politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Leadership ratings: a good guide but not a magic measure
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Leadership ratings: a good guide but not a magic measure
It’s sometimes said that oppositions don’t win elections, governments lose them but that’s only true to a degree. A popular and effective government will always win re-election because in such circumstances, the swing voters in the electorate will have little reason to listen to the opposition, little to gain and potentially much to lose by voting the government out no matter how good the opposi…
Comments
-
Good piece David though I am less sure that things are as close as you suggest.
The Ashcroft polling was almost certainly done by YouGov which for whatever reason seems to rate Tory figures better in ratings than Labour ones.
Thus Ipsos-MORI and ComRes have Balls leading Osborne as best Chancellor while YouGov is the other way round.
What amuses me is that at the same time EdM is attacked for being weak and also the murder of his brother. He can't be both.
The really weak leader is Cameron - just look at how he handled his last reshuffle.0 -
Interesting thread David - as you write, all to play for. And as an alternative to the more commonly expressed "Ed is crap" there was an article in the Guardian yesterday on Ed that verged on hagiography:
How would Prime Minister Miliband perform on the world stage?
Unlike Cameron in opposition, the Labour leader has international experience, and a clear sense of where he stands
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jun/28/prime-minister-miliband-world-stage0 -
At Copenhagen it was "in the corner, crying"CarlottaVance said:
Unlike Cameron in opposition, the Labour leader has international experience, and a clear sense of where he stands0 -
The issue is the unions. The unions gifted him the leadership. He is too weak to take them on. A puppet.MikeSmithson said:
What amuses me is that at the same time EdM is attacked for being weak and also the murder of his brother. He can't be both.0 -
Mike Smithson in 'I prefer Miliband to Cameron shocker'0
-
Next he'll be telling us he doesn't like Gove or Osborne!scampi said:Mike Smithson in 'I prefer Miliband to Cameron shocker'
0 -
LOLScott_P said:
The issue is the unions. The unions gifted him the leadership. He is too weak to take them on. A puppet.MikeSmithson said:
What amuses me is that at the same time EdM is attacked for being weak and also the murder of his brother. He can't be both.
They 'gifted' him the leadership because he wasn't David and little Ed was the stop David candidate. They unions didn't want David because David was seen as the uber Blairite who they feared would end up emulating the tories. Well after all little Ed's traingulation and copying the tories on cuts and spending they must feel really pleased with themselves now.
The tories are going to have a bit of a problem whining about the unions and 'Red' Ed while at the same time shouting about how Osbrowne and Cammie must be right because little Ed and Balls are copying their polices. Which would be the entire point of the endless inane Blairite triangulation in the first place.
The reason little Ed is weak isn't that Dan Hodges won't forgive him for winning against David, since little Ed inexplicably failed to concede victory to David just because he was his brother. Nor is it just the fact that all his tory triangulation reveals little Ed hasn't a clue about what he or labour stands for and cares even less. By being so weak as to let the Blairites push him into this panicky triangulation on cuts and spending so far out he put an enormous hostage to fortune into play.
Here's what happens when an opposition panics and tries to triangulate too soon.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bR_hfQU-4r0
As we all know that was a roaring success and the tories never stop going on about that master strategy.
That and many other reasons is why you don't let another party write all your policies and control the agenda. The agenda can change and you are left looking like a complete tw+t.
It's why you leave the detail to the campaign since an opposition is going to get hammered regardless for years about lack of detail until the campaign anyway. That's how it works.
0 -
I have never thought Ed Miliband weak, indeed l rather like his ruthless streak.MikeSmithson said:Good piece David though I am less sure that things are as close as you suggest.
The Ashcroft polling was almost certainly done by YouGov which for whatever reason seems to rate Tory figures better in ratings than Labour ones.
Thus Ipsos-MORI and ComRes have Balls leading Osborne as best Chancellor while YouGov is the other way round.
What amuses me is that at the same time EdM is attacked for being weak and also the murder of his brother. He can't be both.
The really weak leader is Cameron - just look at how he handled his last reshuffle.
The idea that he was wrong to stand against his brother and win is risible. David had ample opportunity to stand against Brown, notably in the notorious coronation of 2007. Ed stood fair and square and won according to the rules. The idea that he should have had to defer to his elder brother is ridiculous in a democratic party. Primogeniture only applies to hereditary positions, and while there is nepotism in the Labour party it should not go that far.
I would like to see Ed Miliband demonstrate his ruthlessness by axing yesterdays man, Ed Balls. The closer to the election we get the bigger liability Balls is. He contradicted the lead that Miliband gave on fiscal sanity the very next day, and it is not tenable to have the LOTO and shadow chancellor disagreeing on such fundamentals in public. For all their faults Dave and George are clearly friends as well as colleagues and agree on policy fundamentals.
A characteristically good article DH.0 -
He won't. Too weak.foxinsoxuk said:
I would like to see Ed Miliband demonstrate his ruthlessness by axing yesterdays man, Ed Balls.0 -
Same reason Cammie won't axe the toxic liability Osbrowne.Scott_P said:
He won't. Too weak.foxinsoxuk said:
I would like to see Ed Miliband demonstrate his ruthlessness by axing yesterdays man, Ed Balls.
0 -
Interesting YouGov Euro tracker - UK not doing too badly, household finances under strain, but country prospects looking rosier than Germany, and everything better than France:
Govt approval (net)
UK: -34
DE: -42
FR: -55
Household finances NEXT 12m net better:
UK: -28
DE: -6
FR: -50
Household finances LAST 12m net better:
UK: -35
DE: -15
FR: -56
Country economy NEXT 12 months net better
UK: -13
DE:. -26
FR:, -70
Country economy LAST 12 months net better:
UK: -26
DE: -23
FR: -54
Also France only narrowly would vote to stay in the EU (net stay)
UK: -14
DE: +22
FR: +4
It's going to be a long hot summer in Paris....
http://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/n0z7k4uiy6/Copy of Eurotrack June.pdf
0 -
The Gray/Salmond leadership ratings were a "magic measure" in early 2011. Far more indicative of the earthquake that was about to happen than the far more heavily reported Lab/SNP VI figures.
The Lamont/Salmond leadership ratings are a lot tighter right now, but Lamont looks like a sprinter and in politics the marathon athlete usually triumphs.
Due to those two 200,000 GBP bets placed at Hills and Ladbrokes shops in Scotland, reported by Mike, we have a small arbitrage on the indyref market (just under 2%).
Personally, I just don't have the liquidity to participate at the moment as I am currently buying gold mining stocks like a madman. The figures look dire at the moment, but I expect I will be grinning like a Cheshire cat by Hogmanay.
For those interested in the 2% arb, you can currently back 'Yes' at 4/1 with either Hills or Ladbrokes, and 'No' at 2/9 with either Stan James or Bet365. I suspect that you might have difficulty getting a useful sum on 'No' with those two bookies, but it is worth a look.
I would not recommend backing 'No' at current prices without the hedge, as (excluding the DKs/WNVs) the polls are pointing to a 55/45 victory for Alistair Darling's Better Together campaign. And that makes the 2/9 price look extremely stingy.0 -
Which rather appears to be how the SNP are playing independence.Mick_Pork said:
It's why you leave the detail to the campaign since an opposition is going to get hammered regardless for years about lack of detail until the campaign anyway. That's how it works.Scott_P said:
The issue is the unions. The unions gifted him the leadership. He is too weak to take them on. A puppet.MikeSmithson said:
What amuses me is that at the same time EdM is attacked for being weak and also the murder of his brother. He can't be both.
One problem.
They are not the opposition.0 -
No.Mick_Pork said:
Same reason Cammie won't axe the toxic liability Osbrowne.Scott_P said:
He won't. Too weak.foxinsoxuk said:
I would like to see Ed Miliband demonstrate his ruthlessness by axing yesterdays man, Ed Balls.
1. Cameron does not share your analysis of Osborne (how's the burger story doing btw)
2. Cameron and Osborne are mates.
How much of the above can be said for Miliband and Balls?
0 -
Now she has Iain Gray right beside her shouting at Lamont to run faster once she is exposed to the full spotlight of a campaign like he was. What could possibly go wrong?Stuart_Dickson said:The Lamont/Salmond leadership ratings are a lot tighter right now, but Lamont looks like a sprinter and in politics the marathon athlete usually triumphs.
0 -
Not sure about the final paragraph. No leader sealed the deal last time round, in 2005 Blair didn't do much sealing either. Labour won because its vote was more efficient.0
-
It would to a scottish tory.CarlottaVance said:Which rather appears to be how the SNP are playing independence.
One problem.
SLAB and SCONs endless negativity and scare stories aren't detail.
0 -
Neither do the markets.CarlottaVance said:Cameron does not share your analysis of Osborne
And everything Balls predicted would happen, didn't. And he has accepted Osborne's spending envelope. Yet, Miliband has guaranteed him his job up to the election. That seems odd for a "ruthless" winner.
What's the phrase?
Weak, weak, weak.0 -
One problem.Mick_Pork said:
SLAB and SCONs endless negativity and scare stories aren't detail.CarlottaVance said:Which rather appears to be how the SNP are playing independence.
SLAB and SCON don't have to make the case for independence - the SNP do - and you yourself have said 'the campaign hasn't started yet".
Leaving it all to the last few months is very "brave".
0 -
I think the relationship between Dave and George is clearly a lot closer than the two Eds. Indeed it is probably the only good relationship between PM and Chancellor in a couple of decades.Mick_Pork said:
Same reason Cammie won't axe the toxic liability Osbrowne.Scott_P said:
He won't. Too weak.foxinsoxuk said:
I would like to see Ed Miliband demonstrate his ruthlessness by axing yesterdays man, Ed Balls.
I am sure that you are right in that Osborne is not popular in Glasgow, but I suspect no Tory Chancellor would be, or a LibDem such as Alexander would be. There are very few marginals near Glasgow, and as we are constantly reminded FPTP rules. How his policies are seen in marginals such as Loughborough and Broxtowe will determine the next election.
The fact that George has got over the Omnishambles and all three Westminster parties have accepted the austerity programme, shows who has the momentum. George has the wind in his sails, while Balls has run out of puff. 2 years out from an election, with the economy improving, albeit still with significant issues he will be sitting a lot more comfortably than Balls.0 -
1. That is a suprise. Shame the polling doesn't agree with Cammie on OsbrowneCarlottaVance said:
No.Mick_Pork said:
Same reason Cammie won't axe the toxic liability Osbrowne.Scott_P said:
He won't. Too weak.foxinsoxuk said:
I would like to see Ed Miliband demonstrate his ruthlessness by axing yesterdays man, Ed Balls.
1. Cameron does not share your analysis of Osborne (how's the burger story doing btw)
2. Cameron and Osborne are mates.
(how did the pasty story do during Osbrowne's omnishambles BTW?)
2. You think the chumocracy is a plus do you? Just you keep right on thinking that dear.
0 -
You think they're going to be able to get through the campaign without making a positive case for the status quo? It would explain having a 'winner' like Iain Gray back on the team.CarlottaVance said:SLAB and SCON don't have to make the case for independence
It how Mr Smithson made his cash in 2011. That was when SLAB were busy congratulating themselves for their brilliant campaign strategy and seemingly inevitable victory a couple of months out from the result when they had double digit leads.CarlottaVance said:Leaving it all to the last few months is very "brave".
0 -
Welcome back Stuart. You've been missed.0
-
@Mick_Pork - so the SNP are treating the independence referendum like an opposition party in a GE - interesting, thanks!0
-
And infinitely better than the mutual loathing that Blair and Brown had for each other. Yet that didn't stop labour from winning with the two in place while Cammie and Osbrowne being such close chums didn't stop the tories failure to win a majority.foxinsoxuk said:
I think the relationship between Dave and George is clearly a lot closer than the two Eds.Mick_Pork said:
Same reason Cammie won't axe the toxic liability Osbrowne.Scott_P said:
He won't. Too weak.foxinsoxuk said:
I would like to see Ed Miliband demonstrate his ruthlessness by axing yesterdays man, Ed Balls.
The chancellor isn't more important than the PM and the shadow chancellor isn't more important than the opposition leader.
Remind me of Osbrowne's stratospheric approval ratings for the UK as a whole since you seem to think he's only unpopular in Glasgow?
0 -
I understand why excessive coverage on matters Scottish can be off putting to those in darkest Surrey, and it is good to get a nice variation in views and opinions. I sadly note that having an interest in views other than one's own is rare, but a pat on the back to Tim who is not afraid to offer at least faint praise to those he does not agree with.Roger said:Welcome back Stuart. You've been missed.
Others, Carlotta and Fitalass et al please take note, could learn from Tim on that point.-1 -
So in your obvious desperation you're reduced to straw man idiocy by putting your own inept tory spin of things into other people's mouths - interesting, thanks!CarlottaVance said:@Mick_Pork - so the SNP are treating the independence referendum like an opposition party in a GE - interesting, thanks!
0 -
I think you are right in not expecting changes in these two before an election, and the arithmatic is such that it is hard to see the Tories making net gains.tim said:@foxinsox
Cameron was happy to let Osborne cost the Tories a majority last time and will be happy to do so again.
Ed Balls is likely to cost Labour a majority. I suspect that Ed Miliband will dump Balls before the next election, but not yet. Balls is a Brownian style plotter and needs to be ditched close enough to an election that he cannot be openly disloyal. Balls on the backbenches now would be a problem but in autumn 2014 much less so.0 -
After his three years at the helm as Chancellor of the Exchequer, it is indeed shocking to hear Osborne freely admit in his Sky interview, featured here by Mick Pork, that:
"At the moment, sadly, the Public Finances are in a mess - we've got the worst Public Finances in Europe believe it or not, worse even than Italy"
Hardly the sort of statement that is likely to instill confidence in the minds of Britain's creditors and one which will surely go down as being his own "Liam Byrne" moment.0 -
http://www.troyres.com.au/Stuart_Dickson said:
Personally, I just don't have the liquidity to participate at the moment as I am currently buying gold mining stocks like a madman. The figures look dire at the moment, but I expect I will be grinning like a Cheshire cat by Hogmanay.
Do your own research0 -
How on Earth can it be too close to call? PB Tories keep telling us that Dave is a great asset and Ed is a liability. Doesn't add up, maybe the the PB Tories are wrong.0
-
@tim
It's also never going to change. It's far too late for that now. Small movements up or down will not change the underlying toxicity.
Once the public has made it's mind up on a politician then that's pretty much that. Osbrowne will remain toxic to the voters just like Clegg will. No amount of relaunches, radio phone-ins or 'man of the people' humburger tweets will change it.
If Cammie thought it was hard to keep Osbrowne away from the cameras as much as possible when he was shadow chancellor then he's going to find it ten times harder to do with Osbrowne as Chancellor.0 -
I did say that no Chancellor is going to be popular in time of austerity, but I expect that Georges ratings are higher in Loughborough and Broxtowe than Glasgow.Mick_Pork said:
And infinitely better than the mutual loathing that Blair and Brown had for each other. Yet that didn't stop labour from winning with the two in place while Cammie and Osbrowne being such close chums didn't stop the tories failure to win a majority.foxinsoxuk said:
I think the relationship between Dave and George is clearly a lot closer than the two Eds.Mick_Pork said:
Same reason Cammie won't axe the toxic liability Osbrowne.Scott_P said:
He won't. Too weak.foxinsoxuk said:
I would like to see Ed Miliband demonstrate his ruthlessness by axing yesterdays man, Ed Balls.
The chancellor isn't more important than the PM and the shadow chancellor isn't more important than the opposition leader.
Remind me of Osbrowne's stratospheric approval ratings for the UK as a whole since you seem to think he's only unpopular in Glasgow?
In Scotland it looks as if the LibDems are not going too well, and the Tories are a rump with little prospect of improvement. The significance of the independence referendum (a coalition rather than Labour initiative) on the 2015 election is that a vote for independence will make a Labour govt in rUK much less achievable.
A vote for the union would be interesting. Clearly it would make a Westminster Labour govt very likely, in part because of the SLAB MPs, and in part the loss of a referendum would very likely lead to serious infighting in the SNP. Parties that lose elections on such fundamental issues always have bitter disputes afterwards and the SNP lost a lot of seats and support after losing the 78 referendum.
If Scotland votes "yes" to independence, then expect George to be scoffing burgers in Downing street for another 5 years.0 -
The creditors that matter will have done their own analysis and come to that conclusion already. For example (although from January 2010 - and Bill Gross is at one end of the spectrum, but Pimco really matters):peter_from_putney said:After his three years at the helm as Chancellor of the Exchequer, it is indeed shocking to hear Osborne freely admit in his Sky interview, featured here by Mick Pork, that:
"At the moment, sadly, the Public Finances are in a mess - we've got the worst Public Finances in Europe believe it or not, worse even than Italy"
Hardly the sort of statement that is likely to instill confidence in the minds of Britain's creditors and one which will surely go down as being his own "Liam Byrne" moment.
The government's hopes of claiming credit for reviving the British economy suffered a severe blow today when the world's biggest buyers of bonds warned that the UK was a "must to avoid" for his investors as its debt was "resting on a bed of nitroglycerine".
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2010/jan/26/uk-economy-debt-bob-gross0 -
Unfortunately not quoted in London.
0 -
Also Clegg is notable for his absence in the article. He's still hanging on for some reason, despite being less popular than anyone ever. LDs seem stuck.0
-
PS Someone in CCHQ needs sacking. The whole fake hamburger/ date night stuff is genuinely embarrassing. It some PR bods bright idea, possibly the same person who told Brown to smile more. Osborne's job is NOT to be liked. End rant.0
-
0
-
Ed knifing his brother is significant - it was the last thing Ed did other than dither or call for a judge led enquiry.
0 -
That's one way to put it. Little Danny might be well advised to give Lembit a call around 2015 to see if he still has all those contacts for reality shows and other means of employment.foxinsoxuk said:In Scotland it looks as if the LibDems are not going too well
I've said it before on here but anyone who thinks they know for certain how the independence vote (either way) will affect 2015 VI for scotland is talking through their posterior. It is a completely unpredictable factor. We just don't know. You can make theories but at the end of the day you might just be better watching the actual VI polling.foxinsoxuk said:on the 2015 election is that a vote for independence will make a Labour govt in rUK much less achievable.
0 -
The best explanation I've heard is that Ed didn't really expect to win - he wanted to do well enough that no one could criticise David for giving him a senior role. IIRC, he seemed pretty surprised in some of the original photos of the night.TGOHF said:Ed knifing his brother is significant - it was the last thing Ed did other than dither or call for a judge led enquiry.
0 -
All Ed did was put his name on the ballot. The unions put his picture on the envelopes.TGOHF said:Ed knifing his brother is significant - it was the last thing Ed did other than dither or call for a judge led enquiry.
@PeterWatt123
The Falkirk selection appears to be finally shining a light on the reality of power blocks in the Labour Party.
Ed is, always has been, and always will be, a union puppet0 -
"The creditors that matter will have done their own analysis and come to that conclusion already."
Indeed so, but it is shocking in my view to hear the CotE spell things out in such stark terms and furthermore to admit that in the overall scheme of things such little progress has seemingly been achieved over the past three years
0 -
As we will see over the thread our left leaning friends will struggle to post anything positive about red just the usual fop/toff bitterness. Like Labour they refuse to address the issues of the day.0
-
They do spend rather a lot of energy attacking someone they claim isn't a threat.tim said:
Despite all of your repetition of Tory Press Office tweets Miliband has led Cameron on leader approval (Mori, gold standard) every month since the omnishambles budget.Scott_P said:
All Ed did was put his name on the ballot. The unions put his picture on the envelopes.TGOHF said:Ed knifing his brother is significant - it was the last thing Ed did other than dither or call for a judge led enquiry.
@PeterWatt123
The Falkirk selection appears to be finally shining a light on the reality of power blocks in the Labour Party.
Ed is, always has been, and always will be, a union puppet
Why do you think that is?
0 -
A vote for independence would either return SLAB or SNP MPs for nearly all the Scottish seats, but it matters little which. Any Westminster govt formed with either of those in a majority would only last as long as those MPs were in Westminster, and I could not see it lasting more than months, as the Independence bill would have to be in the first Queens speech.Mick_Pork said:
That's one way to put it. Little Danny might be well advised to give Lembit a call around 2015 to see if he still has all those contacts for reality shows and other means of employment.foxinsoxuk said:In Scotland it looks as if the LibDems are not going too well
I've said it before on here but anyone who thinks they know for certain how the independence vote (either way) will affect 2015 VI for scotland is talking through their posterior. It is a completely unpredictable factor. We just don't know. You can make theories but at the end of the day you might just be better watching the actual VI polling.foxinsoxuk said:on the 2015 election is that a vote for independence will make a Labour govt in rUK much less achievable.
A vote for separation would make English votes for English Laws a very likely manifesto policy for the Conservatives, which in the aftermath of a vote for separation would be very popular, particularly amongst the wavering Kippers.0 -
*titters*peter_from_putney said:After his three years at the helm as Chancellor of the Exchequer, it is indeed shocking to hear Osborne freely admit in his Sky interview, featured here by Mick Pork, that:
"At the moment, sadly, the Public Finances are in a mess - we've got the worst Public Finances in Europe believe it or not, worse even than Italy"
Hardly the sort of statement that is likely to instill confidence in the minds of Britain's creditors and one which will surely go down as being his own "Liam Byrne" moment.
It's like private eye brought to life. What devastating satire.
Now explain why despite saying that he backed labour's spending plans and committed the tories to increasing spending?
Take your time.
0 -
Brown was crap - utter crap. Yet we had to suffer his ruinous stint as theJonathan said:
They do spend rather a lot of energy attacking someone they claim isn't a threat.tim said:
Despite all of your repetition of Tory Press Office tweets Miliband has led Cameron on leader approval (Mori, gold standard) every month since the omnishambles budget.Scott_P said:
All Ed did was put his name on the ballot. The unions put his picture on the envelopes.TGOHF said:Ed knifing his brother is significant - it was the last thing Ed did other than dither or call for a judge led enquiry.
@PeterWatt123
The Falkirk selection appears to be finally shining a light on the reality of power blocks in the Labour Party.
Ed is, always has been, and always will be, a union puppet
Why do you think that is?
worst PM ever.
I'm dreading crap PM Ed - he will take us down the Hollande route.0 -
Think of it like this: we were previously slipping down a scree slope towards a sheer drop.peter_from_putney said:"The creditors that matter will have done their own analysis and come to that conclusion already."
Indeed so, but it is shocking in my view to hear the CotE spell things out in such stark terms and furthermore to admit that in the overall scheme of things such little progress has seemingly been achieved over the past three years
We've managed to flip over and dig into the slope so we're not slipping down anymore.
But we're still on the scree, and the safe path is a long way up.
So now we have to climb back. It'll be difficult. And dangerous. And there's no room for error.
Does that help?0 -
I'd rather own Ozzies as a hedge though.Charles said:
Really? The AUS $ is very strong at present but very vulnerable to a popping of the Australian commodity boom and housing bubble.
As far as gold shares go, I have some Petropavlovsk, which have lost 58% by value over the last 3 months, despite them having hedged the majority of their production at near $500 above the current gold price. I would only buy more after seeing a turnaround in the gold price, which I cannot see happening in the foreseeable, but do your own research.0 -
He committed to Labour spending plans at a different time, in a different era. If we were all blessed with perfect foresight we'd be on a beach somewhere sunning ourselves, not bashing away at a keyboard.Mick_Pork said:
*titters*peter_from_putney said:After his three years at the helm as Chancellor of the Exchequer, it is indeed shocking to hear Osborne freely admit in his Sky interview, featured here by Mick Pork, that:
"At the moment, sadly, the Public Finances are in a mess - we've got the worst Public Finances in Europe believe it or not, worse even than Italy"
Hardly the sort of statement that is likely to instill confidence in the minds of Britain's creditors and one which will surely go down as being his own "Liam Byrne" moment.
It's like private eye brought to life. What devastating satire.
Now explain why despite saying that he backed labour's spending plans and committed the tories to increasing spending?
Take your time.
Increased spending: debt interest he couldn't do anything about. Increasing welfare allowances at 5.2% in hindsight was a mistake (and lots of people criticised him at the time).
Those two items explain the rise in total spending. But in real terms, overall government spending will fall over the life of this parliament.
In terms of the cuts, the ringfence around the NHS and the DfID increases explain the severity of the cuts on the unprotected departments. Both can - and are - criticised. I see the political logic for the NHS ringfence (especially as given healthcare inflation is typically higher than normal inflation it's pretty painful anyway). DfID I struggle to understand why they haven't made a concessions (e.g. delaying achievement of the 0.7% target by a couple of years).
0 -
@foxinsoxuk
*sigh*
Try looking up what the McKay commission was set up by Cammie and Clegg to do.
You could also educate yourself with this which blows apart the myth that scottish MPs are crucial to the makeup of westminster election results.
http://wingsoverscotland.com/why-labour-doesnt-need-scotland/
0 -
That rather reminds me of "Touching the Void". Dug into the slope, but progress impossible due to the weight hanging below. Therefore cut the rope, let the weight fall and save yourself.Charles said:
Think of it like this: we were previously slipping down a scree slope towards a sheer drop.peter_from_putney said:"The creditors that matter will have done their own analysis and come to that conclusion already."
Indeed so, but it is shocking in my view to hear the CotE spell things out in such stark terms and furthermore to admit that in the overall scheme of things such little progress has seemingly been achieved over the past three years
We've managed to flip over and dig into the slope so we're not slipping down anymore.
But we're still on the scree, and the safe path is a long way up.
So now we have to climb back. It'll be difficult. And dangerous. And there's no room for error.
Does that help?
Any similarity between this scenario and the Britain<->EU relationship is purely coincidental. :-)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Touching_the_Void0 -
Charles: "Think of it like this: we were previously slipping down a scree slope towards a sheer drop.
We've managed to flip over and dig into the slope so we're not slipping down anymore.
But we're still on the scree, and the safe path is a long way up.
So now we have to climb back. It'll be difficult. And dangerous. And there's no room for error.
Does that help?"
Yes thanks, it helps I suppose, I just hadn't realised that our position was even more desperate than that of Italy ...... how bloody depressing.
0 -
Really? The AUS $ is very strong at present but very vulnerable to a popping of the Australian commodity boom and housing bubble.foxinsoxuk said:
I'd rather own Ozzies as a hedge though.Charles said:
As far as gold shares go, I have some Petropavlovsk, which have lost 58% by value over the last 3 months, despite them having hedged the majority of their production at near $500 above the current gold price. I would only buy more after seeing a turnaround in the gold price, which I cannot see happening in the foreseeable, but do your own research.
We bought into Troy at just under $2 per share, have taken all our money and more off the table on the way up. I think it's a good company, but am selling down rather than buying more at the moment, because I want to manage exposure limits (we invested 2 units, it turned into 5, and we are now back down at 3, but I'd still rather have 1 unit per investment).
Just posted it because Stuart is a buyer of gold mining & he might not have noticed this one because it's pretty obscure.0 -
Osborne backed Browns spending plans in 2007, for very much the same reason that Ed Miliband backed Osbornes spending plans last week. Oppositions always do!Mick_Pork said:
*titters*peter_from_putney said:After his three years at the helm as Chancellor of the Exchequer, it is indeed shocking to hear Osborne freely admit in his Sky interview, featured here by Mick Pork, that:
"At the moment, sadly, the Public Finances are in a mess - we've got the worst Public Finances in Europe believe it or not, worse even than Italy"
Hardly the sort of statement that is likely to instill confidence in the minds of Britain's creditors and one which will surely go down as being his own "Liam Byrne" moment.
It's like private eye brought to life. What devastating satire.
Now explain why despite saying that he backed labour's spending plans and committed the tories to increasing spending?
Take your time.
Most govt spending is in the medium to long term, or determined by existing statutes and policies on welfare, pensions and health. It takes at least a year in office before any significant changes can be made.
0 -
Or to put it more accurately he did some panic triangulation way too far out from the general election and paid the price.Charles said:
He committed to Labour spending plans at a different time, in a different era. If we were all blessed with perfect foresight we'd be on a beach somewhere sunning ourselves, not bashing away at a keyboard.Mick_Pork said:
*titters*peter_from_putney said:After his three years at the helm as Chancellor of the Exchequer, it is indeed shocking to hear Osborne freely admit in his Sky interview, featured here by Mick Pork, that:
"At the moment, sadly, the Public Finances are in a mess - we've got the worst Public Finances in Europe believe it or not, worse even than Italy"
Hardly the sort of statement that is likely to instill confidence in the minds of Britain's creditors and one which will surely go down as being his own "Liam Byrne" moment.
It's like private eye brought to life. What devastating satire.
Now explain why despite saying that he backed labour's spending plans and committed the tories to increasing spending?
Take your time.
As has already been pointed out.
0 -
We bought into Tory at just under $2 per share, have taken all our money and more off the table on the way up. I think it's a good company, but am selling down rather than buying more at the moment, because I want to manage exposure limits (we invested 2 units, it turned into 5, and we are now back down at 3, but I'd still rather have 1 unit per investment).Charles said:
Really? The AUS $ is very strong at present but very vulnerable to a popping of the Australian commodity boom and housing bubble.foxinsoxuk said:
I'd rather own Ozzies as a hedge though.Charles said:
As far as gold shares go, I have some Petropavlovsk, which have lost 58% by value over the last 3 months, despite them having hedged the majority of their production at near $500 above the current gold price. I would only buy more after seeing a turnaround in the gold price, which I cannot see happening in the foreseeable, but do your own research.
Just posted it because Stuart is a buyer of gold mining & he might not have noticed this one because it's pretty obscure.
The volatility of the gold price is such that smaller gold mining companies must be very exposed to risk. The bigger companies with more robust finances are surely safer, but of course less upside. You pays your money and makes your choice!
My investment in stocks is in my self managed ISAs so a much smaller scale than yours I expect!0 -
If only Osborne had shied away from accepting the spending envelope, Cameron might be PM now.
Oh, wait...0 -
Depends what you are hedging.... ;-)tim said:@foxinsox
"Really? The AUS $ is very strong at present but very vulnerable to a popping of the Australian commodity boom and housing bubble."
And vulnerable to China.
I wouldn't touch Australian property or currency with a barge pole.
Of the 39 housing markets studied in Australia, all were rated as either "seriously" or "severely" unaffordable, based on median house price to annual household income ratios of more than four times.
The average ratio for all Australian markets is 5.6 times, which rises to 6.5 times in the large capital cities.
0 -
LOL, ruthless, he is a donkey. Look at his team , look at the guff he spouts. He is useless and just a puppet, bad as Cameron and his champagne chums may be, god help us if we have Donkey Dave as PM.foxinsoxuk said:
I have never thought Ed Miliband weak, indeed l rather like his ruthless streak.MikeSmithson said:Good piece David though I am less sure that things are as close as you suggest.
The Ashcroft polling was almost certainly done by YouGov which for whatever reason seems to rate Tory figures better in ratings than Labour ones.
Thus Ipsos-MORI and ComRes have Balls leading Osborne as best Chancellor while YouGov is the other way round.
What amuses me is that at the same time EdM is attacked for being weak and also the murder of his brother. He can't be both.
The really weak leader is Cameron - just look at how he handled his last reshuffle.
The idea that he was wrong to stand against his brother and win is risible. David had ample opportunity to stand against Brown, notably in the notorious coronation of 2007. Ed stood fair and square and won according to the rules. The idea that he should have had to defer to his elder brother is ridiculous in a democratic party. Primogeniture only applies to hereditary positions, and while there is nepotism in the Labour party it should not go that far.
I would like to see Ed Miliband demonstrate his ruthlessness by axing yesterdays man, Ed Balls. The closer to the election we get the bigger liability Balls is. He contradicted the lead that Miliband gave on fiscal sanity the very next day, and it is not tenable to have the LOTO and shadow chancellor disagreeing on such fundamentals in public. For all their faults Dave and George are clearly friends as well as colleagues and agree on policy fundamentals.
A characteristically good article DH.0 -
No, they don't. Blair started the modern trend with the 97 labour manifesto pledge to match tory spending plans for the first two years while not putting up either the basic or higher rate of income tax. His clones have continued it but the timing and the extent of such pledges and triangulation is usually the biggest factor in causing them to be such hostages to fortune.foxinsoxuk said:
Osborne backed Browns spending plans in 2007, for very much the same reason that Ed Miliband backed Osbornes spending plans last week. Oppositions always do!Mick_Pork said:
*titters*peter_from_putney said:After his three years at the helm as Chancellor of the Exchequer, it is indeed shocking to hear Osborne freely admit in his Sky interview, featured here by Mick Pork, that:
"At the moment, sadly, the Public Finances are in a mess - we've got the worst Public Finances in Europe believe it or not, worse even than Italy"
Hardly the sort of statement that is likely to instill confidence in the minds of Britain's creditors and one which will surely go down as being his own "Liam Byrne" moment.
It's like private eye brought to life. What devastating satire.
Now explain why despite saying that he backed labour's spending plans and committed the tories to increasing spending?
Take your time.
0 -
welcome back Stuart. I do not get your numbers, may be because it is early and I am not awake. If you put £900 on No , you need to put £225 on Yes to cover yourself and therefore if No wins you are down £25, Yes wins you break even. Am I missing something.Stuart_Dickson said:The Gray/Salmond leadership ratings were a "magic measure" in early 2011. Far more indicative of the earthquake that was about to happen than the far more heavily reported Lab/SNP VI figures.
The Lamont/Salmond leadership ratings are a lot tighter right now, but Lamont looks like a sprinter and in politics the marathon athlete usually triumphs.
Due to those two 200,000 GBP bets placed at Hills and Ladbrokes shops in Scotland, reported by Mike, we have a small arbitrage on the indyref market (just under 2%).
Personally, I just don't have the liquidity to participate at the moment as I am currently buying gold mining stocks like a madman. The figures look dire at the moment, but I expect I will be grinning like a Cheshire cat by Hogmanay.
For those interested in the 2% arb, you can currently back 'Yes' at 4/1 with either Hills or Ladbrokes, and 'No' at 2/9 with either Stan James or Bet365. I suspect that you might have difficulty getting a useful sum on 'No' with those two bookies, but it is worth a look.
I would not recommend backing 'No' at current prices without the hedge, as (excluding the DKs/WNVs) the polls are pointing to a 55/45 victory for Alistair Darling's Better Together campaign. And that makes the 2/9 price look extremely stingy.0 -
Out of the danger zone you mean.Charles said:
Think of it like this: we were previously slipping down a scree slope towards a sheer drop.peter_from_putney said:"The creditors that matter will have done their own analysis and come to that conclusion already."
Indeed so, but it is shocking in my view to hear the CotE spell things out in such stark terms and furthermore to admit that in the overall scheme of things such little progress has seemingly been achieved over the past three years
We've managed to flip over and dig into the slope so we're not slipping down anymore.
But we're still on the scree, and the safe path is a long way up.
So now we have to climb back. It'll be difficult. And dangerous. And there's no room for error.
Does that help?
0 -
If only Osbrowne had shied away from accepting the spending envelope, Cameron might have a tory majority now.
Oh, wait...0 -
He is right about Falkirk though, real union fixing skullduggery there. Be interesting to see if Ed will take the fight to Unite.tim said:
Despite all of your repetition of Tory Press Office tweets Miliband has led Cameron on leader approval (Mori, gold standard) every month since the omnishambles budget.Scott_P said:
All Ed did was put his name on the ballot. The unions put his picture on the envelopes.TGOHF said:Ed knifing his brother is significant - it was the last thing Ed did other than dither or call for a judge led enquiry.
@PeterWatt123
The Falkirk selection appears to be finally shining a light on the reality of power blocks in the Labour Party.
Ed is, always has been, and always will be, a union puppet
Why do you think that is?0 -
@Stuart_Dickson
Welcome back! I was saying only yesterday in another place that I missed your contributions. I think you are being very brave investing in gold though. If the China shadow banking bubble bursts, as I fear it will, the price will collapse, big time as more gold than you can shake a stick at is dumped.
@Charles That was my suggestion about Ed and David the other day (and on other days) almost word for word. I don't claim it is an original thought.
@Peter_from_Putney Our deficit is much worse that Italy's and indeed almost everyone else's in Europe. Although it is has come down theirs have come down too, often faster under pressure from the ECB. But Italy's debt is much worse than ours and we can avoid default by printing our own money. It is not a great situation to be in and it is good to see Osborne being frank about it but it is better than Italy's.
I am not entirely sure that I know precisely what figures David Herdson has based his figures on. Some of the figures quoted from Yougov yesterday were shocking. IIRC something like 9% thought Labour were capable of making a tough decision. Surely that must be a reflection on the leadership. Furthermore it was heading in the wrong direction. Ditto the tories who were in the 40s.0 -
No. But not sliding uncontrollable towards catastropheMick_Pork said:
Out of the danger zone you mean.Charles said:
Think of it like this: we were previously slipping down a scree slope towards a sheer drop.peter_from_putney said:"The creditors that matter will have done their own analysis and come to that conclusion already."
Indeed so, but it is shocking in my view to hear the CotE spell things out in such stark terms and furthermore to admit that in the overall scheme of things such little progress has seemingly been achieved over the past three years
We've managed to flip over and dig into the slope so we're not slipping down anymore.
But we're still on the scree, and the safe path is a long way up.
So now we have to climb back. It'll be difficult. And dangerous. And there's no room for error.
Does that help?0 -
I think you mean Donkey Ed! Wrong Miliband.malcolmg said:
LOL, ruthless, he is a donkey. Look at his team , look at the guff he spouts. He is useless and just a puppet, bad as Cameron and his champagne chums may be, god help us if we have Donkey Dave as PM.foxinsoxuk said:
I have never thought Ed Miliband weak, indeed l rather like his ruthless streak.MikeSmithson said:Good piece David though I am less sure that things are as close as you suggest.
The Ashcroft polling was almost certainly done by YouGov which for whatever reason seems to rate Tory figures better in ratings than Labour ones.
Thus Ipsos-MORI and ComRes have Balls leading Osborne as best Chancellor while YouGov is the other way round.
What amuses me is that at the same time EdM is attacked for being weak and also the murder of his brother. He can't be both.
The really weak leader is Cameron - just look at how he handled his last reshuffle.
The idea that he was wrong to stand against his brother and win is risible. David had ample opportunity to stand against Brown, notably in the notorious coronation of 2007. Ed stood fair and square and won according to the rules. The idea that he should have had to defer to his elder brother is ridiculous in a democratic party. Primogeniture only applies to hereditary positions, and while there is nepotism in the Labour party it should not go that far.
I would like to see Ed Miliband demonstrate his ruthlessness by axing yesterdays man, Ed Balls. The closer to the election we get the bigger liability Balls is. He contradicted the lead that Miliband gave on fiscal sanity the very next day, and it is not tenable to have the LOTO and shadow chancellor disagreeing on such fundamentals in public. For all their faults Dave and George are clearly friends as well as colleagues and agree on policy fundamentals.
A characteristically good article DH.
I think Ed does have some ruthlessness in him. He is not a Brownian brooding plotter, but he did get to the top, and that in itself shows a degree of steel. Much more than his cowardly brother.0 -
Admirably fair article by David.0
-
which side is behind in the polls? Cue post from Mick_Pork on "the campaign has not started yet" QEDMick_Pork said:
So in your obvious desperation you're reduced to straw man idiocy by putting your own inept tory spin of things into other people's mouths - interesting, thanks!CarlottaVance said:@Mick_Pork - so the SNP are treating the independence referendum like an opposition party in a GE - interesting, thanks!
0 -
The better Miliband won and Ed is doing a not unreasonable job leading Labour which, unlike all previous election defeats after leaving government, has not torn itself to pieces. That's quite an achievement.
But he has yet to make any significant impact with the wider public, has shown precious few signs of decisiveness or political courage, and hence trails his party.
Will all that prevent him from becoming PM? Of course not, but it doesn't help.0 -
Ah, that helps! Cheers @foxinsoxuk. Perhaps it's easier just to use real names so we don't have to guess so much around here, eh?foxinsoxuk said:I think you mean Donkey Ed! Wrong Miliband.
Mind you, the BBC make the same David/Ed mistake regularly so @malcolmg is in distinguished company!
0 -
Since Kinnock/Smith lost the 92 "tax bombshell", it has been the way.Mick_Pork said:
No, they don't. Blair started the modern trend with the 97 labour manifesto pledge to match tory spending plans for the first two years while not putting up either the basic or higher rate of income tax. His clones have continued it but the timing and the extent of such pledges and triangulation is usually the biggest factor in causing them to be such hostages to fortune.foxinsoxuk said:
Osborne backed Browns spending plans in 2007, for very much the same reason that Ed Miliband backed Osbornes spending plans last week. Oppositions always do!Mick_Pork said:
*titters*peter_from_putney said:After his three years at the helm as Chancellor of the Exchequer, it is indeed shocking to hear Osborne freely admit in his Sky interview, featured here by Mick Pork, that:
"At the moment, sadly, the Public Finances are in a mess - we've got the worst Public Finances in Europe believe it or not, worse even than Italy"
Hardly the sort of statement that is likely to instill confidence in the minds of Britain's creditors and one which will surely go down as being his own "Liam Byrne" moment.
It's like private eye brought to life. What devastating satire.
Now explain why despite saying that he backed labour's spending plans and committed the tories to increasing spending?
Take your time.
Brown led by making spending reviews long term rather than short term, and now budgetary changes are announced a year or two in advance. This does tie the hands of an incoming govt for over a year.
And don't forget that regaining the nations confidence on matters economic was a key part of the 97 strategy. For 20 years Labour lost that, from 77 onwards, and regaining it this time will be no easier.
Miliband did the right thing to accept the spending review. It is not popular with his party, but shows his thirst for govt, and that he is willing to be strong in pursuit of his objective. He has a lackluster front bench behind him, which will be a problem.0 -
Even my Italian neighbours laugh at the prospect of EdM being PM , and they have had Berlusconi for years.They cannot believe the "Piccolo" is a contender0
-
CarlottaVance said:
which side is behind in the westminster VI polls? labour or the tories? Cue post from scottish tory Carlotta on "the campaign has not started yet" QEDMick_Pork said:
So in your obvious desperation you're reduced to straw man idiocy by putting your own inept tory spin of things into other people's mouths - interesting, thanks!CarlottaVance said:@Mick_Pork - so the SNP are treating the independence referendum like an opposition party in a GE - interesting, thanks!
0 -
Former ALP frontbencher Greg Combet, a prominent trade union secretary and author of the carbon tax, is to leave Australian politics at the election
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-06-29/greg-combet-quits-politics/47895420 -
No, I say "my sides got work to do" - you just bluster.Mick_Pork said:which side is behind in the westminster VI polls? labour or the tories? Cue post from scottish tory Carlotta on "the campaign has not started yet" QED
But thanks for the insight that the SNP are approaching independence like an opposition party approaches a GE - explains a lot!
0 -
It became a new labour nostrum and it overlooks that labour might have won in 97 if they had a monkey in a fetching red hat as leader.foxinsoxuk said:
And don't forget that regaining the nations confidence on matters economic was a key part of the 97 strategy. For 20 years Labour lost that, from 77 onwards, and regaining it this time will be no easier.Mick_Pork said:
No, they don't. Blair started the modern trend with the 97 labour manifesto pledge to match tory spending plans for the first two years while not putting up either the basic or higher rate of income tax. His clones have continued it but the timing and the extent of such pledges and triangulation is usually the biggest factor in causing them to be such hostages to fortune.foxinsoxuk said:
Osborne backed Browns spending plans in 2007, for very much the same reason that Ed Miliband backed Osbornes spending plans last week. Oppositions always do!Mick_Pork said:
*titters*peter_from_putney said:After his three years at the helm as Chancellor of the Exchequer, it is indeed shocking to hear Osborne freely admit in his Sky interview, featured here by Mick Pork, that:
"At the moment, sadly, the Public Finances are in a mess - we've got the worst Public Finances in Europe believe it or not, worse even than Italy"
Hardly the sort of statement that is likely to instill confidence in the minds of Britain's creditors and one which will surely go down as being his own "Liam Byrne" moment.
It's like private eye brought to life. What devastating satire.
Now explain why despite saying that he backed labour's spending plans and committed the tories to increasing spending?
Take your time.
Yet you don't seem to think Cammie was right by accepting labour's spending plans?foxinsoxuk said:Miliband did the right thing to accept the spending review. It is not popular with his party, but shows his thirst for govt, and that he is willing to be strong in pursuit of his objective. He has a lackluster front bench behind him, which will be a problem.
Two years out it's hardly all about whether little Ed can posture against his party to try and slide to the right, it's about triangulating on a moving target. He may yet come to regret it in a huge way.
0 -
It was deliberate, just a case of who would be the biggest donkey, two cheeks of the same arse, both useless and highlight all that is wrong with this country. Halfwits like these can get to the position of leading the country without having ever done anything or even shown any talent.foxinsoxuk said:
I think you mean Donkey Ed! Wrong Miliband.malcolmg said:
LOL, ruthless, he is a donkey. Look at his team , look at the guff he spouts. He is useless and just a puppet, bad as Cameron and his champagne chums may be, god help us if we have Donkey Dave as PM.foxinsoxuk said:
I have never thought Ed Miliband weak, indeed l rather like his ruthless streak.MikeSmithson said:Good piece David though I am less sure that things are as close as you suggest.
The Ashcroft polling was almost certainly done by YouGov which for whatever reason seems to rate Tory figures better in ratings than Labour ones.
Thus Ipsos-MORI and ComRes have Balls leading Osborne as best Chancellor while YouGov is the other way round.
What amuses me is that at the same time EdM is attacked for being weak and also the murder of his brother. He can't be both.
The really weak leader is Cameron - just look at how he handled his last reshuffle.
The idea that he was wrong to stand against his brother and win is risible. David had ample opportunity to stand against Brown, notably in the notorious coronation of 2007. Ed stood fair and square and won according to the rules. The idea that he should have had to defer to his elder brother is ridiculous in a democratic party. Primogeniture only applies to hereditary positions, and while there is nepotism in the Labour party it should not go that far.
I would like to see Ed Miliband demonstrate his ruthlessness by axing yesterdays man, Ed Balls. The closer to the election we get the bigger liability Balls is. He contradicted the lead that Miliband gave on fiscal sanity the very next day, and it is not tenable to have the LOTO and shadow chancellor disagreeing on such fundamentals in public. For all their faults Dave and George are clearly friends as well as colleagues and agree on policy fundamentals.
A characteristically good article DH.
I think Ed does have some ruthlessness in him. He is not a Brownian brooding plotter, but he did get to the top, and that in itself shows a degree of steel. Much more than his cowardly brother.0 -
An interesting, and rather more telling than government spending goes up in a recession shock, chart is the share of GDP the deficit amounts to: http://www.tradingeconomics.com/united-kingdom/government-budget
This provides the numbers for Charles's rather good scree analogy. The government has made real and consistent progress in deficit reduction but the sad fact is that as a share of GDP it is still very high. Closing that gap is going to be painful.
What Osborne is doing is setting an agenda for the next election. If the question then is not who has the best ideas for spending but who do you trust to cut spending further and keep a grip he will have won. I don't recall that being the question since 1979 but acknowledging the continuing extent of the problem is smart politics (as well as being honest of course).0 -
Geoff Dave and Ed are interchangeable donkeys of labour persuasion, different from donkey Dave of the Tory persuasion, however all three are donkeys, Cameron is just the least worst of the three.GeoffM said:
Who is "Donkey Dave", please?malcolmg said:god help us if we have Donkey Dave as PM.
I'm losing track of who we are insulting around here.0 -
I know the work we have to do because I've been on the ground helping campaign petal - You just spin incompetently.CarlottaVance said:
No, I say "my sides got work to do" - you just bluster.Mick_Pork said:which side is behind in the westminster VI polls? labour or the tories? Cue post from scottish tory Carlotta on "the campaign has not started yet" QED
But thanks for the insight that in your obvious desperation you're still reduced to straw man idiocy by putting your own inept tory spin of things into other people's mouths - explains a lot!CarlottaVance said:But thanks for the insight that the SNP are approaching independence like an opposition party approaches a GE - explains a lot!
0 -
0
-
@Mick_Pork - so when will the Yes campaign launch?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-181628320 -
Square Root..He will need a lot of that silver tongued charm when he begins campaigning in Helensburgh.0
-
Golly. That's a new one we've never heard before from the PB tories. You are an original voice.SquareRoot said:@MickP0rk
I hope you use the charm you display here on the doorstep. It will do no end of damage.
I manage perfectly well thanks because curiously enough on the ground in scotland there isn't an overabundance of far right swivel-eyed loons to have to deal with. Like on some political betting sites. Funny that. 0 -
Clues for the hard of thinking:SquareRoot said:@MickP0rk
I hope you use the charm you display here on the doorstep. It will do no end of damage.
The doorstep, someone potentially persuadable with a vote.
PB.com, no votes, no influence, almost completely unpersuadable.
0 -
@Mick_Pork - answer came there none! As usual.....Got those million signatures yet? But once again - thanks for the insight!0
-
@TUD - pity you missed yesterday's discussion on why it appears Scotland has made a decent fist of devolution, while Wales appears to have horlicks it...any thoughts?0
-
In opposition in 2007 without access to the books, it was a reasonable pledge by Osborne.Mick_Pork said:
It became a new labour nostrum and it overlooks that labour might have won in 97 if they had a monkey in a fetching red hat as leader.foxinsoxuk said:
And don't forget that regaining the nations confidence on matters economic was a key part of the 97 strategy. For 20 years Labour lost that, from 77 onwards, and regaining it this time will be no easier.Mick_Pork said:
No, they don't. Blair started the modern trend with the 97 labour manifesto pledge to match tory spending plans for the first two years while not putting up either the basic or higher rate of income tax. His clones have continued it but the timing and the extent of such pledges and triangulation is usually the biggest factor in causing them to be such hostages to fortune.foxinsoxuk said:
Osborne backed Browns spending plans in 2007, for very much the same reason that Ed Miliband backed Osbornes spending plans last week. Oppositions always do!Mick_Pork said:
*titters*peter_from_putney said:After his three years at the helm as Chancellor of the Exchequer, it is indeed shocking to hear Osborne freely admit in his Sky interview, featured here by Mick Pork, that:
"At the moment, sadly, the Public Finances are in a mess - we've got the worst Public Finances in Europe believe it or not, worse even than Italy"
Hardly the sort of statement that is likely to instill confidence in the minds of Britain's creditors and one which will surely go down as being his own "Liam Byrne" moment.
It's like private eye brought to life. What devastating satire.
Now explain why despite saying that he backed labour's spending plans and committed the tories to increasing spending?
Take your time.
Yet you don't seem to think Cammie was right by accepting labour's spending plans?foxinsoxuk said:Miliband did the right thing to accept the spending review. It is not popular with his party, but shows his thirst for govt, and that he is willing to be strong in pursuit of his objective. He has a lackluster front bench behind him, which will be a problem.
Two years out it's hardly all about whether little Ed can posture against his party to try and slide to the right, it's about triangulating on a moving target. He may yet come to regret it in a huge way.
In govt in 2007, with access to the books, it was foolish by Brown/Balls.
But I think it now universally agreed that those 2007 spending plans were foolish, and also universally agreed that austerity is nessecary. That is an important political consensus.
0 -
I didn't follow this particular argument but we should have a pb version of Godwin's law for saying someone is "desperate" or "rattled". It might just work in an argument between actual politicians where somebody actually stands to lose their job if they lose an argument, but when you've got a bunch of random people sitting around arguing about politics on the internet it's quite unlikely they are, and if they were you wouldn't be able to tell and are most likely just projecting.Mick_Pork said:@Carlotta you're just repeating yourself now in your desperation. Why not have a nice cup of tea and "calm down dear" as Cammie would say.
0 -
-
0
-
Theuniondivvie said:
Clues for the hard of thinking:SquareRoot said:@MickP0rk
I hope you use the charm you display here on the doorstep. It will do no end of damage.
The doorstep, someone potentially persuadable with a vote.
PB.com, no votes, no influence, almost completely unpersuadable.
Yup. Even dyed in the wool labour voters can take a leaflet or show an interest. Doesn't mean they are all persuadable of course but there's a marked difference to the hostility some would have you believe if you took Lamont and SLAB too seriously.
It's all to play for and SLAB's continual reluctance to publish their membership numbers hardly bodes well for their ground game.
Though I did once come across a bedecked "better together" Ford Focus scooting through the streets with an operative megaphoning the message to somewhat startled pedestrians.
0
![[Deleted User]](https://w4.vanillicon.com/4006a4f7d70697004a1b548514b04f87_100.png)
