Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » More polling to lift the spirits at the Lib Dem conference

SystemSystem Posts: 11,002
edited September 2013 in General

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » More polling to lift the spirits at the Lib Dem conference in Glasgow

Invariably, Lembit excepted, the experience is that sitting MPs tend to perform better than the national average. Maybe this chart, based on an article by Prof Phil Cowley, is part of the explanation.

Read the full story here


«1

Comments

  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    Hhmm
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 113,969
    edited September 2013
    Dog shit Pavement politics works huh?

    But yes Lib Dems will do well because of their hardworking MPs.
  • Sample of 1758, effectively smaller because of the weighting, which probably makes the LibDem sub-sample a bit on the teensy side.
  • JohnOJohnO Posts: 4,211
    tim said:

    My god, is there now area of public life where Tories aren't disliked the most?
    You'd have to poll them against the EDL or syphilis for them to have a lead

    Ed -16...comparing him to EDL and syphilis isn't very kind.

    Can we have more Ed is clap threads please, just for tim.
  • I am rather hoping that house prices in the leafy commuter belt (Cobham) will have gone up as much as London. Probably not - but I'd like to able to afford to move back to a London house (as opposed to flat) one day.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    If you factor in Huhne and Hancock the other LD MPs ratings must be off the scale.

  • taffystaffys Posts: 9,753
    Yikes. Recent polling is a bit of a perfect storm for the tories.....

    Keep blundering on??
  • Of the 11 LD MPs fighting as 1st time incumbents, 6 have Labour as the main rival.
  • taffystaffys Posts: 9,753
    edited September 2013
    ''Probably not - but I'd like to able to afford to move back to a London house (as opposed to flat) one day.''

    Dunno about you, but we in Elmbridge get circulars from Estate agents all the time saying they have london people wanting to sell to move out for a bit more room (and a bit of green, while it lasts)!
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    Hodges on the LDs - what could go wrong ?

    http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100236321/deep-down-vince-cable-knows-that-he-traded-his-principles-for-power/

    "Vince Cable is not destined to be one of the great men of British politics. Instead, he’s going to have to settle for being remembered as the Richard Madeley of British politics."
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,559
    JohnO said:

    tim said:

    My god, is there now area of public life where Tories aren't disliked the most?
    You'd have to poll them against the EDL or syphilis for them to have a lead

    Ed -16...comparing him to EDL and syphilis isn't very kind.

    Can we have more Ed is clap threads please, just for tim.
    LOL ;-)
  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 6,621
    Is there not a large degree of self-selection here?

    LibDem MPs only stay LibDem MPs by being exceptional. Apart from the South-West, a 'normal' constituency MP would be toast as the Red and/or Blue juggernaut squished them to Yellow paste.
  • Maybe I could find a townie who'd like to do a house swap!
  • Of the 11 LD MPs fighting as 1st time incumbents, 6 have Labour as the main rival.

    When you say main rival do you mean LAB in 2nd place?

  • RichardNabaviRichardNabavi Posts: 3,413
    edited September 2013
    On topic: Gay marriage explains the Con figure

    Next question
  • BenMBenM Posts: 1,795
    Tories. LoL.
  • Taffys, I've just realised that JohnO is also an Elmbridge resident - so that makes 3 of us. We are surely over-represented on PB!
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    tim said:

    Shut this twit up someone, please

    "David Cameron has become embroiled in a race row after he said that it is acceptable for Tottenham Hotspur fans to chant the word 'Yid'.

    @TelePolitics: David Cameron embroiled in race row over Tottenham Hotspur 'Yid word' chant http://t.co/fPLyXXo0jm

    SeanT was right - you are obsessed with race.

    Same issue in Scotland - you can't say the F word in case you upset a Shettleston Harriers Fan - yet these sell like hot cakes in the East end

    http://tinyurl.com/ppx96pu
  • On first-time incumbency, it would be interesting to know how much of the advantage depends on whether the opposing party re-selects its previous MP. For example, I would imagine that Anna Soubry's first-time incumbency benefit in Broxtowe will be less against Nick P than it would have been against a new Labour candidate - but how much less? I wonder if there has been any research into this 'retread' factor?
  • The Tories may well be hated, but how bad will it feel for Labour, if David Cameron is still PM after May 2015? That'll just prove how shite all our mainstream politicians are.
  • JohnOJohnO Posts: 4,211
    edited September 2013
    Patrick said:

    Taffys, I've just realised that JohnO is also an Elmbridge resident - so that makes 3 of us. We are surely over-represented on PB!

    Yes, better watch my Ps and Qs - I recall your saying you lived in Cobham when you were working in Asia. I'm thinking of changing its name to "insert oil company"-ville.
  • PolruanPolruan Posts: 2,083

    The Tories may well be hated, but how bad will it feel for Labour, if David Cameron is still PM after May 2015? That'll just prove how shite all our mainstream politicians are.

    Almost exactly like 1992, I guess. Cameron lacks even Major's level of ability, but then again, Ed Miliband's no Kinnock. And not in a good way.
  • Polruan said:

    Cameron lacks even Major's level of ability,

    Don't be silly.
  • Patrick said:

    Taffys, I've just realised that JohnO is also an Elmbridge resident - so that makes 3 of us. We are surely over-represented on PB!

    And JohnO is the most important man in Elmbridge and don't you forget it.


  • Polruan said:

    The Tories may well be hated, but how bad will it feel for Labour, if David Cameron is still PM after May 2015? That'll just prove how shite all our mainstream politicians are.

    Almost exactly like 1992, I guess. Cameron lacks even Major's level of ability, but then again, Ed Miliband's no Kinnock. And not in a good way.
    I would rate Major ahead of Cameron. Major, of course, led his party to a majority - something that Cameron has not done or is likely to do.

  • taffystaffys Posts: 9,753
    JohnO.

    The Elmbridge massive eh?

    We should be loud and proud, paying more tax to the exchequer than any other f8cker.

    ww.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2327394/Elmbridge-The-Surrey-borough-pays-1-18BILLION-income-tax.html

    Personally I think the signs should say 'welcome to Britain's taxpayer powerhouse....'
  • Is seems remarkable that the other parties still haven't cottoned on to the Lib Dem local campaigning techniques, after all this time, as the above data suggests. Can that really be the case?

    I wonder whether there is an effect due to Labour and the Conservatives having more safe seats than the Lib Dems, and so consequently a large proportion of MPs who feel able to take their electorate for granted, and secure for as long as they keep their constituency party happy.

    Perhaps if you only polled marginal constituencies the differences would be smaller?
  • PolruanPolruan Posts: 2,083

    Polruan said:

    Cameron lacks even Major's level of ability,

    Don't be silly.
    Well, Major won a majority. That's a start. And his party management was massively superior to Cameron's; arguably he had a tougher task with his post-92majority than Cameron does with a coalition comprising a number of LibDems who will line up to sound as Tory as possible at every opportunity. Fundamentally Major came across as a decent person and a conviction politician, undermined by his party's position and some of his MPs', erm, convictions.
  • RichardNabaviRichardNabavi Posts: 3,413
    edited September 2013



    I would rate Major ahead of Cameron. Major, of course, led his party to a majority - something that Cameron has not done or is likely to do.

    Having got a majority against a divided and feeble opposition with no UKIP breathing down his neck and without the electoral disadvantage that Cameron faces, Major then presided over an entire parliamentary term of in-fighting and scandal (not all his fault, admittedly), achieving very little and, very importantly, allowing space for Campbell to trash the Conservative brand exceptionally effectively, which is the underlying reason why it's so hard now to get a majority.

    Cameron on the other hand has inherited the worst economic legacy of any PM since at least the thirties, has stabilised the country, skilfully put together a stable coalition against all the odds, has put together probably the best team in the key senior cabinet posts for yonks, has avoided the Blair blunder of changing ministers (other, alas, than Brown) every five minutes, thereby allowing progress to be made on some of the most intractable problems since the war - notably education and welfare. That's why he'll go down in history as the best PM, bar Maggie, of the last 50 years.
  • Actually I live and work in The Hague, back from Manila for 18 months now. But my house is in Cobham - rented out to another oil company person!

    I'll listen to OGH's wisdom on who 'the man' is in my neck of the woods!
  • RichardNabaviRichardNabavi Posts: 3,413
    edited September 2013
    Polruan said:

    And his party management was massively superior to Cameron's;

    Eh? Assuming you're old enough to remember, what desert island were you living on?
  • JohnOJohnO Posts: 4,211
    edited September 2013

    Patrick said:

    Taffys, I've just realised that JohnO is also an Elmbridge resident - so that makes 3 of us. We are surely over-represented on PB!

    And JohnO is the most important man in Elmbridge and don't you forget it.


    Ahem. I am but a humble servant of the people. I knows me place. (Only wishes he still had a forlock to tug)
  • On first-time incumbency, it would be interesting to know how much of the advantage depends on whether the opposing party re-selects its previous MP. For example, I would imagine that Anna Soubry's first-time incumbency benefit in Broxtowe will be less against Nick P than it would have been against a new Labour candidate - but how much less? I wonder if there has been any research into this 'retread' factor?

    In Guildford and Newbury the LD re-treads stood again in 2010 and lost even heavier.
  • I thought JohnO was the most important man in Bournemouth?

    ::Innocent Face::
  • JohnOJohnO Posts: 4,211
    taffys said:

    JohnO.

    The Elmbridge massive eh?

    We should be loud and proud, paying more tax to the exchequer than any other f8cker.

    ww.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2327394/Elmbridge-The-Surrey-borough-pays-1-18BILLION-income-tax.html

    Personally I think the signs should say 'welcome to Britain's taxpayer powerhouse....'

    I think we can arrange that. LoL.
  • BenMBenM Posts: 1,795
    Reading some great stuff from the NIESR on impact of immigration.

    Mostly beneficial it seems.

    Backed up by actual academic analysis, not rabble-rousing in rightwing newspapers.
  • TwistedFireStopperTwistedFireStopper Posts: 2,538
    edited September 2013



    I would rate Major ahead of Cameron. Major, of course, led his party to a majority - something that Cameron has not done or is likely to do.

    Having got a majority against a divided and feeble opposition with no UKIP breathing down his neck and without the electoral disadvantage that Cameron faces, Major then presided over an entire parliamentary term of in-fighting and scandal (not all his fault, admittedly), achieving very little and, very importantly, allowing space for Campbell to trash the Conservative brand exceptionally effectively, which is the underlying reason why it's so hard now to get a majority.

    Cameron on the other hand has inherited the worst economic legacy of any PM since at least the thirties, has stabilised the country, skilfully put together a stable coalition against all the odds, has put together probably the best team in the key senior cabinet posts for yonks, has avoided the Blair blunder of changing ministers (other, alas, than Brown) every five minutes, thereby allowing progress to be made on some of the most intractable problems since the war - notably education and welfare. That's why he'll go down in history as the best PM, bar Maggie, of the last 50 years.
    If Cameron gets a second term, with a majority, so he's unfettered by the LibDems, there is a chance, just, of him doing something worthwhile, and being remembered for it.
    If he doesn't, then I'm afraid that the epitaph has already been written. And that's before the coming Court cases.

  • Of the 11 LD MPs fighting as 1st time incumbents, 6 have Labour as the main rival.

    When you say main rival do you mean LAB in 2nd place?
    Mainly, but in Cambridge with C in 2nd, Lab are realistically the challenger . The Lab figure could be higher.
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,279
    One for the local by-election round up.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hereford-worcester-24093858

    County Councillor steps down after drug caution.
  • TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 7,362
    BenM said:

    Reading some great stuff from the NIESR on impact of immigration.

    Mostly beneficial it seems.

    Backed up by actual academic analysis, not rabble-rousing in rightwing newspapers.

    or labours own supporters.

  • fitalassfitalass Posts: 4,279
    edited September 2013
    It would indeed be interesting to see if there has been any research into such a retread factor, especially if the previous MP's standing as candidates are still regarded as being too closely linked to their party and its previous record in Office. Have previous MP's who have subsequently gone onto be re-elected, been more or less successful getting back into Westminster when they stood again in the same seat at the next GE? Or have they been more successful getting re-elected as a 'new' candidate in a different seat, maybe even after a longer gap out of Parliament? What if Anna Soubry's first-time incumbency is in fact enhanced rather than diminished by the fact that her Labour opponent is the previous MP in the now discredited Blair/Brown Governments?

    On first-time incumbency, it would be interesting to know how much of the advantage depends on whether the opposing party re-selects its previous MP. For example, I would imagine that Anna Soubry's first-time incumbency benefit in Broxtowe will be less against Nick P than it would have been against a new Labour candidate - but how much less? I wonder if there has been any research into this 'retread' factor?

  • TCPoliticalBettingTCPoliticalBetting Posts: 10,819
    edited September 2013
    Regarding Ms Soubry there does not seem to be much sign of her investing effort in the ground war. NickP will probably win against the norm, because she swans around in ministerial work. I would not be surprised if she carpet bagged over to Ken Clarke's association.... when he retires.


  • I would rate Major ahead of Cameron. Major, of course, led his party to a majority - something that Cameron has not done or is likely to do.

    Having got a majority against a divided and feeble opposition with no UKIP breathing down his neck and without the electoral disadvantage that Cameron faces, Major then presided over an entire parliamentary term of in-fighting and scandal (not all his fault, admittedly), achieving very little and, very importantly, allowing space for Campbell to trash the Conservative brand exceptionally effectively, which is the underlying reason why it's so hard now to get a majority.

    Cameron on the other hand has inherited the worst economic legacy of any PM since at least the thirties, has stabilised the country, skilfully put together a stable coalition against all the odds, has put together probably the best team in the key senior cabinet posts for yonks, has avoided the Blair blunder of changing ministers (other, alas, than Brown) every five minutes, thereby allowing progress to be made on some of the most intractable problems since the war - notably education and welfare. That's why he'll go down in history as the best PM, bar Maggie, of the last 50 years.
    In 2010 Labour got 29% of the vote. In 1992 Labour got 34% of the vote.

    Cameron had the easier opposition.

  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    edited September 2013
    I do love Michael Deacon

    " Nick Clegg was doing. That. Thing. Where. He. Stresses. Every. Word. Because. You're. A. Bit. Slow. This is the trouble with his speeches: he aims for impassioned, but he ends up with irritable. Addressing Lib Dem members during their debate on economic policy, he sounded at times like a weary parent chivvying a daydreaming child. "This motion is about what we can do NOW. Not in 10 or 15 years; what we can do NOW. And for heaven's sake Oliver would you hurry up and find your shoes, you were supposed to be at recorder practice five minutes ago."

    Still, it seemed to do the trick, because Mr Clegg won the vote on the motion about What We Can Do NOW Not Later But NOW (namely: continue to do what we've already been doing for some time). According to rumour beforehand, Vince Cable was planning to snub his leader by skipping the vote, but in the event he turned up, three quarters of the way through the debate, wearing the expression of a man who only came in to shelter from the rain and is already wondering whether he wasn't better off outside.

    Anyway, he brightened up a little in time for his own speech an hour later. It even had some jokes in it. One of his jokes was about how members of the Tory party are all really, really old. His other jokes featured references to Karl Marx, the armies of Nebuchadnezzar, Tony Benn and the 1867 Reform Act. Unlike those fuddy-duddy oldies in the Tory party, young Vince has his finger on the pulse. The pulse of a speech-writer who died in 1972.

    He also made some less jocular attacks on the Tories. The "Nasty Party" had "reverted to type". They were "ugly", "cynical" and "blinkered". This was thanks to their strategist Lynton Crosby, the "Australian rottweiler" controlling their "dog-whistle politics". (So the dog-whistle is being blown by... a dog! Vote Lib Dem for a radical new approach to animal metaphor.)... " http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/liberaldemocrats/10313574/Sketch-The-dog-whistle-blown-by-a-dog.html
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 26,286
    edited September 2013
    Mr Titanic Clive Palmer currently leads in Fairfax by 64 votes out of 83,072:

    http://vtr.aec.gov.au/HouseDivisionFirstPrefs-17496-160.htm
  • @fitalass - Yes, good question. Maybe it's not necessarily an advantage running a retread (although I guess it must depend a lot on his/her personal popularity).
  • Regarding Ms Soubry there does not seem to be much sign of her investing effort in the ground war. NickP will probably win against the norm, because she swans around in ministerial work. I half expect her to carpet bag to Ken Clarke's association....

    She doesn't seem to pay much attention to her ministerial work either.

    http://youtu.be/cknGCCG-XKU
  • In 2010 Labour got 29% of the vote. In 1992 Labour got 34% of the vote.

    Cameron had the easier opposition.

    You've forgotten that third parties are so much bigger now, making comparisons of the total vote percentage not meaningful. The lead over Labour was actually similar to 1992.
  • tim said:

    @fitalass - Yes, good question. Maybe it's not necessarily an advantage running a retread (although I guess it must depend a lot on his/her personal popularity).

    Didn't I read somewhere that anti HS2 campaigners were going to target Soubry and put a candidate up?

    Dunno, but it would seem odd for anti-HS2 campaigners to seek to bring back the party which originally proposed HS2.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,603
    FPT:

    Migration Watch UK @migrationwatch

    .@vincecable claims Chinese tourists and Businessmen going elsewhere - Tourists up 13% and Business Visitors up 4% on previous year

    Those figures in isolation don't mean much, if compared to the growth in overseas tourism among Chinese nationals I would venture that the figures look rather paltry. In comparison to Schengen nations there is little doubt that Britain is lagging for tourists at least, not having direct flights to/from provincial cities isn't particularly helpful either.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633

    Of the 11 LD MPs fighting as 1st time incumbents, 6 have Labour as the main rival.

    When you say main rival do you mean LAB in 2nd place?
    Mainly, but in Cambridge with C in 2nd, Lab are realistically the challenger . The Lab figure could be higher.
    Cambridge last time out Labour grabbed 3rd from the jaws of victory - not helped by their Nazi saluting candidate - who is fighting the seat again.

    The gentrification (caused by a "house price bubble" (c) tim ) is happening slowly inside the city - long term Labour look doomed.

  • TCPoliticalBettingTCPoliticalBetting Posts: 10,819
    edited September 2013
    TGOHF said:

    Of the 11 LD MPs fighting as 1st time incumbents, 6 have Labour as the main rival.

    When you say main rival do you mean LAB in 2nd place?
    Mainly, but in Cambridge with C in 2nd, Lab are realistically the challenger . The Lab figure could be higher.
    Cambridge last time out Labour grabbed 3rd from the jaws of victory - not helped by their Nazi saluting candidate - who is fighting the seat again. The gentrification (caused by a "house price bubble" (c) tim ) is happening slowly inside the city - long term Labour look doomed.
    I just expect a major shift of votes in Uni areas against the LDs and back to Labour. Why I believe that I just wonder .... hmm any ideas?
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    Oh my word - Hugo Rifkind has done a mini-SeanT in The Times - but the most popular out of 210 comments so far is far more explicit.

    A taste of it - interestingly San Toi the author is pretty much on the middle-Left judging by his other posts.

    "No - you are squeamishly neglecting the wider picture.

    There is right now raging across the international Muslim world a corrupted form of Islam that is nothing short of virulent extreme ruthless and bloody religious totalitarianism. And the veil is its swastika, its hammer and sickle - its goose-step.

    And you are asking - in your polite ( cowardly? ) way for these young women nurtured in this movement ( by accident of birth - for the most part ) to be so kind as to, fight the good fight for humankind - for Rifkind - because it's, as you say, downright " rude." But that’s not going to work, is it.

    That would have been like asking some young kid compulsorily conscripted into the Hitler Youth, to take off his swastika because it “ upset Jews ” - and “ that's not nice ”. And maybe in doing that take a stand against the Nazi Party and the whole society some nightmare had found him in. “ Be a good boy - go along - sort it out”..." http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/opinion/columnists/hugorifkind/article3870979.ece
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    tim said:

    In 2010 Labour got 29% of the vote. In 1992 Labour got 34% of the vote.

    Cameron had the easier opposition.

    You've forgotten that third parties are so much bigger now, making comparisons of the total vote percentage not meaningful. The lead over Labour was actually similar to 1992.
    In the Autumn before the 2010 election the Tories were on 44 and the Lib Dems on 18, there was nothing inevitable about Cameron and Osborne being so rubbish that they handed 5-6% to the Lib Dems, thats just a crappy excuse.
    You get nothing for poll leads tim, votes are all - worth remembering I'd say.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 26,286
    GB figures:

    1992:
    Con 42.8%
    Lab 35.2%
    Lead: 7.6%

    2010:
    Con: 36.9%
    Lab: 29.7%
    Lead: 7.2%

    (Con only reached 37.0% in 2010 if you include Bercow's votes).
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,603
    edited September 2013
    tim said:

    In 2010 Labour got 29% of the vote. In 1992 Labour got 34% of the vote.

    Cameron had the easier opposition.

    You've forgotten that third parties are so much bigger now, making comparisons of the total vote percentage not meaningful. The lead over Labour was actually similar to 1992.
    In the Autumn before the 2010 election the Tories were on 44 and the Lib Dems on 18, there was nothing inevitable about Cameron and Osborne being so rubbish that they handed 5-6% to the Lib Dems, thats just a crappy excuse.
    I agree with Nick.

    Osborne was an idiot to let the Lib Dems into "Prime Ministerial" debates, that is what cost the Tories a slim majority, giving Nick Clegg that level of exposure which allowed him to firm up the LD vote in Con/Lib marginals.

    The gain in Con/Lab marginals for the LD's was not as pronounced because lefties know how to vote tactically unlike Tories.
  • PolruanPolruan Posts: 2,083

    Polruan said:

    And his party management was massively superior to Cameron's;

    Eh? Assuming you're old enough to remember, what desert island were you living on?
    Near Huntingdon, oddly enough...

    I'd regard Major's achievement in remaining PM for the full 5 years whilst occasionally getting anything at all done, against a strong opposition and a backdrop of continuous scandal as better then Cameron's achievements in alienating a large proportion of his party, going ahead with votes that he can't win because nobody's done the maths properly... and so on. Just my opinion, but some others may agree.

    I don't really see how a one-term PM is ever going to go down as a great PM unless he/she does something truly exceptional. As TFS says, in the unlikely event that Cameron wins an outright majority in 2015 then there are ways he could live up to the reputation you have planned for him, but there's a pretty big "if" entailed there.
  • tim said:


    In the Autumn before the 2010 election the Tories were on 44 and the Lib Dems on 18, there was nothing inevitable about Cameron and Osborne being so rubbish that they handed 5-6% to the Lib Dems, thats just a crappy excuse.

    The main reason was that they told the truth. I agree the campaign itself from January onwards was pretty rubbish (Steve Hilton???), but the lead fell before that. People wanted to be told that there would be no pain, and Osborne (rightly in my view) didn't tell them what they wanted to hear.

    This time round we may see either a re-run in reverse, or more likely the Hollande approach: Labour buying short-term popularity at the expense of not being able to govern if they do win (especialluy if there's a hung parliament or a very small Labour majority). My advice is to plan your affairs to mitigate the impact.
  • TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 7,362
    edited September 2013
    MaxPB said:

    FPT:

    Migration Watch UK @migrationwatch

    .@vincecable claims Chinese tourists and Businessmen going elsewhere - Tourists up 13% and Business Visitors up 4% on previous year

    Those figures in isolation don't mean much, if compared to the growth in overseas tourism among Chinese nationals I would venture that the figures look rather paltry. In comparison to Schengen nations there is little doubt that Britain is lagging for tourists at least, not having direct flights to/from provincial cities isn't particularly helpful either.

    Max,does it really matter about Chinese tourists if tourism is up and with business visitors up.(how many of these are Chinese ? )

    some more facts for vince to think about before he comes out with more tripe.


    Migration Watch UK @migrationwatch

    .@vincecable Claims that students are going elsewhere - not true. 2012 visa applications for University up by 3% on 2011 and by 9% on 2010


    Migration Watch UK @migrationwatch

    .@vincecable Britain is open for business - 4 new routes opened for investors, entrepreneurs and exceptionally talented in last two years



  • In 2010 Labour got 29% of the vote. In 1992 Labour got 34% of the vote.

    Cameron had the easier opposition.

    You've forgotten that third parties are so much bigger now, making comparisons of the total vote percentage not meaningful. The lead over Labour was actually similar to 1992.
    In 2010, the Conservatives led by David Cameron received 55.5% of the two party share of the vote.

    In 1992, the Conservatives led by John Major received 54.9% of the two party share of the vote.

    These are very similar percentages of a shrinking two-party share, with Cameron just edging it.
  • TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 7,362
    BenM said:

    Reading some great stuff from the NIESR on impact of immigration.

    Mostly beneficial it seems.

    Backed up by actual academic analysis, not rabble-rousing in rightwing newspapers.

    Or ordinary lib dem or labour voters.

    Even Lib Dem voters back tighter migration controls, survey suggests

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/9129419/Even-Lib-Dem-voters-back-tighter-migration-controls-survey-suggests.html
  • In 2010 Labour got 29% of the vote. In 1992 Labour got 34% of the vote.

    Cameron had the easier opposition.

    You've forgotten that third parties are so much bigger now, making comparisons of the total vote percentage not meaningful. The lead over Labour was actually similar to 1992.
    In 2010, the Conservatives led by David Cameron received 55.5% of the two party share of the vote.

    In 1992, the Conservatives led by John Major received 54.9% of the two party share of the vote.

    These are very similar percentages of a shrinking two-party share, with Cameron just edging it.
    As an interesting aside, in 2005, Labour led by Tony Blair received 52.1% of the two party share of the vote.
  • taffystaffys Posts: 9,753
    Even Lib Dem voters back tighter migration controls, survey suggests

    Talking of immigration, what's triggered the current round of burqa busting by the libs and the others of the soft left?

    Its not as if its a new phenomenon. Why is it being brought up now?
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 14,195
    Have to admit my Lib Dem MP has been a big a big help to us, our previous Tory mp (different area) was as much use as a chocolate tea pot.

    For his help he gains 2 voters at next election.
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    I see Mr Hodges wasn't very impressed by Dr Cable either

    "A few years ago I read an article on the TV personality Richard Madeley. It was that sort of day. In fact, it was quite a funny piece and carried one stand out line: “Richard Madeley’s biggest problem,” it said, “is that he’s just intelligent enough to realise how unintelligent he is”. That may be a fair assessment, or it may be wholly unjustified. But it made me laugh.

    I was reminded of that article yesterday when I saw Vince Cable’s speech. Or more accurately where I saw the whole Vince Cable palaver. He was opposing his party’s stance on the economy. Then he wasn’t. He wasn’t going to attend the economic debate. The he did. He was going to support the critical amendment. Then he was going to vote against it. He was going to stand up and give a stinging speech himself, attacking the Tories. Well, to be fair, at least he delivered on that last bit.

    But then, in his defence, he wasn’t actually making his pitch to the country or to the media or the Richard and Judy Book Club. He was speaking to the rather sparse ranks of Lib Dem activists. Though speaking isn’t really the right word. Instead he was launching a thinly veiled attack on the leader of the Liberal Democrats, Tim Farron.

    Obviously Farron isn’t technically leader yet. But when Nick Clegg finally decides he’s had quite enough of being burnt in effigy, Farron will replace him. At least, that’s what Vince Cable thinks, hence his pre-emptive strike yesterday. Vince Cable believes the next leader of the Lib Dems should be Vince Cable..." http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100236321/deep-down-vince-cable-knows-that-he-traded-his-principles-for-power/
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,603

    MaxPB said:

    FPT:

    Migration Watch UK @migrationwatch

    .@vincecable claims Chinese tourists and Businessmen going elsewhere - Tourists up 13% and Business Visitors up 4% on previous year

    Those figures in isolation don't mean much, if compared to the growth in overseas tourism among Chinese nationals I would venture that the figures look rather paltry. In comparison to Schengen nations there is little doubt that Britain is lagging for tourists at least, not having direct flights to/from provincial cities isn't particularly helpful either.

    Max,does it really matter about Chinese tourists if tourism is up and with business visitors up.(how many of these are Chinese ? )

    some more facts for vince to think about before he comes out with more tripe.


    Migration Watch UK @migrationwatch

    .@vincecable Claims that students are going elsewhere - not true. 2012 visa applications for University up by 3% on 2011 and by 9% on 2010


    Migration Watch UK @migrationwatch

    .@vincecable Britain is open for business - 4 new routes opened for investors, entrepreneurs and exceptionally talented in last two years



    Overseas tourism among Chinese citizens was up almost 25% YoY and overseas investment by Chinese business was up by an even bigger amount, rises of 11% and 4% are lagging behind the trend growth rates. They are going elsewhere. Vince is right on this count, and I don't doubt it, the paperwork for Chinese people is too onerous compared to the single Schengen visa.

    The problem that the Home Office has is that they think anyone who comes here as a tourist is a potential illegal immigrant, and while I agree that sentiment is true for certain nations, China is not one of them, Chinese people are fiercely nationalistic and the ones China lets out of the country are guaranteed to return to China. The visa process for China should reflect this and it should be made very, very easy to obtain an overseas visitor visa for Chinese citizens with a single online application and a small processing fee.
  • OT, rcs1000 was saying the Pirates seemed to be winning the poster war in Germany. Apparently they're winning the drone war as well.

    http://torrentfreak.com/pirate-party-crashes-spy-drone-in-front-of-german-chancellor-angela-merkel-130917/?utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=twitterfeed
  • PolruanPolruan Posts: 2,083
    edited September 2013

    MaxPB said:

    FPT:

    Migration Watch UK @migrationwatch


    some more facts for vince to think about before he comes out with more tripe.


    Migration Watch UK @migrationwatch

    .@vincecable Claims that students are going elsewhere - not true. 2012 visa applications for University up by 3% on 2011 and by 9% on 2010

    Perhaps I'm being unnecessarily suspicious, but wouldn't the number of applications granted be a more relevant figure, and is the reason for not using it that it shows a lower increase? Also, how does that compare with trend rate over the previous period, and the rates of growth that universities had previously forecast?
  • TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 7,362
    Robin Brant @robindbrant

    Firefighters in eng and Wales will strike next week on 25th sept

    Do we still have the Green Goddesses ;-)
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,603
    SeanT said:

    Where's that Roger? And that there Nabavi character?

    As of this moment, I've got the most shared blog AGAIN on the Telegraph, today - beating Dan Hodges, Peter Oborne, Iain Martin and Dan Hannan - amongst others.

    http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/seanthomas/100236221/when-it-comes-to-race-its-the-left-which-is-now-cranky-and-obsessive/


    *does ridiculous juvenile dance around pb thread, waving his Cornish buttocks at bemused pb-ers*

    Sean, do you have it within your power to open the comments section for that article, or have the Telegraph's legal team deemed their readership too distasteful?
  • SeanT said:

    Where's that Roger? And that there Nabavi character?

    At your service.

    A much better article than yesterday's, IMHO
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    SeanT said:

    Where's that Roger? And that there Nabavi character?

    As of this moment, I've got the most shared blog AGAIN on the Telegraph, today - beating Dan Hodges, Peter Oborne, Iain Martin and Dan Hannan - amongst others.

    http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/seanthomas/100236221/when-it-comes-to-race-its-the-left-which-is-now-cranky-and-obsessive/


    *does ridiculous juvenile dance around pb thread, waving his Cornish buttocks at bemused pb-ers*

    Have you read Hugo Rifkind in the Times today? A very interesting piece with almost 100% support in the comments
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    I think Dan Hannan is most logical here.

    "...The only reason we're having this discussion is that, a generation ago, chunks of the public sector became obsessed – I don't use that word lightly – with ethnicity. Virtually every issue was reinterpreted as a struggle against racism. Because the most visible symbols of religious devotion (hijabs and Sikhs' turbans) tended to be worn by people who were not white, chunks of the Left forgot what ought to have been their guiding principle: equality before the law. Instead – like, paradoxically, the apartheid authorities in South Africa – they started categorising people. Some large corporations followed suit.

    British Airways, keen to allow hijabs but not bulky crucifixes, got itself into the ludicrous position of decreeing that religious items might be worn by employees if there was a "mandatory scriptural requirement". What constitutes a mandatory scriptural requirement? The question has divided theologians for centuries. It has led to schisms, even wars. But don’t worry, we now have an ultimate arbiter: British Airways..." http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danielhannan/100236246/so-would-nuns-be-allowed-to-wear-hijabs/
  • How many ways can SeanT find to write "Aren't lefties shit and aren't we right-wingers better than them?"
  • TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 7,362
    Kevin Maguire @Kevin_Maguire

    Posties' union CWU to ask Lab conf to commit party to renationalise Royal Mail. @ChukaUmunna against. Big battle ahead

  • This website's most watched LD MP moves further down the gang plank.

    http://order-order.com/2013/09/17/hancock-breached-code-of-conduct/
    “Myself and two other councillors have concluded that the report was comprehensive enough and a hearing will take place in the next few weeks.

    “Cllr Hancock and/or his legal advisers will have the opportunity to respond to the report, and question witnesses and the report’s author.

    “The hearings sub-committee will then make a final decision. It would not be appropriate to make a decision on publication of the report until the process is concluded.”
  • RichardNabaviRichardNabavi Posts: 3,413
    edited September 2013

    How many ways can SeanT find to write "Aren't lefties shit and aren't we right-wingers better than them?"

    Well, the converse has kept Polly going for decades, so I'd have thought quite a lot more ways.
  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983

    Kevin Maguire @Kevin_Maguire

    Posties' union CWU to ask Lab conf to commit party to renationalise Royal Mail. @ChukaUmunna against. Big battle ahead

    Why should there be a battle over this? Cant they do what they usually do - Labour conference can vote for a policy of public ownership, they can campaign on that as a manifesto pledge and a future Labour government can sell it off / refuse to renationalise it as per usual.
  • PolruanPolruan Posts: 2,083
    Polruan said:

    MaxPB said:

    FPT:

    Migration Watch UK @migrationwatch


    some more facts for vince to think about before he comes out with more tripe.


    Migration Watch UK @migrationwatch

    .@vincecable Claims that students are going elsewhere - not true. 2012 visa applications for University up by 3% on 2011 and by 9% on 2010

    Perhaps I'm being unnecessarily suspicious, but wouldn't the number of applications granted be a more relevant figure, and is the reason for not using it that it shows a lower increase? Also, how does that compare with trend rate over the previous period, and the rates of growth that universities had previously forecast?
    Hmm. Section 5.25 of this

    https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/immigration-statistics-april-to-june-2013/immigration-statistics-april-to-june-2013#study-1

    which is the most recent data on visas appears to suggest that for the year to 30 June 2013, the number of visas issued for long-term study fell by 5% and the number of arrivals fell by over 20%. This excludes short-term student visas (<6months for English language courses etc) and as such probably is a good measure of the number of "proper" university students doing full courses or a year in the UK. The trend for both visas and admissions has been sharply downwards since about June 2010.

    Sounds like Vince might be onto something (whether by accident or design)
  • tim said:

    tim said:


    In the Autumn before the 2010 election the Tories were on 44 and the Lib Dems on 18, there was nothing inevitable about Cameron and Osborne being so rubbish that they handed 5-6% to the Lib Dems, thats just a crappy excuse.

    The main reason was that they told the truth. I agree the campaign itself from January onwards was pretty rubbish (Steve Hilton???), but the lead fell before that. People wanted to be told that there would be no pain, and Osborne (rightly in my view) didn't tell them what they wanted to hear.

    This time round we may see either a re-run in reverse, or more likely the Hollande approach: Labour buying short-term popularity at the expense of not being able to govern if they do win (especialluy if there's a hung parliament or a very small Labour majority). My advice is to plan your affairs to mitigate the impact.
    I must've missed the truth telling bit.
    I could've sworn they said they'd spend less than Labour

    No end to universal benefits such as the child benefit, no VAT rise, no increase in employee NI contributions, no top down organisation of the NHS, and so on ...


  • How many ways can SeanT find to write "Aren't lefties shit and aren't we right-wingers better than them?"

    The more pertinent question is whether he is better at doing that then Polly is at writing her "I know Labour are crap, but the Tories eat babies, so whose side are you on?" epistles.
  • Robin Brant @robindbrant

    Firefighters in eng and Wales will strike next week on 25th sept

    Do we still have the Green Goddesses ;-)

    No, you don't.

  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,603

    How many ways can SeanT find to write "Aren't lefties shit and aren't we right-wingers better than them?"

    There are so many ways, I expect Sean's relationship with the Telegraph is beneficial to both sides. ;)
    SeanT said:



    No. The mods can't cope with the arguments on these race/Islam/Immigration threads, they attract nutters from all sides - left and right - and blatant trolls as well (Guardianista trying to be Nazis) - and the whole thing collapses. So they just close comments.

    Not an ideal situation, at all - but not my doing.

    That's fair enough. Another insight you could provide, why is it that across all commenters on all websites the ones on the Telegraph blogs seem the craziest. Do they put something in the water or something? I was looking at the comments on the article about the sale of Lloyds, something which is good news for the country and the government, but reading the comments one would assume the world was about to end...
  • How many ways can SeanT find to write "Aren't lefties shit and aren't we right-wingers better than them?"

    Well, the converse has kept Polly going for decades, so I'd have thought quite a lot more ways.

    SeanT is the Polly Toynbee of the right. I like it: preaching to the converted, making them feel good about themselves, not challenging them to any real degree. Just comfy, plodding and non-threatening. Though SeanT is a better writer.

  • @Southam - Yes, he is a much better writer, although I don't remember Polly being as bad a few years as she is now.
  • How many ways can SeanT find to write "Aren't lefties shit and aren't we right-wingers better than them?"

    Well, the converse has kept Polly going for decades, so I'd have thought quite a lot more ways.
    Chuckle - Good point well made Sir.
  • @Southam - Yes, he is a much better writer, although I don't remember Polly being as bad a few years as she is now.

    She's far too formulaic; it's all lists and doom-laden prognostication. She's just uninteresting. I have no idea why people obsess about her.

  • Theresa May on Sky News talking about the Daniel Pelka case, uttering that worthless platitude "Lessons have been learned". Clearly, they haven't learned. Not until someone loses their job, or goes to prison for criminal negligence.
  • How many ways can SeanT find to write "Aren't lefties shit and aren't we right-wingers better than them?"

    It's like Ed is crap threads.

    You make a vow to yourself, not to write any more of them, and then wham, you get presented with new overwhelming evidence on the topic, and you can't help yourself.
  • MrJonesMrJones Posts: 3,523
    FPT
    Charles said:

    MrJones said:

    FPT

    Charles said:

    MrJones said:

    Grandiose said:

    'I've been absolutely determined to get that money back for taxpayers and pay down debt, that is what we've started to do today'

    The government has started to get that back for taxpayers and use it to pay down debt. Nothing incorrect about that.

    Loss 1: taxpayer buying worthless shares for far more than they were worth
    Loss 2: taxpayer paying to make those worthless shares worth something again through ZIRP, QE and all the other economic policies designed to pay off the banksta's gambling debts
    Loss 3: taxpayer will eventually pay for a sweetener to ensure success of a future flotation

    The taxpayer will only ever get back part of loss 2.
    You forgot:Loss 4: funding a annual supply of tin foil hats for MrJones
    http://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/boys-quizzed-over-500-rapes-a-year-by-gangs-8335165.html

    Nothing to do with the banks.
    Sure but you mentioned tin foil hats.

    We live in a country where thousands of young girls have been gang-raped within a few miles of whoreminster by a gang-culture that not a single member of the political class will admit even exists and the ability of that gang-culture to rape with almost complete impunity from the law is precisely because not a single member of the political class will admit the problem exists.

    Same with the grooming gangs where thousands of young girls were raped, tortured and forced into prostitution whil ethe political class covered it up and won't hold an inquiry into the biggest child abuse scandal since Victorian times because they don't want the public to understand the scale of what they covered up - a scale, like the gang problem in London, that was the direct result of them covering it up when it started.

    So if the political class are prepared to lie and cover up thousands of children being gang-raped i think it's quite reasonable to not trust their word on lesser issues.
  • SeanT said:

    How many ways can SeanT find to write "Aren't lefties shit and aren't we right-wingers better than them?"

    How many ways can SeanT find to write "Aren't lefties shit and aren't we right-wingers better than them?"

    Well, the converse has kept Polly going for decades, so I'd have thought quite a lot more ways.

    SeanT is the Polly Toynbee of the right. I like it: preaching to the converted, making them feel good about themselves, not challenging them to any real degree. Just comfy, plodding and non-threatening. Though SeanT is a better writer.

    Thanks for the compliment. As Richard N observes, one of the keys to being a successfuly commenter is finding ways of saying exactly the same thing in different ways, until the end of time. Cf Dan Hodges.

    Though, as it happens, I do challenge Telegraf readers from time to time. I practically got death threats from the commenters when I blogged that Britain is getting "nicer", and my blog last week on Agent Orange got a lot of right wing Telegraph Atlanticists very angry, too:

    http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/seanthomas/100235050/spare-us-the-hypocrisy-over-chemical-weapons-america-what-about-agent-orange/

    Your UKIPers engaging in dogging piece also attracted some weirdos, and some of them drifted over to PB.
  • taffystaffys Posts: 9,753
    The Guardian threads on Burqas are open and well worth a read. Many on the 'soft' left seem to have turned against the wearing of this troublesome garment (if that's anything to go by). Perhaps that is why the liberals have brought it up now.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 113,969
    edited September 2013
    Bobajob said:
    What is it about sportsmen and Downing Street?

    Matthew Hoggard called Tony Blair a knob to his face when he visited Downing Street, whilst Andrew Flintoff had a piss in the Rose Garden.
  • taffystaffys Posts: 9,753
    This is one of the biggest disconnects between the rulers and the ruled.

    One of the points made on the Guardian site is that this garment is being worn not for religious purposes, but to challenge the cultural norms of a free democracy. Its a political garment, not a religious one.

    It's hard not to agree with that.

    The only problem for me is enforcement. Imagine being a copper having to nick muslim women for wearing burqas. The lawyers will have a field day.
  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    taffys said:


    One of the points made on the Guardian site is that this garment is being worn not for religious purposes, but to challenge the cultural norms of a free democracy.

    Of course if it was banned then it wouldnt quite as free a democracy and they would have succeeded with their challenge.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633

    Kevin Maguire @Kevin_Maguire

    Posties' union CWU to ask Lab conf to commit party to renationalise Royal Mail. @ChukaUmunna against. Big battle ahead

    Where's Ed on this - eating bamboo in a zen way ?
  • taffys said:

    This is one of the biggest disconnects between the rulers and the ruled.

    One of the points made on the Guardian site is that this garment is being worn not for religious purposes, but to challenge the cultural norms of a free democracy. Its a political garment, not a religious one.

    It's hard not to agree with that.

    The only problem for me is enforcement. Imagine being a copper having to nick muslim women for wearing burqas. The lawyers will have a field day.

    It'll be chaos. Every bleeding heart do gooder will march down the street in a burka, trying to get arrested.
    Much more sensible to impose restrictions in certain areas and establishments, subject to the proper checks and balances.
  • SeanT said:

    How many ways can SeanT find to write "Aren't lefties shit and aren't we right-wingers better than them?"

    How many ways can SeanT find to write "Aren't lefties shit and aren't we right-wingers better than them?"

    Well, the converse has kept Polly going for decades, so I'd have thought quite a lot more ways.

    SeanT is the Polly Toynbee of the right. I like it: preaching to the converted, making them feel good about themselves, not challenging them to any real degree. Just comfy, plodding and non-threatening. Though SeanT is a better writer.

    Thanks for the compliment. As Richard N observes, one of the keys to being a successfuly commenter is finding ways of saying exactly the same thing in different ways, until the end of time. Cf Dan Hodges.

    Though, as it happens, I do challenge Telegraf readers from time to time. I practically got death threats from the commenters when I blogged that Britain is getting "nicer", and my blog last week on Agent Orange got a lot of right wing Telegraph Atlanticists very angry, too:

    http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/seanthomas/100235050/spare-us-the-hypocrisy-over-chemical-weapons-america-what-about-agent-orange/

    As I have said on here before, I am deeply envious of you. I wish I had your gifts. I always wanted to write fiction, but I don't have the skill, the patience or the range. You are a very lucky man, so push yourself to the limit; no settling for the formulaic, though - of course - there is a place for that, especially if it pays the bills.
This discussion has been closed.