A grateful populace is still dancing in the streets. Apparently the demand is growing for the new walton Bridge (Danny Alexander was there) to be named after a certain beloved local leader.
Why not view the data in the article as the fact that up to 31% of the infamous 2010 LDs could vote Conservative and not LD because of the LD stance on immigration? That is about 7% of those voting. It would also seal the fate of about 20 LD MPs.
Why not view the data in the article as the fact that up to 31% of the infamous 2010 LDs could vote Conservative and not LD because of the LD stance on immigration? That is about 7% of those voting. It would also seal the fate of about 20 LD MPs.
I remain sceptical that everything is a) good news for the LDs, b) that the LDs will make all the running in GE2015 result and c) Europe doesn't matter as its actually a proxy for immigration which gets many very exercised.
Mr. M, I'm not sure that deliberately reducing the size of one of our largest and most important (in tax terms) sectors would necessarily help reduce the deficit.
A grateful populace is still dancing in the streets. Apparently the demand is growing for the new walton Bridge (Danny Alexander was there) to be named after a certain beloved local leader.
I'll be watching for a local population explosion and children called Jonnoh - like in the Balkans and Tonee!
Mr. M, I'm not sure that deliberately reducing the size of one of our largest and most important (in tax terms) sectors would necessarily help reduce the deficit.
Plato and Mark Senior, the other factor that I do wonder about is the Lib Dem "swing back" that they had achieved at previous GEs from the NOTA voters. This was I guess circa 3% to 5% of the LD votes, but as part of the Govt, why would protest votes go back to the party that was .. in ... Govt?
Why not view the data in the article as the fact that up to 31% of the infamous 2010 LDs could vote Conservative and not LD because of the LD stance on immigration? That is about 7% of those voting. It would also seal the fate of about 20 LD MPs.
Because we don't wear blue tinted glasses
Nor do we wear yellow tinted glasses so we do not view the data as thinking that the 16% of Conservatives who thought the poster campaign as racist or 24% of Conservatives who thought it stupid/offensive would suddenly switch to LD . That would seal the fate of several hundred Conservative MPs
I get the impression that Mr Greenslade is a bit miffed that the Sun is taking this approach - the Times has 332, 146 subscribers this week according to its banner. I don't know the breakdown of full paper et al vs £2pw subs, but its a substantial number of paywallers.
Anecdotally, I'm finding rather a lot of others on Twitter with accounts - and several journos have stopped prefacing stories with £.
Mr. M, leaving aside the, ahem, significant role the financial sector played in the recession Brown ran a deficit for several years before it hit, borrowing £153bn during a boom.
ScottP: don't understand your comment that Ed is eroding the left-LD grouping. It's why we're nudging up to 40% again. In general your comments are too partisan to bother with.
John O: I think there was an element of froth in Labour's score when it was at 42-43%, and you're right that it's gone. The remainder are mostly not really interested in the Tories triumphing over 1% GDP growth or whatever while Cameron is in his anti-UKIP baby-eating mode. There is also a non-froth element to UKIP. I think you'll find it hard to get them down to 5%, especially with the Euros in 2014. Oddly, you might be best off if Labour wins the Euros - deflates UKIP and helps you build the "stop them!" narrative.
Financier: I'm not at all worried that Unite might leave Labour, or Ed might be defeated at the conference - that's not how Labour politics works, as John O notes. There is a certain ritual element to these things, a bit like family rows where everyone knows the family is staying together in the end. In particular I'm not worried about finance for 2015 - I won't go into it but it'll work out (the longer term is trickier, but we'll worry about that later). There is a risk that the public will think us self-preoccupied by the conference, and a potential that it will enable us to take the news agenda - doubt if either effect will last into 2015.
Plato and Mark Senior, the other factor that I do wonder about is the Lib Dem "swing back" that they had achieved at previous GEs from the NOTA voters. This was I guess circa 3% to 5% of the LD votes, but as part of the Govt, why would protest votes go back to the party that was .. in ... Govt?
Indeed - habit? That LDs were still marginally better as a NOTA Party compared to the others if an indy wasn't on the ballot?
The LDs have also made quite a point of being in HMG and in Oppo at the same time. How they frame this will be interesting messaging.
Plato and Mark Senior, the other factor that I do wonder about is the Lib Dem "swing back" that they had achieved at previous GEs from the NOTA voters. This was I guess circa 3% to 5% of the LD votes, but as part of the Govt, why would protest votes go back to the party that was .. in ... Govt?
Indeed - habit? That LDs were still marginally better as a NOTA Party compared to the others if an indy wasn't on the ballot? The LDs have also made quite a point of being in HMG and in Oppo at the same time. How they frame this will be interesting messaging.
There was some previous analysis that after each GE the LDs lost most of their GE vote and then had to fight to get them back in the following years. In essence their GE vote was the most detatched and had the smallest "core" as a share of their GE vote, compared to the main two parties. After 3 years there is no sign that these voters are coming back, but there are 22 months left.
Why not view the data in the article as the fact that up to 31% of the infamous 2010 LDs could vote Conservative and not LD because of the LD stance on immigration? That is about 7% of those voting. It would also seal the fate of about 20 LD MPs.
Because we don't wear blue tinted glasses
Nor do we wear yellow tinted glasses so we do not view the data as thinking that the 16% of Conservatives who thought the poster campaign as racist or 24% of Conservatives who thought it stupid/offensive would suddenly switch to LD . That would seal the fate of several hundred Conservative MPs
Mark, immigration is the 2nd biggest concern of voters. You and Labour are on the wrong side of the argument. So be it.
Mr. M, leaving aside the, ahem, significant role the financial sector played in the recession Brown ran a deficit for several years before it hit, borrowing £153bn during a boom.
And Spain ran surpluses until it went pop (to an even greater degree than the UK).
Fascinating to read two virulently anti-LD posters discussing the minutiae of the LD vote. It has always been the softest of votes and I recall even when I lived in the LD heartland of Sutton that 12-18 months out from a GE, we would get really worried about where the vote was and whether it would come back - usually after the poor European Parliamentary or LGA elections.
It would be especially hard work for people moving into the Borough who were more often than not Tory or Labour supporters and had never seen anything in the way of LD activity on the ground.
The Conservative and Labour parties have always enjoyed a core vote of around 30% each who will always vote for them whatever policies they advocated. I suspect that in the same way as much of the LD vote is an anti-Conservative AND anti-Labour vote, the Conservative vote was more than anything else an anti-Labour vote and vice-versa.
Certainly, when I look on here, the anti-Labour vitriol is astonishing and far in excess of anything I hear out in the real world. I strongly suspect most people haven't passed any kind of judgement on Ed Miliband as a potential Prime Minister at this time. Some on here had made up their minds as soon as he became Labour leader or was it simply a reflex action because he was leader of the Labour party ?
It could therefore be argued that the 2015 GE will be primarily about which party can come up with more scares, threats and innuendo aimed at persuading the voters of the dangers of voting for its principal opponent and therefore the "you can't trust the other lot, stick with us" mantra will be the theme from this autumn for the next 20 months.
Not brilliant but that's how democratic politics seems to function.
Foot in Mouth time for the Conservative Grid again:
"Grant Shapps will today take aim at Labour's predictions about growth, crime and unemployment, claiming Ed Miliband's party "loves doing Britain down"
Now you don't need to be a rocket science to ask the following question when he finishes his speech at Policy Exchange - "Grant, you say Ed M is doing down Britain, can you remember which party ran the campaign "Broken Britain" ".
Maybe another one of the "get on the front foot during recess" ideas?
Foot in Mouth time for the Conservative Grid again:
"Grant Shapps will today take aim at Labour's predictions about growth, crime and unemployment, claiming Ed Miliband's party "loves doing Britain down"
Now you don't need to be a rocket science to ask the following question when he finishes his speech at Policy Exchange - "Grant, you say Ed M is doing down Britain, can you remember which party ran the campaign "Broken Britain" ".
Maybe another one of the "get on the front foot during recess" ideas?
And he would be very happy to take that question. And answer it in full.
Foot in Mouth time for the Conservative Grid again:
"Grant Shapps will today take aim at Labour's predictions about growth, crime and unemployment, claiming Ed Miliband's party "loves doing Britain down"
Now you don't need to be a rocket science to ask the following question when he finishes his speech at Policy Exchange - "Grant, you say Ed M is doing down Britain, can you remember which party ran the campaign "Broken Britain" ".
Maybe another one of the "get on the front foot during recess" ideas?
I still can't see what's particularly racist about the poster. Surely only illegals need be "offended"?
it doesn't need to be racist to be undermining.
as a native briton, probably you don't feel it, but if like myself you're only a beaurocrats stamp away from either deportation or permanent residence, there is a slight insecurity, always present. If a poster campaign subtly ups the temperature of anti immigrant feeling (to be sure most people who like this poster are not only unhappy about levels of illegal immigration) it makes that insecurity worse. So if you have a choice of countries to take your high level of education and professional skills,maybe you are going to choose somewhere else other than britain.
This and the talk of tourist bonds surely can't be good for the economy in the long run
Immigration is more important than life itself to Tory-UKIP switchers
UKIP voters are not rational.
You'll be calling them swivel eyed loons next......
What is clear is that UKIP voters priorities are different from those of the established parties.
They view immigration (82) as more important than the economy (53) vs 66/50 overall. They also see immigration affecting their family (36 - ranked #3) - more than twice as much as any other group (Tories closest on 15 - ranked #5 equal).
On Health they view that as a worry for their family (38) more than the country (24) - everyone else views it the other way round (38:41).
And of course on Europe, they are in a league of their own (country/family) (OA): 40/26 (12/6).
I have to say all this nonsense about "talking down Britain" is ludicrous. An opposition party is there to oppose and to be critical of the Government's policy. Given that said Government is the representative of the British people, inevitably criticism might be viewed as "talking down" the country.
Which of course it isn't.
No Government has a mandate not to be opposed in a democratic society. I am also entirely convinced that the Labour Party and those who support it love this country every bit as much as Conservative, Liberal Democrat or UKIP supporters or those not supporting any party.
It's also not just about the mandatory effusive tweet every time a British sportsman does well or a royal baby is born. Loving your country takes many forms - I can enjoy walking in rural Shropshire or admire London on a summer's evening. It doesn't make me blind to its faults and imperfections and nor does it make me angry when said imperfections are left to fester.
Politics should be about being honest about the areas of our life and society where we aren't doing well enough and whether that's injustice, homelessness or the hundreds of commuters squeezed like cattle on the 6.32 from London to Guildford and paying fortunes for the privilege, we should be about trying to improve and make better and not shout down those who point out the problems.
And Shapps is merely throwing back all the crap Labour threw at the Tories and Balls in particular here.
It was Labour who started this mud-slinging and revelled in it. Now they're getting it back and until they find something compelling to say the media will run with it.
I think Mike has this wrong, for a very simple reason.
LibDem supporters (like supporters of other parties) are not a homogenous bunch of people with identical views on everything. Amongst them are Guardian-reading, hand-wringing academics and Beeboid types, who probably have no contact with immigrants other than their cleaning ladies and the staff in the coffee shop; they won't vote Tory whatever happens.
But there's also a subset of more ordinary people who voted LibDem in 2010, as a compromise between what they saw as Labour profligacy and incompetence, and the over-austere Conservative alternative. Such voters don't necessarily think like LibDem activists, and don't necessarily like hugging illegal immigrant: those are the sort who switched to UKIP in Eastleigh.
The Conservatives can't and won't attract the former sort whatever they do, but they can attract some of the latter.
I still can't see what's particularly racist about the poster. Surely only illegals need be "offended"?
it doesn't need to be racist to be undermining.
as a native briton, probably you don't feel it, but if like myself you're only a beaurocrats stamp away from either deportation or permanent residence, there is a slight insecurity, always present. If a poster campaign subtly ups the temperature of anti immigrant feeling (to be sure most people who like this poster are not only unhappy about levels of illegal immigration) it makes that insecurity worse. So if you have a choice of countries to take your high level of education and professional skills,maybe you are going to choose somewhere else other than britain.
This and the talk of tourist bonds surely can't be good for the economy in the long run
Well said. The Tories message on students, tourist bonds, "health tourism" "benefit tourism" Go Home vans all stacks up to a message of xenophobia that Cameron was supposed to have rejected in 2005. It does huge economic damage and besmirches the country abroad. And among decent people here.
I still can't see what's particularly racist about the poster. Surely only illegals need be "offended"?
I don't get especially worked up about it and think we've discussed it to death. But to respond - it's not racist per se, but it suggests that there is particular concern about illegal immigration (yes, it's obviously about immigration, though the word isn't used) in the area where the van is touring. Not burglary, not assault, not rape - none of these things have caused enough concern to warrant a touring van. Illegal immigration. Now if you're a legal immigrant or descended from one, you could reasonably expect that this concern could result in tiresome harassment. People calling the police to report that there's a dodgy chap (you) at number 14, better check it out. Police demanding to see your papers. Sure, you'll be able to satisfy them, but apparently the focus is on people who look like YOU as the problem.
At the same time, you sense that this isn't actually intended to address the problem, since illegal immigrants know the score and are hardly likely to react to a passing van. It is clearly a political stunt to show that the Government is Worried About Illegal Foreigners. It's not exactly wrong, but it's alienating. You're British. The Government is supposed to be about you too. Why are they posturing like this? Oh, to get votes. Sigh.
That, as fairly as I can as I can put it, is the reason why many people find it unpleasant. Not racist. Not illegal. But alienating.
Though it was time someone exposed Toby Young for what he is I thought Stella's talent was misdirected on that particular subject. It's the nature of twitter that it encourages puerile comments from puerile people and the fact that spotty twelve year old boys are sending obscene tweets shouldn't exercise any MP's time.
On the other hand exposing Toby for what he is is a service but probably best not as part of a clean up twitter campaign.
"Remarkably, the US manufacturing renaissance isn’t the result of a grand scheme or costly stimulus package dreamt up in Washington. Rather, it is a pure free market triumph, the unintended consequence of enlightened policy decisions on energy"
"Thanks to a much more benign attitude than that seen in our paranoid, anti-growth Britain, US shale gas and oil output has grown more than 50pc annually since 2007, creating jobs and driving down costs. In its latest report, McKinsey, the consultancy, calculates that shale could bolster US GDP by $690bn (£450bn) a year and create 1.7m jobs across the economy by 2020, and not just in energy-intensive industries. "
I think Mike has this wrong, for a very simple reason.
LibDem supporters (like supporters of other parties) are not a homogenous bunch of people with identical views on everything. Amongst them are Guardian-reading, hand-wringing academics and Beeboid types, who probably have no contact with immigrants other than their cleaning ladies and the staff in the coffee shop; they won't vote Tory whatever happens.
Bold statement coming from a Sussex tory. The blue folk I have come across in our neck of the woods don't exactly impress with their street smarts or first hand experience of immigration.
I think Mike has this wrong, for a very simple reason.
LibDem supporters (like supporters of other parties) are not a homogenous bunch of people with identical views on everything. Amongst them are Guardian-reading, hand-wringing academics and Beeboid types, who probably have no contact with immigrants other than their cleaning ladies and the staff in the coffee shop; they won't vote Tory whatever happens.
Bold statement coming from a Sussex tory. The blue folk I have come across in our neck of the woods don't exactly impress with their street smarts or first hand experience of immigration.
How 'diverse' is your neck of the woods, Jonathan?
(In case you're wondering, Ilford North was only 44% white British in 2011)
I think Mike has this wrong, for a very simple reason.
LibDem supporters (like supporters of other parties) are not a homogenous bunch of people with identical views on everything. Amongst them are Guardian-reading, hand-wringing academics and Beeboid types, who probably have no contact with immigrants other than their cleaning ladies and the staff in the coffee shop; they won't vote Tory whatever happens.
Bold statement coming from a Sussex tory. The blue folk I have come across in our neck of the woods don't exactly impress with their street smarts or first hand experience of immigration.
Surely Mr Nabavi's views as a Sussex Tory are more representative than yours as a Sussex Labourite. Rare as hens teeth bar in Hastings.
"I don't get especially worked up about it and think we've discussed it to death. But to respond - it's not racist per se"
You're being far too kind Nick. I had lunch with four advertising friends completely non political and for the first time ever there was unanimity. All thought it so shocking they just laughed!
You'd have to be a complete imbecile (or a racist) not to realize what is offensive about it. I heard Nick Clegg do a very good demolition job on them.
Why isn't Ed speaking out? That's the real offense.
Except that the truth is 'Vote UKIP - get none of what you want'
They want Cameron out, they get what they want by voting UKIP And a Tory leader who won't let the Bulgarians in rather than one who will recommend a yes vote.
Isn't that what they think, it's perfectly logical.
I think Mike has this wrong, for a very simple reason.
LibDem supporters (like supporters of other parties) are not a homogenous bunch of people with identical views on everything. Amongst them are Guardian-reading, hand-wringing academics and Beeboid types, who probably have no contact with immigrants other than their cleaning ladies and the staff in the coffee shop; they won't vote Tory whatever happens.
Bold statement coming from a Sussex tory. The blue folk I have come across in our neck of the woods don't exactly impress with their street smarts or first hand experience of immigration.
How 'diverse' is your neck of the woods, Jonathan?
(In case you're wondering, Ilford North was only 44% white British in 2011)
Golly, Horsham is absolutely packed with immigrants - really it is just like Brick Lane.
"I don't get especially worked up about it and think we've discussed it to death. But to respond - it's not racist per se"
You're being far too kind Nick. I had lunch with four advertising friends completely non political and for the first time ever there was unanimity. All thought it so shocking they found it laughable.
You'd have to be a complete imbecile (or a racist) not to realize what is offensive about it. I heard Nick Clegg do a very good demolition job on them.
Why isn't Ed speaking out? That's the real offense.
As I said earlier, I don't find it offensive. So it's OK to be in this country illegally, Roger?
I think Mike has this wrong, for a very simple reason.
LibDem supporters (like supporters of other parties) are not a homogenous bunch of people with identical views on everything. Amongst them are Guardian-reading, hand-wringing academics and Beeboid types, who probably have no contact with immigrants other than their cleaning ladies and the staff in the coffee shop; they won't vote Tory whatever happens.
Bold statement coming from a Sussex tory. The blue folk I have come across in our neck of the woods don't exactly impress with their street smarts or first hand experience of immigration.
Surely Mr Nabavi's views as a Sussex Tory are more representative than yours as a Sussex Labourite. Rare as hens teeth bar in Hastings.
Visited Brighton and Hove lately? Lots of hen's teeth. The Labour problem there is that we're maybe not left-wing enough. But we should win two or three of the seats just the same.
Rich media leftie luvvie white people find all sorts of things offensive.
Steven Fry had them nailed:
“It's now very common to hear people say, 'I'm rather offended by that.' As if that gives them certain rights. It's actually nothing more... than a whine. 'I find that offensive.' It has no meaning; it has no purpose; it has no reason to be respected as a phrase. 'I am offended by that.' Well, so f*****g what.”
Bold statement coming from a Sussex tory. The blue folk I have come across in our neck of the woods don't exactly impress with their street smarts or first hand experience of immigration.
Sussex Tories are actually very well informed on the political salience of concerns over illegal immigration and also welfare, given that they have lost councillors to UKIP in the coastal belt and have a tough fight on their hands in seats like Hastings & Rye.
Any law would need to be exceptionally well-written and clear (yes, I know). But the idea that people in real and genuine pain or severe disability have to continue suffering does not seem just.
The rumours and allegations are that such things are sometimes happening by the back door, without anyone knowing. That is much more open to abuse than good legislation.
There is nothing racist about asking people to desist in crime (the crime in this instance being their illegal presence in the UK).
As a pedant, Mr Dancer, I must note that the crime is, rather, entering the country illegally or failing to leave the country, rather than strictly *being* in the country illegally.
"I don't get especially worked up about it and think we've discussed it to death. But to respond - it's not racist per se"
You're being far too kind Nick. I had lunch with four advertising friends completely non political and for the first time ever there was unanimity. All thought it so shocking they just laughed!
You'd have to be a complete imbecile (or a racist) not to realize what is offensive about it. I heard Nick Clegg do a very good demolition job on them.
Why isn't Ed speaking out? That's the real offense.
Bold statement coming from a Sussex tory. The blue folk I have come across in our neck of the woods don't exactly impress with their street smarts or first hand experience of immigration.
Sussex Tories are actually very well informed on the political salience of concerns over illegal immigration and also welfare, given that they have lost councillors to UKIP in the coastal belt and have a tough fight on their hands in seats like Hastings & Rye.
In any regard you might care to drag up in your defence their experience is no different from Liberal Democrats.
I think Mike has this wrong, for a very simple reason.
LibDem supporters (like supporters of other parties) are not a homogenous bunch of people with identical views on everything. Amongst them are Guardian-reading, hand-wringing academics and Beeboid types, who probably have no contact with immigrants other than their cleaning ladies and the staff in the coffee shop; they won't vote Tory whatever happens.
Bold statement coming from a Sussex tory. The blue folk I have come across in our neck of the woods don't exactly impress with their street smarts or first hand experience of immigration.
Surely Mr Nabavi's views as a Sussex Tory are more representative than yours as a Sussex Labourite. Rare as hens teeth bar in Hastings.
Visited Brighton and Hove lately? Lots of hen's teeth. The Labour problem there is that we're maybe not left-wing enough. But we should win two or three of the seats just the same.
Come on now, when a Labourite tries to make a county point by rubbishing another, he's asking for it when he's in a tiny minority of voters.
Rich media leftie luvvie white people find all sorts of things offensive.
Steven Fry had them nailed:
“It's now very common to hear people say, 'I'm rather offended by that.' As if that gives them certain rights. It's actually nothing more... than a whine. 'I find that offensive.' It has no meaning; it has no purpose; it has no reason to be respected as a phrase. 'I am offended by that.' Well, so f*****g what.”
― Stephen Fry
Best not vote for the PM who ordered an investigation into Rihannas corset then
Looks like Rihanna's successfully banned her own picture!
Rich media leftie luvvie white people find all sorts of things offensive.
Steven Fry had them nailed:
“It's now very common to hear people say, 'I'm rather offended by that.' As if that gives them certain rights. It's actually nothing more... than a whine. 'I find that offensive.' It has no meaning; it has no purpose; it has no reason to be respected as a phrase. 'I am offended by that.' Well, so f*****g what.”
― Stephen Fry
Best not vote for the PM who ordered an investigation into Rihannas corset then
Are you auditioning for the Lynton role at Labour HQ ? You seem to have a knack of identifying the issues that the nation really cares about.
"I don't get especially worked up about it and think we've discussed it to death. But to respond - it's not racist per se"
You're being far too kind Nick. I had lunch with four advertising friends completely non political and for the first time ever there was unanimity. All thought it so shocking they just laughed!
You'd have to be a complete imbecile (or a racist) not to realize what is offensive about it. I heard Nick Clegg do a very good demolition job on them.
Why isn't Ed speaking out? That's the real offense.
I thought Ed was on holiday and you had to ask Mrs M's permission to speak to him on the phone ?
"I don't get especially worked up about it and think we've discussed it to death. But to respond - it's not racist per se"
You're being far too kind Nick. I had lunch with four advertising friends completely non political and for the first time ever there was unanimity. All thought it so shocking they just laughed!
You'd have to be a complete imbecile (or a racist) not to realize what is offensive about it. I heard Nick Clegg do a very good demolition job on them.
Why isn't Ed speaking out? That's the real offense.
"I don't get especially worked up about it and think we've discussed it to death. But to respond - it's not racist per se"
You're being far too kind Nick. I had lunch with four advertising friends completely non political and for the first time ever there was unanimity. All thought it so shocking they just laughed!
You'd have to be a complete imbecile (or a racist) not to realize what is offensive about it. I heard Nick Clegg do a very good demolition job on them.
Why isn't Ed speaking out? That's the real offense.
Labour have nothing to gain by attacking the Conservatives from the left, on immigration.
Reading through this thread, it's left me wondering why the Greens aren't doing much better. Big chunk of lefties protestors available,lots of leftish policies, party unsullied by power so ideal for purists, established home for protest voters. UKIP have picked up more dissatisfied LDs than the Greens . Have the Greens just thrown in the towel or is something else at play ?
Greenies and Kippers disagree violently over AGW and windfarms - I can't imagine many swapping sides on that basis alone.
.
Unlike Tory voters who decamp to UKIP Lib Dem voters understand FPTP
daft statement tim. Mid term you would expect all the protest parties to be at their zenith. Votes don't really start to concentrate until the last 6 months before the GE.
Obviously you have a point there and I have money on UKIP 5-10%. But the scale of the Tory membership loss, many to UKIP is not the usual impact of a protest vote, it's damaging the Tories on the ground.
If even UKIP can get votes from the LDs why can't the Greens
I was under the impression that the Greens were picking up similar levels of 2010 Lib Dems. I'm sure someone can check (I can't right now).
Those figures are NOT CORRECT , they do not include the Won't Vote and Don't Knows ( in this poll 26% ) so the correct figures are roughly Con 9 Lab 24 LD 30 UKIP 7 Others 4 DK/WV 26
Fair comment - but the original point stands- 2010 Lib Dems are ~3 times as likely to go UKIP as Green.
Sky News Newsdesk @SkyNewsBreak Ex-Tory co-treasurer Peter Cruddas wins £180,000 in libel damages over Sunday Times allegation he charged £250,000 to meet David Cameron
"I don't get especially worked up about it and think we've discussed it to death. But to respond - it's not racist per se"
You're being far too kind Nick. I had lunch with four advertising friends completely non political and for the first time ever there was unanimity. All thought it so shocking they just laughed!
You'd have to be a complete imbecile (or a racist) not to realize what is offensive about it. I heard Nick Clegg do a very good demolition job on them.
Why isn't Ed speaking out? That's the real offense.
Because Ed/Labour is terrified of being shown to be weak on those three pillars labour is already seen as weak on.
Crosby is causing a panic in labour circles, as seen by their hapless determination to 'get' him.
I think Mike has this wrong, for a very simple reason.
LibDem supporters (like supporters of other parties) are not a homogenous bunch of people with identical views on everything. Amongst them are Guardian-reading, hand-wringing academics and Beeboid types, who probably have no contact with immigrants other than their cleaning ladies and the staff in the coffee shop; they won't vote Tory whatever happens.
Bold statement coming from a Sussex tory. The blue folk I have come across in our neck of the woods don't exactly impress with their street smarts or first hand experience of immigration.
Surely Mr Nabavi's views as a Sussex Tory are more representative than yours as a Sussex Labourite. Rare as hens teeth bar in Hastings.
Visited Brighton and Hove lately? Lots of hen's teeth. The Labour problem there is that we're maybe not left-wing enough. But we should win two or three of the seats just the same.
Come on now, when a Labourite tries to make a county point by rubbishing another, he's asking for it when he's in a tiny minority of voters.
(1) You clearly didn't get the point I was making. The comments Richard make about the LDs could obviously apply to his own party. He has no particular insight into LD voters I am aware of. (2) You make some weird assumption that you, I or Richard speak for anyone but ourselves. Our opinions carry an equal weight of one out of 47million voters. None of us represent Sussex in any sense. (3) In the only Sussex-wide poll (the recent PCC vote). Labour came second with 41% of the vote. If 41% is as rare as hens teeth. In 2010, on 37% Tories must be very rare indeed. (4) You make a big assumption about who I currently would vote for.
"(4) You make a big assumption about who I currently would vote for."
Really? So you're not a Labour voter? Who said to me at Dirty Dicks "Ed Miliband Ten More Years" ? And certainly was a card carrying Labour Horsham member who commented that I was probably one of their handful of website visitors?
But to respond - it's not racist per se, but it suggests that there is particular concern about illegal immigration (yes, it's obviously about immigration, though the word isn't used) in the area where the van is touring. Not burglary, not assault, not rape - none of these things have caused enough concern to warrant a touring van.
Really?
Actually there have been hundreds of advertising campaigns in relation to all sorts of crimes and offences:
I think Mike has this wrong, for a very simple reason.
LibDem supporters (like supporters of other parties) are not a homogenous bunch of people with identical views on everything. Amongst them are Guardian-reading, hand-wringing academics and Beeboid types, who probably have no contact with immigrants other than their cleaning ladies and the staff in the coffee shop; they won't vote Tory whatever happens.
Bold statement coming from a Sussex tory. The blue folk I have come across in our neck of the woods don't exactly impress with their street smarts or first hand experience of immigration.
Surely Mr Nabavi's views as a Sussex Tory are more representative than yours as a Sussex Labourite. Rare as hens teeth bar in Hastings.
Visited Brighton and Hove lately? Lots of hen's teeth. The Labour problem there is that we're maybe not left-wing enough. But we should win two or three of the seats just the same.
Come on now, when a Labourite tries to make a county point by rubbishing another, he's asking for it when he's in a tiny minority of voters.
(1) You clearly didn't get the point I was making. The comments Richard make about the LDs could obviously apply to his own party. He has no particular insight into LD voters I am aware of. (2) You make some weird assumption that you, I or Richard speak for anyone but ourselves. Our opinions carry an equal weight of one out of 47million voters. None of us represent Sussex in any sense. (3) In the only Sussex-wide poll (the recent PCC vote). Labour came second with 41% of the vote. If 41% is as rare as hens teeth. In 2010, on 37% Tories must be very rare indeed. (4) You make a big assumption about who I currently would vote for.
"Several MPs have spoken to me about a sense of “drift”, and a lack of clarity from the party leadership. And whilst only a handful of MPs I’ve spoken to are opposed to Miliband’s plans to reform the union-link, I’m not sensing any confidence from within the PLP that Miliband a) has a plan to fund the party’s election campaign post-reform or b) that they sense this is a real vote winner."
Even more fun however
"The policy will come, we are told. And it will be bold, and radical (think house building, control of energy prices and – perhaps – public rail ownership), but it won’t come yet."
Looking back to the end of last year, Labour were up 8% with ICM, 10-13% with Yougov, 10% with Com Res, and 11% with Populus. There's no doubt that that lead has eroded, notwithstanding an increase in support for UKIP. "Banging on" about immigration and Europe clearly hasn't damaged the Conservatives, although I suspect the main reason for the shift is the improving economic outlook.
I think Mike has this wrong, for a very simple reason.
LibDem supporters (like supporters of other parties) are not a homogenous bunch of people with identical views on everything. Amongst them are Guardian-reading, hand-wringing academics and Beeboid types, who probably have no contact with immigrants other than their cleaning ladies and the staff in the coffee shop; they won't vote Tory whatever happens.
Bold statement coming from a Sussex tory. The blue folk I have come across in our neck of the woods don't exactly impress with their street smarts or first hand experience of immigration.
Surely Mr Nabavi's views as a Sussex Tory are more representative than yours as a Sussex Labourite. Rare as hens teeth bar in Hastings.
Visited Brighton and Hove lately? Lots of hen's teeth. The Labour problem there is that we're maybe not left-wing enough. But we should win two or three of the seats just the same.
Come on now, when a Labourite tries to make a county point by rubbishing another, he's asking for it when he's in a tiny minority of voters.
(1) You clearly didn't get the point I was making. The comments Richard make about the LDs could obviously apply to his own party. He has no particular insight into LD voters I am aware of. (2) You make some weird assumption that you, I or Richard speak for anyone but ourselves. Our opinions carry an equal weight of one out of 47million voters. None of us represent Sussex in any sense. (3) In the only Sussex-wide poll (the recent PCC vote). Labour came second with 41% of the vote. If 41% is as rare as hens teeth. In 2010, on 37% Tories must be very rare indeed. (4) You make a big assumption about who I currently would vote for.
You still haven't told us how diverse 'your neck of the woods' is!
Assuming Horsham hasn't changed totally from when I worked there and lived up the road - its about as diverse as where I live now. Not at all, unless you count those who run Chinese/Indian and kebab shops.
"There is nothing racist about asking people to desist in crime (the crime in this instance being their illegal presence in the UK)."
As it doesn't affect anyone without a foreign accent and a non white face I'd expect you to be insensitive to the effect........
But just imagine you do have a dusky skin and a foreign accent isn't it likely that white people without a foreign accent will start wondering.....Is my neighbour a criminal?
And those with a foreign accent and dusky skin will wonder 'are those Morris Dancers looking at me and my family suspiciously........'
"There’s a fear that we’re turning inwards to talk about ourselves with an election already on the horizon. As the economy picks up and the Tories feel bullish enough to try and attack Labor on our traditional strength (the NHS) some MPs have begun to fear that the party’s broader strategy isn’t working."
No! Ed is a strategic genius to spend nearly half the time before the GE on an internal party wrangle that few, if any, voters care about - and all under the cover of a "non-story" too!
He would have been mad to sort this out two years ago because......well, because.....
In any regard you might care to drag up in your defence their experience is no different from Liberal Democrats.
Did I say it was?
My original point was simply that 2010 LibDem voters were not a homogenous group, and that it is possible (in principle at least) for the Conservatives to appeal to some of them. Not really a controversial point, is it?
Renationalising the railways should show the world that we are open for business and enterprise.
titters..
The East Coast line is nationalised and showing a profit for the taxpayer. The West Coast franchise was a disaster for the taxpayer. You'll struggle to persuade anyone outside John Majors group of 1930's fantasists that railway privatisation has worked well.
So you'll be disappointed if full nationalisation of the railways isn't in the 2015 Labour manifesto ?
Renationalising the railways should show the world that we are open for business and enterprise.
titters..
The East Coast line is nationalised and showing a profit for the taxpayer. The West Coast franchise was a disaster for the taxpayer. You'll struggle to persuade anyone outside John Majors group of 1930's fantasists that railway privatisation has worked well.
So you'll be disappointed if full nationalisation of the railways isn't in the 2015 Labour manifesto ?
Especially since its the one bit of UNITE policy its members actually support.....(+34% net).....
Another wedge is hammered in. Labour used this tactic against the Tories many times - now the tide has turned. I don't like it much myself - but it works.
" Mr Shapps, the Conservative party chairman, will use a speech which sets the tone for Tories’ strategy in the countdown to the 2015 general election.
He will also say that Labour’s negative outlook is the “single biggest difference” with the Conservatives. The aggressive focus on Labour is further evidence that the Conservatives are increasingly on an election footing.
In a speech to the Policy Exchange thinktank, he will say: “The sad fact is, Labour loves doing Britain down.In every case it’s almost as if they’ve been willing the country to fail.
“You could almost see the palpable sense of disappointment for Ed Balls just last week through gritted teeth he acknowledged stronger growth. It’s the single biggest difference between our outlooks.
“We can see a vision of this country beyond the boom and bust of Brown, a future where we continue to generate employment.”
My accent confounded a lady I knew when at university. She thought I was from the south of England, but had no idea which bit.
I'm routinely mistaken for being Welsh - even by Welsh speakers. It's something to do with my vowels. Given I'm an RP Geordie of Lancashire and Irish stock - it's a wonder I'm not from Pakistan!
Another wedge is hammered in. Labour used this tactic against the Tories many times - now the tide has turned. I don't like it much myself - but it works.
" Mr Shapps, the Conservative party chairman, will use a speech which sets the tone for Tories’ strategy in the countdown to the 2015 general election.
He will also say that Labour’s negative outlook is the “single biggest difference” with the Conservatives. The aggressive focus on Labour is further evidence that the Conservatives are increasingly on an election footing.
In a speech to the Policy Exchange thinktank, he will say: “The sad fact is, Labour loves doing Britain down.In every case it’s almost as if they’ve been willing the country to fail.
“You could almost see the palpable sense of disappointment for Ed Balls just last week through gritted teeth he acknowledged stronger growth. It’s the single biggest difference between our outlooks.
“We can see a vision of this country beyond the boom and bust of Brown, a future where we continue to generate employment.”
It's no great surprise that as the Tories go in search of UKIP voters they make it harder for themselves to attract erstwhile LD and Labour voters. Presumably, though, they have factored that in to their calculations. The great merit if swinging to the populist right is that it puts the Tories in their comfort zone. The big drawback is that the Tory comfort zone actively repels as many as it attracts. Thus, it will all come down to turnout. Which of England's two nations will be the more motivated in 2015? For the last 4 GEs it has been the anti-Tory party; Crosby has set himself the task of reviving the anti-Labour coalition of 1992. From 6,000 miles away it looks a tough, but not impossible, task. A hung Parliament with Labour as - marginally - the biggest party still feels like the most likely outcome. But EdM remains a major Labour weakness and that could tip the balance if the Tories can make 2015 a referendum on him.
In any regard you might care to drag up in your defence their experience is no different from Liberal Democrats.
Did I say it was?
My original point was simply that 2010 LibDem voters were not a homogenous group, and that it is possible (in principle at least) for the Conservatives to appeal to some of them. Not really a controversial point, is it?
Your main point was not controversial. Your illustrations were through. You were IMO unfairly dismissive of 2010 LibDem voters with liberal views many of whom have direct experience of immigration.
Never mind. I hope that you are well and enjoying that rarest of things the British summer.
A girl at primary school, of whom I have only vague memories, had a weird accent. Her parents were a mixture of cockney, Liverpudlian and something else.
And you score 10/10. Congrats. Happy trolling - I fear you've already outed yourself since top quality trolling doesn't draw attention to itself, it just nudges subjects into eventual oblivion.
As a regular rail user, I can certainly attest to considerable improvements in many areas. The trains I travel on are much cleaner and more comfortable than 20 years ago and they are generally more reliable. The network is largely safer than before though no one must ever be complacent about that.
There are however big problems - capacity is one I see every day coming back into Waterloo but the capacity issue can be compounded by poor scheduling. Many commuters travel to and from Surbiton and they want a train that doesn't stop at all the intermediate stations. The 6.32 to Guildford is first stop Surbiton and every one of its 12 coaches is jammed with Surbiton-bound coaches looking for the quickest way home. All South West Trains need to do is introduce a few Surbiton stops on other mainline services to alleviate the issue.
As for capacity, we have the scandal of the vacated former Eurostar platforms at Waterloo which could be brought back into service and provide additional capacity but no one seems willing or able to do that.
On the financing, leasing companies like Porterbrook need to be taken out of the hands of the banks and the charges for carriages slashed so train operating companies can get more coaches to alleviate overcrowding. The fares are high because of the question of supply and demand - reducing fares will make overcrowding worse unless additional capacity is provided.
Sky News Newsdesk @SkyNewsBreak Ex-Tory co-treasurer Peter Cruddas wins £180,000 in libel damages over Sunday Times allegation he charged £250,000 to meet David Cameron
Does Ed still want an independent enquiry into this ?
Comments
http://www.theguardian.com/media/greenslade/2013/jul/31/sun-paywalls?CMP=twt_fd
Anecdotally, I'm finding rather a lot of others on Twitter with accounts - and several journos have stopped prefacing stories with £.
John O: I think there was an element of froth in Labour's score when it was at 42-43%, and you're right that it's gone. The remainder are mostly not really interested in the Tories triumphing over 1% GDP growth or whatever while Cameron is in his anti-UKIP baby-eating mode. There is also a non-froth element to UKIP. I think you'll find it hard to get them down to 5%, especially with the Euros in 2014. Oddly, you might be best off if Labour wins the Euros - deflates UKIP and helps you build the "stop them!" narrative.
Financier: I'm not at all worried that Unite might leave Labour, or Ed might be defeated at the conference - that's not how Labour politics works, as John O notes. There is a certain ritual element to these things, a bit like family rows where everyone knows the family is staying together in the end. In particular I'm not worried about finance for 2015 - I won't go into it but it'll work out (the longer term is trickier, but we'll worry about that later). There is a risk that the public will think us self-preoccupied by the conference, and a potential that it will enable us to take the news agenda - doubt if either effect will last into 2015.
The LDs have also made quite a point of being in HMG and in Oppo at the same time. How they frame this will be interesting messaging.
'I don't really think the Tories wanted 111 on the front pages followed by Osbornes twit of a father in law.'
We've had Labour's version of Carl Pilkington on TV for the best part of a week,defending his party's record on the NHS & the poll gap narrows to 3%.
I still can't see what's particularly racist about the poster. Surely only illegals need be "offended"?
Fascinating to read two virulently anti-LD posters discussing the minutiae of the LD vote. It has always been the softest of votes and I recall even when I lived in the LD heartland of Sutton that 12-18 months out from a GE, we would get really worried about where the vote was and whether it would come back - usually after the poor European Parliamentary or LGA elections.
It would be especially hard work for people moving into the Borough who were more often than not Tory or Labour supporters and had never seen anything in the way of LD activity on the ground.
The Conservative and Labour parties have always enjoyed a core vote of around 30% each who will always vote for them whatever policies they advocated. I suspect that in the same way as much of the LD vote is an anti-Conservative AND anti-Labour vote, the Conservative vote was more than anything else an anti-Labour vote and vice-versa.
Certainly, when I look on here, the anti-Labour vitriol is astonishing and far in excess of anything I hear out in the real world. I strongly suspect most people haven't passed any kind of judgement on Ed Miliband as a potential Prime Minister at this time. Some on here had made up their minds as soon as he became Labour leader or was it simply a reflex action because he was leader of the Labour party ?
It could therefore be argued that the 2015 GE will be primarily about which party can come up with more scares, threats and innuendo aimed at persuading the voters of the dangers of voting for its principal opponent and therefore the "you can't trust the other lot, stick with us" mantra will be the theme from this autumn for the next 20 months.
Not brilliant but that's how democratic politics seems to function.
New Populus #MPpanel research finds 32% of MPs would support shale gas #fracking in their constituency, but 43% would say no.
"Grant Shapps will today take aim at Labour's predictions about growth, crime and unemployment, claiming Ed Miliband's party "loves doing Britain down"
Now you don't need to be a rocket science to ask the following question when he finishes his speech at Policy Exchange - "Grant, you say Ed M is doing down Britain, can you remember which party ran the campaign "Broken Britain" ".
Maybe another one of the "get on the front foot during recess" ideas?
@ImperialWarMuseum
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BQfFXtXCEAA9WCF.jpg:large
as a native briton, probably you don't feel it, but if like myself you're only a beaurocrats stamp away from either deportation or permanent residence, there is a slight insecurity, always present. If a poster campaign subtly ups the temperature of anti immigrant feeling (to be sure most people who like this poster are not only unhappy about levels of illegal immigration) it makes that insecurity worse. So if you have a choice of countries to take your high level of education and professional skills,maybe you are going to choose somewhere else other than britain.
This and the talk of tourist bonds surely can't be good for the economy in the long run
What is clear is that UKIP voters priorities are different from those of the established parties.
They view immigration (82) as more important than the economy (53) vs 66/50 overall. They also see immigration affecting their family (36 - ranked #3) - more than twice as much as any other group (Tories closest on 15 - ranked #5 equal).
On Health they view that as a worry for their family (38) more than the country (24) - everyone else views it the other way round (38:41).
And of course on Europe, they are in a league of their own (country/family) (OA): 40/26 (12/6).
Which of course it isn't.
No Government has a mandate not to be opposed in a democratic society. I am also entirely convinced that the Labour Party and those who support it love this country every bit as much as Conservative, Liberal Democrat or UKIP supporters or those not supporting any party.
It's also not just about the mandatory effusive tweet every time a British sportsman does well or a royal baby is born. Loving your country takes many forms - I can enjoy walking in rural Shropshire or admire London on a summer's evening. It doesn't make me blind to its faults and imperfections and nor does it make me angry when said imperfections are left to fester.
Politics should be about being honest about the areas of our life and society where we aren't doing well enough and whether that's injustice, homelessness or the hundreds of commuters squeezed like cattle on the 6.32 from London to Guildford and paying fortunes for the privilege, we should be about trying to improve and make better and not shout down those who point out the problems.
And Shapps is merely throwing back all the crap Labour threw at the Tories and Balls in particular here.
It was Labour who started this mud-slinging and revelled in it. Now they're getting it back and until they find something compelling to say the media will run with it.
All fair in love and war blah blah.
LibDem supporters (like supporters of other parties) are not a homogenous bunch of people with identical views on everything. Amongst them are Guardian-reading, hand-wringing academics and Beeboid types, who probably have no contact with immigrants other than their cleaning ladies and the staff in the coffee shop; they won't vote Tory whatever happens.
But there's also a subset of more ordinary people who voted LibDem in 2010, as a compromise between what they saw as Labour profligacy and incompetence, and the over-austere Conservative alternative. Such voters don't necessarily think like LibDem activists, and don't necessarily like hugging illegal immigrant: those are the sort who switched to UKIP in Eastleigh.
The Conservatives can't and won't attract the former sort whatever they do, but they can attract some of the latter.
At the same time, you sense that this isn't actually intended to address the problem, since illegal immigrants know the score and are hardly likely to react to a passing van. It is clearly a political stunt to show that the Government is Worried About Illegal Foreigners. It's not exactly wrong, but it's alienating. You're British. The Government is supposed to be about you too. Why are they posturing like this? Oh, to get votes. Sigh.
That, as fairly as I can as I can put it, is the reason why many people find it unpleasant. Not racist. Not illegal. But alienating.
http://yougov.co.uk/news/2013/07/31/manning-and-snowden-send-both-prison/
A majority of Americans want Bradley Manning and Edward Snowden to serve time in prison, though the public is slightly more forgiving to Snowden
Though it was time someone exposed Toby Young for what he is I thought Stella's talent was misdirected on that particular subject. It's the nature of twitter that it encourages puerile comments from puerile people and the fact that spotty twelve year old boys are sending obscene tweets shouldn't exercise any MP's time.
On the other hand exposing Toby for what he is is a service but probably best not as part of a clean up twitter campaign.
RT @EricPickles: New DCLG statistics show councils making £635 million net PROFIT from #parking in 2013-14 (+5.6%) bit.ly/15uXGDH
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/industry/10211889/Britain-is-playing-catch-up-to-the-US-manufacturing-boom.html
"Remarkably, the US manufacturing renaissance isn’t the result of a grand scheme or costly stimulus package dreamt up in Washington. Rather, it is a pure free market triumph, the unintended consequence of enlightened policy decisions on energy"
"Thanks to a much more benign attitude than that seen in our paranoid, anti-growth Britain, US shale gas and oil output has grown more than 50pc annually since 2007, creating jobs and driving down costs. In its latest report, McKinsey, the consultancy, calculates that shale could bolster US GDP by $690bn (£450bn) a year and create 1.7m jobs across the economy by 2020, and not just in energy-intensive industries. "
Ross Hawkins @rosschawkins
(My timeline suggests folk are finding ways of satirising the idea of a Lib Dem Pocket book of achievements)
I am now One of Them!
(In case you're wondering, Ilford North was only 44% white British in 2011)
"I don't get especially worked up about it and think we've discussed it to death. But to respond - it's not racist per se"
You're being far too kind Nick. I had lunch with four advertising friends completely non political and for the first time ever there was unanimity. All thought it so shocking they just laughed!
You'd have to be a complete imbecile (or a racist) not to realize what is offensive about it. I heard Nick Clegg do a very good demolition job on them.
Why isn't Ed speaking out? That's the real offense.
In truth - vote Farage - get Drenge.
RT @CallumIJones: "Do you get a lot of abuse on Twitter?" @MattChorley asks @nick_clegg <<< He says "probably"
"I've just won my 1st Hortence Troll badge - YEAH."
Well done! I always thought it an injustice that you've been trolling for so many years without recognition.
Steven Fry had them nailed:
“It's now very common to hear people say, 'I'm rather offended by that.' As if that gives them certain rights. It's actually nothing more... than a whine. 'I find that offensive.' It has no meaning; it has no purpose; it has no reason to be respected as a phrase. 'I am offended by that.' Well, so f*****g what.”
― Stephen Fry
There is nothing racist about asking people to desist in crime (the crime in this instance being their illegal presence in the UK).
One area of law I would really like to see examined is Right-to-die. Sadly, there's been another knockback.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-23506186
Any law would need to be exceptionally well-written and clear (yes, I know). But the idea that people in real and genuine pain or severe disability have to continue suffering does not seem just.
The rumours and allegations are that such things are sometimes happening by the back door, without anyone knowing. That is much more open to abuse than good legislation.
Labour should never let itself be out-manouvered by the LDs attacking the Tories. EdM should have been onto this fast.
What's the point in having an official opposition if it doesn't oppose?
http://news.sky.com/story/1122615/rihanna-wins-topshop-image-rights-fight
I thought Ed was on holiday and you had to ask Mrs M's permission to speak to him on the phone ?
He's been wedged - again.
You think they're terrible, so does Roger and his advertising friends.
Given the YouGov polling - you aren't in tune with the majority of the public.
Ex-Tory co-treasurer Peter Cruddas wins £180,000 in libel damages over Sunday Times allegation he charged £250,000 to meet David Cameron
Crosby is causing a panic in labour circles, as seen by their hapless determination to 'get' him.
(2) You make some weird assumption that you, I or Richard speak for anyone but ourselves. Our opinions carry an equal weight of one out of 47million voters. None of us represent Sussex in any sense.
(3) In the only Sussex-wide poll (the recent PCC vote). Labour came second with 41% of the vote. If 41% is as rare as hens teeth. In 2010, on 37% Tories must be very rare indeed.
(4) You make a big assumption about who I currently would vote for.
"(4) You make a big assumption about who I currently would vote for."
Really? So you're not a Labour voter? Who said to me at Dirty Dicks "Ed Miliband Ten More Years" ? And certainly was a card carrying Labour Horsham member who commented that I was probably one of their handful of website visitors?
I'll put you down as Undecided then - right.
Actually there have been hundreds of advertising campaigns in relation to all sorts of crimes and offences:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/rlancefield/2925103807/
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-birmingham-19832682
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-bristol-17636839
http://content.met.police.uk/Campaign/blunt
You still haven't told us how diverse 'your neck of the woods' is!
http://labourlist.org/2013/07/the-narrowing-polls-are-a-worry-but-worse-labour-mps-fear-theres-a-sense-of-drift/
"Several MPs have spoken to me about a sense of “drift”, and a lack of clarity from the party leadership. And whilst only a handful of MPs I’ve spoken to are opposed to Miliband’s plans to reform the union-link, I’m not sensing any confidence from within the PLP that Miliband a) has a plan to fund the party’s election campaign post-reform or b) that they sense this is a real vote winner."
Even more fun however
"The policy will come, we are told. And it will be bold, and radical (think house building, control of energy prices and – perhaps – public rail ownership), but it won’t come yet."
One nation - East Germany 1970s style.
Renationalising the railways should show the world that we are open for business and enterprise.
titters..
"There is nothing racist about asking people to desist in crime (the crime in this instance being their illegal presence in the UK)."
As it doesn't affect anyone without a foreign accent and a non white face I'd expect you to be insensitive to the effect........
But just imagine you do have a dusky skin and a foreign accent isn't it likely that white people without a foreign accent will start wondering.....Is my neighbour a criminal?
And those with a foreign accent and dusky skin will wonder 'are those Morris Dancers looking at me and my family suspiciously........'
"There’s a fear that we’re turning inwards to talk about ourselves with an election already on the horizon. As the economy picks up and the Tories feel bullish enough to try and attack Labor on our traditional strength (the NHS) some MPs have begun to fear that the party’s broader strategy isn’t working."
No! Ed is a strategic genius to spend nearly half the time before the GE on an internal party wrangle that few, if any, voters care about - and all under the cover of a "non-story" too!
He would have been mad to sort this out two years ago because......well, because.....
My original point was simply that 2010 LibDem voters were not a homogenous group, and that it is possible (in principle at least) for the Conservatives to appeal to some of them. Not really a controversial point, is it?
Nationality and race are not the same thing at all. Immigrants can be of any colour.
As it happens, my accent may not be quite what you expect.
My accent confounded a lady I knew when at university. She thought I was from the south of England, but had no idea which bit.
" Mr Shapps, the Conservative party chairman, will use a speech which sets the tone for Tories’ strategy in the countdown to the 2015 general election.
He will also say that Labour’s negative outlook is the “single biggest difference” with the Conservatives. The aggressive focus on Labour is further evidence that the Conservatives are increasingly on an election footing.
In a speech to the Policy Exchange thinktank, he will say: “The sad fact is, Labour loves doing Britain down.In every case it’s almost as if they’ve been willing the country to fail.
“You could almost see the palpable sense of disappointment for Ed Balls just last week through gritted teeth he acknowledged stronger growth. It’s the single biggest difference between our outlooks.
“We can see a vision of this country beyond the boom and bust of Brown, a future where we continue to generate employment.”
The news came as a survey suggests voters are not warming to coalition government and would prefer either the Tories or Labour to win an overall majority in 2015..." http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/10212191/Stop-talking-down-economy-Grant-Shapps-tells-Labour.html
I think I should have said "If it sounds like a troll and pastes like a troll..."
Conservative politician says something against Labour in the Daily Telegraph. Shock waves reverberate around the World.
Never mind. I hope that you are well and enjoying that rarest of things the British summer.
And you score 10/10. Congrats. Happy trolling - I fear you've already outed yourself since top quality trolling doesn't draw attention to itself, it just nudges subjects into eventual oblivion.
There are however big problems - capacity is one I see every day coming back into Waterloo but the capacity issue can be compounded by poor scheduling. Many commuters travel to and from Surbiton and they want a train that doesn't stop at all the intermediate stations. The 6.32 to Guildford is first stop Surbiton and every one of its 12 coaches is jammed with Surbiton-bound coaches looking for the quickest way home. All South West Trains need to do is introduce a few Surbiton stops on other mainline services to alleviate the issue.
As for capacity, we have the scandal of the vacated former Eurostar platforms at Waterloo which could be brought back into service and provide additional capacity but no one seems willing or able to do that.
On the financing, leasing companies like Porterbrook need to be taken out of the hands of the banks and the charges for carriages slashed so train operating companies can get more coaches to alleviate overcrowding. The fares are high because of the question of supply and demand - reducing fares will make overcrowding worse unless additional capacity is provided.