Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » After last night’s Survation poll with Ukip just 2pc behind

SystemSystem Posts: 11,002
edited May 2013 in General

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » After last night’s Survation poll with Ukip just 2pc behind the Tories today’s YouGov has the gap at 17pc

The first YouGov poll to be carried out after the “loongate” story blew up has a dramatically different picture than Survation last night.

Read the full story here


«13

Comments

  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    Viva la difference
  • RogerRoger Posts: 18,891
    edited May 2013
    Why the huge difference...

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4f6wzGpFKUQ

  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 50,772
    The "swivel eyed loons" story is plebgate delux. Once again there is an orgy of name calling and abuse based on what Mr Anderson might politely call "unreliable evidence". All those that went on and on and on about plebs are once again in full cry. It has to be true because they want to believe it.

    I cannot deny for a moment that these absurd episodes are doing real damage to the government in general and Cameron in particular. Once upon a time the tories had the self discipline and self control to simply ignore such nonsense but we live in a more febrile age.

    Plebgate went on for weeks and it is all too likely this story too will run for a while yet. Those that want stable, real world, economically sane government really need to get a grip of themselves and reflect on who and what drives this. They are not your friends.
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    edited May 2013
    "It is argued that the absence of prompting depresses the UKIP share and helps boost the Tories.

    I don't think anyone can seriously doubt it to be fair. It's a question of who gets prompted and why. Like with the debates there are going to be serious questions for all pollsters to deal with if the kippers maintain a high polling, particularly if it is higher than the lib dems. That there are reasons around having MPs and being able to win seats will not stop those questions.

    As for how this poll will play into the current farce around Cammie and the tories, I presume if reason and cool heads were the dominant force in the tory party right now then they would take both polls into consideration, weigh up the consequences and rationally decide on a course of action. Problem being panic is the now the default response of backbenchers and a weak an incompetent leadership show no sign of being able to stop them running around like headless chickens, banging on about Europe and lashing out against policies.

    When Brown's administration was falling apart, and the rumours around his leadership and challengers were in full flow and all over the newpapers, the volume of petulant cries and whining about the meeja having it in for him from labour spinners were always a good indicator of just how badly things were going for them. "tittle tattle" was usually the default denial and refusal to acknowledge the shabolic nature of any given situation from the spinners. How things have changed... John Major never had to deal with an unsympathetic meeja either.;^ )
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,879
    It's too febrile now to make any real sense of the polls. At some stage things will move on. UKIP need some time away from the full glare of publicity in order to develop a coherent and rounded offering which goes beyond the EU. If they are serious about being a proper political party they need to be able to talk about issues such as tax, welfare, transport, health, education etc - the issues that will matter once the GE comes into focus. And they need to find a few credible performers beyond Farage. If they can do that and end up with a voter base of 10% plus it would be a stunning achievement.
  • IcarusIcarus Posts: 885
    JackW said:

    Viva la difference

    Jack W outed as a Europhile swivel eyed loon!



  • NormNorm Posts: 1,251
    Although Survation was probably a rogue equally these YouGov figures don't feel right. I suspect UKIP is running 5 points higher and you can lop 2.5 points off Tories and Labour.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,879
    Mick_Pork said:

    "It is argued that the absence of prompting depresses the UKIP share and helps boost the Tories.

    I don't think anyone can seriously doubt it to be fair. It's a question of who gets prompted and why. Like with the debates there are going to be serious questions for all pollsters to deal with if the kippers maintain a high polling, particularly if it is higher than the lib dems. That there are reasons around having MPs and being able to win seats will not stop those questions.

    As for how this poll will play into the current farce around Cammie and the tories, I presume if reason and cool heads were the dominant force in the tory party right now then they would take both polls into consideration, weigh up the consequences and rationally decide on a course of action. Problem being panic is the now the default response of backbenchers and a weak an incompetent leadership show no sign of being able to stop them running around like headless chickens, banging on about Europe and lashing out against policies.

    When Brown's administration was falling apart, and the rumours around his leadership and challengers were in full flow and all over the newpapers, the volume of petulant cries and whining about the meeja having it in for him from labour spinners were always a good indicator of just how badly things were going for them. "tittle tattle" was usually the default denial and refusal to acknowledge the shabolic nature of any given situation from the spinners. How things have changed... John Major never had to deal with an unsympathetic meeja either.;^ )

    Isn't it more the case that a lot of Tory MPs and members would actually feel more comfortable with UKIP? It's not panic driving them, it's total contempt for Cameron and co. It's contempt coupled with cowardice - they do not have the courage of their convictions.

  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    edited May 2013

    UKIP need some time away from the full glare of publicity in order to develop a coherent and rounded offering which goes beyond the EU.

    No they don't. They want the media to be all kipper all the time and considering their big next electoral test is the EU elections they will hardly want to stop banging on about that till those elections are over.

    The real question is will the tories be dumb enough to keep banging on about the EU. They've already done it for months when it was blatantly obvious it would only help the kippers so it's far from certain they even know how to stop now.

    "And they need to find a few credible performers beyond Farage. If they can do that and end up with a voter base of 10% plus it would be a stunning achievement.

    They have Diane James but Farage loves the limelight. It'll matter in 2015 but it sure isn't going to matter much now unless they are challenged on things other than their pet subjects like the EU, welfare or immigration. Not very likely as long as Crosby and Osbrowne are still intent on doing all the kippers work for them with yet more inept master strategising.

    The kippers were working from a 2010 base of 3%. They triple that and it's a huge step forward for them but FPTP won't be kind unless it's a fair bit higher even than that.

  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    Icarus said:

    JackW said:

    Viva la difference

    Jack W outed as a Europhile swivel eyed loon!

    Despite your disgraceful effrontery we have a pleasing custom on PB of welcoming newcomers to the site, so :

    Welcome newbie .... would you care for a stay at Auchentennach and meet a nice old gentleman and have a taste of some fine pies ??

  • RogerRoger Posts: 18,891
    edited May 2013
    "Once upon a time the tories had the self discipline and self control to simply ignore such nonsense but we live in a more febrile age"

    I think the Tories problems are more prosaic. The skills required to be a Prime minister are different from those required to be a PR man and though in this age of tinsel and glitter Cameron's qualifications seem ideal I think he's discovering (as am I) that there's more to being PM than PR (and I say this as someone who generally believes that that presentation in politics is all)

    Perhaps he's discovering the old lawyer's maxim that 'one who acts for himself has a fool for a client'
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    @SouthamObserver Spot on, as so often. The Conservative right are timorous quislings, eager to betray but too fearful to risk their own necks. It's noteworthy how few Tory right criticisms of David Cameron come with a name attached.
  • DaemonBarberDaemonBarber Posts: 1,626
    The rise of another right of centre party should be a welcome thing. Politics needs a good shakeup every now and again. The Tories have effectively had the right to themselves for a long time. It is unfortunate however that FPTP just doesn't work. A sensible system would allow a right leaning coalition, FPTP will just ensure a dilution of the right and return a Labour government. Probably with a large (if not thumping) majority.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,559
    While the UKIP\Con gap is increasingly good sport to watch, the quiet message from this and other polls is that Ed is no great shakes as a leader any more than Dave. He isn't winning hearts and minds or votes; his hope of being PM in his own right rests with Nigel.
  • The user and all related content has been deleted.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 24,967
    Is Gloucester Old Spot male or female ?

    I'd like to know if we can expect breeding or fighting between GOS and Mick Pork.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 18,891
    edited May 2013
    @Tim

    I was listening to it last night and I couldn't get out of my head how appropriate it was

    (and it's brilliant-a cross between Dylan and Lou Reed)

  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,559
    antifrank said:

    @SouthamObserver Spot on, as so often. The Conservative right are timorous quislings, eager to betray but too fearful to risk their own necks. It's noteworthy how few Tory right criticisms of David Cameron come with a name attached.

    You can hardly attach it to one party, it's MPs in general. Labour MPs leaked like sieves about Brown being an electoral disaster yet the body of them wouldn't remove him despite some obvious leads.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950
    tim said:

    Looks more likely, although anything over ten does the job.

    Now a question for the PB Tories.
    How did Cameron arrange the Gay marriage issue so that Labour gets the credit, he is invisible and the Tory face is that of Gerald Howarth.

    If he was going to use it to detox the Tories, how come he disappeared at the first sign of trouble?

    Sir Gerald Howarth has one legacy

    #aggressivehomosexuals

    All good questions.

    DC is or at least looks weak, which comes to the same thing. He’s weak because he never grasped the nettle from the start to be a strong PM rather than a good Coalition PM and this has affected every decision he’s made since and explains all the flip-flops.

    Of course that said the reality remains that he didn’t win the election so his options were always limited and perhaps his current predicament is just how it is to be a Coalition PM.

    That said, we have the Gay Marriage bill, he introduced it and it passed. In time, it will come to be seen as a defining detoxification issue which David Cameron pushed through (only geeks will remember the exact divisions). So he has and is pushing the “right” agenda. Which gives confidence (if you are a tory..) that he will emerge from his cocoon. But right now, he is cautious, if not fearful not only of his coalition partner but of his party also.

    Rebels, loyalists and activists are waiting for him to take the gloves off. Tories will quickly be whipped into line with a strong leader. The concern of course (and it’s increasing) is that there is a blancmange fist under the velvet glove.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    I was struck last night by the low numbers of Conservative rebels, if one might call them that on a free vote, in the various divisions.

    Are some keeping their powder dry or do they realize that the game is up ??
  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    JackW said:



    Welcome newbie .... would you care for a stay at Auchentennach and meet a nice old gentleman and have a taste of some fine pies ??

    You're not meant to use pbc to groom unsuspecting Lib Dems, JackW!
  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143
    I've been opinion polled. One of the questions was a little different to normal. I was asked to describe the mood of the nation in three words. I chose: frustrated, anxious and impatient. What would you choose?

    Also, the Conservative leadership appears to be convinced that immigration is the principal reason for the rise of UKIP. Can they win back UKIP voters by getting tough on immigration?
  • IcarusIcarus Posts: 885
    edited May 2013
    Opposition is much easier than actually having to do things. That the back benches of former "Party of Government" the Conservatives, have shown a preference for opposition to the government contrasts markedly with the Liberal Democrats behaviour in the coalition.

    Not new Jack -just sleeping!

    OT can I recommend Tio Pepe's En Rama http://tinyurl.com/mwewgxc - unfiltered short life sherry, to wash down your pies.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    @OblitusSumMe Divided, fretful, weary.
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    edited May 2013
    @SouthamObserver


    "Isn't it more the case that a lot of Tory MPs and members would actually feel more comfortable with UKIP?!

    MPs? Nope. They can defect at any time. How many have? Even including the swivel eyed loons like Dorries and Co?

    Members? Same applies but we know they are losing members and activists to the kippers so it's clearly a problem.

    " It's not panic driving them, it's total contempt for Cameron and co. It's contempt coupled with cowardice - they do not have the courage of their convictions."

    They certainly have no fondness for Cammie and few can seriously doubt their contempt is matched by his contempt for them. However, panic is driving them. They are on the receiving end of the wrath of their local constituency associations and we saw just how terrified so many of them are of that anger and a rising kipper vote last night.
  • NormNorm Posts: 1,251
    edited May 2013

    Southam said

    "Isn't it more the case that a lot of Tory MPs and members would actually feel more comfortable with UKIP? It's not panic driving them, it's total contempt for Cameron and co. It's contempt coupled with cowardice - they do not have the courage of their convictions".



    I am not quite sure what you mean by that last sentence. I don't recall a third of the parliamentary party regularly rebelling in the Major years. Although the payroll vote is smaller now that is still a pretty damning figure. It may appear some are obsessing about UKIP but of course if you occupy a safe Tory seat, UKIP present the first real threat to your previously comfortable incumbency and are therefore are more likely to be on your radar than Labour or the Lib Dems.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 24,967

    antifrank said:

    @SouthamObserver Spot on, as so often. The Conservative right are timorous quislings, eager to betray but too fearful to risk their own necks. It's noteworthy how few Tory right criticisms of David Cameron come with a name attached.

    You can hardly attach it to one party, it's MPs in general. Labour MPs leaked like sieves about Brown being an electoral disaster yet the body of them wouldn't remove him despite some obvious leads.
    With the most cowardly being the very same David Miliband who Southam regards as being the nation's political messiah.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 24,967
    "In time, it will come to be seen as a defining detoxification issue which David Cameron pushed through (only geeks will remember the exact divisions)."

    Just like Thatcher is given so much credit for having legalised homosexuality in Scotland and Northern Ireland.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,879
    antifrank said:

    @SouthamObserver Spot on, as so often. The Conservative right are timorous quislings, eager to betray but too fearful to risk their own necks. It's noteworthy how few Tory right criticisms of David Cameron come with a name attached.

    Safe seats are very comfy to sit on.


  • RogerRoger Posts: 18,891
    "I was struck last night by the low numbers of Conservative rebels,"

    30% sounds reasonably robust! Take away those on the payroll and the Tory gays and you are probably talking 50%. Is there a word like 'fratricide' or 'matricide' when describing the killing of your leader?
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,559
    tim said:

    Benedict Brogan ‏@benedictbrogan
    Twitter may make life difficult for Dave, but his real problem is he's not v good at politics. My column http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/benedictbrogan/100217929/cameron-shouldnt-blame-our-rowdy-press-for-his-own-failings/


    "He is not very good at politics"

    A fitting epitaph

    Here lies David Cameron.
    He thought he'd be quite good at being Prime Minister, but he wasn't very good at politics.

    Hope you didn't miss this bit in Brogan's article

    " Ed Miliband is presiding over a slow-motion slump in Labour support." slowly but surely Ed's choking Labour.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    @Topping

    Despite the vocal opposition of a sizable minority it's notable how quickly gay law reforms have passed into the publically accepted canon of social reform. The list is extensive :

    1. Equalization of the age of consent.
    2. Gay adoption
    3. Gays in the military
    4. Provision of goods and services
    5. Civil Partnerships

    And soon gay marriage which will surely join them in short measure as a relatively uncontroversial feature of daily life for a large majority of our citizens.

    We are IMHO a much better country for it.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950

    "In time, it will come to be seen as a defining detoxification issue which David Cameron pushed through (only geeks will remember the exact divisions)."

    Just like Thatcher is given so much credit for having legalised homosexuality in Scotland and Northern Ireland.

    You mean after which she went on to be PM for 10 years?

    hope so.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950
    JackW said:

    @Topping

    Despite the vocal opposition of a sizable minority it's notable how quickly gay law reforms have passed into the publically accepted canon of social reform. The list is extensive :

    1. Equalization of the age of consent.
    2. Gay adoption
    3. Gays in the military
    4. Provision of goods and services
    5. Civil Partnerships

    And soon gay marriage which will surely join them in short measure as a relatively uncontroversial feature of daily life for a large majority of our citizens.

    We are IMHO a much better country for it.

    well exactly: DC is on the right side of history.

    And we're of course not going to mention in the same sentence the words/phrases "in power"..."13 years"..."did f*** all about it" are we...
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,879

    antifrank said:

    @SouthamObserver Spot on, as so often. The Conservative right are timorous quislings, eager to betray but too fearful to risk their own necks. It's noteworthy how few Tory right criticisms of David Cameron come with a name attached.

    You can hardly attach it to one party, it's MPs in general. Labour MPs leaked like sieves about Brown being an electoral disaster yet the body of them wouldn't remove him despite some obvious leads.
    With the most cowardly being the very same David Miliband who Southam regards as being the nation's political messiah.

    Not really - just infinitely preferable to his brother. But it's not going to happen, so we move on and hope against hope that EdM is not the electoral disaster many of us fear.

  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    @Icarus

    "Not new Jack -just sleeping!"

    From this mornings contribution it's more like snoring very loudly
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,765
    The detox strategy was based on the assumption that people who refused to vote Conservative did so because the Party was socially conservative. Whereas, in reality, the biggest barrier to voting Conservative is because the Party is seen as only caring about rich people. The detox strategy was aiming at the wrong target from day one.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,559
    TOPPING said:

    "In time, it will come to be seen as a defining detoxification issue which David Cameron pushed through (only geeks will remember the exact divisions)."

    Just like Thatcher is given so much credit for having legalised homosexuality in Scotland and Northern Ireland.

    You mean after which she went on to be PM for 10 years?

    hope so.
    Hardly on the back of Scottish and Irish votes.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,879
    Mick_Pork said:

    @SouthamObserver


    "Isn't it more the case that a lot of Tory MPs and members would actually feel more comfortable with UKIP?!

    MPs? Nope. They can defect at any time. How many have? Even including the swivel eyed loons like Dorries and Co?

    Members? Same applies but we know they are losing members and activists to the kippers so it's clearly as problem.

    " It's not panic driving them, it's total contempt for Cameron and co. It's contempt coupled with cowardice - they do not have the courage of their convictions."

    They certainly have no fondness for Cammie and few can seriously doubt their contempt is matched by his contempt for them. However, panic is driving them. They are on the receiving end of the wrath of their local constituency associations and we saw just how terrified so many of them are of that anger and a rising kipper vote last night.

    It would be interesting to look at the majorities most of Dave's right wing critics have. My sense is that most are in safeish seats. They are insulated from political realities. And they will not risk those seats for anything so vulgar as principles.

  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095
    edited May 2013
    These recent threads will be interesting to read in a few years times, then it will be clear for all to see who the "swivel eyed loons" were.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950

    TOPPING said:

    "In time, it will come to be seen as a defining detoxification issue which David Cameron pushed through (only geeks will remember the exact divisions)."

    Just like Thatcher is given so much credit for having legalised homosexuality in Scotland and Northern Ireland.

    You mean after which she went on to be PM for 10 years?

    hope so.
    Hardly on the back of Scottish and Irish votes.
    No of course not but for the totality of voters she did something right.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    Roger said:

    "I was struck last night by the low numbers of Conservative rebels,"

    30% sounds reasonably robust! Take away those on the payroll and the Tory gays and you are probably talking 50%. Is there a word like 'fratricide' or 'matricide' when describing the killing of your leader?

    Unfair I think Roger.

    30% on a free vote is low for Conservatives on such a measure. There was also a number of Labour MP's, I think about a dozen mostly RC members, who defied their whipped vote.

  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    Yet more trouble ahead by the looks of things.
    ForexLive ‏@ForexLive 16m

    Berlin looks to scupper Cameron's EU renegotiation plans http://bit.ly/1188VfB
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,879
    Sean_F said:

    The detox strategy was based on the assumption that people who refused to vote Conservative did so because the Party was socially conservative. Whereas, in reality, the biggest barrier to voting Conservative is because the Party is seen as only caring about rich people. The detox strategy was aiming at the wrong target from day one.

    If you look at UKIP's last manifesto it was even more favourable to the very rich than anything the Tories have espoused.

  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,074
    Sean_F said:

    The detox strategy was based on the assumption that people who refused to vote Conservative did so because the Party was socially conservative. Whereas, in reality, the biggest barrier to voting Conservative is because the Party is seen as only caring about rich people. The detox strategy was aiming at the wrong target from day one.

    Exactly so. Which is why he should have aimed for a marriage tax allowance at the same time as the gay marriage proposal. Instead he went for a cut in the 50p tax rate, the £10,000 personal allowance is hardly spoken about and there's the child benefit mess.

    Individually some of these policies are good but they're lost in the noise and there's no coherence. As I said last night: more focus is needed.

  • NormNorm Posts: 1,251
    edited May 2013
    TOPPING said:

    JackW said:

    @Topping

    Despite the vocal opposition of a sizable minority it's notable how quickly gay law reforms have passed into the publically accepted canon of social reform. The list is extensive :

    1. Equalization of the age of consent.
    2. Gay adoption
    3. Gays in the military
    4. Provision of goods and services
    5. Civil Partnerships

    And soon gay marriage which will surely join them in short measure as a relatively uncontroversial feature of daily life for a large majority of our citizens.

    We are IMHO a much better country for it.

    well exactly: DC is on the right side of history.

    And we're of course not going to mention in the same sentence the words/phrases "in power"..."13 years"..."did f*** all about it" are we...
    Is it not actually the case that gay marriage was foisted on us by Europe and more specifically as the implementation of a European Council recommendation which was accepted by the government back in November 2011 with an undertaking to implement it by June this year. On that basis this government can hardly claim credit for this measure or criticise Labour for not introducing it during their tenure. This is also why this measure wasn't in the coalition work programme issued back in June 2010.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,559
    Really ? How ?

    I don't remember the 1980s being a time when the public were screaming out for gay rights, nor do I remember the Conservatives being at the vanguard of it, quite the reverse.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,136

    Mick_Pork said:

    @SouthamObserver


    "Isn't it more the case that a lot of Tory MPs and members would actually feel more comfortable with UKIP?!

    MPs? Nope. They can defect at any time. How many have? Even including the swivel eyed loons like Dorries and Co?

    Members? Same applies but we know they are losing members and activists to the kippers so it's clearly as problem.

    " It's not panic driving them, it's total contempt for Cameron and co. It's contempt coupled with cowardice - they do not have the courage of their convictions."

    They certainly have no fondness for Cammie and few can seriously doubt their contempt is matched by his contempt for them. However, panic is driving them. They are on the receiving end of the wrath of their local constituency associations and we saw just how terrified so many of them are of that anger and a rising kipper vote last night.

    It would be interesting to look at the majorities most of Dave's right wing critics have. My sense is that most are in safeish seats. They are insulated from political realities. And they will not risk those seats for anything so vulgar as principles.

    This is the same problem the US Republicans have: People in safe seats aren't scared of the voters, at large but they are scared of their own base deselecting them.

    The result is that they won't let the party move to the centre, where it needs to go to win.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,771
    Cyclefree said:

    Sean_F said:

    The detox strategy was based on the assumption that people who refused to vote Conservative did so because the Party was socially conservative. Whereas, in reality, the biggest barrier to voting Conservative is because the Party is seen as only caring about rich people. The detox strategy was aiming at the wrong target from day one.

    Exactly so. Which is why he should have aimed for a marriage tax allowance at the same time as the gay marriage proposal. Instead he went for a cut in the 50p tax rate, the £10,000 personal allowance is hardly spoken about and there's the child benefit mess.

    Individually some of these policies are good but they're lost in the noise and there's no coherence. As I said last night: more focus is needed.

    Well, the UKIP manifesto is pretty good for everyone. A 25% flat tax is great for mega-rich bankers; the citizens' pension is great for those who have retired; the halving of electricity prices will be fantastic for all who use the stuff; leaving the EU will mean British firms will no longer need to compete with pesky foreigners; and by cancelling the vast bulk of immigration it will be great for the unemployed.

    Oh yes, and the deficit is going to be reduced.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,879

    TOPPING said:

    "In time, it will come to be seen as a defining detoxification issue which David Cameron pushed through (only geeks will remember the exact divisions)."

    Just like Thatcher is given so much credit for having legalised homosexuality in Scotland and Northern Ireland.

    You mean after which she went on to be PM for 10 years?

    hope so.
    Hardly on the back of Scottish and Irish votes.

    The Tories had more than one Scottish MP in the 1980s! The Scots clearly liked her more than anyone who has succeeded her. And wasn't she quite popular in certain parts of NI?

  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530

    The Scots clearly liked her more than anyone who has succeeded her.

    Satire I presume. Nicely done. ;)

  • FinancierFinancier Posts: 3,916

    UKIP are on a surge.
    They'll win Euro 2014
    They represent the vast majority of the population who despise and despair of our politicians, political and ruling classes and the political parties and powerful companies and lobbies that they represent.

    All of the above are seen to be acting in their own, self-serving, interests, rather than those of the people of the UK as a whole.

    The same is true (in spades for the EU monolith, which has never, ever, been remotely popular in the UK - more of a 'necessary evil' since the trade and travel advantages were self-evident to many (thanks to Ryanair, EasyJet etc).

    So UKIP's philosophy represents that of the 'silent majority' on so many issues: education, welfare, immigration, crime, 'life-style values' and much, much more than simply Europe and 'Gay Marriage'.

    To summarise - the vast majority of posters on here are comfortably off(at least); live in urban areas; are well-educated and highly skilled at their professions - not to mention intelligent - and are broadly sympathetic to the notion of 'progressive liberalism' in terms of social policy.

    That you are therefore completely out-of-touch with a vast swathe of what might be called the 'traditional British mind-set' is frightening: you subscribe, as a group (some notable exceptions) to the same mind-set as the political parties who are so completely and utterly despised and rejected by so many - the many that UKIP are attracting in droves.

    I strongly believe we are seeing a broad re-run of the 1930's with Farage and Salmond (and Galloway, in his own way) representing the views of 'the underclass' as seen by the political chatterati: it's the same basis on which Hitler built up the Nazis (and NO, I am NOT comparing Farage, nor UKIP's, policies in any way with those of the National Socialists, ONLY saying that the 'new workers party' has arisen from precisely the same causes that allowed Hitler to prosper and that the average (German) PB poster would have been saying precisely the same things about Hitler in 1930's Germany as they are today about Farage.

    You could say the same thing about 1640 England or 1780 France: the people are rebelling against an arrogant and incompetent elite/governing class - who's failings and weaknesses have been shown up: 'weighed in the scales and found wanting', in fact.

    Cameron is weak and ineffective, Milliband worse and Clegg is lying and deceit personified.

    No wonder people are turning to an effective and attractive alternative - and I, for one, would not be at all surprised to see UKIP poll 40% in the Euros and ~30% in GE 2015: YOU, the politicians, the old-style political parties and the mind-set which goes with them - you have ALL rejected the British people these last 45 years and now the British people have rejected YOU.


    Firstly welcome - and you are exactly right in your thinking. To understand today's politics and the way the electorate are thinking and behaving - you have to "sit in their chair" and understand their viewpoint - whether you agree with it or not. It is no good sitting in a bunker and just quoting the polls 24/7.

    However, we have seen that many voters are very loyal to their parties and to some. voting for another party (even though it may be the best option) is anathema to them and their ilk. So whilst I expect UKIP to do very well in 2014, I do see a creep back by many 2014 rebels to their traditional parties in 2015 - just because of some perverse loyalty and also a touch of "the devil,you know."
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,559

    Sean_F said:

    The detox strategy was based on the assumption that people who refused to vote Conservative did so because the Party was socially conservative. Whereas, in reality, the biggest barrier to voting Conservative is because the Party is seen as only caring about rich people. The detox strategy was aiming at the wrong target from day one.

    If you look at UKIP's last manifesto it was even more favourable to the very rich than anything the Tories have espoused.

    Seriously ? I mean you say you will keep voting for the party who were relaxed about being "filthy rich " which so many of them achieved, both rich and filthy.
  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983

    And wasn't she quite popular in certain parts of NI?

    With the Anglo Irish agreement she managed the rare feat of alienating the unionist side as much as she had previously alienated the nationalist side.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950
    @Alanbrooke

    my (modest) point was that someone said that MT didn't get credit for decriminalising homosexuality I pointed out that as she was PM for the next 10 years it didn't do her any harm.

    No comment on the love or not for her in NI or Scotland.
  • FinancierFinancier Posts: 3,916
    Re: YouGov

    It would appear that the main beneficiary of the ID weightings is the LibDems - up by 26% - and the None/Don't Knows. The Cons and Labour are hardly affected by the weightings.

    So are the LibDems really in a worse place than the polls show and could in fact reach a steady 5%. It might well be that Clegg's now near constant dissembling is not helping them.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    tim said:

    Sean_F said:

    The detox strategy was based on the assumption that people who refused to vote Conservative did so because the Party was socially conservative. Whereas, in reality, the biggest barrier to voting Conservative is because the Party is seen as only caring about rich people. The detox strategy was aiming at the wrong target from day one.

    Osborne looked at Romney and drew the lesson that he should use gay marriage as a flagship detox policy.
    Of course he couldn't draw the lesson that a party leadership stuffed with out of touch rich men giving themselves tax cuts loses elections.
    Could he?
    More piss poor political history from "tim"

    1. Cameron's and Osborne's support for gay marriage predates Romney's run for the GOP nomination.

    2. The "rich" are paying more in tax than for 12 years 9 months of the Labour governments 13 years in power.

    Next ....



  • CD13CD13 Posts: 6,349

    MPs with large majorities have a well-paid job for life and they're not going to risk them for here-today, gone-tomorrow governments. If their tantrum destabilises their own party, so what? The important thing is to keep their associations sweet.

    What can Cameron really do to them? They have few ambitions anyway. They probably agree with their local associations.

    The Labour rebels included Joe Benton. He 's 75 and MP for Bootle. What could EdM threaten him with?
  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    CD13 said:



    The Labour rebels included Joe Benton. He 's 75 and MP for Bootle. What could EdM threaten him with?

    A kiss?
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 24,967

    antifrank said:

    @SouthamObserver Spot on, as so often. The Conservative right are timorous quislings, eager to betray but too fearful to risk their own necks. It's noteworthy how few Tory right criticisms of David Cameron come with a name attached.

    You can hardly attach it to one party, it's MPs in general. Labour MPs leaked like sieves about Brown being an electoral disaster yet the body of them wouldn't remove him despite some obvious leads.
    With the most cowardly being the very same David Miliband who Southam regards as being the nation's political messiah.

    Not really - just infinitely preferable to his brother. But it's not going to happen, so we move on and hope against hope that EdM is not the electoral disaster many of us fear.

    I'm never going to vote for him but I can tell you that EdM is far superior to his brother.

    DM is probably the most overrated politician of the last generation.
  • MrJonesMrJones Posts: 3,523
    A non-globalist conservative* party could get 40%+

    (*conservative including not replacing the indigenous population obv.)

    yougov seem wrong to me, not so much because of the numbers as the lack of movement
  • MrJonesMrJones Posts: 3,523
    tim said:

    Looks more likely, although anything over ten does the job.

    Now a question for the PB Tories.
    How did Cameron arrange the Gay marriage issue so that Labour gets the credit, he is invisible and the Tory face is that of Gerald Howarth.

    If he was going to use it to detox the Tories, how come he disappeared at the first sign of trouble?

    Sir Gerald Howarth has one legacy

    #aggressivehomosexuals

    The answer is obvious. The whole detox strategy was wrong. The detox they needed was 90% ERM, sleaze and spiv related and only 10% gay huskie related.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 24,967
    Sean_F said:

    The detox strategy was based on the assumption that people who refused to vote Conservative did so because the Party was socially conservative. Whereas, in reality, the biggest barrier to voting Conservative is because the Party is seen as only caring about rich people. The detox strategy was aiming at the wrong target from day one.

    I've being saying so for years and was certain about it from the local election results of as long ago as 2008.

    I'd be interested to know at what point you reached the same conclusion.
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    I rather liked this - a different view on party memberships

    "“Why are you a member of the party?” is a question asked of volunteers by our non-political friends and family. It’s also a question we tend to ask ourselves, because, in this transactional era where the ego is supreme, party membership is an anomaly. You don’t get to buy policies with your subscription fee; that’s the whole point, in fact, and it’s why single-issue movements can be dangerous.

    It’s a question that CCHQ and the leadership should ask, as membership continues to decline. The anomalous nature of party affiliation in the “I pay so I get what I want” age is a much better hypothesis to explain the decline in party membership than the pet theory of any political commentator, by the way; no theory can be proven in this matter, but theories are better if they’re applicable to all parties, as mine is. I reject claims that Mr Cameron or any of his policies is the cause of any change in membership numbers. If that were true, membership would have boomed pre-Cameron – it didn’t, it’s been falling for decades. Also, the decline would affect only the Conservatives. Of course it does not.

    To answer the “Why?” question: in truth (I suspect, though again can’t prove, of course) we join the party because we hate socialism, with a passion several notches higher than that of the average citizen. The Tory party is a machine with many purposes, but its principal objective is defined by its negative. Stop socialism..." http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/graemearcher/100217832/two-modest-proposals-from-a-swivel-eyed-loon/

  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 30,846
    JackW said:

    @Topping

    Despite the vocal opposition of a sizable minority it's notable how quickly gay law reforms have passed into the publically accepted canon of social reform. The list is extensive :

    1. Equalization of the age of consent.
    2. Gay adoption
    3. Gays in the military
    4. Provision of goods and services
    5. Civil Partnerships

    And soon gay marriage which will surely join them in short measure as a relatively uncontroversial feature of daily life for a large majority of our citizens.

    We are IMHO a much better country for it.

    Agree entirely Jack. I had a real feeling yesterday that our country has become just that little bit more civilized with the acceptance of Gay Marriage.

    In this way I think that those who say Gay Marriage affects only gays (true in the most immediate sense) are slightly wrong. It affects everyone because by removing another barrier, by making our country and its systems that little tiny bit more welcoming, we have improved the lot of everyone, not just those directly affected by the change.
  • MrJonesMrJones Posts: 3,523

    I've been opinion polled. One of the questions was a little different to normal. I was asked to describe the mood of the nation in three words. I chose: frustrated, anxious and impatient. What would you choose?

    Also, the Conservative leadership appears to be convinced that immigration is the principal reason for the rise of UKIP. Can they win back UKIP voters by getting tough on immigration?

    staring.over.abyss.

    Although you'd need to add "with a political class that have parachutes" to get the full effect so not really three words.
  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095
    @tim

    "not in the manifesto" =weak argument. If Govt's only did what was in their manifesto's Govt would be chaos. Govt's have to react to changing events.

    Did Blair have the Iraq war in his manifesto?
  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143
    Mick_Pork said:

    "It is argued that the absence of prompting depresses the UKIP share and helps boost the Tories.

    I don't think anyone can seriously doubt it to be fair. It's a question of who gets prompted and why.

    If I was running an online opinion poll I would prompt with a mock-up/scan of the ballot paper from the last general election. They have the postcode of the people they are polling, so they can assign people to each constituency.

    Extra realism must surely be more accurate. The candidate names would help remind respondents of the local tactical considerations in their seat. And you as the opinion pollster would not have to choose whether to prompt for UKIP/Greens/BNP, as this would be governed by whether the poll respondent lived in a seat that these parties had stood a candidate in.

    Opinium are still prompting for Veritas on their second "Another party" screen, and they didn't stand any candidates in the 2010 GE. Likewise about half of the people who are given the option of saying Green Party in an opinion poll weren't able to do so at the 2010 GE, and likely won't have a Green candidate in 2015.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    @tim

    Frankly "tim" I think your 24/7 presence on PB is dimming your wits.

    If you really think the modern Conservative party looks to the GOP for inspiration on any social issue then you should seek immediate medical attention and them admit yourself to a secure facility where a decent rest will do you a power of good.

    Come back refreshed but sadly in the sure knowledge that :

    Ed Miliband will never be Prime Minister.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,765
    South am, no one reads the UKIP manifesto. My guess is they'll move closer to their voters on economics.

    WRT the lessons from the US, Harry Hayfield put it best. Obama's support for gay marriage enthused his supporters. Cameron's support demoralised his.
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    WTF?

    Police officers must declare if they are friends with journalists under draconian new guidelines published yesterday.

    As a result, every officer in England and Wales must formally report any friendship outside his workplace with a journalist.

    And if they fail to do so and are judged to have concealed the relationship, they could now face dismissal for gross misconduct.

    This effectively means that people working in media organisations would be placed in the same bracket as criminals.

    The decision will alarm Government ministers and censorship campaigners, who fear police forces are shutting their doors to scrutiny.

    Frontline police representatives have already warned that ambitious police managers and their political masters are trying to shut down whistleblowers and voices of dissent.

    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2328088/Police-officers-forced-friends-work-media--face-sack.html#ixzz2TuXkEsUQ
    Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    Plato said:


    This effectively means that people working in media organisations would be placed in the same bracket as criminals.

    Fair enough.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,933
    Good morning, everyone.

    Just to raise another point, it's worth mentioning that in the polls Labour are varying from mid- to high-30s. That's not all that great. When Labour collapsed under Brown the Conservatives got silly polling numbers (high 40s, even one at 52).

    If this approximate trend continues to the election we could see some very strange results.
  • CD13CD13 Posts: 6,349

    It's shaping up to the an interesting GE in 2015 (if the coalition lasts).

    The split Tories, the Two Ed-Gremlins for Labour (don't let them near the economy), the LD rebels without a cause, and the spectre of UKIP rubbishing all predictions.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,263
    Plato said:
    It's an interesting piece, though written in terms that do mostly apply to Conservatives. The writer sees membership much as I do - being part of a wider movement, without the expectation of personal influence, though you might get lucky and get a policy adopted or become a councillor/MP. But I know people with quite different motivations:

    - Community service. This is something I actually associate more with traditional Tories; when we were doing our "say something nice about opponents" day, it was the thing I singled out. A lot of people would like to do something for the local community - especially if they've done well and want to give something back - and through membership they get to be councillors, school governors, etc. Often they don't really care much which party they're in, and will switch if badly treated - I suspect the defecting Merton Tories are a bit like this.

    - Changing the party. People with strong ideological beliefs realise it's very difficult to change our essentially pragmatic and centrist parties, but they feel they have a duty to try. More prominent in Labour than the others, but all parties have them.

    - Personal ambition. You do get people who join at 18 because they want to be Prime Minister. That's where the Spads in their 20s come from!


  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 24,967
    Sean_F said:

    The detox strategy was based on the assumption that people who refused to vote Conservative did so because the Party was socially conservative. Whereas, in reality, the biggest barrier to voting Conservative is because the Party is seen as only caring about rich people. The detox strategy was aiming at the wrong target from day one.

    Not to mention that 'posh' people giving themselves tax cuts when in government made the Conservatives MORE toxic among working and lower middle class voters.

    While the social liberalism / enviromentalism / internationalism which was supposed to appeal, but didn't, to middle class leftists also made the Conservatives seem out of touch with working class concerns.

    Yet for years we were told by the establishment media that George Osborne was a strategic genius. A typical insidethebubble feedback loop.


  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,879

    Sean_F said:

    The detox strategy was based on the assumption that people who refused to vote Conservative did so because the Party was socially conservative. Whereas, in reality, the biggest barrier to voting Conservative is because the Party is seen as only caring about rich people. The detox strategy was aiming at the wrong target from day one.

    If you look at UKIP's last manifesto it was even more favourable to the very rich than anything the Tories have espoused.

    Seriously ? I mean you say you will keep voting for the party who were relaxed about being "filthy rich " which so many of them achieved, both rich and filthy.

    I didn't vote for them in 2010. I may not vote for them in 2015. I don't believe that giving wealthy people huge tax cuts is a priority, so I could never vote UKIP, while the Tories give every impression of favouring the richest over the most vulnerable, so they won't get my vote either.

  • BenMBenM Posts: 1,795
    Good to see the bigots eviscerated last night.

    Well done Mr Cameron (and MOTM to Ed Miliband!).
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,771

    Good morning, everyone.

    Just to raise another point, it's worth mentioning that in the polls Labour are varying from mid- to high-30s. That's not all that great. When Labour collapsed under Brown the Conservatives got silly polling numbers (high 40s, even one at 52).

    If this approximate trend continues to the election we could see some very strange results.

    If there are four players in double digits, plus sizeable Scots and Welsh and Green votes, the we will see some very disproportionate results.

    I wouldn't be surprised to see:

    (1) The LibDems get an order of magnitude more seats than UKIP despite half the votes
    or
    (2) A party with a majority in the HoC on less than 30% of the votes.

    What odds on electoral reform of some description before 2020?
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,771

    Sean_F said:

    The detox strategy was based on the assumption that people who refused to vote Conservative did so because the Party was socially conservative. Whereas, in reality, the biggest barrier to voting Conservative is because the Party is seen as only caring about rich people. The detox strategy was aiming at the wrong target from day one.

    Not to mention that 'posh' people giving themselves tax cuts when in government made the Conservatives MORE toxic among working and lower middle class voters.

    While the social liberalism / enviromentalism / internationalism which was supposed to appeal, but didn't, to middle class leftists also made the Conservatives seem out of touch with working class concerns.

    Yet for years we were told by the establishment media that George Osborne was a strategic genius. A typical insidethebubble feedback loop.


    I think people forget that - with Straw and Blunkett - New Labour was actually very socially conservative, and that was a key part of its electoral success.

    Ed Miliband's Labour, Clegg's Lib Dems, and David Cameron's Conservatives are all socially liberal parties. This - rather than simply the EU - is why now is a particularly fruitful time for UKIP, and why they have an opportunity (which may or may not be achieved) to carve out themselves a position as a credible party of government.
  • FinancierFinancier Posts: 3,916
    @Plato
    "Police officers must declare if they are friends with journalists under draconian new guidelines published yesterday."

    This is probably an over-reaction to the huge amount of unofficial briefing of the press and the facility for the press to "buy" information from the police.

    It has become quite apparent over recent years that there has been a too cosy relationship between the police and the press and matters that should have been kept confidential until a person has been charged have been too freely available to the press.

    However, monitoring of the police by scrutiny is a different matter and the new guidelines should not inhibit that function. I agree that it would be easy to use the new guidelines to inhibit scrutiny.

    Do you know if these guidelines are from the Home Office and what degrees of freedom are given?
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,771
    rcs1000 said:

    Sean_F said:

    The detox strategy was based on the assumption that people who refused to vote Conservative did so because the Party was socially conservative. Whereas, in reality, the biggest barrier to voting Conservative is because the Party is seen as only caring about rich people. The detox strategy was aiming at the wrong target from day one.

    Not to mention that 'posh' people giving themselves tax cuts when in government made the Conservatives MORE toxic among working and lower middle class voters.

    While the social liberalism / enviromentalism / internationalism which was supposed to appeal, but didn't, to middle class leftists also made the Conservatives seem out of touch with working class concerns.

    Yet for years we were told by the establishment media that George Osborne was a strategic genius. A typical insidethebubble feedback loop.


    I think people forget that - with Straw and Blunkett - New Labour was actually very socially conservative, and that was a key part of its electoral success.

    Ed Miliband's Labour, Clegg's Lib Dems, and David Cameron's Conservatives are all socially liberal parties. This - rather than simply the EU - is why now is a particularly fruitful time for UKIP, and why they have an opportunity (which may or may not be achieved) to carve out themselves a position as a credible party of government.
    (As an aside: I think there is a substantial portion of the country who are socially liberal, with regards to gay marriage, and legalisation of cannabis, and the like. It may even be 60% of the population. But this still leaves a large minority that is currently very poorly served by the three big established parties)
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,263
    As others have said: it does seem odd that there have been no recent Con->UKIP MP defections: the switcher would be guaranteed masses of limelight (and adulation from some), compared with what is often a low-key existence as an obscure Tory backbencher. I suspect it's partly for social reasons. People don't like to disappoint the network of friends and supporters who have sustained them for years. If I'd ever been tempted to switch (to the Greens, say) that would have been a big deterrent.

    If so, it makes the reported defection of many activists important. If your friends are switching, perhaps you should join them.
  • BenMBenM Posts: 1,795
    Someone in Labour should put the CBI in a box.

    This is idiotic:
    The CBI boss, who is being talked of as a successor to Dick Olver as chairman of BAE Systems, invited the G8 to consider three points in relation to tax reform:

    • Avoiding the moral debate – "it's all about the rules".

    • Fixing the rules on an international stage, not unilaterally.

    • Consulting on proposed changes with business.
    1. Tax certainly is moral. Which is why Starbucks, Google, Microsoft et al are on the run.

    2. So much for sovereignty.

    3. Business will jolly well do what the law passed by democratically elected government says they should do. They can make representation, but they are not the final arbiters of the level of tax charged by the government (ok, they are in feeble minded Osborne's case but he has less than 2 years to go in his current position before he is booted out).
  • UKIP taps into an idea that today's political class are primarily in it for themselves. The scandal of MPs' expenses is part of it, but UKIP supporters also notice that none of them has ever had a proper job. UKIP voters see that an important reason that they are politicians is because 'it pays their bills'. And satisfies their egos.

    This isn't entirely the fault of current MPs. When MPs had outside work as matter of routine, the media were quick to criticise X or Y for having two incomes. He was paid for being a full-time MP, yet had a separate job. It made him more rounded by his work and contacts in the normal world, and more able to see other points of view. And for most of them, it helped to development management skills. Those big benefits have been lost in a clamour for 'fairness'.

    I used to think that Farage liked to make an unattractive boast when he said that he would have made much more money continuing as a city trader, rather than running UKIP. But an important implicit claim resonates. It is that he is doing what is right for Britain, rather than what is best for himself.

    A lot of people are responding positively to that. It is just so different to our perception of most other top politicians
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    @Richard_Tyndall

    My support for gay law reform springs from my social liberalism but also strengthened from the case of a very dear friend.

    He came out to me as "queer" (different world then) as a young man, when to be actively so was a crime and to be publically "shamed" would have been almost a death sentence for him.

    He was a transparently decent, kind, charming and brave man. A man's man in almost every way and as far away from camp stereotypes of the day as could be so. I counted myself fortunate to be his good friend.

    However he was also a desperately lonely man. He so wanted to share his life with a long term partner but was so terrified of exposure that he dared not do so, At times I saw what I can only describe as a sad longing in his eyes. He died after, I believe, letting an operable disease take its course.

    I have often wondered if there was anything more that might have been done for him. Sadly I think not. The times were different, attitudes scarily different and he was a casualty of his nature and the horrible intolerances of the day.
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    Financier said:

    @Plato
    "Police officers must declare if they are friends with journalists under draconian new guidelines published yesterday."

    This is probably an over-reaction to the huge amount of unofficial briefing of the press and the facility for the press to "buy" information from the police.

    It has become quite apparent over recent years that there has been a too cosy relationship between the police and the press and matters that should have been kept confidential until a person has been charged have been too freely available to the press.

    However, monitoring of the police by scrutiny is a different matter and the new guidelines should not inhibit that function. I agree that it would be easy to use the new guidelines to inhibit scrutiny.

    Do you know if these guidelines are from the Home Office and what degrees of freedom are given?

    I believe they are from ACPO - happy to be corrected.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,933
    Mr. W, that's a rather sad and moving tale. At least he had a stalwart Jacobite friend to whom he could be open about things.
  • NormNorm Posts: 1,251
    edited May 2013
    Sean_F said:


    WRT the lessons from the US, Harry Hayfield put it best. Obama's support for gay marriage enthused his supporters. Cameron's support demoralised his.

    This of course wouldn't matter if the electorate as a whole felt better about the Tories but of course it doesn't. However as I said below Cameron's hands were effectively tied by the FCO acceptance of a European Council recommendation on same sex marriage back in November 2011. I'd like to think at least some of the disgruntled Tory activists and supporters would have been more ready to accept these measures had they been included in the Tory 2015 manifesto. As it is they feel betrayed by their own leadership who appear to have acted behind their backs and seemingly in a great hurry mainly because they didn't want to admit Europe is to "blame" for the rushed timetable.

  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,771
    BenM said:

    2. So much for sovereignty.

    Multinationals are inherently hard to tax properly without cross-border co-operation. It's no coincidence that American companies (Apple, HP, Intel, etc.) have their European headquarters in Dublin, because Ireland has the lowest corporate tax rate in Europe.

    If Intel Ireland sells Intel UK a chip for $100, which is then sold to a UK customer for $101, then Intel UK has only made $1 profit on the chip. Without understanding what work has gone on in each country, you simply cannot work out whether Intel is fairly adjudging costs across its business, or whether it is evading taxes.

    (N.B., this is not about the EU, before anyone jumps down my throat. The same would be true if we were talking about Intel Israel or Intel Switzerland.)
  • JonathanDJonathanD Posts: 2,400

    UKIP taps into an idea that today's political class are primarily in it for themselves. The scandal of MPs' expenses is part of it,


    Yes, UKIP MEPs are a paragon of virtue with regards to expenses....

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1226927/Former-British-MEP-jailed-fiddling-39-000-expenses-spent-fine-wine-new-car.htm
  • BenMBenM Posts: 1,795
    It is massively ironic that Ukip sells itself as anti-establishment outsiders given its antics in the European Parliament.

    Luckily for it rightwing newspapers - thanks to foolsih eruophobia - largely ignore the EP. So they get away with it.

    Because any cursory examination of their behaviour in the European Parliament would reveal Ukip to be the biggest, laziest troughers of them all.
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    BenM said:

    It is massively ironic that Ukip sells itself as anti-establishment outsiders given its antics in the European Parliament.

    Luckily for it rightwing newspapers - thanks to foolsih eruophobia - largely ignore the EP. So they get away with it.

    Because any cursory examination of their behaviour in the European Parliament would reveal Ukip to be the biggest, laziest troughers of them all.

    UKIP will be given a thorough examination soon. All will be revealed. Cameron's analysis of UKIP being "fruitcakes and closet racists" is not entirely far-fetched.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 30,846
    BenM said:

    It is massively ironic that Ukip sells itself as anti-establishment outsiders given its antics in the European Parliament.

    Luckily for it rightwing newspapers - thanks to foolsih eruophobia - largely ignore the EP. So they get away with it.

    Because any cursory examination of their behaviour in the European Parliament would reveal Ukip to be the biggest, laziest troughers of them all.

    Ben falls back on his normal tactics. When you have lost the substantive argument, just smear.
  • JonathanDJonathanD Posts: 2,400
    BenM said:

    It is massively ironic that Ukip sells itself as anti-establishment outsiders given its antics in the European Parliament.

    Luckily for it rightwing newspapers - thanks to foolsih eruophobia - largely ignore the EP. So they get away with it.

    Because any cursory examination of their behaviour in the European Parliament would reveal Ukip to be the biggest, laziest troughers of them all.


    Still more Labour politicians who went to jail for fraud than UKIP ones.

  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 48,921
    Personally I think it's great that UKIP are ripping the political establishment a new one!
  • Bond_James_BondBond_James_Bond Posts: 1,939
    TOPPING said:

    Of course that said the reality remains that he didn’t win the election so his options were always limited and perhaps his current predicament is just how it is to be a Coalition PM.

    Thing is, wasn't it exactly around the time Cameron withdrew the Lisbon pledge in 2009 that his poll ratings started to slide? It's a bit difficult to feel too sympathetic to him in regard to his UKIP troubles, because he created them largely himself.

    What he could have done was stick to having a referendum on either Lisbon or further sovereignty transfers. He then gets his GE majority, and the referendum - held quickly after - would have given him the result he wanted.

    Farage would still now be saying "Dave fiddled the question, the referendum wasn't fair", but this is a feebler attack line that the one Cameron gifted him: "Dave welshed on his last referendum promise and he'll welsh on the next". So while UKIP would still be ticking up, they would I guess be at 7 or 8, rather than 17 or 22 or whatever.

    This is not being wise after the event because I remember lurking here at the time and reading others making the same point and pointing up the risks of what Cameron was doing.

    You do get the impression that Cameron has little idea of what his activists think. I don't think he knows and doesn't care; I think he doesn't know, and isn't interested because he expects, net, to gain from annoying them.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787

    Mr. W, that's a rather sad and moving tale. At least he had a stalwart Jacobite friend to whom he could be open about things.

    There were a few of us who knew. He told me his mother suspected (mothers I think often know) but the issue was never raised with her.

    He loved her very dearly. She pre-deceased him by about a year and then he just let go. I still well up remembering what a fine, loving but tragic figure he was.

  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143

    If so, it makes the reported defection of many activists important. If your friends are switching, perhaps you should join them.

    Could a local Conservative Association decide to disaffiliate from the Conservative party and affiliate itself to UKIP?

    I have no idea what the Conservative Party is like, but if the mainstream of a local party were to feel closer to UKIP than to their own leadership, then a UKIP-inclined local party chairman and MP might be able to pull that off.
This discussion has been closed.