politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » New study suggests that UKIP’s “2020 strategy” is going to

On topic, yes of course there is potential, but it's probably best not to assume that the remaining Labour and Lib Dem voters, or the 2015 Cameron switchers, will be particularly Ukip-inclined. Don't forget that the last time a third force did very well, in 1983 with the SDP-Liberal Alliance, the strong second-place record just led to a diminished second-place record next election. And they did much better than Ukip each time.

FPT Anecdotes work both ways, and it is not just the bottom five or ten per cent or just benefits recipients who feel like they lose out, though it may seem that way from certain communities, which are favourable to the Conservatives.

They won thirty seven per cent support and a ten-seat majority even when the threat of a Scottish say in government was agreed retrospectively by all to be an incredibly powerful force in England. Admittedly, many of the sixty-three per cent are irrelevant to this particular question of public support because they vote for Ukip in Labour safe seats. Still, even they didn't see fit to endow Cameron and chose in many ways a much more pro-traditional economics alternative to either Conservatives or Labour, i.e. protect benefits and the NHS - as long as you're English - what the Europeans call "welfare chauvinism" when the Front National does it.

The UK could be one election away from a Labour minority with the support of every other HoC party, and all the reversal of direction of the centre ground so embodied. Really voters move the centre ground by choosing governments. They go right and they go left and democratic governments tend towards their own reversals as the embodied contradictions build up.

Expectations matter too. There is no doubt that the ten-seat majority gives a much more powerful mandate than it would seem to historically merit, because it was so unexpected and because it succeeded a coalition. So that has its own impact on momentum which the Conservatives ought to use as much as they can in the early years of this government (pre-Europe).

Not at all, Mr. Smithson. They'll do what they did last time, and the six times before that: campaign far too wide, without any real focus, win few if any seats with wide but shallow support, then bitch about the system being unfair.

FPT

EPG said:

The UK could be one election away from a Labour minority with the support of every other HoC party

Certainly it feels significant that the Tories, in any sort of hung parliament situation even if they are largest party, will really struggle to find allies. 2020 at least will be one they have to win outright again I suspect, to have any chance. Relying on the NI unionists is not, well, reliable, should it come down to that.

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. kle4, always baffled me why that hasn't been the case for ages.

Should have been done when equal prize money was awarded - no excuse for not harmonising the number of sets at that time.

It remains hard for UKIP, certainly, and they are currently a little rudderless, but 2 years ago I thought they would win no MPs this time and that they would have to work damn hard to build on that and might break through in 2020, so they are slightly ahead of my expectations in that they still face an uphill battle to win more seats, but have something to work with at least.

Plato said:

For any vintage tennis fans - there's an Arthur Ashe docu on BBC4 http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b060c7kc/arthur-ashe-more-than-a-champion

They showed that a couple of weeks back - interesting viewing, especially his politics.

Wasn't watching the tennis. What's Inverdale been saying?

Sunil_Prasannan said:

williamglenn said:

AndyJS said:

https://twitter.com/NormLucy/status/619876344596463616

Inverdale is dreadful. How can he be a sports commentator when he acts as if he wouldn't even be watching if he wasn't being paid to endure it?

He's OK as a presenter, his highlights programme last year was better than Clare Balding's "Wimbledon2day"!

Don't start me on Wimbledon2day.

Plato said:

For any vintage tennis fans - there's an Arthur Ashe docu on BBC4 http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b060c7kc/arthur-ashe-more-than-a-champion

Watched that last night and must say its v moving, I shed a few tears

Danny565 said:

justin124 said:

Why has Frank Field nominated Jeremy Corbyn? They surely come from very different wings of the party.

People assume he's right-wing just because he's Eurosceptic and mildly more critical of welfare than many in Labour are.

He voted for Ed Miliband last time.

Anyone know who Kate Hoey is supporting?

Lennon said:

Danny565 said:

justin124 said:

Why has Frank Field nominated Jeremy Corbyn? They surely come from very different wings of the party.

People assume he's right-wing just because he's Eurosceptic and mildly more critical of welfare than many in Labour are.

He voted for Ed Miliband last time.

Anyone know who Kate Hoey is supporting?

Andy Burnham, I believe.

SouthamObserver said:

Tremendous from England. Brilliant stuff from an exciting team. I don't think I've seen such promise for a long, long time. Not the final deal yet and they'll lose a few games a long the way, but this is a young, fearless side, and it's just great to see.

Great effort from England following on from the promising warmup series against the Kiwis. As you say not 100% the finished article yet, but that was a great Ashes Test to watch as an England supporter. On to Lord's next.

Notable England scored at more than 4 an over in both innings. Though that is not unheard of in modern Test Cricket, it has not been common for England.

Tim posts a comment on Twitter I'm sure we can all agree with:

https://twitter.com/GOsborneGenius/status/618461469798191104

Sandpit said:

Charles said:

Danny565 said:

justin124 said:

Why has Frank Field nominated Jeremy Corbyn? They surely come from very different wings of the party.

People assume he's right-wing just because he's Eurosceptic and mildly more critical of welfare than many in Labour are.

He voted for Ed Miliband last time.

I think he was also one of the group who felt it was important that the left had a chance to be represented in the contest

Those that wanted him in for that reason are now finding the whole campaign dominated by him, with nominations from unions and the other three contenders all a little bit samey by comparison. Could the election changes made by Miliband after the Falkirk debacle yet come back to haunt the party?

AV mitigates against it.

If he wins, he at least represents most of the party.

If not, they see what proportion of the party wants that stuff, because let's face it his is the opposite of a personality-based campaign.

FWIW, my instinct is that he will now come third. Kendall has shown the vulnerability of a campaign relying on media who like it when Labour people kick their own side. Forgetting perhaps that all the voters were ordinary party members.

NickPalmer said:

justin124 said:

Why has Frank Field nominated Jeremy Corbyn? They surely come from very different wings of the party.

Frank definitely does not belong to a wing - he's Frank. For instance, he is strongly against means-testing benefits, which in a way makes him pro-Universal Credit like IDS, but also makes him critical of welfare cuts in general. As I understand it, he'd favour UC for everyone, with a significantly higher tax level, so that there was no poverty trap (since you wouldn't lose benefit with a rising income) and no jealousy (since everyone would get the benefit). But the tax required would be a huge political challenge, as the Greens have found with their in some ways similar ideas.

The reason he didn't flourish as a Minister is said to be that he wasn't up for the haggling and compromise stuff - he'd lock himself away for a day at a time, and come out with The Solution, accepting no variation. Hague's joke that Blair had told Field to think the unthinkable and then said "That's unthinkable!" when he saw the result had a lot of truth in it. But his strength is the converse of the weakness - you get an absolutely unvarnished, intellectually coherent opinion from him.

Frank Field arguably is partly responsible for John Major becoming PM, 2 days before she was ousted he told Thatcher in No 10 she was doomed and she asked him what she could do. Frank told her that she needed to find an alternative to Heseltine and that alternative was Major. He also tried to replace both Brown and Ed Miliband with Alan Johnson. He is probably the sharpest backbencher on either side of the Commons!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8248795.stm

Plato said:

For any vintage tennis fans - there's an Arthur Ashe docu on BBC4 http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b060c7kc/arthur-ashe-more-than-a-champion

There was a very moving hour special about him on R5 the other night, which (with some relief IMO) managed to get well past the simplistic black man wins Wimbledon angle. As he said himeslf...

"I don't want to be remembered for my tennis accomplishments. That's no contribution to society. That [tennis] was purely selfish; that was for me."

isam said:

HYUFD said:

NickPalmer said:

justin124 said:

Why has Frank Field nominated Jeremy Corbyn? They surely come from very different wings of the party.

Frank definitely does not belong to a wing - he's Frank. For instance, he is strongly against means-testing benefits, which in a way makes him pro-Universal Credit like IDS, but also makes him critical of welfare cuts in general. As I understand it, he'd favour UC for everyone, with a significantly higher tax level, so that there was no poverty trap (since you wouldn't lose benefit with a rising income) and no jealousy (since everyone would get the benefit). But the tax required would be a huge political challenge, as the Greens have found with their in some ways similar ideas.

The reason he didn't flourish as a Minister is said to be that he wasn't up for the haggling and compromise stuff - he'd lock himself away for a day at a time, and come out with The Solution, accepting no variation. Hague's joke that Blair had told Field to think the unthinkable and then said "That's unthinkable!" when he saw the result had a lot of truth in it. But his strength is the converse of the weakness - you get an absolutely unvarnished, intellectually coherent opinion from him.

Frank Field arguably is partly responsible for John Major becoming PM, 2 days before she was ousted he told Thatcher in No 10 she was doomed and she asked him what she could do. Frank told her that she needed to find an alternative to Heseltine and that alternative was Major. He also tried to replace both Brown and Ed Miliband with Alan Johnson. He is probably the sharpest backbencher on either side of the Commons!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8248795.stm

Field is a big Enoch fan of course, so obv someone who puts the truth before the spin

Indeed, though Powell was quite capable of using the media to his own advantage when he wanted to

JEO said:

This is truly heartbreaking:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-3151387/Raped-playground-11-abused-seven-men-night-aged-12-Victim-Rotherham-Asian-sex-gang-scandal-tells-truly-horrifying-story.html

It should remind us all that 'broken Britain' isn't just a slogan, but something that really destroyed people's lives.

Truly shocking. How someone can come out of the other side of that ordeal I can't imagine.
However long they put these people away, it's not long enough - and that has to include those in authority who deliberately ignored the problem, if we are ever to trust these authorities again.

Sandpit said:

kle4 said:

On a similar note, in the US with the more than a dozen declared Republican candidates, most of whom have to know they have no chance, and not even a chance to get much publicity either particularly if they don't get through to the debates (though I'm unclear how they are narrowed down), so what are they actually hoping to achieve personally?

The first two GOP debates will invite the top 10 in the poll average.
Source http://www.wsj.com/articles/republican-presidential-debates-set-a-high-bar-1432586670

So far there are 19 candidates declared for Presidential nomination - 14 Republicans and 5 Democrats, with potentially a couple more on each side still to declare!
Source: http://www.uspresidentialelectionnews.com/whos-running-for-president-in-2016/

This will be the most crowded field since 1968 I believe when there were 9 Democratic candidates who contested the nomination and 12 contested the Republican nomination

kle4 said:

I actually feel a bit sorry for Kendall. Even if she didn't think she could actually win, if she put in a really good showing that would do good things for her career and future chances perhaps, but if she occupies the last slot behind Corbyn, it looks like a gamble that really did not pay off.

On a similar note, in the US with the more than a dozen declared Republican candidates, most of whom have to know they have no chance, and not even a chance to get much publicity either particularly if they don't get through to the debates (though I'm unclear how they are narrowed down), so what are they actually hoping to achieve personally?

Kendall is giving labour an opportunity. To take that opportunity she does not need to win, but come second. If she is clearly rejected then its Labour you should feel sorry for. For her, if she believes in a direction for Labour she needs to put down a calling card

Flightpathl said:

kle4 said:

I actually feel a bit sorry for Kendall. Even if she didn't think she could actually win, if she put in a really good showing that would do good things for her career and future chances perhaps, but if she occupies the last slot behind Corbyn, it looks like a gamble that really did not pay off.

On a similar note, in the US with the more than a dozen declared Republican candidates, most of whom have to know they have no chance, and not even a chance to get much publicity either particularly if they don't get through to the debates (though I'm unclear how they are narrowed down), so what are they actually hoping to achieve personally?

Kendall is giving labour an opportunity. To take that opportunity she does not need to win, but come second. If she is clearly rejected then its Labour you should feel sorry for. For her, if she believes in a direction for Labour she needs to put down a calling card

Kendall is the only one of the four capable of being leader on May 9th 2020 two days after the next election. Burnham is like EdM but with a Liverpool accent and without the intellect.

MikeSmithson said:

Flightpathl said:

kle4 said:

I actually feel a bit sorry for Kendall. Even if she didn't think she could actually win, if she put in a really good showing that would do good things for her career and future chances perhaps, but if she occupies the last slot behind Corbyn, it looks like a gamble that really did not pay off.

On a similar note, in the US with the more than a dozen declared Republican candidates, most of whom have to know they have no chance, and not even a chance to get much publicity either particularly if they don't get through to the debates (though I'm unclear how they are narrowed down), so what are they actually hoping to achieve personally?

Kendall is giving labour an opportunity. To take that opportunity she does not need to win, but come second. If she is clearly rejected then its Labour you should feel sorry for. For her, if she believes in a direction for Labour she needs to put down a calling card

Kendall is the only one of the four capable of being leader on May 9th 2020 two days after the next election. Burnham is like EdM but with a Liverpool accent and without the intellect.

I have not seen enough charisma from Liz to convince me to give her my support. I'll see her in the flesh tomorrow, so to speak, and as I've said previously this is her last chance to impress.

Flightpathl said:

kle4 said:

I actually feel a bit sorry for Kendall. Even if she didn't think she could actually win, if she put in a really good showing that would do good things for her career and future chances perhaps, but if she occupies the last slot behind Corbyn, it looks like a gamble that really did not pay off.

On a similar note, in the US with the more than a dozen declared Republican candidates, most of whom have to know they have no chance, and not even a chance to get much publicity either particularly if they don't get through to the debates (though I'm unclear how they are narrowed down), so what are they actually hoping to achieve personally?

Kendall is giving labour an opportunity. To take that opportunity she does not need to win, but come second. If she is clearly rejected then its Labour you should feel sorry for. For her, if she believes in a direction for Labour she needs to put down a calling card

The same was said for Portillo who in 2001 came third or Clarke who lost in 1997 and 2001 too and came last in 2005. To make a change you need to win, did Clarke make any difference to Hague and IDS' chances when he was runner-up behind them?

Much as the mention of the word Thurrock still wounds me, isn't it true that the closest ukip came to a second win in terms of margin between the winner and themselves was the aforementioned seat?

My point being they came 3rd not 2nd

kle4 said:

It remains hard for UKIP, certainly, and they are currently a little rudderless, but 2 years ago I thought they would win no MPs this time and that they would have to work damn hard to build on that and might break through in 2020, so they are slightly ahead of my expectations in that they still face an uphill battle to win more seats, but have something to work with at least.

To be fair to yourself you were right. UKIP do not have any MPs unless you count 'that Tory' Carswell. When people voted for Carswell they were not voting for a UKIP candidate they were voting for an Independent.

We will live in a different world in 2020. Who knows what the challenges then will be?

CUWNBLOTLP
CUWNBPM

isam said:

HYUFD said:

Flightpathl said:

kle4 said:

I actually feel a bit sorry for Kendall. Even if she didn't think she could actually win, if she put in a really good showing that would do good things for her career and future chances perhaps, but if she occupies the last slot behind Corbyn, it looks like a gamble that really did not pay off.

On a similar note, in the US with the more than a dozen declared Republican candidates, most of whom have to know they have no chance, and not even a chance to get much publicity either particularly if they don't get through to the debates (though I'm unclear how they are narrowed down), so what are they actually hoping to achieve personally?

Kendall is giving labour an opportunity. To take that opportunity she does not need to win, but come second. If she is clearly rejected then its Labour you should feel sorry for. For her, if she believes in a direction for Labour she needs to put down a calling card

The same was said for Portillo who in 2001 came third or Clarke who lost in 1997 and 2001 too and came last in 2005. To make a change you need to win, did Clarke make any difference to Hague and IDS' chances when he was runner-up behind them?

Portillo should lead the out campaign in the EU referendum

A former political big beast that is probably better known by most people for his media work, and probably even then not for the political stuff

Maybe, though Boris may be better at the populism Out will need

Flightpathl said:

kle4 said:

It remains hard for UKIP, certainly, and they are currently a little rudderless, but 2 years ago I thought they would win no MPs this time and that they would have to work damn hard to build on that and might break through in 2020, so they are slightly ahead of my expectations in that they still face an uphill battle to win more seats, but have something to work with at least.

To be fair to yourself you were right. UKIP do not have any MPs unless you count 'that Tory' Carswell. When people voted for Carswell they were not voting for a UKIP candidate they were voting for an Independent.

The Farage purge that followed his un-resignation may well have left him with a pretty poor backroom team. With the Euroref in less than 2 years the reason to exist is fading fast. Without their unifying europhobia they are a disparate bunch of leftist populists, quixiotic right wingers and Farages drinking buddies.

Farage had his moment and blew it.

HYUFD said:

isam said:

HYUFD said:

Flightpathl said:

kle4 said:

I actually feel a bit sorry for Kendall. Even if she didn't think she could actually win, if she put in a really good showing that would do good things for her career and future chances perhaps, but if she occupies the last slot behind Corbyn, it looks like a gamble that really did not pay off.

On a similar note, in the US with the more than a dozen declared Republican candidates, most of whom have to know they have no chance, and not even a chance to get much publicity either particularly if they don't get through to the debates (though I'm unclear how they are narrowed down), so what are they actually hoping to achieve personally?

Kendall is giving labour an opportunity. To take that opportunity she does not need to win, but come second. If she is clearly rejected then its Labour you should feel sorry for. For her, if she believes in a direction for Labour she needs to put down a calling card

The same was said for Portillo who in 2001 came third or Clarke who lost in 1997 and 2001 too and came last in 2005. To make a change you need to win, did Clarke make any difference to Hague and IDS' chances when he was runner-up behind them?

Portillo should lead the out campaign in the EU referendum

A former political big beast that is probably better known by most people for his media work, and probably even then not for the political stuff

Maybe, though Boris may be better at the populism Out will need

Portillo wont want to lead the campaign. He doesn't believe a referendum should have been offered in the 1st place, because he thinks the 'stay in' side will win and this will be a massive green light for further integration and UK involvement.

isam said:

HYUFD said:

isam said:

HYUFD said:

Flightpathl said:

kle4 said:

I actually feel a bit sorry for Kendall. Even if she didn't think she could actually win, if she put in a really good showing that would do good things for her career and future chances perhaps, but if she occupies the last slot behind Corbyn, it looks like a gamble that really did not pay off.

On a similar note, in the US with the more than a dozen declared Republican candidates, most of whom have to know they have no chance, and not even a chance to get much publicity either particularly if they don't get through to the debates (though I'm unclear how they are narrowed down), so what are they actually hoping to achieve personally?

Kendall is giving labour an opportunity. To take that opportunity she does not need to win, but come second. If she is clearly rejected then its Labour you should feel sorry for. For her, if she believes in a direction for Labour she needs to put down a calling card

The same was said for Portillo who in 2001 came third or Clarke who lost in 1997 and 2001 too and came last in 2005. To make a change you need to win, did Clarke make any difference to Hague and IDS' chances when he was runner-up behind them?

Portillo should lead the out campaign in the EU referendum

A former political big beast that is probably better known by most people for his media work, and probably even then not for the political stuff

Maybe, though Boris may be better at the populism Out will need

I don't think Boris is really a euro sceptic though

Portillo is a genuine BOOer, a conservative with clout without the divisive element that ukip carry

Portillo is not a Conservative with clout, he's not even yesterday's man, or last decade's man.. He's rather like that ever so nice Mr Redwood: a proven failure. He has public knowledge through his programs on trains.. and zero political credibility outside a very narrow band of redneck out of touch Conservatives...

rottenborough said:

HYUFD said:

isam said:

HYUFD said:

Flightpathl said:

kle4 said:

I actually feel a bit sorry for Kendall. Even if she didn't think she could actually win, if she put in a really good showing that would do good things for her career and future chances perhaps, but if she occupies the last slot behind Corbyn, it looks like a gamble that really did not pay off.

On a similar note, in the US with the more than a dozen declared Republican candidates, most of whom have to know they have no chance, and not even a chance to get much publicity either particularly if they don't get through to the debates (though I'm unclear how they are narrowed down), so what are they actually hoping to achieve personally?

Kendall is giving labour an opportunity. To take that opportunity she does not need to win, but come second. If she is clearly rejected then its Labour you should feel sorry for. For her, if she believes in a direction for Labour she needs to put down a calling card

The same was said for Portillo who in 2001 came third or Clarke who lost in 1997 and 2001 too and came last in 2005. To make a change you need to win, did Clarke make any difference to Hague and IDS' chances when he was runner-up behind them?

Portillo should lead the out campaign in the EU referendum

A former political big beast that is probably better known by most people for his media work, and probably even then not for the political stuff

Maybe, though Boris may be better at the populism Out will need

Portillo wont want to lead the campaign. He doesn't believe a referendum should have been offered in the 1st place, because he thinks the 'stay in' side will win and this will be a massive green light for further integration and UK involvement.

Well I don't say he will but think he would be a great candidate to do so

I don't really think he would stay out of it because he thinks it shouldn't have been called because out will lose though, doesn't make sense to me that

isam said:

HYUFD said:

isam said:

HYUFD said:

Flightpathl said:

kle4 said:

I actually feel a bit sorry for Kendall. Even if she didn't think she could actually win, if she put in a really good showing that would do good things for her career and future chances perhaps, but if she occupies the last slot behind Corbyn, it looks like a gamble that really did not pay off.

On a similar note, in the US with the more than a dozen declared Republican candidates, most of whom have to know they have no chance, and not even a chance to get much publicity either particularly if they don't get through to the debates (though I'm unclear how they are narrowed down), so what are they actually hoping to achieve personally?

Kendall is giving labour an opportunity. To take that opportunity she does not need to win, but come second. If she is clearly rejected then its Labour you should feel sorry for. For her, if she believes in a direction for Labour she needs to put down a calling card

The same was said for Portillo who in 2001 came third or Clarke who lost in 1997 and 2001 too and came last in 2005. To make a change you need to win, did Clarke make any difference to Hague and IDS' chances when he was runner-up behind them?

Portillo should lead the out campaign in the EU referendum

A former political big beast that is probably better known by most people for his media work, and probably even then not for the political stuff

Maybe, though Boris may be better at the populism Out will need

I don't think Boris is really a euro sceptic though

Portillo is a genuine BOOer, a conservative with clout without the divisive element that ukip carry

Boris has been making noises on the EUsceptic side

https://twitter.com/totallytopical2/status/618508823922393088

JEO said:

HYUFD said:

isam said:

HYUFD said:

isam said:

HYUFD said:

Flightpathl said:

kle4 said:

I actually feel a bit sorry for Kendall. Even if she didn't think she could actually win, if she put in a really good showing that would do good things for her career and future chances perhaps, but if she occupies the last slot behind Corbyn, it looks like a gamble that really did not pay off.

On a similar note, in the US with the more than a dozen declared Republican candidates, most of whom have to know they have no chance, and not even a chance to get much publicity either particularly if they don't get through to the debates (though I'm unclear how they are narrowed down), so what are they actually hoping to achieve personally?

Kendall is giving labour an opportunity. To take that opportunity she does not need to win, but come second. If she is clearly rejected then its Labour you should feel sorry for. For her, if she believes in a direction for Labour she needs to put down a calling card

The same was said for Portillo who in 2001 came third or Clarke who lost in 1997 and 2001 too and came last in 2005. To make a change you need to win, did Clarke make any difference to Hague and IDS' chances when he was runner-up behind them?

Portillo should lead the out campaign in the EU referendum

A former political big beast that is probably better known by most people for his media work, and probably even then not for the political stuff

Maybe, though Boris may be better at the populism Out will need

I don't think Boris is really a euro sceptic though

Portillo is a genuine BOOer, a conservative with clout without the divisive element that ukip carry

Boris has been making noises on the EUsceptic side

Boris made noises on the social democratc side when he was running for the Oxford union. It's what he does to win votes.

Boris is an opportunist, now the Tories have a majority his best chance to beat Osborne and succeed Cameron is to lead the Out campaign to victory in EUref

isam said:

https://twitter.com/totallytopical2/status/618508823922393088

He needs to interview the new Greek Finance Minister.
The Greek finance minister has published an essay arguing that it is vital for Greece to stay in the Eurozone in order to overthrow Capitalism and promote Communism in the EU from within (what a crazy guy):

http://www.workersliberty.org/system/files/milios.pdf

"Communist Dilemmas on the Greek Euro-Crisis: To Exit or
Not to Exit?
Christos Laskos, John Milios and Euclid Tsakalotos"

Moses_ said:

According to the Telegraph Corbyn is in 2nd place behind Burnham.

Jeremy Corbyn leaps into second place in race for Labour leadership supporters
Left-wing Labour leadership candidate has backing of 28 constituencies as he quickly becomes a major player in the race

Labour MPs said privately that his surprise success was a "disaster" for the party which will "now be stuck with him".

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/11732639/Jeremy-Corbyn-leaps-into-second-place-in-race-for-Labour-leadership-supporters.html

It's not a poll (double edged sword there).

SeanT said:

By 2020 the EU may not exist as we know it. What would UKIP do then?

Propitiously, there are rumours on Twitter that Germany is preparing, this evening, for Grexit.

Something tells me they won't actually go through with it, but we are perilously close to the edge. If Greece does go, it is easy to envisage the collapse - in the medium term - of the entire Project.

I'm not surprised, if the Germans get whiff that the new Greek Finance Minister has written an essay about the need for Greece to stay in the Eurozone just to overthrow capitalism and install communism in Europe from within, they will throw him out of the room.

JEO said:

madasafish said:

isam said:

HYUFD said:

isam said:

HYUFD said:

Flightpathl said:

kle4 said:

I actually feel a bit sorry for Kendall. Even if she didn't think she could actually win, if she put in a really good showing that would do good things for her career and future chances perhaps, but if she occupies the last slot behind Corbyn, it looks like a gamble that really did not pay off.

On a similar note, in the US with the more than a dozen declared Republican candidates, most of whom have to know they have no chance, and not even a chance to get much publicity either particularly if they don't get through to the debates (though I'm unclear how they are narrowed down), so what are they actually hoping to achieve personally?

Kendall is giving labour an opportunity. To take that opportunity she does not need to win, but come second. If she is clearly rejected then its Labour you should feel sorry for. For her, if she believes in a direction for Labour she needs to put down a calling card

The same was said for Portillo who in 2001 came third or Clarke who lost in 1997 and 2001 too and came last in 2005. To make a change you need to win, did Clarke make any difference to Hague and IDS' chances when he was runner-up behind them?

Portillo should lead the out campaign in the EU referendum

A former political big beast that is probably better known by most people for his media work, and probably even then not for the political stuff

Maybe, though Boris may be better at the populism Out will need

I don't think Boris is really a euro sceptic though

Portillo is a genuine BOOer, a conservative with clout without the divisive element that ukip carry

Portillo is not a Conservative with clout, he's not even yesterday's man, or last decade's man.. He's rather like that ever so nice Mr Redwood: a proven failure. He has public knowledge through his programs on trains.. and zero political credibility outside a very narrow band of redneck out of touch Conservatives...

Portillo is well known as a likeable fellow from the BBC.

Also gay, and from immigrant stock... None of the misinformed bile thrown at ukip candidates would stick

I hope he goes for it

SeanT said:

By 2020 the EU may not exist as we know it. What would UKIP do then?

Propitiously, there are rumours on Twitter that Germany is preparing, this evening, for Grexit.

Something tells me they won't actually go through with it, but we are perilously close to the edge. If Greece does go, it is easy to envisage the collapse - in the medium term - of the entire Project.

There would be worse things than having to start from scratch and just try the project again, as an EU without the bullcrap might get a lot more admirers, rather than tolerators, as at present, with the outright admirers being often very unusual people of course.

I am truly looking forward to one thing if, as anticipated, some sort of fudgy compromise is reached, and that's the linguistic contortions that will be undertaken to try to insist that this time its really sorted, that this deal was not a climbdown from anyone really or some such talk.

One moment I did like right at the start of the Labour leadership campaign was an event where in response to the first question which prompted the usual spiel about how it had been a well fought campaign and to praise Ed for it, the moderator basically just asked them to spare everyone that stock answer, and that it was nonsense, or words to that effect.

Though it was amusing to see people try to not appear to have been disloyal to a leader and platform they had been saying was excellent right up to the election, while wanting to explain they were the one to 'fix' the mess they were now in. It basically boiled down to 'Ed was great and our campaign was great...but we need to change what we said, how we said it and who was saying it, as those were crap'.

On Corbyn, can I just say to the Labour party: Serves. You. Right.

You wanted to be politically correct and inclusive - and this is what you get.

Being a leader needs an element of ruthlessness to beat the competition, not someone who is let in because you felt sorry for him.

HYUFD said:

isam said:

JEO said:

madasafish said:

isam said:

HYUFD said:

isam said:

HYUFD said:

Flightpathl said:

kle4 said:

I actually feel a bit sorry for Kendall. Even if she didn't think she could actually win, if she put in a really good showing that would do good things for her career and future chances perhaps, but if she occupies the last slot behind Corbyn, it looks like a gamble that really did not pay off.

On a similar note, in the US with the more than a dozen declared Republican candidates, most of whom have to know they have no chance, and not even a chance to get much publicity either particularly if they don't get through to the debates (though I'm unclear how they are narrowed down), so what are they actually hoping to achieve personally?

Kendall is giving labour an opportunity. To take that opportunity she does not need to win, but come second. If she is clearly rejected then its Labour you should feel sorry for. For her, if she believes in a direction for Labour she needs to put down a calling card

The same was said for Portillo who in 2001 came third or Clarke who lost in 1997 and 2001 too and came last in 2005. To make a change you need to win, did Clarke make any difference to Hague and IDS' chances when he was runner-up behind them?

Portillo should lead the out campaign in the EU referendum

A former political big beast that is probably better known by most people for his media work, and probably even then not for the political stuff

Maybe, though Boris may be better at the populism Out will need

I don't think Boris is really a euro sceptic though

Portillo is a genuine BOOer, a conservative with clout without the divisive element that ukip carry

Portillo is not a Conservative with clout, he's not even yesterday's man, or last decade's man.. He's rather like that ever so nice Mr Redwood: a proven failure. He has public knowledge through his programs on trains.. and zero political credibility outside a very narrow band of redneck out of touch Conservatives...

Portillo is well known as a likeable fellow from the BBC.

Also gay, and from immigrant stock... None of the misinformed bile thrown at ukip candidates would stick

I hope he goes for it

Portillo is still married to a woman I believe, so he is more likely bisexual than gay

Ah! Still remembering the clip of one of Portillo's train journeys when he consumed a German sausage.

OchEye said:

HYUFD said:

isam said:

JEO said:

madasafish said:

isam said:

HYUFD said:

isam said:

HYUFD said:

Flightpathl said:

kle4 said:

I actually feel a bit sorry for Kendall. Even if she didn't think she could actually win, if she put in a really good showing that would do good things for her career and future chances perhaps, but if she occupies the last slot behind Corbyn, it looks like a gamble that really did not pay off.

On a similar note, in the US with the more than a dozen declared Republican candidates, most of whom have to know they have no chance, and not even a chance to get much publicity either particularly if they don't get through to the debates (though I'm unclear how they are narrowed down), so what are they actually hoping to achieve personally?

Kendall is giving labour an opportunity. To take that opportunity she does not need to win, but come second. If she is clearly rejected then its Labour you should feel sorry for. For her, if she believes in a direction for Labour she needs to put down a calling card

The same was said for Portillo who in 2001 came third or Clarke who lost in 1997 and 2001 too and came last in 2005. To make a change you need to win, did Clarke make any difference to Hague and IDS' chances when he was runner-up behind them?

Portillo should lead the out campaign in the EU referendum

A former political big beast that is probably better known by most people for his media work, and probably even then not for the political stuff

Maybe, though Boris may be better at the populism Out will need

I don't think Boris is really a euro sceptic though

Portillo is a genuine BOOer, a conservative with clout without the divisive element that ukip carry

Portillo is not a Conservative with clout, he's not even yesterday's man, or last decade's man.. He's rather like that ever so nice Mr Redwood: a proven failure. He has public knowledge through his programs on trains.. and zero political credibility outside a very narrow band of redneck out of touch Conservatives...

Portillo is well known as a likeable fellow from the BBC.

Also gay, and from immigrant stock... None of the misinformed bile thrown at ukip candidates would stick

I hope he goes for it

Portillo is still married to a woman I believe, so he is more likely bisexual than gay

Ah! Still remembering the clip of one of Portillo's train journeys when he consumed a German sausage.

Think I will try and forget that image!