politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The UKIP surge continues. How are the purples going to do

System

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The UKIP surge continues. How are the purples going to do at GE2015?

politicalbetting.com is proudly powered by WordPress
with "Neat!" theme. Entries (RSS) and Comments (RSS).

Read the full story here

Alanbrooke

Labour bankrupted us.

Sean_F

If you'd asked me straight after the local elections, I'd have said I expect UKIP to fall back to 6-7% in 2015, and to be in serious contention in 3 or 4 Parliamentary seats.

Now, I'm not so sure. I'd probably still stick by my prediction, but I do strongly wonder if UKIP are in the same sort of position as Labour in the early 20s. Cameron just seems hapless. UKIP are sure to come top in the Euros, and do very well in local elections on the same day, and perhaps the bandwagon will still keep rolling.

corporeal

Sean_F said:

Now, I'm not so sure. I'd probably still stick by my prediction, but I do strongly wonder if UKIP are in the same sort of position as Labour in the early 20s.

I think that's going much too far tbh.

ProfessorDavey

corporeal said:

Sean_F said:

Now, I'm not so sure. I'd probably still stick by my prediction, but I do strongly wonder if UKIP are in the same sort of position as Labour in the early 20s.

I think that's going much too far tbh.

I agree - in the 1920s Labour were clearly a progressive party looking forward, and I suspect had a lot of support from young people looking for a brighter future. UKIP are a reactionary party looking backwards supported by the over 60s looking back to some mythical golden age. The problem with being primarily attractive to people who remember the 1950s is that you have a built in time bomb, year on year a block of your support disappears because it has died.

DavidL

EdConwaySky Ed Conway
Key thing: IMF's recommendations today are "fiscally neutral" - eg all extra spending offset by cuts. This is mainly a question of timing

So the IMF think Osborne has the fiscal balance right but should cut current spending by more to increase investment. Do you think they read PB too?

I like to think that UKIP will fall away, even reluctantly in respect of many supporters, as the full horror of a Miliband Premiership hoves into view. Speeches like today's are a good start and the tories best chance. They may not love the tories but look at the alternative. Scary.

DavidL

Eric Joyce arrested again: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-22626211

Now that would be a by election Labour could do without.

rcs1000

@Sean_F

Although it is worth remembering the Conservative Party has been successful and long-lived because it adapts. The 'New Labour' of 1997 was the SDP of 1987. Under Smith and Blair, 'New Labour' adopted those policies of the splittists that were most successful. Under whoever follows Cameron, I would not be surprised to see the Conservatives do the same.

Now, it may be the gulf is too wide to be bridged; for now at least, the old alliance between business and the metropolitan elite on the one hand, and the countryside and the social conservatives on the other seems to have broken down. And is worth remembering that Benn-ites had nowhere else to go; the metropolitan elite can (as they have done in Richmond-Upon-Thames in the past) lend their votes to the Yellow Peril.

But my gut would be that - unless there is a real breakthrough - then we will see UKIP achieving a low teens position with one to two seats in the near-term, and a gradual absorption of many of their policies by the Conservative Party in the medium term.

taffys

UKIP are a reactionary party looking backwards supported by the over 60s looking back to some mythical golden age.

Really?

Do you think the young people of Britain have failed to notice that more than half of their counterparts in Southern Europe, inside the eurozone, have no jobs and no prospects?

And what's more, that the eurocrats don't even seem that concerned?

Sean_F

ProfessorDavey said:

corporeal said:

Sean_F said:

Now, I'm not so sure. I'd probably still stick by my prediction, but I do strongly wonder if UKIP are in the same sort of position as Labour in the early 20s.

I think that's going much too far tbh.

I agree - in the 1920s Labour were clearly a progressive party looking forward, and I suspect had a lot of support from young people looking for a brighter future. UKIP are a reactionary party looking backwards supported by the over 60s looking back to some mythical golden age. The problem with being primarily attractive to people who remember the 1950s is that you have a built in time bomb, year on year a block of your support disappears because it has died.

UKIP have plenty of support among people in their forties and fifties, and those people are far more likely to go out and vote, and get involved in political affairs, than younger age cohorts are. Our society is a considerably older society than it was in the 1920s.

What drives them is not belief in a mythical golden age, but more a fear that they and their children are on the slide. UKIP supporters are consistently the most pessimistic of all party supporters in terms of their economic prospects. So long as real incomes remain static (pretty much the case across the West) so that fear will persist.

rcs1000

SeanT said:

Temeperatures in England have been below average, sometimes WAY below, for every month this year, so far.

http://www.netweather.tv/index.cgi?action=cet;sess=

The British climate is broken.

While the Australians suffered their worst heatwave on record in 2012/2013. I think we need to build some kind of heat pipe from Australia to here, and then we can pipe their excess away. Something like a giant air-conditioning machine.

Norm

ProfessorDavey said:

corporeal said:

Sean_F said:

Now, I'm not so sure. I'd probably still stick by my prediction, but I do strongly wonder if UKIP are in the same sort of position as Labour in the early 20s.

I think that's going much too far tbh.

I agree - in the 1920s Labour were clearly a progressive party looking forward, and I suspect had a lot of support from young people looking for a brighter future. UKIP are a reactionary party looking backwards supported by the over 60s looking back to some mythical golden age. The problem with being primarily attractive to people who remember the 1950s is that you have a built in time bomb, year on year a block of your support disappears because it has died.

Yes but then the next age band become older and fill the gap left. Look at the radical sixties generation , one moment rioting in red square and now 45 years later becoming the standard UKIP voter.

In any case there is some evidence to suggest UKIP have attracted middle aged and younger supporters as well. Their main problem is organisational. They need to build up their social networks and stop their voters drifting away. They also need a few parliamentary defectors and above all a news agenda that plays to their strengths.

Sean_F

rcs1000 said:

@Sean_F

Although it is worth remembering the Conservative Party has been successful and long-lived because it adapts. The 'New Labour' of 1997 was the SDP of 1987. Under Smith and Blair, 'New Labour' adopted those policies of the splittists that were most successful. Under whoever follows Cameron, I would not be surprised to see the Conservatives do the same.

Now, it may be the gulf is too wide to be bridged; for now at least, the old alliance between business and the metropolitan elite on the one hand, and the countryside and the social conservatives on the other seems to have broken down. And is worth remembering that Benn-ites had nowhere else to go; the metropolitan elite can (as they have done in Richmond-Upon-Thames in the past) lend their votes to the Yellow Peril.

But my gut would be that - unless there is a real breakthrough - then we will see UKIP achieving a low teens position with one to two seats in the near-term, and a gradual absorption of many of their policies by the Conservative Party in the medium term.

That is so, and I think is still the most likely outcome. Year by year, however, support for both the Conservative and Labour Parties ebbs away. There must come a tipping point eventually.

rcs1000

taffys said:

UKIP are a reactionary party looking backwards supported by the over 60s looking back to some mythical golden age.

Really?

Do you think the young people of Britain have failed to notice that more than half of their counterparts in Southern Europe, inside the eurozone, have no jobs and no prospects?

And what's more, that the eurocrats don't even seem that concerned?

Although it is worth noting that in the mid 1980s, the proportion of Scottish school leavers (who did not go onto university) that found themselves in full time jobs troughed in the low 20s percentage-wise. While the numbers for Spain and Greece are horrendous and awful, they are not unprecedented in the West.

rcs1000

Sean_F said:

rcs1000 said:

@Sean_F

Although it is worth remembering the Conservative Party has been successful and long-lived because it adapts. The 'New Labour' of 1997 was the SDP of 1987. Under Smith and Blair, 'New Labour' adopted those policies of the splittists that were most successful. Under whoever follows Cameron, I would not be surprised to see the Conservatives do the same.

Now, it may be the gulf is too wide to be bridged; for now at least, the old alliance between business and the metropolitan elite on the one hand, and the countryside and the social conservatives on the other seems to have broken down. And is worth remembering that Benn-ites had nowhere else to go; the metropolitan elite can (as they have done in Richmond-Upon-Thames in the past) lend their votes to the Yellow Peril.

But my gut would be that - unless there is a real breakthrough - then we will see UKIP achieving a low teens position with one to two seats in the near-term, and a gradual absorption of many of their policies by the Conservative Party in the medium term.

That is so, and I think is still the most likely outcome. Year by year, however, support for both the Conservative and Labour Parties ebbs away. There must come a tipping point eventually.

Well, the tipping point seems to be in terms of fragmentation rather than in terms of another genuine mass movement. It's quite possible that no political party will exceed 30% of the vote in 2015.

Despite all our best efforts, we may be doomed to coalition government for the foreseeable future.

taffys

rcs1000...

Interesting stat. Perhaps the experiences of those Scottish school leavers are a part of what drives the strong nationalist movement today....???

rcs1000

SeanT said:

rcs1000 said:

SeanT said:

Temeperatures in England have been below average, sometimes WAY below, for every month this year, so far.

http://www.netweather.tv/index.cgi?action=cet;sess=

The British climate is broken.

While the Australians suffered their worst heatwave on record in 2012/2013. I think we need to build some kind of heat pipe from Australia to here, and then we can pipe their excess away. Something like a giant air-conditioning machine.

Global warming, at least as far as Britain is considered, is total bollocks. Here are 400 years of average central English temperatures for June.

http://forum.netweather.tv/index.php?app=core&module=attach&section=attach&attach_rel_module=post&attach_id=171953

This is the longest run of reliable weather reports, from one region, in the world. And there is absolutely so significant statistical change whatseover, since 1665: just a clear cyclical pattern, as one might expect from a self-correcting system. AKA the weather.

Taking into account recent severe winters, and the semi-permanent shifting of the jet stream south, it's a fair bet to say the British climate is now actively worsening, if such a thing were possible (and, unfortunately, it is).

I have been looking at cheap properties in southwest Portugal.

My colleagues - having done very well out of playing Berlin property in the last decade - are now looking actively at Portugese and Spanish property, especially as the terms from the Spanish lenders are super attractive. (They would rather sell you the property at 50 cents in the Euro and have someone actually paying their interest, than have a Spanish construction company owing them money.)
t

ProfessorDavey

Sean_F said:

UKIP are sure to come top in the Euros

UKIP will certainly do well in the Euros, but no certainty they'd come top. Wasn't there a poll just a couple of days ago that indicated Labour would come top in the Euros closely followed by UKIP.

The challenge for UKIP is being able to break into large tracts of the UK, notably Scotland, Wales and London. To get 30% plus across the UK (which is probably what you'd need to top the poll), you are going to need huge levels of support in the south (ex London) to counter markedly lower support in London and Scotland (and to a lesser extent the North of England and Wales).

JackW

Peter the Punter - "Thank you Stockholm and now we cross from Television Centre to Westminster and Mike Smithson and may we now have the seat numbers of the British Jury?"

Mike - "A wonderful show Peter, a fab frock by the way. Here are the seats of the British jury - Green Party 1 seat .. Respect Party 1 seat .. The Speaker 1 seat .. Independent 1 seat .. Ukip 3 seats .. Plaid 3 seats .. SNP 12 seats .. Northern Ireland 18 seats .. and now for our top three .. LibDems 45seats .. Labour 280 seats .. and finally our top prize goes to .. those wonderful Conservatives with 285 seats."

edmundintokyo

rcs1000 said:

Sean_F said:

rcs1000 said:

@Sean_F

Although it is worth remembering the Conservative Party has been successful and long-lived because it adapts. The 'New Labour' of 1997 was the SDP of 1987. Under Smith and Blair, 'New Labour' adopted those policies of the splittists that were most successful. Under whoever follows Cameron, I would not be surprised to see the Conservatives do the same.

Now, it may be the gulf is too wide to be bridged; for now at least, the old alliance between business and the metropolitan elite on the one hand, and the countryside and the social conservatives on the other seems to have broken down. And is worth remembering that Benn-ites had nowhere else to go; the metropolitan elite can (as they have done in Richmond-Upon-Thames in the past) lend their votes to the Yellow Peril.

But my gut would be that - unless there is a real breakthrough - then we will see UKIP achieving a low teens position with one to two seats in the near-term, and a gradual absorption of many of their policies by the Conservative Party in the medium term.

That is so, and I think is still the most likely outcome. Year by year, however, support for both the Conservative and Labour Parties ebbs away. There must come a tipping point eventually.

Well, the tipping point seems to be in terms of fragmentation rather than in terms of another genuine mass movement. It's quite possible that no political party will exceed 30% of the vote in 2015.

Despite all our best efforts, we may be doomed to coalition government for the foreseeable future.

Unless Lab and Con _really_ get hammered the fragmentation doesn't particularly lead to coalition. All that matters is how close Lab is to Con. For example:

Lab 29
Con 25
Lib 15
UKIP 16
-> Lab maj 30

http://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/cgi-bin/usercode.pl?CON=25&TVCON=&LAB=29&TVLAB=&LIB=15&TVLIB=&UKIP=16&region=All+GB+changed+seats&boundary=2010&seat=--Show+all--&minorparties=Y

rcs1000

taffys said:

rcs1000...

Interesting stat. Perhaps the experiences of those Scottish school leavers are a part of what drives the strong nationalist movement today....???

There's a report here - http://www.ces.ed.ac.uk/PDF Files/Brief010.pdf

It's astonishing how bad the Irish economy was in the mid 1980s too. I hadn't realised that youth unemployment there was 35% in 1985. (I also hadn't realised how much 'training schemes' flattered the reported unemployment numbers)

Jonathan

If Nick Clegg can outpoll all major parties just weeks from a GE and end up losing seats on the day itself, I don't see any reason to expect great things from UKIP two years from now.

They will do well in the Euros 2014, but on the day after polling the only story that will matter will be the scottish referendum.

Sean_F

ProfessorDavey said:

Sean_F said:

UKIP are sure to come top in the Euros

UKIP will certainly do well in the Euros, but no certainty they'd come top. Wasn't there a poll just a couple of days ago that indicated Labour would come top in the Euros closely followed by UKIP.

The challenge for UKIP is being able to break into large tracts of the UK, notably Scotland, Wales and London. To get 30% plus across the UK (which is probably what you'd need to top the poll), you are going to need huge levels of support in the south (ex London) to counter markedly lower support in London and Scotland (and to a lesser extent the North of England and Wales).

Survation placed both UKIP and Labour on 30% for the Euros, but I think UKIP supporters will be more fired up to vote than Labour voters. I agree Scotland Wales and London will be their weakest areas.

[Deleted User]

So if global warming is bollocks why must our metropolitan out-of-touch elite insist on building green boondoggles and hugely inflating electricity prices? Watermelons. End the subsidies now and focus on cost of living.

rcs1000

SeanT said:

rcs1000 said:

SeanT said:

rcs1000 said:

SeanT said:

Temeperatures in England have been below average, sometimes WAY below, for every month this year, so far.

http://www.netweather.tv/index.cgi?action=cet;sess=

The British climate is broken.

While the Australians suffered their worst heatwave on record in 2012/2013. I think we need to build some kind of heat pipe from Australia to here, and then we can pipe their excess away. Something like a giant air-conditioning machine.

Global warming, at least as far as Britain is considered, is total bollocks. Here are 400 years of average central English temperatures for June.

http://forum.netweather.tv/index.php?app=core&module=attach&section=attach&attach_rel_module=post&attach_id=171953

This is the longest run of reliable weather reports, from one region, in the world. And there is absolutely so significant statistical change whatseover, since 1665: just a clear cyclical pattern, as one might expect from a self-correcting system. AKA the weather.

Taking into account recent severe winters, and the semi-permanent shifting of the jet stream south, it's a fair bet to say the British climate is now actively worsening, if such a thing were possible (and, unfortunately, it is).

I have been looking at cheap properties in southwest Portugal.

My colleagues - having done very well out of playing Berlin property in the last decade - are now looking actively at Portugese and Spanish property, especially as the terms from the Spanish lenders are super attractive. (They would rather sell you the property at 50 cents in the Euro and have someone actually paying their interest, than have a Spanish construction company owing them money.)
t

My brother (a day trader) and I have reached the same conclusion. Iberian property is now so cheap - they are so desperate to sell - this may be the year to start buying. You can get decent little cottages in the sun for €75k.

Interestingly, the Spanish current account deficit has turned into a surplus in the last year (although the numbers are volatile from a month-to-month basis) which would seem to suggest that money is flowing into the country to buy up cheap property.

Ryanair and Easyjet should be the beneficiaries :-)

ProfessorDavey

Sean_F said:

ProfessorDavey said:

corporeal said:

Sean_F said:

Now, I'm not so sure. I'd probably still stick by my prediction, but I do strongly wonder if UKIP are in the same sort of position as Labour in the early 20s.

I think that's going much too far tbh.

I agree - in the 1920s Labour were clearly a progressive party looking forward, and I suspect had a lot of support from young people looking for a brighter future. UKIP are a reactionary party looking backwards supported by the over 60s looking back to some mythical golden age. The problem with being primarily attractive to people who remember the 1950s is that you have a built in time bomb, year on year a block of your support disappears because it has died.

UKIP have plenty of support among people in their forties and fifties, and those people are far more likely to go out and vote, and get involved in political affairs, than younger age cohorts are. Our society is a considerably older society than it was in the 1920s.

What drives them is not belief in a mythical golden age, but more a fear that they and their children are on the slide. UKIP supporters are consistently the most pessimistic of all party supporters in terms of their economic prospects. So long as real incomes remain static (pretty much the case across the West) so that fear will persist.

Most polling suggests UKIP support levels in the 60+ age bracket is about double that in the younger age brackets (when you look across a number of polls, which you need to do as the margin of error is too large from a single poll).

Regarding pessimism about economic prospects - rather odd seeing as UKIP supports are far less likely than others to be concerned about the economy. In the recent yougov poll on issues supporters of Conservatives, Labour and LibDem all put the economy top of their concerns, with between 58% and 70% seeing it as one of their top 3 or 4 issues. By contrast less than half of UKIP supporter thought the economy to be an issue, ranking only 3rd in their list of concerns.

rcs1000

Patrick said:

So if global warming is bollocks why must our metropolitan out-of-touch elite insist on building green boondoggles and hugely inflating electricity prices? Watermelons. End the subsidies now and focus on cost of living.

Technically, while global warming clearly hasn't happened in the UK, the data suggests Australia (and the plains states in the US, and large chunks of China) are getting warmer. Still doesn't explain why we're the ones building the windmills, mind.

OblitusSumMe

SeanT said:

Temeperatures in England have been below average, sometimes WAY below, for every month this year, so far.

http://www.netweather.tv/index.cgi?action=cet;sess=

The British climate is broken.

It's interesting, yes. The Central England Temperature data from the Met Office is here, including this interesting graph and the daily data.

The graph shows that the only exceptionally peculiar period was at the end of March/beginning of April.

ProfessorDavey

Sean_F said:

ProfessorDavey said:

Sean_F said:

UKIP are sure to come top in the Euros

UKIP will certainly do well in the Euros, but no certainty they'd come top. Wasn't there a poll just a couple of days ago that indicated Labour would come top in the Euros closely followed by UKIP.

The challenge for UKIP is being able to break into large tracts of the UK, notably Scotland, Wales and London. To get 30% plus across the UK (which is probably what you'd need to top the poll), you are going to need huge levels of support in the south (ex London) to counter markedly lower support in London and Scotland (and to a lesser extent the North of England and Wales).

Survation placed both UKIP and Labour on 30% for the Euros, but I think UKIP supporters will be more fired up to vote than Labour voters. I agree Scotland Wales and London will be their weakest areas.

So you accept that your comment that 'UKIP are sure to come top in the Euros' is wrong. Rather that UKIP might come top but nothing certain about it.

Sean_F

ProfessorDavey said:

Sean_F said:

ProfessorDavey said:

Sean_F said:

UKIP are sure to come top in the Euros

UKIP will certainly do well in the Euros, but no certainty they'd come top. Wasn't there a poll just a couple of days ago that indicated Labour would come top in the Euros closely followed by UKIP.

The challenge for UKIP is being able to break into large tracts of the UK, notably Scotland, Wales and London. To get 30% plus across the UK (which is probably what you'd need to top the poll), you are going to need huge levels of support in the south (ex London) to counter markedly lower support in London and Scotland (and to a lesser extent the North of England and Wales).

Survation placed both UKIP and Labour on 30% for the Euros, but I think UKIP supporters will be more fired up to vote than Labour voters. I agree Scotland Wales and London will be their weakest areas.

So you accept that your comment that 'UKIP are sure to come top in the Euros' is wrong. Rather that UKIP might come top but nothing certain about it.

There's no certainty in anything, least of all in politics. They might be swept aside by some event that I haven't predicted. Other than that, I'm pretty sure they'll top the poll.

taffys

London's demographics won't help UKIP.

Would London still be France's sixth biggest city if we left the EU? would the many many hard working EU citizens helping to drive the economy forward still be in London?

It seems doubtful to me.

Which I why I want to at least hear what Dave has to say on repatriated powers, as I suspect many others do.

MrJones

UKIP's potential constituency (imo)
- disgruntled Tories
- pretty much everyone in the socio-economic middle
- bitter ex-labour
so potentially a lot, easily over 30%.

However achieving that requires a) successfully steering a course through the weighted centre of gravity of those three blocs and b) the political class not finding a way to put the kibosh on them in some way e.g. through exceptional fines after messing up campaign contributions.

Say for the sake of argument they have a 30% chance of achieving A and a 40% chance of avoiding B then i think that would give them a 12% chance of doing very well and 88% chance of not much at all.

rcs1000

taffys said:

London's demographics won't help UKIP.

Would London still be France's sixth biggest city if we left the EU? would the many many hard working EU citizens helping to drive the economy forward still be in London?

It seems doubtful to me.

Which I why I want to at least hear what Dave has to say on repatriated powers, as I suspect many others do.

And which is why the BOOers want us to vote now, because they worry that Dave might be successful.

Quincel

In fairness, nothing is certain about UKIP support more than 12 days ahead, let alone 12 months.

Sean_F

ProfessorDavey said:

Sean_F said:

ProfessorDavey said:

corporeal said:

Sean_F said:

Now, I'm not so sure. I'd probably still stick by my prediction, but I do strongly wonder if UKIP are in the same sort of position as Labour in the early 20s.

I think that's going much too far tbh.

I agree - in the 1920s Labour were clearly a progressive party looking forward, and I suspect had a lot of support from young people looking for a brighter future. UKIP are a reactionary party looking backwards supported by the over 60s looking back to some mythical golden age. The problem with being primarily attractive to people who remember the 1950s is that you have a built in time bomb, year on year a block of your support disappears because it has died.

UKIP have plenty of support among people in their forties and fifties, and those people are far more likely to go out and vote, and get involved in political affairs, than younger age cohorts are. Our society is a considerably older society than it was in the 1920s.

What drives them is not belief in a mythical golden age, but more a fear that they and their children are on the slide. UKIP supporters are consistently the most pessimistic of all party supporters in terms of their economic prospects. So long as real incomes remain static (pretty much the case across the West) so that fear will persist.

Most polling suggests UKIP support levels in the 60+ age bracket is about double that in the younger age brackets (when you look across a number of polls, which you need to do as the margin of error is too large from a single poll).

Regarding pessimism about economic prospects - rather odd seeing as UKIP supports are far less likely than others to be concerned about the economy. In the recent yougov poll on issues supporters of Conservatives, Labour and LibDem all put the economy top of their concerns, with between 58% and 70% seeing it as one of their top 3 or 4 issues. By contrast less than half of UKIP supporter thought the economy to be an issue, ranking only 3rd in their list of concerns.

Their support peaks among the over-60s, but is consistently in double figures among voters aged 40-59. If those voters do remember a golden age, it's probably the 25 years or so prior to the credit crunch, when incomes rose steadily.

WRT pessimism, there are some numbers here from Yougov. I was partly mistaken. They are about as pessimistic as Labour supporters, but far more pessimistic than Conservatives or Lib Dems.

http://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/c3o569hzch/YG-Archive-Pol-Sun-results-200513.pdf

OblitusSumMe

rcs1000 said:

Sean_F said:

rcs1000 said:

@Sean_F

Although it is worth remembering the Conservative Party has been successful and long-lived because it adapts. The 'New Labour' of 1997 was the SDP of 1987. Under Smith and Blair, 'New Labour' adopted those policies of the splittists that were most successful. Under whoever follows Cameron, I would not be surprised to see the Conservatives do the same.

Now, it may be the gulf is too wide to be bridged; for now at least, the old alliance between business and the metropolitan elite on the one hand, and the countryside and the social conservatives on the other seems to have broken down. And is worth remembering that Benn-ites had nowhere else to go; the metropolitan elite can (as they have done in Richmond-Upon-Thames in the past) lend their votes to the Yellow Peril.

But my gut would be that - unless there is a real breakthrough - then we will see UKIP achieving a low teens position with one to two seats in the near-term, and a gradual absorption of many of their policies by the Conservative Party in the medium term.

That is so, and I think is still the most likely outcome. Year by year, however, support for both the Conservative and Labour Parties ebbs away. There must come a tipping point eventually.

Well, the tipping point seems to be in terms of fragmentation rather than in terms of another genuine mass movement. It's quite possible that no political party will exceed 30% of the vote in 2015.

Despite all our best efforts, we may be doomed to coalition government for the foreseeable future.

If we assume that UNS roughly holds then Labour can win a majority with fewer votes than in 2010.

We all thought the 2005 result was a travesty at the time, but if 2015 doesn't result in another hung Parliament it will likely be even more of an aberration. As the combined votes for the two largest parties continues to decline some very odd results become likely under FPTP.

TOPPING

What is not going to work for too much longer is the NOTA approach from UKIP. The reality is that especially with gay marriage, Europe, etc – agree or disagree – politicians have to make decisions and that much as it would be nice to have things happen as each of us would wish, the reality is we need people to act, in a credible way, for the best interests of the country as they see them.

It may be the UKIP develops a coherent manifesto addressing the boring but necessary elements of government but I doubt it. And if they did there would still be the credibility issue. So that leaves them as a rump, single issue protest party cf The Greens and outside the political mainstream.

The more people say it’s the Elite vs the Little People, Us vs Them, as though there is a parallel political system they can somehow magic up, the more it actually sounds ridiculous and I think that that realisation will grow.

Norm

The question is whether Cameron should try and snuffle out UKIP now or hope the tide turns and their bubble goes flat. Either way it leaves the Tories in trouble at the next election as Bob Sykes eloquently made clear in the last thread.

Peter_the_Punter

Interesting thread.

My portfolio is heavily laden with pro-UKIP bets but I note that some of the most respected punters on here - notably Richard Nabavi, Rod Crosby and Tim - take a different view. I so respect their opinions that I have reviewed my own position repeatedly in the past few days but I keep coing back to my original take. UKIP is a protest movement that spreads far and wide and will continue to grow for a long while yet, certainly up to and beyond the Euros and very probably into the 2015 GE. I expect somewhere between 10% and 15% of the national vote to go their way, and between 2 and 5 seats in the new Parliament. I know my three respected fellow posters and punters have well articulated reasons for opposing that view and are adamant that UKIP will finish up with nul seats, but I disagree. In places like Boston and Eastleigh they have fertile enough territory to win their first seats and given a fair wind they could greatly improve on even my prediction.

I note that some other serious punters and commentators are tending to agree with me and I should be very interested to hear from more. [Mad JackW appears to be on board already, although in his current deranged state I'm not sure that actually counts for much.]

Anyway, my money is down and like punters everywhere, I'm prepared to take it on the chin if wrong. But I don't think I am.

MrJones

ProfessorDavey said:

corporeal said:

Sean_F said:

Now, I'm not so sure. I'd probably still stick by my prediction, but I do strongly wonder if UKIP are in the same sort of position as Labour in the early 20s.

I think that's going much too far tbh.

I agree - in the 1920s Labour were clearly a progressive party looking forward, and I suspect had a lot of support from young people looking for a brighter future. UKIP are a reactionary party looking backwards supported by the over 60s looking back to some mythical golden age. The problem with being primarily attractive to people who remember the 1950s is that you have a built in time bomb, year on year a block of your support disappears because it has died.

I think you'll find a lot of them are looking forward at the non-future of their grand-children.

taffys

They worry that Dave might be successful.

If there's one thing that might shoot UKIP's fox its real concessions from Europe.

We can normally rely on eurocrats to do the opposite of what we want, but who knows?

OblitusSumMe

SeanT said:

rcs1000 said:

SeanT said:

Temeperatures in England have been below average, sometimes WAY below, for every month this year, so far.

http://www.netweather.tv/index.cgi?action=cet;sess=

The British climate is broken.

While the Australians suffered their worst heatwave on record in 2012/2013. I think we need to build some kind of heat pipe from Australia to here, and then we can pipe their excess away. Something like a giant air-conditioning machine.

Global warming, at least as far as Britain is considered, is total bollocks. Here are 400 years of average central English temperatures for June.

http://forum.netweather.tv/index.php?app=core&module=attach&section=attach&attach_rel_module=post&attach_id=171953

This is the longest run of reliable weather reports, from one region, in the world. And there is absolutely so significant statistical change whatseover, since 1665: just a clear cyclical pattern, as one might expect from a self-correcting system. AKA the weather.

Taking into account recent severe winters, and the semi-permanent shifting of the jet stream south, it's a fair bet to say the British climate is now actively worsening, if such a thing were possible (and, unfortunately, it is).

I have been looking at cheap properties in southwest Portugal.

Do you show June just because it gives the answer you want.

If you look at the Annual figures it is quite different:
http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/hadobs/hadcet/index.html

rcs1000

@MrJones
"the non-future of their grand-children"

No hyperbole there.

edmundintokyo

rcs1000 said:

SeanT said:

Temeperatures in England have been below average, sometimes WAY below, for every month this year, so far.

http://www.netweather.tv/index.cgi?action=cet;sess=

The British climate is broken.

While the Australians suffered their worst heatwave on record in 2012/2013. I think we need to build some kind of heat pipe from Australia to here, and then we can pipe their excess away. Something like a giant air-conditioning machine.

I think I know where you're going with this. There's already a lot of water of different temperatures flowing around the oceans, so maybe we could arrange to have warm water flowing around the bottom of Africa, then up across to Central America, then back across the Atlantic to Europe.

Sean_F

Norm said:

The question is whether Cameron should try and snuffle out UKIP now or hope the tide turns and their bubble goes flat. Either way it leaves the Tories in trouble at the next election as Bob Sykes eloquently made clear in the last thread.

At the moment, Cameron should do nothing. Then hammer home the message to them to vote Conservative to keep out Labour.

rcs1000

taffys said:

They worry that Dave might be successful.

If there's one thing that might shoot UKIP's fox its real concessions from Europe.

We can normally rely on eurocrats to do the opposite of what we want, but who knows?

What's interesting, of course, is if the Germans get on board too. Mr Cameron and Mrs Merkel - as Europes paymasters - carry a lot of clout.

rcs1000

edmundintokyo said:

rcs1000 said:

SeanT said:

Temeperatures in England have been below average, sometimes WAY below, for every month this year, so far.

http://www.netweather.tv/index.cgi?action=cet;sess=

The British climate is broken.

While the Australians suffered their worst heatwave on record in 2012/2013. I think we need to build some kind of heat pipe from Australia to here, and then we can pipe their excess away. Something like a giant air-conditioning machine.

I think I know where you're going with this. There's already a lot of water of different temperatures flowing around the oceans, so maybe we could arrange to have warm water flowing around the bottom of Africa, then up across to Central America, then back across the Atlantic to Europe.

And just think of the engineering jobs it would generate!

RichardNabavi

5% to 8%, no seats.

This is a Cleggasm/Rick Perry phenomenon, nothing whatsoever like Labour in the 1920s (who had a unified mass movement, leaders, a philosophy and a real set of genuine demands). It's not even as serious as the SDP of the 1980s. Anyway, their one and only policy demand has already been granted by the PM.

UKIP's best hope is to be a Beppo Grillo phenomenon, but that means keeping the bubble inflated for two whole years. Unlikely.

Socrates

rcs1000 said:

taffys said:

London's demographics won't help UKIP.

Would London still be France's sixth biggest city if we left the EU? would the many many hard working EU citizens helping to drive the economy forward still be in London?

It seems doubtful to me.

Which I why I want to at least hear what Dave has to say on repatriated powers, as I suspect many others do.

And which is why the BOOers want us to vote now, because they worry that Dave might be successful.

Funnily enough, in recent weeks I've become more convinced that David Cameron won't be successful, and that makes me more likely to vote Conservative at the next election. A failed attempt at renegotiation will be the best thing that could ever happen to the BOO campaign, and after such an event, I think we would win the subsequent referendum by a country mile.

My ideal outcome would be for one of these recent proposals for a reformed "EEA plus" system, where we can sign external free trade deals, get some input on rule setting, and also escape most of the domestic regulation and most of the budget contribution. I think it's fanciful, but I'd like that best, followed by a complete failure. My worst outcome would be a middle of the road option, which is enough to persuade people temporarily that reform has happened and get a stay in vote, yet not enough to make it better than a network of free trade deals that we can get outside the EU.

Marches

rcs1000 said:

edmundintokyo said:

rcs1000 said:

SeanT said:

Temeperatures in England have been below average, sometimes WAY below, for every month this year, so far.

http://www.netweather.tv/index.cgi?action=cet;sess=

The British climate is broken.

While the Australians suffered their worst heatwave on record in 2012/2013. I think we need to build some kind of heat pipe from Australia to here, and then we can pipe their excess away. Something like a giant air-conditioning machine.

I think I know where you're going with this. There's already a lot of water of different temperatures flowing around the oceans, so maybe we could arrange to have warm water flowing around the bottom of Africa, then up across to Central America, then back across the Atlantic to Europe.

And just think of the engineering jobs it would generate!

You'd find that the Greens would want to stop it as it was going against nature....

Norm

MrJones said:

ProfessorDavey said:

corporeal said:

Sean_F said:

Now, I'm not so sure. I'd probably still stick by my prediction, but I do strongly wonder if UKIP are in the same sort of position as Labour in the early 20s.

I think that's going much too far tbh.

I agree - in the 1920s Labour were clearly a progressive party looking forward, and I suspect had a lot of support from young people looking for a brighter future. UKIP are a reactionary party looking backwards supported by the over 60s looking back to some mythical golden age. The problem with being primarily attractive to people who remember the 1950s is that you have a built in time bomb, year on year a block of your support disappears because it has died.

I think you'll find a lot of them are looking forward at the non-future of their grand-children.

That's a good point. I think it is a little patronising to think of UKIP as a bunch of ill-educated crustaceous old farts. There is more to it than that. I suspect many are simply thinking the political consensus has failed so lets change it. Personally I think Cameron despite his faults is a smarter politician than some give him credit for and he'll see off their threat. Unfortunately it may not be in time to win him the election.

Socrates

I hope people realise that the UK accounts for 0.04% of the Earth's surface.

OblitusSumMe

edmundintokyo said:

rcs1000 said:

SeanT said:

Temeperatures in England have been below average, sometimes WAY below, for every month this year, so far.

http://www.netweather.tv/index.cgi?action=cet;sess=

The British climate is broken.

While the Australians suffered their worst heatwave on record in 2012/2013. I think we need to build some kind of heat pipe from Australia to here, and then we can pipe their excess away. Something like a giant air-conditioning machine.

I think I know where you're going with this. There's already a lot of water of different temperatures flowing around the oceans, so maybe we could arrange to have warm water flowing around the bottom of Africa, then up across to Central America, then back across the Atlantic to Europe.

Many of the ocean currents have interesting names, such as the Agulhas, or the Kuroshio.

Some others have less snazzy names - how would you like to name this putative current?

MrJones

Most of the people on here talk as if the BBC version of reality was true but it's not.

For example, the consequences of 40 years of pretending the inner-city gang culture didn't exist allowing it to get a little bit worse every year.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2324949/Armed-officers-patrol-streets-LUTON-stop-dangerous-shoot-outs-feuding-gangs.html

It's a small country and more and more people are living outside the political class' ever-shrinking bubble.

rcs1000

Socrates said:

I hope people realise that the UK accounts for 0.04% of the Earth's surface.

I prefer to think of us as home to more than a third of the world's derivative contracts

Socrates

@RichardNabavi

The Cleggasm and Rick Perry's support lasted for a few weeks. Is that what you're predicting for UKIP? If not, you can't compare them.

rcs1000

MrJones said:

Most of the people on here talk as if the BBC version of reality was true but it's not.

For example, the consequences of 40 years of pretending the inner-city gang culture didn't exist allowing it to get a little bit worse every year.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2324949/Armed-officers-patrol-streets-LUTON-stop-dangerous-shoot-outs-feuding-gangs.html

It's a small country and more and more people are living outside the political class' ever-shrinking bubble.

If the BBC is at one end of the reality spectrum, the Daily Mail is at the other.

Both are better at pandering to their constituencies than informing.

Socrates

This is absolutely awful:

http://www.npr.org/2013/05/21/185839248/loss-of-timber-payments-cuts-deep-in-oregon

david_herdson

What a shame the spread markets aren't as plentiful as UKIP seats would be a joy to buy. I voted for the 5-8% range, as I think there'll be a marked fall back in support as the economy improves and people take a closer look at what Miliband and Balls would look like in government. Even if they poll a band or two higher, they should still end up with zero seats.

So, there's probably an 80%+ chance that every one of Farage and team will end up outside of parliament, meaning the spread would be set low. However, once they do start to win seats, they could pick up bucketfuls.

It's not inconceivable that UKIP could win the Euroelection next year with 30%+ of the vote and if the Conservatives panic, Farage plays it right, newspaper endorsements and defections follow and UKIP gain a place in the leaders' debates, that might roll through to the election. Of course, that's a lot of ifs but none of it is out of the question. Put another way, the chances of UKIP winning more than 80 seats are higher than the chances of the Lib Dems doing so.

MikeK

ProfessorDavey said:

corporeal said:

Sean_F said:

Now, I'm not so sure. I'd probably still stick by my prediction, but I do strongly wonder if UKIP are in the same sort of position as Labour in the early 20s.

I think that's going much too far tbh.

I agree - in the 1920s Labour were clearly a progressive party looking forward, and I suspect had a lot of support from young people looking for a brighter future. UKIP are a reactionary party looking backwards supported by the over 60s looking back to some mythical golden age. The problem with being primarily attractive to people who remember the 1950s is that you have a built in time bomb, year on year a block of your support disappears because it has died.

Your premise, that UKIP is built mainly on the over 60's is patiently not true, professor. In fact it's a load of verbiage and codswallop. Not only that, If by progressive, you mean socialist, well we are definitely not that. but we look to the future, a future without the constricting and strangling all powerful state which you so admire.

RichardNabavi

Socrates said:

The Cleggasm and Rick Perry's support lasted for a few weeks. Is that what you're predicting for UKIP? If not, you can't compare them.

I'm predicting that the current surge (which I consider as super-imposed on the 'real' level of UKIP mid-term support) will last a few weeks and then drop back. These are the voters/poll respondents who are basically having a laugh and kicking the establishment to see what reaction they get. (And, to be fair, the reaction will have provided them with plenty of entertainment). That will still leave UKIP with a reasonable showing in opinion polls, maybe 10%-12%ish, and of course I also expect them to do well in the Euros next year, as they did last time. I further expect a chunk of that core UKIP support to vote Conservative in the GE, getting me back to my 5% to 8% forecast.

I might be completely wrong, of course!

MikeK

SeanT said:

Sean_F said:

If you'd asked me straight after the local elections, I'd have said I expect UKIP to fall back to 6-7% in 2015, and to be in serious contention in 3 or 4 Parliamentary seats.

Now, I'm not so sure. I'd probably still stick by my prediction, but I do strongly wonder if UKIP are in the same sort of position as Labour in the early 20s. Cameron just seems hapless. UKIP are sure to come top in the Euros, and do very well in local elections on the same day, and perhaps the bandwagon will still keep rolling.

UKIP aren't Labour in the 1920s, they are the SNP in the 1970s. A single issue joke party, which morphed into an irritation, and then into a significant presence (where they are now), and who might, in a couple of decades, be in government. Maybe.

I voted for 11-14% but I reckon it will be at the bottom of that range, 11% maybe.

Backtracking already then, Thomas.

MikeK

SeanT said:

Temeperatures in England have been below average, sometimes WAY below, for every month this year, so far.

http://www.netweather.tv/index.cgi?action=cet;sess=

The British climate is broken.

The Ice ages started with wintry summers. You have been warned!

OblitusSumMe

SeanT said:

OblitusSumMe said:

SeanT said:

rcs1000 said:

SeanT said:

Temeperatures in England have been below average, sometimes WAY below, for every month this year, so far.

http://www.netweather.tv/index.cgi?action=cet;sess=

The British climate is broken.

While the Australians suffered their worst heatwave on record in 2012/2013. I think we need to build some kind of heat pipe from Australia to here, and then we can pipe their excess away. Something like a giant air-conditioning machine.

Global warming, at least as far as Britain is considered, is total bollocks. Here are 400 years of average central English temperatures for June.

http://forum.netweather.tv/index.php?app=core&module=attach&section=attach&attach_rel_module=post&attach_id=171953

This is the longest run of reliable weather reports, from one region, in the world. And there is absolutely so significant statistical change whatseover, since 1665: just a clear cyclical pattern, as one might expect from a self-correcting system. AKA the weather.

Taking into account recent severe winters, and the semi-permanent shifting of the jet stream south, it's a fair bet to say the British climate is now actively worsening, if such a thing were possible (and, unfortunately, it is).

I have been looking at cheap properties in southwest Portugal.

Do you show June just because it gives the answer you want.

If you look at the Annual figures it is quite different:
http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/hadobs/hadcet/index.html

But look, what's that at the end? Quick - hide the decline. HIDE THE DECLINE.

If saying the magic words makes you feel safer then be my guest, but you won't be able to hide from the reality for ever.

taffys

RCS..... Mr Cameron and Mrs Merkel - as Europe's paymasters - carry a lot of clout.

In a sense Germany may decide whether the UK stays in or leaves the EU. If they throw their weight behind the Dave then we will undoubtedly get some concessions. Trouble is, the Germans often agree with Britain but vote with France.

But then France has voted for Francois Hollande - and whilst that's their call, it must undoubtedly have weakened their position with Germany.

Socrates

RichardNabavi said:

Socrates said:

The Cleggasm and Rick Perry's support lasted for a few weeks. Is that what you're predicting for UKIP? If not, you can't compare them.

I'm predicting that the current surge (which I consider as super-imposed on the 'real' level of UKIP mid-term support) will last a few weeks and then drop back. These are the voters/poll respondents who are basically having a laugh and kicking the establishment to see what reaction they get. (And, to be fair, the reaction will have provided them with plenty of entertainment). That will still leave UKIP with a reasonable showing in opinion polls, maybe 10%-12%ish, and of course I also expect them to do well in the Euros next year, as they did last time. I further expect a chunk of that core UKIP support to vote Conservative in the GE, getting me back to my 5% to 8% forecast.

I might be completely wrong, of course!

So where do you think UKIP will be in the polls four weeks from now?

murali_s

But look, what's that at the end? Quick - hide the decline. HIDE THE DECLINE.



Yes, 2013 has been a cold year to-date in the CET region, but it's only one year and we're not even 50% of the way through the year.

With regards to AGW we need to look globally and the theme remains the same- anomalous warmth.

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/2013/4

MikeK

JackW said:

Peter the Punter - "Thank you Stockholm and now we cross from Television Centre to Westminster and Mike Smithson and may we now have the seat numbers of the British Jury?"

Mike - "A wonderful show Peter, a fab frock by the way. Here are the seats of the British jury - Green Party 1 seat .. Respect Party 1 seat .. The Speaker 1 seat .. Independent 1 seat .. Ukip 3 seats .. Plaid 3 seats .. SNP 12 seats .. Northern Ireland 18 seats .. and now for our top three .. LibDems 45seats .. Labour 280 seats .. and finally our top prize goes to .. those wonderful Conservatives with 285 seats."

He always goes on like this. Must be Mrs Jacks Haggis.

ProfessorDavey

MikeK said:

ProfessorDavey said:

corporeal said:

Sean_F said:

Now, I'm not so sure. I'd probably still stick by my prediction, but I do strongly wonder if UKIP are in the same sort of position as Labour in the early 20s.

I think that's going much too far tbh.

I agree - in the 1920s Labour were clearly a progressive party looking forward, and I suspect had a lot of support from young people looking for a brighter future. UKIP are a reactionary party looking backwards supported by the over 60s looking back to some mythical golden age. The problem with being primarily attractive to people who remember the 1950s is that you have a built in time bomb, year on year a block of your support disappears because it has died.

Your premise, that UKIP is built mainly on the over 60's is patiently not true, professor. In fact it's a load of verbiage and codswallop. Not only that, If by progressive, you mean socialist, well we are definitely not that. but we look to the future, a future without the constricting and strangling all powerful state which you so admire.

Sorry but you simply cannot justify your statement. Look at recent yougov polling. Take the most recent 4 polls and average UKIP support in 60plus and less than 60. You get 20.72% support amongst the over 60s, 11.3% amongst under 60s. If that doesn't equate to support being built mainly on the over 60s I don't know what is.

You might want it to be otherwise, and certainly UKIP need to work on it being otherwise to cement their recent progress in support, but it doesn't change the fact that UKIP support is built on the over 60s demographic.

To suggest otherwise is as much a nonsense as denying that Labour support is built mainly on the north of England, Scotland, Wales and London, or that Conservative support is built mainly on the South of England.

williamglenn

edmundintokyo said:

rcs1000 said:

SeanT said:

Temeperatures in England have been below average, sometimes WAY below, for every month this year, so far.

http://www.netweather.tv/index.cgi?action=cet;sess=

The British climate is broken.

While the Australians suffered their worst heatwave on record in 2012/2013. I think we need to build some kind of heat pipe from Australia to here, and then we can pipe their excess away. Something like a giant air-conditioning machine.

I think I know where you're going with this. There's already a lot of water of different temperatures flowing around the oceans, so maybe we could arrange to have warm water flowing around the bottom of Africa, then up across to Central America, then back across the Atlantic to Europe.

Nothing so complex is needed. We just need to harness the hot air coming from the political class - the guff stream.

Alanbrooke

TOPPING said:

What is not going to work for too much longer is the NOTA approach from UKIP. The reality is that especially with gay marriage, Europe, etc – agree or disagree – politicians have to make decisions and that much as it would be nice to have things happen as each of us would wish, the reality is we need people to act, in a credible way, for the best interests of the country as they see them.

It may be the UKIP develops a coherent manifesto addressing the boring but necessary elements of government but I doubt it. And if they did there would still be the credibility issue. So that leaves them as a rump, single issue protest party cf The Greens and outside the political mainstream.

The more people say it’s the Elite vs the Little People, Us vs Them, as though there is a parallel political system they can somehow magic up, the more it actually sounds ridiculous and I think that that realisation will grow.

i can't see how the NOTA vote would go anywhere else but to staying at home and not voting. As has been pointed out before the current big 3 aren't motivating anyone and turnouts haven't exactly been impressive since 1992. Dave, Nick and Ed are inspiring no-one.

RichardNabavi

Socrates said:

So where do you think UKIP will be in the polls four weeks from now?

Where are they now? We've had everything from IIRC 13% to 22% in the last week.

On the timing, they'll stay high (and possibly get higher still) until the narrative changes for some reason. I'm not going to predict a number of weeks.

Socrates

MrJones said:

Most of the people on here talk as if the BBC version of reality was true but it's not.

For example, the consequences of 40 years of pretending the inner-city gang culture didn't exist allowing it to get a little bit worse every year.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2324949/Armed-officers-patrol-streets-LUTON-stop-dangerous-shoot-outs-feuding-gangs.html

It's a small country and more and more people are living outside the political class' ever-shrinking bubble.

MrJones, the people living on that estate are being ridiculous to be concerned about this. After all, crime has fallen from extremely high levels to very high levels. It's unreasonable to demand tougher sentences. Voters should just shut up and vote for one of the establishment parties. After all, rehabilitation of these misunderstood murderers is more important than stopping them from getting back on the streets.

Anorak

Ok, now I'm confused. Earlier the thread was full of people saying the IMF had broadly endorsed the UK gov's financial management policies. Now I read this:

IMF: UK a long way from recovery

"The UK economy is still a long way from "a strong and sustainable recovery", the International Monetary Fund (IMF) has warned."

"the IMF said austerity measures were acting as a drag on the economy"

"the view of the IMF was that the UK should consider slowing the pace of cuts"

Flanders: "The Fund has been saying for several years that the chancellor might have to slow the pace of deficit cuts if the economy continued to under-perform. In the staff's view, that day has now finally arrived"

Balls: "this is the call for action on jobs and growth that the IMF has been threatening to deliver for many months"

Who's right?

ProfessorDavey

ProfessorDavey said:

MikeK said:

ProfessorDavey said:

corporeal said:

Sean_F said:

Now, I'm not so sure. I'd probably still stick by my prediction, but I do strongly wonder if UKIP are in the same sort of position as Labour in the early 20s.

I think that's going much too far tbh.

I agree - in the 1920s Labour were clearly a progressive party looking forward, and I suspect had a lot of support from young people looking for a brighter future. UKIP are a reactionary party looking backwards supported by the over 60s looking back to some mythical golden age. The problem with being primarily attractive to people who remember the 1950s is that you have a built in time bomb, year on year a block of your support disappears because it has died.

Your premise, that UKIP is built mainly on the over 60's is patiently not true, professor. In fact it's a load of verbiage and codswallop. Not only that, If by progressive, you mean socialist, well we are definitely not that. but we look to the future, a future without the constricting and strangling all powerful state which you so admire.

Sorry but you simply cannot justify your statement. Look at recent yougov polling. Take the most recent 4 polls and average UKIP support in 60plus and less than 60. You get 20.72% support amongst the over 60s, 11.3% amongst under 60s. If that doesn't equate to support being built mainly on the over 60s I don't know what is.

You might want it to be otherwise, and certainly UKIP need to work on it being otherwise to cement their recent progress in support, but it doesn't change the fact that UKIP support is built on the over 60s demographic.

To suggest otherwise is as much a nonsense as denying that Labour support is built mainly on the north of England, Scotland, Wales and London, or that Conservative support is built mainly on the South of England.

Same picture from the recent Survation poll, UKIP support age 18-34 was 13.2%, age 35-55 13.7%, over 55 28.8%.

BenM

Anorak said:

Ok, now I'm confused. Earlier the thread was full of people saying the IMF had broadly endorsed the UK gov's financial management policies. Now I read this:

IMF: UK a long way from recovery

"The UK economy is still a long way from "a strong and sustainable recovery", the International Monetary Fund (IMF) has warned."

"the IMF said austerity measures were acting as a drag on the economy"

"the view of the IMF was that the UK should consider slowing the pace of cuts"

Flanders: "The Fund has been saying for several years that the chancellor might have to slow the pace of deficit cuts if the economy continued to under-perform. In the staff's view, that day has now finally arrived"

Balls: "this is the call for action on jobs and growth that the IMF has been threatening to deliver for many months"

Who's right?

Not the PB Tories.

The IMF were never going to skewer Osborne - as host (and part-funder) he breathes down their necks and controls their message.

OblitusSumMe

murali_s said:

But look, what's that at the end? Quick - hide the decline. HIDE THE DECLINE.

Yes, 2013 has been a cold year to-date in the CET region, but it's only one year and we're not even 50% of the way through the year.

With regards to AGW we need to look globally and the theme remains the same- anomalous warmth.

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/2013/4
I thought this was a striking plot from that web page.

Vast swathes of the world classified as much warmer than average. Yes, England is cooler than average, but nowhere in the world is classified as much cooler than average.

I'm sure seant, and others like him, will be eager to tell us how astonishingly cold it is in Bhutan, or wherever, the next time that Europe has a record-breaking heatwave, but they will always refuse to look at the big picture.

Alanbrooke

murali_s said:

With regards to AGW we need to look globally and the theme remains the same- anomalous warmth.

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/2013/4



So what ? Since we appear to be in that bit of the world which isn't prone to extremes of temperature, why are we making pointless efforts to control someone else's climate ?

sam

Conservatively Ive gone for 11-14% and 2-5 seats, although Im not sure both can be right?!

BenM

Alanbrooke said:

So what ? Since we appear to be in that bit of the world which isn't prone to extremes of temperature, why are we making pointless efforts to contol someone else's climate ?

Sea level rise.

Food imports.

Rexel56

OblitusSumMe said:

SeanT said:

OblitusSumMe said:

SeanT said:

rcs1000 said:

SeanT said:

Temeperatures in England have been below average, sometimes WAY below, for every month this year, so far.

http://www.netweather.tv/index.cgi?action=cet;sess=

The British climate is broken.

While the Australians suffered their worst heatwave on record in 2012/2013. I think we need to build some kind of heat pipe from Australia to here, and then we can pipe their excess away. Something like a giant air-conditioning machine.

Global warming, at least as far as Britain is considered, is total bollocks. Here are 400 years of average central English temperatures for June.

http://forum.netweather.tv/index.php?app=core&module=attach&section=attach&attach_rel_module=post&attach_id=171953

This is the longest run of reliable weather reports, from one region, in the world. And there is absolutely so significant statistical change whatseover, since 1665: just a clear cyclical pattern, as one might expect from a self-correcting system. AKA the weather.

Taking into account recent severe winters, and the semi-permanent shifting of the jet stream south, it's a fair bet to say the British climate is now actively worsening, if such a thing were possible (and, unfortunately, it is).

I have been looking at cheap properties in southwest Portugal.

Do you show June just because it gives the answer you want.

If you look at the Annual figures it is quite different:
http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/hadobs/hadcet/index.html

But look, what's that at the end? Quick - hide the decline. HIDE THE DECLINE.

If saying the magic words makes you feel safer then be my guest, but you won't be able to hide from the reality for ever.

The chart you linked to suggests a self-balancing system that is reverting to its long term state after a particularly significant period of being above it. What is your alternative interpretation?

MrJones

Socrates said:

MrJones said:

Most of the people on here talk as if the BBC version of reality was true but it's not.

For example, the consequences of 40 years of pretending the inner-city gang culture didn't exist allowing it to get a little bit worse every year.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2324949/Armed-officers-patrol-streets-LUTON-stop-dangerous-shoot-outs-feuding-gangs.html

It's a small country and more and more people are living outside the political class' ever-shrinking bubble.

MrJones, the people living on that estate are being ridiculous to be concerned about this. After all, crime has fallen from extremely high levels to very high levels. It's unreasonable to demand tougher sentences. Voters should just shut up and vote for one of the establishment parties. After all, rehabilitation of these misunderstood murderers is more important than stopping them from getting back on the streets.

That story also illustrates (imo) the problem with defining what one unit of "crime" is as crimes are weighted by things like randomness, avoidability and potential lethality. For example i'm sure both those estates have always had a pub where there was a lot of fights but that doesn't weigh as much because people could always avoid those specific pubs. On the other hand people running round an estate firing off guns in the middle of the afternoon is weighted much higher because of the avoidability, randomness and potential lethality.

OblitusSumMe

Alanbrooke said:

murali_s said:

With regards to AGW we need to look globally and the theme remains the same- anomalous warmth.

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/2013/4

So what ? Since we appear to be in that bit of the world which isn't prone to extremes of temperature, why are we making pointless efforts to contol someone else's climate ?

A couple of reasons are worth thinking about.

1. We import lots of our food, so we're reliant on the climatic stability of other parts of the world where that food is grown.

2. The extra heat elsewhere will melt ice and expand the oceans, flooding many of our coastal settlements (and the ports through which we import our food and the nuclear power stations we've built around the coast).

sam

Just find it inconceivable that UKIP would be less than three times more popular with voters in 2015 than they were in 2010

Socrates

@tim

At what point did I say there's a conspiracy to cover up the crime rate? Are you incapable of reading words?

BoredInParis

UKIP will stay high until at least the Euros next year and probably through to January 2015.

I'm not entirely sure what will happen then, but I can see pretty much every party having a crisis, too far back, not far forward enough, the first polls from 6, 3, 2 months out. Everything seems pretty fragile to 'events'.

Alanbrooke

@BenM

FFS there is no forecast rise in the sea that will destroy the UK within the next 100 yrs, the latest forecast was for about a foot rise over a century and the most glum assumptions were radically scaled back. So we have endless hype for a threat that doesn't exist.

JosiasJessop

BenM said:

Alanbrooke said:

So what ? Since we appear to be in that bit of the world which isn't prone to extremes of temperature, why are we making pointless efforts to contol someone else's climate ?

Sea level rise.

I would like to propose how to mitigate for all this sea-level rise nonsense. We are a modern, advancing society, and the idea that a silly little thing like melting icecaps can effect us is so 1980s. My 12-year old nephew came up with a solution, which I paraphrase here.

Scientists and engineers are currently working on carbon nanotubes, suitable for stretching into space as a space elevator. Just bunch a load of these together, seal them and you have a carbon nanotube straw. Put one end in the ocean, and the vacuum of space will suck the water up. At the space end you will have a large ball of ice that can then be used as a large billiard ball to be fired to deflect any menacing asteroids.

Simples. ;-)

(Yes, I know all the rather large and varied problems with this idea. I just liked it when my nephew asked me whether it was possible).

sam

"The head of the Police Federation will suggest a "fear factor" in the wake of the Leveson Inquiry is preventing officers from blowing the whistle on how crime statistics are being manipulated.

The intervention by Steve Williams, chairman of the organisation which represents 130,000 frontline officers in England and Wales, is highly significant because it appears to confirm widespread public scepticism of how crime is recorded.

Official figures show crime is at an historic low, despite cuts to police budgets and staffing levels.

"Crimes are downgraded in seriousness or the numbers are hidden. For example, if 10 caravans are broken into overnight with 10 different victims it will sometimes be recorded as just one crime.

"And a stolen mobile phone will be recorded as lost property, and so will not appear in crime data at all.

"If there is a crime where there is little or no evidence, and little chance of police detecting it, then that will be screened out at a very early stage so it does not appear in the stats."



http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/10052668/Police-ordered-to-slant-crime-data.html

OblitusSumMe

Rexel56 said:

OblitusSumMe said:

SeanT said:

OblitusSumMe said:

SeanT said:

rcs1000 said:

SeanT said:

Temeperatures in England have been below average, sometimes WAY below, for every month this year, so far.

http://www.netweather.tv/index.cgi?action=cet;sess=

The British climate is broken.

While the Australians suffered their worst heatwave on record in 2012/2013. I think we need to build some kind of heat pipe from Australia to here, and then we can pipe their excess away. Something like a giant air-conditioning machine.

Global warming, at least as far as Britain is considered, is total bollocks. Here are 400 years of average central English temperatures for June.

http://forum.netweather.tv/index.php?app=core&module=attach&section=attach&attach_rel_module=post&attach_id=171953

This is the longest run of reliable weather reports, from one region, in the world. And there is absolutely so significant statistical change whatseover, since 1665: just a clear cyclical pattern, as one might expect from a self-correcting system. AKA the weather.

Taking into account recent severe winters, and the semi-permanent shifting of the jet stream south, it's a fair bet to say the British climate is now actively worsening, if such a thing were possible (and, unfortunately, it is).

I have been looking at cheap properties in southwest Portugal.

Do you show June just because it gives the answer you want.

If you look at the Annual figures it is quite different:
http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/hadobs/hadcet/index.html

But look, what's that at the end? Quick - hide the decline. HIDE THE DECLINE.

If saying the magic words makes you feel safer then be my guest, but you won't be able to hide from the reality for ever.

The chart you linked to suggests a self-balancing system that is reverting to its long term state after a particularly significant period of being above it. What is your alternative interpretation?

Systems do not "self-balance" through some sort of magical effect. There has to be a force involved. So, for example, a pendulum swings back and forth because of a known observable force: gravity.

For the ice ages the force involved was - it is thought - variations in the orbit of the Earth affecting the length of time that winter snow survived to reflect sunlight during northern hemisphere summer, with subsequent positive feedbacks to amplify this effect.

There is no magic temperature that the Earth's climate naturally reverts to - it changes in reaction to changes in the forcing applied. The observed forcings are pointing in one direction, towards continued warming, but there is a modest amount of randomness over short time and space periods that will confuse those who are willing to be confused.

Neil

sam said:

Just find it inconceivable that UKIP would be less than three times more popular with voters in 2015 than they were in 2010

They were about five times less popular in 2010 than they were in 2009. I find it hard to believe there wont be some fall back from current polls in 2015.

ps rcs1000 - not sure if you saw my post last night but happy to confirm that bet at those odds

Alanbrooke

OblitusSumMe said:

Alanbrooke said:

murali_s said:

With regards to AGW we need to look globally and the theme remains the same- anomalous warmth.

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/2013/4

So what ? Since we appear to be in that bit of the world which isn't prone to extremes of temperature, why are we making pointless efforts to contol someone else's climate ?

A couple of reasons are worth thinking about.

1. We import lots of our food, so we're reliant on the climatic stability of other parts of the world where that food is grown.

2. The extra heat elsewhere will melt ice and expand the oceans, flooding many of our coastal settlements (and the ports through which we import our food and the nuclear power stations we've built around the coast).

1. We can grow more than we do and we're all too fat. The supermarkets might be short of kumquats but we'll get by.

2. There is no forecast rise in sea levels in what's left on my lifetime or my kids lifetime which will have us living in boats. The scaremongering is just ridiculous. If you're worried about sea levels then go to coastal areas of China and tell them to use less energy. There's absolutely no reason why the UK should commit economic suicide when the people potentially most affected can't be bothered to look after themselves.

Anorak

sam said:

Official figures show crime is at an historic low, despite allowing cuts to police budgets and staffing levels.

Fixed it for you.

sam

Anorak said:

sam said:

Official figures show crime is at an historic low, despite allowing cuts to police budgets and staffing levels.

Fixed it for you.

No youve altered a quote to suit you

OblitusSumMe

JosiasJessop said:

BenM said:

Alanbrooke said:

So what ? Since we appear to be in that bit of the world which isn't prone to extremes of temperature, why are we making pointless efforts to contol someone else's climate ?

Sea level rise.

I would like to propose how to mitigate for all this sea-level rise nonsense. We are a modern, advancing society, and the idea that a silly little thing like melting icecaps can effect us is so 1980s. My 12-year old nephew came up with a solution, which I paraphrase here.

Scientists and engineers are currently working on carbon nanotubes, suitable for stretching into space as a space elevator. Just bunch a load of these together, seal them and you have a carbon nanotube straw. Put one end in the ocean, and the vacuum of space will suck the water up. At the space end you will have a large ball of ice that can then be used as a large billiard ball to be fired to deflect any menacing asteroids.

Simples. ;-)

(Yes, I know all the rather large and varied problems with this idea. I just liked it when my nephew asked me whether it was possible).

That's a wonderful story.

Has your nephew ever been shown a siphon in action?

sam

Neil said:

sam said:

Just find it inconceivable that UKIP would be less than three times more popular with voters in 2015 than they were in 2010

They were about five times less popular in 2010 than they were in 2009. I find it hard to believe there wont be some fall back from current polls in 2015.

ps rcs1000 - not sure if you saw my post last night but happy to confirm that bet at those odds

Want to go in again at 4/5?

Anorak

sam said:

Anorak said:

sam said:

Official figures show crime is at an historic low, despite allowing cuts to police budgets and staffing levels.

Fixed it for you.

No youve altered a quote to suit you

You don't say

I'm sure the Police Federation are completely honest when it comes to reporting stats and their members views regarding job cuts.

BenM

Something major going on down in Woolwich, SE London.

http://www.newsshopper.co.uk/news/10436107.Police_called_to_Woolwich__shooting____live_updates/?ref=mr

Neil

sam said:

Want to go in again at 4/5?

At some point I'm going to have to stop accepting bets on UKIP's performance in 2015!

BenM

Alanbrooke said:

@BenM

FFS there is no forecast rise in the sea that will destroy the UK within the next 100 yrs, the latest forecast was for about a foot rise over a century and the most glum assumptions were radically scaled back. So we have endless hype for a threat that doesn't exist.

So your time horizon stretches to just 100 years?

david_herdson

tim said:

Fraser Nelson ‏@frasernelson
The IMF are not the only ones to worry about Osborne's messing with the housing market. Speccie cover: http://ow.ly/i/2aV4J

Amongst all of Osborne's damaging policies and strategies (most of which have damaged the Tory party admittedly) this one could be the biggest and longest lived.

Considering that the zombie debt surrounding inflated house prices is because Labour allowed the housing market to run out of control (while taking the popularity that came with rising prices), *and* failing to regulate the lending sector properly, it's extraordinary brass neck to criticise Osborne for attempting to prevent the fallout from the biggest housing bubble in history from acting as too big a break on the economy.