he tongue-in-cheekily enquires as to whether Ireland should be "handed back" to Morocco.
You call yourself "Kent Rising". You claim to support UKIP.
Do you support ending the right of Irish Citizens to enter the UK with the full right of UK Citizens (which is not reciprocated)?
Zen No it is not obvious as Quebec proved in 1995 when it rejected independence despite Quebec nationalists winning over 50 seats in the 1993 general election
Let them go. If they are allowed to continue they will spread the disease to cornwall and wales and both those countries cannot afford independence. I speak here as someone who would love cornish independence but reality gets in the way ....they cannot afford it. A successful SNP will result in nationalist surge in both countries and that will be bad for them overall
If the polls go as predicted then the first order of business regardless of who gets in should be another referendum on scottish independence. This time held south of the border. If the scots vote SNP in the numbers showing then I see little reason not to give them what they have voted for
As long as you don't want Scotland to keep paying you £10bn per annum in subsidies, this would be perfect.
With oil sub $70/barrel and North Sea production down double digits year-over-year, the subsidy is no longer anywhere near £10bn.
Actually no, Scotland still pays £10bn it doesnt get back. It just gets a deficit on the GERS/UK accounts. It';s not changed. It's why Wales is how it is today. Once Wales natural resources ran out, Westminster still filched its wealth till it had no more wealth to give.
In the grand scheme of things when we are spending around 700 billion a year 10 billion a year is nothing more than an accounting blip. Keep it for all I care. You claim to be left wing but are more right wing than any tory.....this is nothing more than why should we pay for the poor just because we are better off. You want to keep your money and not share it with regions such as my homeland of cornwall that are much worse off than average than the scots. Screw your champagne socialism
If the polls go as predicted then the first order of business regardless of who gets in should be another referendum on scottish independence. This time held south of the border. If the scots vote SNP in the numbers showing then I see little reason not to give them what they have voted for
As long as you don't want Scotland to keep paying you £10bn per annum in subsidies, this would be perfect.
With oil sub $70/barrel and North Sea production down double digits year-over-year, the subsidy is no longer anywhere near £10bn.
Actually no, Scotland still pays £10bn it doesnt get back. It just gets a deficit on the GERS/UK accounts. It';s not changed. It's why Wales is how it is today. Once Wales natural resources ran out, Westminster still filched its wealth till it had no more wealth to give.
In the grand scheme of things when we are spending around 700 billion a year 10 billion a year is nothing more than an accounting blip. Keep it for all I care. You claim to be left wing but are more right wing than any tory.....this is nothing more than why should we pay for the poor just because we are better off. You want to keep your money and not share it with regions such as my homeland of cornwall that are much worse off than average than the scots. Screw your champagne socialism
Hahha.
I don't claim to be left wing.
I'm a Libertarian.
if you are a libertarian than I am a transvestite duck you are a left wing authoritarian judging by your posts here
If the polls go as predicted then the first order of business regardless of who gets in should be another referendum on scottish independence. This time held south of the border. If the scots vote SNP in the numbers showing then I see little reason not to give them what they have voted for
As long as you don't want Scotland to keep paying you £10bn per annum in subsidies, this would be perfect.
With oil sub $70/barrel and North Sea production down double digits year-over-year, the subsidy is no longer anywhere near £10bn.
Actually no, Scotland still pays £10bn it doesnt get back. It just gets a deficit on the GERS/UK accounts. It';s not changed. It's why Wales is how it is today. Once Wales natural resources ran out, Westminster still filched its wealth till it had no more wealth to give.
In the grand scheme of things when we are spending around 700 billion a year 10 billion a year is nothing more than an accounting blip. Keep it for all I care. You claim to be left wing but are more right wing than any tory.....this is nothing more than why should we pay for the poor just because we are better off. You want to keep your money and not share it with regions such as my homeland of cornwall that are much worse off than average than the scots. Screw your champagne socialism
Hahha.
I don't claim to be left wing.
I'm a Libertarian.
if you are a libertarian than I am a transvestite duck you are a left wing authoritarian judging by your posts here
The demise of the Liberals wasn't badly called, it was real. The Liberals were out of power for the best part of a century. The Greens are the "clean" lefty protest vote now and are exceeding the LDs in many elections and potentially in the popular vote. Why vote for the LDs if they're less credible even than the Greens?
There are now two protest parties in England and Wales who are unaffected by the grubby realities of political power. One is the nationalist (and I don't mean that in a bad way) UKIP and the other is the idealist (ditto) Greens.
Should either of these parties exercise political power, they would disappoint their putative supporters. It is, for example, extraordinary that Socrates, Richard_Tyndall and FalseFlag all support the same party given their extraordinary divergence in views on all issues other than the EU.
But it is ever thus with insurgent political movements (and I include the LibDems in 2010 and the Obama campaign of 2008): people like to project their values onto political movements, and the less you know, the more you can project. To gain political power, be a blank slate.
If the polls go as predicted then the first order of business regardless of who gets in should be another referendum on scottish independence. This time held south of the border. If the scots vote SNP in the numbers showing then I see little reason not to give them what they have voted for
As long as you don't want Scotland to keep paying you £10bn per annum in subsidies, this would be perfect.
With oil sub $70/barrel and North Sea production down double digits year-over-year, the subsidy is no longer anywhere near £10bn.
Actually no, Scotland still pays £10bn it doesnt get back. It just gets a deficit on the GERS/UK accounts. It';s not changed. It's why Wales is how it is today. Once Wales natural resources ran out, Westminster still filched its wealth till it had no more wealth to give.
In the grand scheme of things when we are spending around 700 billion a year 10 billion a year is nothing more than an accounting blip. Keep it for all I care. You claim to be left wing but are more right wing than any tory.....this is nothing more than why should we pay for the poor just because we are better off. You want to keep your money and not share it with regions such as my homeland of cornwall that are much worse off than average than the scots. Screw your champagne socialism
Hahha.
I don't claim to be left wing.
I'm a Libertarian.
if you are a libertarian than I am a transvestite duck you are a left wing authoritarian judging by your posts here
Maybe you don't understand Libertarianism.
I understand libertarianism very well thank you having been a member of the libertarian party under chris mounsie of devil's kitchen fame. I think its rather you that doesn't as I have seen you argue time and time again for a bigger state with more control. You support a party that wants to increase the state enough said really. Remind me again about the SNP plans for a named adult to be supervising every scottish child for instance. You call yourself a libertarian? I think you are nothing but a student politics idiot frankly from what you say on here. Go cry on wes streetings shoulder he will understand
RUK massively buys Scottish stuff, food and drink, oil, etc. Therefore Scotland enjoys a surplus. Therefore Scotland ends up paying a little more in tax. Is it really much more complex than that? I see no pillage and plunder here, I see a part of the UK doing very nicely thankyou.
Watched "Newzoids" on ITV at 9pm tonight, basically a CGI version of Spitting Image. A bit hit and miss but there were a few funny sketches, eg. Lord Sugar asking Ed, Yvette and Ed to design a new Labour logo
If the polls go as predicted then the first order of business regardless of who gets in should be another referendum on scottish independence. This time held south of the border. If the scots vote SNP in the numbers showing then I see little reason not to give them what they have voted for
As long as you don't want Scotland to keep paying you £10bn per annum in subsidies, this would be perfect.
With oil sub $70/barrel and North Sea production down double digits year-over-year, the subsidy is no longer anywhere near £10bn.
Actually no, Scotland still pays £10bn it doesnt get back. It just gets a deficit on the GERS/UK accounts. It';s not changed. It's why Wales is how it is today. Once Wales natural resources ran out, Westminster still filched its wealth till it had no more wealth to give.
If the polls go as predicted then the first order of business regardless of who gets in should be another referendum on scottish independence. This time held south of the border. If the scots vote SNP in the numbers showing then I see little reason not to give them what they have voted for
As long as you don't want Scotland to keep paying you £10bn per annum in subsidies, this would be perfect.
With oil sub $70/barrel and North Sea production down double digits year-over-year, the subsidy is no longer anywhere near £10bn.
Actually no, Scotland still pays £10bn it doesnt get back. It just gets a deficit on the GERS/UK accounts. It';s not changed. It's why Wales is how it is today. Once Wales natural resources ran out, Westminster still filched its wealth till it had no more wealth to give.
In the grand scheme of things when we are spending around 700 billion a year 10 billion a year is nothing more than an accounting blip. Keep it for all I care. You claim to be left wing but are more right wing than any tory.....this is nothing more than why should we pay for the poor just because we are better off. You want to keep your money and not share it with regions such as my homeland of cornwall that are much worse off than average than the scots. Screw your champagne socialism
Hahha.
I don't claim to be left wing.
I'm a Libertarian.
if you are a libertarian than I am a transvestite duck you are a left wing authoritarian judging by your posts here
Maybe you don't understand Libertarianism.
I understand libertarianism very well thank you having been a member of the libertarian party under chris mounsie of devil's kitchen fame. I think its rather you that doesn't as I have seen you argue time and time again for a bigger state with more control. You support a party that wants to increase the state enough said really. Remind me again about the SNP plans for a named adult to be supervising every scottish child for instance. You call yourself a libertarian? I think you are nothing but a student politics idiot frankly from what you say on here. Go cry on wes streetings shoulder he will understand
If the polls go as predicted then the first order of business regardless of who gets in should be another referendum on scottish independence. This time held south of the border. If the scots vote SNP in the numbers showing then I see little reason not to give them what they have voted for
As long as you don't want Scotland to keep paying you £10bn per annum in subsidies, this would be perfect.
With oil sub $70/barrel and North Sea production down double digits year-over-year, the subsidy is no longer anywhere near £10bn.
Actually no, Scotland still pays £10bn it doesnt get back. It just gets a deficit on the GERS/UK accounts. It';s not changed. It's why Wales is how it is today. Once Wales natural resources ran out, Westminster still filched its wealth till it had no more wealth to give.
You are getting dangerously close to my specialist subject. The excess that Scotland pays to the UK is almost entirely tied to the price and volume of oil extracted. Last fiscal year, to April 2014, there was around a £13bn subsidy from Scotland to the UK - assuming flat per capita spending and assigning all oil taxation revenues to Scotland.
In fiscal 2015 (just passed) it will be lower because the price of oil was lower for the year, and because the North Sea is structurally in decline. In fiscal 2016, if oil stays where it is, and we continue to see 10% decline rates, then it will probably be reversed.
Then you should support my call for a referendum on scotland held south of the border you will definitely have a smaller state....92% smaller to be exact. Of course the size of the state as advocated by the party you espouse will soon balloon relative to your gdp but then that will be an independent scotlands problem.
I personally dont vote for parties that advocate big state policies which is why I won't vote tory.
Chris Hanretty's 2015 UK Parliamentary Election Forecast has today halved the previous Tory lead over Labour from 18 seats to 9. This particular model now has it Blues 279 vs Reds 270. Unless there are half a million or so shy Tories out there, their hopes of forming the next Government are rapidly going down the plughole.
I would like a law providing for 1,000 interesting comments a day on politicalbetting.
Damn it! Why can't the government deliver. We need a new one.
The Counter-Inflation Act 1973 could be revived. It allowed for the fixing of wages, prices, rents, insurance premiums, and share dividends by a Pay Board, Price Commission and the Treasury. Fixing the number and quality of blog comments would have been but a minor addition to their responsibilities...
Chris Hanretty's 2015 UK Parliamentary Election Forecast has today halved the previous Tory lead over Labour from 18 seats to 9. This particular model now has it Blues 279 vs Reds 270. Unless there are half a million or so shy Tories out there, their hopes of forming the next Government are rapidly going down the plughole.
I wonder what has caused this. The polls have generally showed the Tories in a slightly improved position over the past 4-5 days, so I wonder what in their model has caused such a large change?
I would like a law providing for 1,000 interesting comments a day on politicalbetting.
Damn it! Why can't the government deliver. We need a new one.
The Counter-Inflation Act 1973 could be revived. It allowed for the fixing of wages, prices, rents, insurance premiums, and share dividends by a Pay Board, Price Commission and the Treasury. Fixing the number and quality of blog comments would have been but a minor addition to their responsibilities...
Think of the quango's required to assess the amount of interest contained in a blog comment. One way to solve the unemployment problem I guess
Chris Hanretty's 2015 UK Parliamentary Election Forecast has today halved the previous Tory lead over Labour from 18 seats to 9. This particular model now has it Blues 279 vs Reds 270. Unless there are half a million or so shy Tories out there, their hopes of forming the next Government are rapidly going down the plughole.
I wonder what has caused this. The polls have generally showed the Tories in a slightly improved position over the past 4-5 days, so I wonder what in their model has caused such a large change?
It's a methodological tweak as per their Updates tab:
27th April We have revised how we use older constituency polls in constituencies with multiple constituency polls. We now exclude constituency polls that are more than four months old, if there are more recent polls in that constituency.
Then you should support my call for a referendum on scotland held south of the border you will definitely have a smaller state....92% smaller to be exact. Of course the size of the state as advocated by the party you espouse will soon balloon relative to your gdp but then that will be an independent scotlands problem.
I personally dont vote for parties that advocate big state policies which is why I won't vote tory.
Shame you're not libertarian.
You see, the fundamental point of libertarianism is that GOVERNMENT DOES NOTHING. It doesn't subtract or add to national wealth. You are claiming it can somehow "give" wealth to a state. Pathetic, failed understanding.
Wealth is based on Resources and Productivity. That's it.
Then you should support my call for a referendum on scotland held south of the border you will definitely have a smaller state....92% smaller to be exact. Of course the size of the state as advocated by the party you espouse will soon balloon relative to your gdp but then that will be an independent scotlands problem.
I personally dont vote for parties that advocate big state policies which is why I won't vote tory.
Shame you're not libertarian.
You see, the fundamental point of libertarianism is that GOVERNMENT DOES NOTHING. It doesn't subtract or add to national wealth. You are claiming it can someone "give" wealth to a state. Pathetic, failed understanding.
Wealth is based on Resources and Productivity. That's it.
When did I claim government gave wealth to anything? Clue here I didn't I did however point out that you support an anti austerity party that wants to increase welfare spend. Government has only a couple of functions in my book one is defense the other is law enforcement. In additions laws should be few and understandable. That is a libertarian view. You however have argued for increased welfare spending, increased nhs spending and generally in favour of a party thats big state. You are less of a libertarian than most labour supporters who at least accept the state might be overlarge
Chris Hanretty's 2015 UK Parliamentary Election Forecast has today halved the previous Tory lead over Labour from 18 seats to 9. This particular model now has it Blues 279 vs Reds 270. Unless there are half a million or so shy Tories out there, their hopes of forming the next Government are rapidly going down the plughole.
I wonder what has caused this. The polls have generally showed the Tories in a slightly improved position over the past 4-5 days, so I wonder what in their model has caused such a large change?
Clearly today's reversal for the Tories in the ComRes poll won't have helped, neither will yesterday's small lead for Labour from YouGov. Both appeared to contradict what had appeared to be a turning point for the Blue Team. On the other hand, Sporting continue to give the Tories a 19 seat lead over Labour.
You see, the fundamental point of libertarianism is that GOVERNMENT DOES NOTHING.
That is anarchism not libertarianism.
No, Anarchism is that government doesn't exist. Libertarianism is that government exists but does nothing.
You really talk a load of shadow chancellors. The principle of libertarianism is that government does as little as possible. Libertarianism espouses such thinigs as property laws and national defence for starters. A government that does nothing could do neither of these. Go back to class
You see, the fundamental point of libertarianism is that GOVERNMENT DOES NOTHING.
That is anarchism not libertarianism.
No, Anarchism is that government doesn't exist. Libertarianism is that government exists but does nothing.
Libertarian's focus on personal freedom mean they are sceptical of state intervention, nothing more.
See Dair even a liberal democrat understands what libertarianism is about, somewhere there is a village missing its idiot I suggest you return there post haste before your job is filled
Chris Hanretty's 2015 UK Parliamentary Election Forecast has today halved the previous Tory lead over Labour from 18 seats to 9. This particular model now has it Blues 279 vs Reds 270. Unless there are half a million or so shy Tories out there, their hopes of forming the next Government are rapidly going down the plughole.
I wonder what has caused this. The polls have generally showed the Tories in a slightly improved position over the past 4-5 days, so I wonder what in their model has caused such a large change?
Clearly today's reversal for the Tories in the ComRes poll won't have helped, neither will yesterday's small lead for Labour from YouGov. Both appeared to contradict what had appeared to be a turning point for the Blue Team. On the other hand, Sporting continue to give the Tories a 19 seat lead over Labour.
The Newsnight prediction was calculated before the ComRes poll. Somebody down thread suggests it is due to a late stage methodology change.
I am wondering, are Cameron and Miliband actually going to meet any real people on this campaign?
Cameron has done the odd open Q&A at factories and call centres, but I believe they are well marshalled events and Miliband just lugs his lectern around from playing fields to Labour supporters back gardens.
Last time, there were complaints that very little real contact with voters, but obviously Brown had his Mrs Duffy moment and Cameron was a lot more open to meeting people and did countless Cameron Directs (which were nowhere near as controlled as nowadays), even after getting ambushed by the Lib Dem supporter who ranted about his disabled kid at him.
I actually think a politician can look a lot better in the publics eyes if they do meet some real people who vernently disagree with them, but remain calm, show some conviction and agree to disagree.
I am wondering, are Cameron and Miliband actually going to meet any real people on this campaign?
I really don't understand why Cameron hasn't done this. Yes, there will be a load of people who disagree with what he says, or say that his government has not done the best it can, but at least it would appear as a genuine attempt to connect to the electorate. He should be out on his soapbox facing the public.
I am wondering, are Cameron and Miliband actually going to meet any real people on this campaign?
I really don't understand why Cameron hasn't done this. Yes, there will be a load of people who disagree with what he says, or say that his government has not done the best it can, but at least it would appear as a genuine attempt to connect to the electorate. He should be out on his soapbox facing the public.
Just like Major in 1992 - how the bien pensant laughed.....until the election......
I am wondering, are Cameron and Miliband actually going to meet any real people on this campaign?
I really don't understand why Cameron hasn't done this. Yes, there will be a load of people who disagree with what he says, or say that his government has not done the best it can, but at least it would appear as a genuine attempt to connect to the electorate. He should be out on his soapbox facing the public.
Just like Major in 1992 - how the bien pensant laughed.....until the election......
The difference is John Major had a working class background, he knew how "real"* people thought and could pass the "people like us" sniff test. It was fairly low risk.
Nicola grew up on a Ayrshire council scheme. Again, common people, not a problem. It's like dealing with friends and family.
Dave and Ed; well, you know, not so much. Real danger it comes off as fake or goes badly wrong. Reminds me a Pulp song.
*"real" is a crappy term, but I can't think of anything better.
I am wondering, are Cameron and Miliband actually going to meet any real people on this campaign?
I really don't understand why Cameron hasn't done this. Yes, there will be a load of people who disagree with what he says, or say that his government has not done the best it can, but at least it would appear as a genuine attempt to connect to the electorate. He should be out on his soapbox facing the public.
Just like Major in 1992 - how the bien pensant laughed.....until the election......
Nicola grew up on a Ayrshire council scheme. Again, common people, not a problem. It's like dealing with friends and family.
Nicola has the most 'normal' background of the party leaders - though Leanne Wood is in a similar mould. Cameron/Miliband/Clegg/Farage might as well all be from different planets.....
Of course Thatcher rose from humble origins too, as did Heath, Wilson, Callaghan - and was well known for treating her staff considerately and her colleagues atrociously.....
I am wondering, are Cameron and Miliband actually going to meet any real people on this campaign?
I really don't understand why Cameron hasn't done this. Yes, there will be a load of people who disagree with what he says, or say that his government has not done the best it can, but at least it would appear as a genuine attempt to connect to the electorate. He should be out on his soapbox facing the public.
Just like Major in 1992 - how the bien pensant laughed.....until the election......
Nicola grew up on a Ayrshire council scheme. Again, common people, not a problem. It's like dealing with friends and family.
Nicola has the most 'normal' background of the party leaders - though Leanne Wood is in a similar mould. Cameron/Miliband/Clegg/Farage might as well all be from different planets.....
Of course Thatcher rose from humble origins too, as did Heath, Wilson, Callaghan - and was well known for treating her staff considerately and her colleagues atrociously.....
Wasn’t the same with “son of the manse”, Brown, though. Middle class background, state-educated.
I actually think a politician can look a lot better in the publics eyes if they do meet some real people who vernently disagree with them, but remain calm, show some conviction and agree to disagree.
Quite. I think the reason they have gone for more controlled audiences is that there's a bunch of anarchists of all persuasions who would just go around trying to be troublemakers.
I cannot believe that you can seriously not understand such a thing. My identity is English and British. Many people, even in England, don't feel anythingent sentences and have made meur, Mr SeanT.
"British" does not exist. It is a fantasy without any bearing in reality. .
It exists to me. All states, all tribes, are in some sense arbitrary constructs - we are all after all human beings, why put labels on things based on geography, language or history? - and I connect most deeply with the British identity. That you do not think it should have any pull on people does not make it any less real in the minds of the, admittedly diminishing, number who believe in it, anymore than someone suggesting that since everyone in these isles is descended from settlers from the Iberian penninsula 15000 years ago (or whatever the prevailing evidence suggests right now) means Scottish identity is a false thing for you to believe in.
I'm off to bed now, but it is moments like this, when the very idea that someone might actually feel some connection to the wider concept of Britain, as anathema as that might be to you, is reacted to as though it is some aberrant delusion, that shows a little of the nastiness that, funnily enough, the SNP for one are always complaining about going their way (not without cause, it must be said).
I won't say the mask slips, as I would hope such arrogant and belittling dismissal is not at the core of those who react that way to the genuine sentiment of others for the UK, but the brazen dismissal is more disrespectful than if you had said you hated all English people. At least with hatred it might leave open the possibility that you respected them. As it is, what you are saying is that someone cannot reasonably feel affection for Britain because the very idea is bloody stupid, and that shows no respect whatsoever to the views and opinions of others, as it is treating them as invalid.
You will not care at my feeling this, and that is perfectly reasonable (you need not care what some touchy englishman feels), but I strive very hard to be reasonable and see all sides, and I feel sad you have so little respect for others as shown this evening.
Good night all, even to Dair.
P.S I do not mind even slightly if I am mocked for getting touchy or emotional about this; contrary to the beliefs of some, annoying or angering someone else does not mean you have 'won' or the person getting emotional has 'lost'. It might be a silly reaction, but sometimes that is actually appropriate.
That was a delight to wake up to. What a great post.
Though I noticed that The Herald has Brown trying to copy The SNP to blame the Tories for Labour's feelings.
As was pointed out downthread, someone forgot to deliver the Times to the BBC yesterday.
Given Nick Palmer's commment that most of his constituents get their news from the TV, I wonder if Ed has the Beeb on his mind when he talks about breaking up the media?
If the polls go as predicted then the first order of business regardless of who gets in should be another referendum on scottish independence. This time held south of the border. If the scots vote SNP in the numbers showing then I see little reason not to give them what they have voted for
As long as you don't want Scotland to keep paying you £10bn per annum in subsidies, this would be perfect.
With oil sub $70/barrel and North Sea production down double digits year-over-year, the subsidy is no longer anywhere near £10bn.
Actually no, Scotland still pays £10bn it doesnt get back. It just gets a deficit on the GERS/UK accounts. It';s not changed. It's why Wales is how it is today. Once Wales natural resources ran out, Westminster still filched its wealth till it had no more wealth to give.
Hahha.
I don't claim to be left wing.
I'm a Libertarian.
if you are a libertarian than I am a transvestite duck you are a left wing authoritarian judging by your posts here
Maybe you don't understand Libertarianism.
I understand libertarianism very well thank you having been a member of the libertarian party under chris mounsie of devil's kitchen fame. I think its rather you that doesn't as I have seen you argue time and time again for a bigger state with more control. You support a party that wants to increase the state enough said really. Remind me again about the SNP plans for a named adult to be supervising every scottish child for instance. You call yourself a libertarian? I think you are nothing but a student politics idiot frankly from what you say on here. Go cry on wes streetings shoulder he will understand
I want a fundamentally smaller state.
I support virtually no SNP policies.
This is interesting. This comment (together with your others as a libertarian) puts you clearly on the centre-right of the political axis.
So, if you were "English" you'd most likely be a Conservative or UKIP supporter.
If Scotland became independent, would you switch your vote to a Scottish centre-right party? Like a renamed/rebranded Scottish Conservatives?
What Cameron is relying on, IMHO, is voters pencils in key marginal seats hesitating and hovering over the "Labour" box on Thursday next week and deciding, at the last moment, 'nah, too risky' and to tick the "Conservative" box instead*
*Probably applies more to UKIP/Lib Dem voters, to be fair, as the number of Con-Lab floaters is marginal.
He might be right. I simply don't know. I'd like to think the British electorate were sensible and practical people. But I don't think many people realise what a parlous state the country and its finances are still in.
But I don't think many people realise what a parlous state the country and its finances are still in.
Agreed. I also think the public underestimate how well the politicians will deal with the result if it's as expected. They think that because this coalition held together well then everything will be alright after a week of negotiations, whereas the mood on this board among those engaged is that it's going to be absolute chaos!!
Election Forecast has Dumfries & Galloway with Labour (current holders) on 31%, Tories on 31% and SNP on 32%. Must be one of the closest three ways in the whole country, certainly closer than South Thanet is likely to be. Less a question of were you up for and more a question of had you had your tea before I think.
The other slightly odd thing about the seat allocations in Election Forecast is that as far as I can see they are only predicting about 13 Tory gains. This looks very low to me but they seem to be assuming a lot more Lib Dems are going to hang on in the SW than most.
Moving average chart of the 100 most recent YouGov polls. YouGov's methology changed at data point number 78 and took 5 days to fully impact upon the moving average. Click to enlarge...
Attempting to blame the Conservatives for SLAB's calamity is pathetic, though very much in character.
The Fink
I am a Tory living in Pinner. If Labour’s Douglas Alexander with his 17,000 majority is going to lose his seat to some 20-year-old nationalist sitting her finals, it’s not my fault. The idea that this catastrophe is happening because the Tories and David Cameron are talking about it — and they should therefore stop doing so — is patently absurd. This gets things precisely the wrong way round. Mr Cameron is talking about it because it is happening.
It is Labour that is losing these seats. Labour that dominated Scottish politics for a generation. Labour that crafted the institutions on which the SNP has built its power. Labour that ran the Better Together campaign. And if Labour collapses in Scotland, it is Labour’s fault.
Election Forecast has Dumfries & Galloway with Labour (current holders) on 31%, Tories on 31% and SNP on 32%. Must be one of the closest three ways in the whole country, certainly closer than South Thanet is likely to be. Less a question of were you up for and more a question of had you had your tea before I think.
The other slightly odd thing about the seat allocations in Election Forecast is that as far as I can see they are only predicting about 13 Tory gains. This looks very low to me but they seem to be assuming a lot more Lib Dems are going to hang on in the SW than most.
Attempting to blame the Conservatives for SLAB's calamity is pathetic, though very much in character.
The Fink
I am a Tory living in Pinner. If Labour’s Douglas Alexander with his 17,000 majority is going to lose his seat to some 20-year-old nationalist sitting her finals, it’s not my fault. The idea that this catastrophe is happening because the Tories and David Cameron are talking about it — and they should therefore stop doing so — is patently absurd. This gets things precisely the wrong way round. Mr Cameron is talking about it because it is happening.
It is Labour that is losing these seats. Labour that dominated Scottish politics for a generation. Labour that crafted the institutions on which the SNP has built its power. Labour that ran the Better Together campaign. And if Labour collapses in Scotland, it is Labour’s fault.
I am wondering, are Cameron and Miliband actually going to meet any real people on this campaign?
I really don't understand why Cameron hasn't done this. Yes, there will be a load of people who disagree with what he says, or say that his government has not done the best it can, but at least it would appear as a genuine attempt to connect to the electorate. He should be out on his soapbox facing the public.
Just like Major in 1992 - how the bien pensant laughed.....until the election......
The difference is John Major had a working class background, he knew how "real"* people thought and could pass the "people like us" sniff test. It was fairly low risk.
Nicola grew up on a Ayrshire council scheme. Again, common people, not a problem. It's like dealing with friends and family.
Dave and Ed; well, you know, not so much. Real danger it comes off as fake or goes badly wrong. Reminds me a Pulp song.
*"real" is a crappy term, but I can't think of anything better.
"Liberal Democrat Chief Secretary to the Treasury Danny Alexander has said the Conservatives proposed to "slash" child benefit while the two parties were in government together."
Lib Dems reinforce their image as duplicituous untrustworthy bar stewards urinating on anyone who was a previous partner.
"Liberal Democrat Chief Secretary to the Treasury Danny Alexander has said the Conservatives proposed to "slash" child benefit while the two parties were in government together."
Lib Dems reinforce their image as duplicituous untrustworthy bar stewards urinating on anyone who was a previous partner.
Comments
I think Clegg would resign, with Cable taking over as a sort of interim leader, as he'd be trusted as the party elder statesman, is Labour leaning so would be trusted by the left of the party but has shown willingness to deal with the Tories, and of course because young cardinals vote for old popes.
Team GB isn't a nation. It even includes people who aren't British - such as Cavendish and Kennaugh.
Dair Czechoslovakia was a lumped together produced of the Treaty of Versailles, the Nazis then recreated Slovakia and then Czechoslovakia was reformed as a satellite of the Communists, it was hardly a 300 year entity. Of course the Queen remains Queen of Australia, Canada and New Zealand even now and Wales shows no desire for separation, it barely even backed devolution.
'I thought Ed was courageous meeting Russell Brand. What I didn't realize was that Brand had a readership bigger than the Sun so not just courageous but astute'
And Brand's been telling them for years that voting is a waste of time & your 'astute' Ed met him after voter registration had closed.
Comedy at its best.
"At we don't have to take the trouble to check who has the special status on here of being wrong every time."
I am the kiss of death so wouldn't try to predict what day it is tomorrow.
Certain posters have a reputation for being good psephologists Rod being one of the most respected so I recorded their predictions. My particular favourite is Barnesium (if i've got the name right) the other is Jack. It had to be scientific I didn't include people who just pluck numbers out of their backside.
Conversely, if it's the other way around, the LibDems will return to their position of "Labour-lite".
I'm off to bed now, but it is moments like this, when the very idea that someone might actually feel some connection to the wider concept of Britain, as anathema as that might be to you, is reacted to as though it is some aberrant delusion, that shows a little of the nastiness that, funnily enough, the SNP for one are always complaining about going their way (not without cause, it must be said).
I won't say the mask slips, as I would hope such arrogant and belittling dismissal is not at the core of those who react that way to the genuine sentiment of others for the UK, but the brazen dismissal is more disrespectful than if you had said you hated all English people. At least with hatred it might leave open the possibility that you respected them. As it is, what you are saying is that someone cannot reasonably feel affection for Britain because the very idea is bloody stupid, and that shows no respect whatsoever to the views and opinions of others, as it is treating them as invalid.
You will not care at my feeling this, and that is perfectly reasonable (you need not care what some touchy englishman feels), but I strive very hard to be reasonable and see all sides, and I feel sad you have so little respect for others as shown this evening.
Good night all, even to Dair.
P.S I do not mind even slightly if I am mocked for getting touchy or emotional about this; contrary to the beliefs of some, annoying or angering someone else does not mean you have 'won' or the person getting emotional has 'lost'. It might be a silly reaction, but sometimes that is actually appropriate.
Cameron wants the Tories to have massive fart over the next week.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/apr/29/david-cameron-time-for-tory-campaign-let-rip-final-week-election-conservatives
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/apr/29/david-cameron-tax-lock-pledge-insult-voters
54% of Scots support the SNP and aren't likely to be waving a Union Flag. Only 55% of people backed the Union and significant numbers of them wouldn't be caught dead with a Union Flag.
If the bulk of the union is to be saved then it is better to excise a minor part before the cancer spreads
I don't hate the concept of Britain. It is a good concept. If I had my way, the BBC would exist (with a BBC Trust that actually worked) and Team GB would continue. I don't see any need to break cultural ties.
I'd happily continue to field Team GB in hte Olympics and as seperate countries we could actually have a Team GB football team without the (probably nonsense) about it threatening the home nations.
But that doesn't need us to be the same Nation. We include Mark Cavendish and Peter Kennaugh and win gold medals despite them not being from the UK. The IOC allows multi-national teams.
And here's the thing/ A proper separation would work for both countries but it wouldnt see us departing. We could still be friends and have common cause on all sorts of issues and even team up if we wanted.
Do you support ending the right of Irish Citizens to enter the UK with the full right of UK Citizens (which is not reciprocated)?
I don't claim to be left wing.
I'm a Libertarian.
'Cameron wants the Tories to have massive fart over the next week'
Oh how we laughed at that.
ComRes must be an outlier
Should either of these parties exercise political power, they would disappoint their putative supporters. It is, for example, extraordinary that Socrates, Richard_Tyndall and FalseFlag all support the same party given their extraordinary divergence in views on all issues other than the EU.
But it is ever thus with insurgent political movements (and I include the LibDems in 2010 and the Obama campaign of 2008): people like to project their values onto political movements, and the less you know, the more you can project. To gain political power, be a blank slate.
Damn it! Why can't the government deliver. We need a new one.
I support virtually no SNP policies.
In fiscal 2015 (just passed) it will be lower because the price of oil was lower for the year, and because the North Sea is structurally in decline. In fiscal 2016, if oil stays where it is, and we continue to see 10% decline rates, then it will probably be reversed.
I personally dont vote for parties that advocate big state policies which is why I won't vote tory.
27th April
We have revised how we use older constituency polls in constituencies with multiple constituency polls. We now exclude constituency polls that are more than four months old, if there are more recent polls in that constituency.
You see, the fundamental point of libertarianism is that GOVERNMENT DOES NOTHING. It doesn't subtract or add to national wealth. You are claiming it can somehow "give" wealth to a state. Pathetic, failed understanding.
Wealth is based on Resources and Productivity. That's it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Camarón
On the other hand, Sporting continue to give the Tories a 19 seat lead over Labour.
Do you think the government should have legalised gay marriage (yes or no are your two possible answers)
Cameron has done the odd open Q&A at factories and call centres, but I believe they are well marshalled events and Miliband just lugs his lectern around from playing fields to Labour supporters back gardens.
Last time, there were complaints that very little real contact with voters, but obviously Brown had his Mrs Duffy moment and Cameron was a lot more open to meeting people and did countless Cameron Directs (which were nowhere near as controlled as nowadays), even after getting ambushed by the Lib Dem supporter who ranted about his disabled kid at him.
I actually think a politician can look a lot better in the publics eyes if they do meet some real people who vernently disagree with them, but remain calm, show some conviction and agree to disagree.
Nicola grew up on a Ayrshire council scheme. Again, common people, not a problem. It's like dealing with friends and family.
Dave and Ed; well, you know, not so much. Real danger it comes off as fake or goes badly wrong. Reminds me a Pulp song.
*"real" is a crappy term, but I can't think of anything better.
Of course Thatcher rose from humble origins too, as did Heath, Wilson, Callaghan - and was well known for treating her staff considerately and her colleagues atrociously.....
http://www.electionforecast.co.uk/
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2015-32526461
Though I noticed that The Herald has Brown trying to copy The SNP to blame the Tories for Labour's feelings.
Given Nick Palmer's commment that most of his constituents get their news from the TV, I wonder if Ed has the Beeb on his mind when he talks about breaking up the media?
So, if you were "English" you'd most likely be a Conservative or UKIP supporter.
If Scotland became independent, would you switch your vote to a Scottish centre-right party? Like a renamed/rebranded Scottish Conservatives?
*Probably applies more to UKIP/Lib Dem voters, to be fair, as the number of Con-Lab floaters is marginal.
He might be right. I simply don't know. I'd like to think the British electorate were sensible and practical people. But I don't think many people realise what a parlous state the country and its finances are still in.
A truly excellent post.
The other slightly odd thing about the seat allocations in Election Forecast is that as far as I can see they are only predicting about 13 Tory gains. This looks very low to me but they seem to be assuming a lot more Lib Dems are going to hang on in the SW than most.
That was a good article from him.
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2015/04/sun-says-stop-snp-scottish-sun-says-back-snp
Lib Dems reinforce their image as duplicituous untrustworthy bar stewards urinating on anyone who was a previous partner.
Fundamentally, it's an ABL position by Rupert Murdoch...
I'd extend that to Mr Clegg too - let him sink.