Howdy, Stranger!

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

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » We could be heading for GE2015 outcome that’ll appear to be

SystemSystem Posts: 11,008
edited May 2014 in General

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » We could be heading for GE2015 outcome that’ll appear to be grossly unfair, undemocratic and peverse

For in terms of seat distribution a Ukip vote up to the mid-20s is only important if the party is taking more votes from CON than LAB. The big driver, as ever, is the swing between CON and LAB and in about 10% of constituencies the Lib Dems.

Read the full story here


«134

Comments

  • Options
    JohnOJohnO Posts: 4,214
    edited May 2014
    Home alone. Please join me.

    (shouldn't that be Tories on 280 seats??)
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,961
    "I said they were stupid at the time because it was blindingly obvious that the main beneficiary of continuing with First Past the Post was always going to be Labour."

    Surely it is better to oppose something in principle, than support something just for electoral advantage?
  • Options
    Stuart_DicksonStuart_Dickson Posts: 3,557
    The Tories are the Stupid Party.
  • Options
    dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,287
    UKIP nul points.
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453

    The Tories are the Stupid Party.

    Positive campaigning from the Nats

    No bitterness in evidence.

    Oh, wait...
  • Options
    EasterrossEasterross Posts: 1,915
    Good morning all and happy birthday OGH. On thread so much speculation and we are only 10 days away from a real poll with real votes. Let's see how things pan out a fortnight tonight before speculating about the GE next year.
  • Options
    JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    Reports are reaching JNN that Nick Clegg is shortly to launch "Operation Conchita". This post Euro Election strategy is for Clegg's party to rise like a LibDem phoenix and capture the hearts and souls of the British voting public.

    Precise details are as yet unclear but leaked reports exclusively shared with JNN indicate that following historical precedent all LibDem candidates will have to sport a beard, wear a figure hugging evening dress and be able to trill a decent Shirley Bassey ballad to assembled husting meetings.

    Sources close to Viscount Thurso conceded that whilst the beard was of little concern he would need to raid Vince Cable's stock of bejewelled evening dresses and might have trouble belting out a decent tune !!
  • Options
    Iggypop37Iggypop37 Posts: 14
    still way too early to call. a lot anfd and will happen between now and next May. Does seems though this one is going to be even harder to predict than GE2010.
  • Options
    EasterrossEasterross Posts: 1,915
    David Cameron makes clear he will not be PM if he cannot guarantee an In-Out Referendum after next GE
  • Options
    Iggypop37Iggypop37 Posts: 14
    edited May 2014
    anyone see the indy this morning. If it is true Miliband being very wily in giving the kippers more or less an easy run in Newark. Could cause Cameron a lot of issues.

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/ukip-boosted-by-labour-decision-to-soft-pedal-in-newark-byelection-9350087.html.
  • Options
    CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    @RichardNabavi FPT

    On the choice between Miliband and Farage

    I disagree - Miliband would be better. He may be absolutely wrongheaded about everything, but he is a professional politician who understands the realities of the world in which we live. It will be a torrid 2 years but then, like Hollande, he will trim his sails. A bad 2 years followed by a wasted 3 years.

    Farage relishing the fact that he is different to the rest. My fear - and perhaps I am wrong, so happy to consider any evidence to the contrary - is that he makes too many decisions based on gut feel and that he enjoys "teasing" the media. Those are absolutely the wrong attributes in a PM, who needs to be cool and analytical. Farage is unpredictable. That will scare the market and scare our partners (who will see him as unreliable)
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,969
    FPT: Mr. Llama, worth also pointing out the idiocy of a needless war in Iraq, wich had a similar impact on Afghanistan efforts as the Sicilian expedition did upon the Athenians in the Peloponnesian War.

    Mr. Smithson, you've rather rewritten history there. The Conservatives delivered their side of the bargain, then the perfidious yellows welched on boundary reforms because they weren't allowed to ruin the Lords with utterly deranged changes.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,969
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,578
    The Tories didn’t see it and the tone of their campaign so poisoned relations with the LDs that they were never going to get the boundary change through.

    Oh pulease! The Lib Dems lost the AV referendum (which was run less than brilliantly) and then offered up a dogs dinner of HoL reform.....
  • Options
    JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    JohnO said:

    Home alone. Please join me.

    (shouldn't that be Tories on 280 seats??)

    Did you enjoy a post "Dirty Dick's" jaunt this time ?!?

  • Options
    saddenedsaddened Posts: 2,245
    "The Tories didn’t see it and the tone of their campaign so poisoned relations with the LDs that they were never going to get the boundary change through"

    That's interesting, because until now you have stuck with the LD lie that boundary changes were renaged on because of Lords reform.
  • Options
    MrsBMrsB Posts: 574
    spot on Mike. Tories shot selves in foot in AV referendum.
  • Options
    CarolaCarola Posts: 1,805
    Did Dave just go back to the 'cast-iron' firework?

    Happy birthday OGH.
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    Yeah. I saw that.

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/ukip-boosted-by-labour-decision-to-soft-pedal-in-newark-byelection-9350087.html

    Risky strategy from Ed if true. Though it would be fun seeing Mr Helmer sitting on the opposition benches.
    Iggypop37 said:

    anyone see the indy this morning. If it is true Miliband being very wily in giving the kippers more or less an easy run in Newark. Could cause Cameron a lot of issues.

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/ukip-boosted-by-labour-decision-to-soft-pedal-in-newark-byelection-9350087.html.

  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    MrsB said:

    Tories shot selves in foot in AV referendum.

    They made the terminal mistake of taking the Lib Dems at their word.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,969
    MrsB, splendid to see you on, even if you are completely wrong. Parties should not support or oppose voting systems based on how much it would harm or advantage their own prospects.
  • Options
    david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,419
    RobD said:

    "I said they were stupid at the time because it was blindingly obvious that the main beneficiary of continuing with First Past the Post was always going to be Labour."

    Surely it is better to oppose something in principle, than support something just for electoral advantage?

    Yes. In any case, there's no reason to think that AV would be any better than FPTP. In terms of party advantage, the two would probably be about the same though much depends on the relative strengths of minor parties like UKIP and the Lib Dems.
  • Options
    MrsBMrsB Posts: 574
    Look, Ed might not be my first choice of PM, but an Ed / Nigel comparison? Really? Farage couldn't run a district council, never mind a country.
  • Options
    JohnOJohnO Posts: 4,214
    edited May 2014
    JackW said:

    JohnO said:

    Home alone. Please join me.

    (shouldn't that be Tories on 280 seats??)

    Did you enjoy a post "Dirty Dick's" jaunt this time ?!?

    I was escorted personally to the (last) train by a guilt-ridden Neil and somehow contrived to stay awake and alight, albeit a little unsteadily, at Hersham Halt.
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    AV would not give the Tories more chance of power. It was almost designed to keep them out of power. They made no mistake.

    Which pb kipper would put Cameron's Tories as second choice on their ballot in an AV GE?
    Scott_P said:

    MrsB said:

    Tories shot selves in foot in AV referendum.

    They made the terminal mistake of taking the Lib Dems at their word.
  • Options
    dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,287
    Good to see OGH having a happy birthday. Another cause for celebration is the retirement of Gordon Brown, as well as the Coalition. Keeping Labour out of power is no bad thing after all, even Cameron can recognise that.
  • Options
    CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    Iggypop37 said:

    anyone see the indy this morning. If it is true Miliband being very wily in giving the kippers more or less an easy run in Newark. Could cause Cameron a lot of issues.

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/ukip-boosted-by-labour-decision-to-soft-pedal-in-newark-byelection-9350087.html.

    Getting their excuses in early, I see...

    That said, given that they have claimed they are focusing their resources on the Euro and local elections that does rather up the ante in those contests
  • Options
    EasterrossEasterross Posts: 1,915
    Interesting that Labour isn't going to try in a constituency it won in 1997. Hardly the actions of a party sure of winning next year. Tories will also be able to truthfully claim a vote for UKIP helps Labour since Labour is trying to help Roger Helmer win.

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/ukip-boosted-by-labour-decision-to-soft-pedal-in-newark-byelection-9350087.html
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    edited May 2014
    It takes more than one. Who would be in a UKIP cabinet? Roger Helmer, Neil Hamilton?
    MrsB said:

    Look, Ed might not be my first choice of PM, but an Ed / Nigel comparison? Really? Farage couldn't run a district council, never mind a country.

  • Options
    CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    MrsB said:

    Look, Ed might not be my first choice of PM, but an Ed / Nigel comparison? Really? Farage couldn't run a district council, never mind a country.

    I agree. I don't know why Mr Nabavi's usual judgement seems to have deserted him.

    Admittedly he did post on Saturday night, so perhaps we should put it down to too much fine claret?
  • Options
    JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    JohnO said:

    JackW said:

    JohnO said:

    Home alone. Please join me.

    (shouldn't that be Tories on 280 seats??)

    Did you enjoy a post "Dirty Dick's" jaunt this time ?!?

    I was escorted persoanlly to the (last) train by a guilt-ridden Neil and somehow contrived to stay awake and alight, albeit a little unsteadily, at Hersham Halt.
    How perversely disappointing .... especially for those of us awaiting with barely concealed anticipation at the prospect of your latest voyage of discovery to the south coast.

    Next time ....

  • Options
    GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 20,793
    edited May 2014
    If we don't get an election result that's "unfair, undemocratic and perverse" in 2015, it'll happen before long.

    I think ultimately we're going to have to move towards PR. I can only see the polarization of Con and Lab getting worse this century, with an increasing trend towards small, local political movements. FPTP doesn't work in such circumstances.

    The duopoly of Lab and Con is over, if they want to retain some sort of legitimate power in the 21st century they will have to share it with smaller, like-minded parties.

    Or to put it another way (and back in the day I never thought I'd say this) I agree with Rod. ;)
  • Options
    EasterrossEasterross Posts: 1,915
    dr_spyn said:

    Good to see OGH having a happy birthday. Another cause for celebration is the retirement of Gordon Brown, as well as the Coalition. Keeping Labour out of power is no bad thing after all, even Cameron can recognise that.

    dr_spyn said:

    Good to see OGH having a happy birthday. Another cause for celebration is the retirement of Gordon Brown, as well as the Coalition. Keeping Labour out of power is no bad thing after all, even Cameron can recognise that.

    Where is the confirmation Brown is to stand down? He absolutely refused to answer the question when Samantha Simmons tried to question him on SKY News this week.
  • Options
    david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,419
    Iggypop37 said:

    anyone see the indy this morning. If it is true Miliband being very wily in giving the kippers more or less an easy run in Newark. Could cause Cameron a lot of issues.

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/ukip-boosted-by-labour-decision-to-soft-pedal-in-newark-byelection-9350087.html.

    He'd be being too clever for his own good. Does he really think it's a good idea allowing a party that lost its deposit finishing fourth last time, almost 20% behind Labour to overtake them? Newark was always going to be a tough take for Labour but if their own vote share drops, what message does that give to other Labour target seats where they might stand a decent chance?
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,578
    edited May 2014

    Interesting that Labour isn't going to try in a constituency it won in 1997. Hardly the actions of a party sure of winning next year. Tories will also be able to truthfully claim a vote for UKIP helps Labour since Labour is trying to help Roger Helmer win.

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/ukip-boosted-by-labour-decision-to-soft-pedal-in-newark-byelection-9350087.html

    Especially since the tabloids have started digging on Helmer:

    Married UKIP politician, 70, accused of taking young female researcher to a strip club, threatening to 'trash' her reputation if she told and then pressuring her to resign
    Former UKIP researcher accuses MEP of sacking her after strip club visit
    Alexandra Swann said she felt 'deeply uncomfortable' about Roger Helmer's behaviour


    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2625285/Married-UKIP-politician-70-accused-taking-young-female-researcher-strip-club-threatening-trash-reputation-told-pressuring-resign.html#ixzz31OZ2S4xd
  • Options
    dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,287
    Ed wasn't first choice of the PLP either.
  • Options
    GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 20,793

    David Cameron makes clear he will not be PM if he cannot guarantee an In-Out Referendum after next GE

    I wonder whether Dave and Nick have already had discussions about what it would take for the Lib-Dems to agree to an IN/OUT?
  • Options
    GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 20,793

    Iggypop37 said:

    anyone see the indy this morning. If it is true Miliband being very wily in giving the kippers more or less an easy run in Newark. Could cause Cameron a lot of issues.

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/ukip-boosted-by-labour-decision-to-soft-pedal-in-newark-byelection-9350087.html.

    He'd be being too clever for his own good. Does he really think it's a good idea allowing a party that lost its deposit finishing fourth last time, almost 20% behind Labour to overtake them? Newark was always going to be a tough take for Labour but if their own vote share drops, what message does that give to other Labour target seats where they might stand a decent chance?
    Tony Blair would have had a decent go at winning Newark 94-97. Indeed, he DID win it 1997.
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,578
    SeanT said:

    Better Together ‏@UK_Together 40m
    NEW POLL Sunday Mail Yougov poll for Progressive has NO lead growing by 6 points. YES 34% NO 54% #indyref pic.twitter.com/5plBNJXukG

    I would be wary of MoS poll reporting - they frequently compare polls from different companies - the absolute numbers are probably ok, but any "trend" should be treated with caution.
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 40,901

    Interesting that Labour isn't going to try in a constituency it won in 1997. Hardly the actions of a party sure of winning next year. Tories will also be able to truthfully claim a vote for UKIP helps Labour since Labour is trying to help Roger Helmer win.

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/ukip-boosted-by-labour-decision-to-soft-pedal-in-newark-byelection-9350087.html

    Especially since the tabloids have started digging on Helmer:

    Married UKIP politician, 70, accused of taking young female researcher to a strip club, threatening to 'trash' her reputation if she told and then pressuring her to resign
    Former UKIP researcher accuses MEP of sacking her after strip club visit
    Alexandra Swann said she felt 'deeply uncomfortable' about Roger Helmer's behaviour


    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2625285/Married-UKIP-politician-70-accused-taking-young-female-researcher-strip-club-threatening-trash-reputation-told-pressuring-resign.html#ixzz31OZ2S4xd

    When you post stuff like this, do you really think it is going to put UKIP supporters off voting UKIP?
  • Options
    EasterrossEasterross Posts: 1,915
    Since I am still in a jolly mood after last night's Eurovision here is my 1st prediction for the General Election next year:
    Tories 38
    Labour 32
    LibDem 15
    UKIP 10

    David Cameron will in effect form a majority government as he will be promised support by the DUP/UUP.
  • Options
    ToryJimToryJim Posts: 3,401
    isam said:

    Interesting that Labour isn't going to try in a constituency it won in 1997. Hardly the actions of a party sure of winning next year. Tories will also be able to truthfully claim a vote for UKIP helps Labour since Labour is trying to help Roger Helmer win.

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/ukip-boosted-by-labour-decision-to-soft-pedal-in-newark-byelection-9350087.html

    Especially since the tabloids have started digging on Helmer:

    Married UKIP politician, 70, accused of taking young female researcher to a strip club, threatening to 'trash' her reputation if she told and then pressuring her to resign
    Former UKIP researcher accuses MEP of sacking her after strip club visit
    Alexandra Swann said she felt 'deeply uncomfortable' about Roger Helmer's behaviour


    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2625285/Married-UKIP-politician-70-accused-taking-young-female-researcher-strip-club-threatening-trash-reputation-told-pressuring-resign.html#ixzz31OZ2S4xd

    When you post stuff like this, do you really think it is going to put UKIP supporters off voting UKIP?
    Of course it won't put off the hardcore, who seem every bit as nuts as the parade of alien conspiracists who plague a certain tv channel. It may make the "let's punish the buggers" crowd think again though.
  • Options
    CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    edited May 2014
    isam said:

    Interesting that Labour isn't going to try in a constituency it won in 1997. Hardly the actions of a party sure of winning next year. Tories will also be able to truthfully claim a vote for UKIP helps Labour since Labour is trying to help Roger Helmer win.

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/ukip-boosted-by-labour-decision-to-soft-pedal-in-newark-byelection-9350087.html

    Especially since the tabloids have started digging on Helmer:

    Married UKIP politician, 70, accused of taking young female researcher to a strip club, threatening to 'trash' her reputation if she told and then pressuring her to resign
    Former UKIP researcher accuses MEP of sacking her after strip club visit
    Alexandra Swann said she felt 'deeply uncomfortable' about Roger Helmer's behaviour


    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2625285/Married-UKIP-politician-70-accused-taking-young-female-researcher-strip-club-threatening-trash-reputation-told-pressuring-resign.html#ixzz31OZ2S4xd

    When you post stuff like this, do you really think it is going to put UKIP supporters off voting UKIP?
    I'm always wary of reaching conclusions based on a Mail story ;-)

    However - if true - this is far far more important than the crap stories that people post about "random UKIP candidate says something vaguely nasty".

    Helmer is a senior member of the party - and this is (a) a breach of employment law (b) sexual harassment and (c) deeply deeply unpleasant.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,969
    AV's an awful system. It can lead to loneliness, depression, and Ed Miliband.

    For those interested, a brief piece about why polygraphs are rubbish (been meaning to write it since I started my blog, but the use of one in Supermodels of SHIELD reminded me): http://thaddeusthesixth.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05/the-polygraph-work-of-science-fiction.html
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,578
    edited May 2014
    SeanT said:

    SeanT said:

    Better Together ‏@UK_Together 40m
    NEW POLL Sunday Mail Yougov poll for Progressive has NO lead growing by 6 points. YES 34% NO 54% #indyref pic.twitter.com/5plBNJXukG

    I would be wary of MoS poll reporting - they frequently compare polls from different companies - the absolute numbers are probably ok, but any "trend" should be treated with caution.
    I think they have indeed extrapolated a trend by wrongly comparing different pollsters, however a trend exists:.
    Compared to their last poll (Nov) this poll actually shows an increase for yes!

    Once the Don’t Knows were excluded, the poll in September put Yes on 31% and the one in November on 33%. Both polls represented a lower Yes tally than recorded by any other poll conducted at around the same time.

    So we should not be surprised that in its third outing, after a gap of nearly six months, the company (for the Sunday Mail) should have once again produced a relatively low Yes vote. It puts Yes on 34%, twenty points behind No on 54%. Once the Don’t Knows are excluded this represents a Yes vote of 39% – the lowest in any poll since the end of February.


    http://blog.whatscotlandthinks.org/2014/05/progressive-big-swing-to-yes-but-yes-still-far-behind/

    I wouldn't read too much into the third of a pollster's polls.

    Has the YeSNP momentum slowed? Possibly - but since that's also what I'd wish for, I'm reluctant to diagnose it.
  • Options
    MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 7,382
    GIN1138 said:

    David Cameron makes clear he will not be PM if he cannot guarantee an In-Out Referendum after next GE

    I wonder whether Dave and Nick have already had discussions about what it would take for the Lib-Dems to agree to an IN/OUT?
    I'm sure that is right. The referendum would be the key item for the Tories in any coalition negotiations and at the end of the day the LDs would agree.

  • Options
    NinoinozNinoinoz Posts: 1,312

    Only three years ago the Conservatives were the biggest backer of the status quo in the AV referendum.

    Don't mention this, you'll upset the PB Tories.

    Shows how worthless an EU referendum would be under Cameron.

    Happy Birthday anyway, Mike.
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 40,901
    Charles said:

    isam said:

    Interesting that Labour isn't going to try in a constituency it won in 1997. Hardly the actions of a party sure of winning next year. Tories will also be able to truthfully claim a vote for UKIP helps Labour since Labour is trying to help Roger Helmer win.

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/ukip-boosted-by-labour-decision-to-soft-pedal-in-newark-byelection-9350087.html

    Especially since the tabloids have started digging on Helmer:

    Married UKIP politician, 70, accused of taking young female researcher to a strip club, threatening to 'trash' her reputation if she told and then pressuring her to resign
    Former UKIP researcher accuses MEP of sacking her after strip club visit
    Alexandra Swann said she felt 'deeply uncomfortable' about Roger Helmer's behaviour


    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2625285/Married-UKIP-politician-70-accused-taking-young-female-researcher-strip-club-threatening-trash-reputation-told-pressuring-resign.html#ixzz31OZ2S4xd

    When you post stuff like this, do you really think it is going to put UKIP supporters off voting UKIP?
    I'm always wary of reaching conclusions based on a Mail story ;-)

    However - if true - this is far far more important than the crap stories that people post about "random UKIP candidate says something vaguely nasty".

    Helmer is a senior member of the party - and this is (a) a breach of employment law (b) sexual harassment and (c) deeply deeply unpleasant.
    "deeply, deeply unpleasant" ?

    What>? Going for a beer in a strip bar?

    Honestly, I know Conservatives are desperate for UKIP to fail and I can understand why, but you are sounding like Loony lefties with your faux outrage and rules and regs

    They went for a beer after work and ended up in a seedy dive, shit happens.
  • Options
    CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    GIN1138 said:

    David Cameron makes clear he will not be PM if he cannot guarantee an In-Out Referendum after next GE

    I wonder whether Dave and Nick have already had discussions about what it would take for the Lib-Dems to agree to an IN/OUT?
    I'm sure that is right. The referendum would be the key item for the Tories in any coalition negotiations and at the end of the day the LDs would agree.

    Frankly I don't see how they could refuse it: the optics of preventing the British people from having a vote would be absolutely terrible.

    The trick is how to extract the maximum price for a concession they will ultimately make.
  • Options
    saddenedsaddened Posts: 2,245
    isam said:

    Interesting that Labour isn't going to try in a constituency it won in 1997. Hardly the actions of a party sure of winning next year. Tories will also be able to truthfully claim a vote for UKIP helps Labour since Labour is trying to help Roger Helmer win.

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/ukip-boosted-by-labour-decision-to-soft-pedal-in-newark-byelection-9350087.html

    Especially since the tabloids have started digging on Helmer:

    Married UKIP politician, 70, accused of taking young female researcher to a strip club, threatening to 'trash' her reputation if she told and then pressuring her to resign
    Former UKIP researcher accuses MEP of sacking her after strip club visit
    Alexandra Swann said she felt 'deeply uncomfortable' about Roger Helmer's behaviour


    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2625285/Married-UKIP-politician-70-accused-taking-young-female-researcher-strip-club-threatening-trash-reputation-told-pressuring-resign.html#ixzz31OZ2S4xd

    When you post stuff like this, do you really think it is going to put UKIP supporters off voting UKIP?
    Why wouldn't it?
    So you think the article is a lie?

    You don't think that what is alleged is an issue?

    Another reason?

    Genuinely interested in your mind set over issues like this, that for an NO of any other party would be seen as a real problem.
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,578
    isam said:

    Interesting that Labour isn't going to try in a constituency it won in 1997. Hardly the actions of a party sure of winning next year. Tories will also be able to truthfully claim a vote for UKIP helps Labour since Labour is trying to help Roger Helmer win.

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/ukip-boosted-by-labour-decision-to-soft-pedal-in-newark-byelection-9350087.html

    Especially since the tabloids have started digging on Helmer:

    Married UKIP politician, 70, accused of taking young female researcher to a strip club, threatening to 'trash' her reputation if she told and then pressuring her to resign
    Former UKIP researcher accuses MEP of sacking her after strip club visit
    Alexandra Swann said she felt 'deeply uncomfortable' about Roger Helmer's behaviour


    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2625285/Married-UKIP-politician-70-accused-taking-young-female-researcher-strip-club-threatening-trash-reputation-told-pressuring-resign.html#ixzz31OZ2S4xd
    When you post stuff like this, do you really think it is going to put UKIP supporters off voting UKIP?
    Of course not, but it might make potential UKIP voters (both significantly more important and numerous) who read it in the Sunday Mail think that this "different from all the others" political party, isn't so different after all.

    Continued UKIP sensitivity to scrutiny of their candidates (something Con & Lab have learned to live with) is however noted.

  • Options
    CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    isam said:

    Charles said:

    isam said:

    Interesting that Labour isn't going to try in a constituency it won in 1997. Hardly the actions of a party sure of winning next year. Tories will also be able to truthfully claim a vote for UKIP helps Labour since Labour is trying to help Roger Helmer win.

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/ukip-boosted-by-labour-decision-to-soft-pedal-in-newark-byelection-9350087.html

    Especially since the tabloids have started digging on Helmer:

    Married UKIP politician, 70, accused of taking young female researcher to a strip club, threatening to 'trash' her reputation if she told and then pressuring her to resign
    Former UKIP researcher accuses MEP of sacking her after strip club visit
    Alexandra Swann said she felt 'deeply uncomfortable' about Roger Helmer's behaviour


    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2625285/Married-UKIP-politician-70-accused-taking-young-female-researcher-strip-club-threatening-trash-reputation-told-pressuring-resign.html#ixzz31OZ2S4xd

    When you post stuff like this, do you really think it is going to put UKIP supporters off voting UKIP?
    I'm always wary of reaching conclusions based on a Mail story ;-)

    However - if true - this is far far more important than the crap stories that people post about "random UKIP candidate says something vaguely nasty".

    Helmer is a senior member of the party - and this is (a) a breach of employment law (b) sexual harassment and (c) deeply deeply unpleasant.
    "deeply, deeply unpleasant" ?

    What>? Going for a beer in a strip bar?

    Honestly, I know Conservatives are desperate for UKIP to fail and I can understand why, but you are sounding like Loony lefties with your faux outrage and rules and regs

    They went for a beer after work and ended up in a seedy dive, shit happens.
    My argument is entirely based on Alexandra Swann's account - which clearly Helmer denies. Who knows what the truth is.

    If she is correct, that she felt that she had to go because of a threat to her job/career then that is disgraceful.

    It would be a sacking offence at any of the firms that I have worked at.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,969
    edited May 2014
    F1: apparently it rained overnight, so the track will be greener, diminishing the advantage of those on the clean side of the track. Probably won't make a huge difference, to be honest.

    Edited extra bit: I did check the forecasts for the race, and it's likely to be dry throughout.
  • Options
    another_richardanother_richard Posts: 25,046
    So I see that none of the Conservative cheerleaders are able to explain what 'For real change in Europe' actually means.

    Nor why the present Conservative MEPs haven't already achieved this 'real change in Europe'.

  • Options
    MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 7,382
    Charles said:

    GIN1138 said:

    David Cameron makes clear he will not be PM if he cannot guarantee an In-Out Referendum after next GE

    I wonder whether Dave and Nick have already had discussions about what it would take for the Lib-Dems to agree to an IN/OUT?
    I'm sure that is right. The referendum would be the key item for the Tories in any coalition negotiations and at the end of the day the LDs would agree.

    Frankly I don't see how they could refuse it: the optics of preventing the British people from having a vote would be absolutely terrible.

    The trick is how to extract the maximum price for a concession they will ultimately make.
    The key aspect of the referendum in any coalition negotiations is that it would make a deal easier for CON back-benchers to swallow.

  • Options
    timmotimmo Posts: 1,469
    So. Mike you admit that the argument used by the LDs to scupper boundary changes which was House of. LEDs reform was a lie?
  • Options
    No_Offence_AlanNo_Offence_Alan Posts: 3,802
    GIN1138 said:

    Iggypop37 said:

    anyone see the indy this morning. If it is true Miliband being very wily in giving the kippers more or less an easy run in Newark. Could cause Cameron a lot of issues.

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/ukip-boosted-by-labour-decision-to-soft-pedal-in-newark-byelection-9350087.html.

    He'd be being too clever for his own good. Does he really think it's a good idea allowing a party that lost its deposit finishing fourth last time, almost 20% behind Labour to overtake them? Newark was always going to be a tough take for Labour but if their own vote share drops, what message does that give to other Labour target seats where they might stand a decent chance?
    Tony Blair would have had a decent go at winning Newark 94-97. Indeed, he DID win it 1997.
    Different boundaries.
    Having said that, Eastleigh was once a target seat for Labour.
    At the 1980s by-election, Labour were predicting they would win it, based on the national opinion polls at the time.

  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,969
    Mr. Richard, the Morris Dancer Party will commit to real change in Europe, beginning with the invasion of France.
  • Options
    NinoinozNinoinoz Posts: 1,312
    edited May 2014
    isam said:

    Interesting that Labour isn't going to try in a constituency it won in 1997. Hardly the actions of a party sure of winning next year. Tories will also be able to truthfully claim a vote for UKIP helps Labour since Labour is trying to help Roger Helmer win.

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/ukip-boosted-by-labour-decision-to-soft-pedal-in-newark-byelection-9350087.html

    Especially since the tabloids have started digging on Helmer:

    Married UKIP politician, 70, accused of taking young female researcher to a strip club, threatening to 'trash' her reputation if she told and then pressuring her to resign
    Former UKIP researcher accuses MEP of sacking her after strip club visit
    Alexandra Swann said she felt 'deeply uncomfortable' about Roger Helmer's behaviour


    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2625285/Married-UKIP-politician-70-accused-taking-young-female-researcher-strip-club-threatening-trash-reputation-told-pressuring-resign.html#ixzz31OZ2S4xd

    When you post stuff like this, do you really think it is going to put UKIP supporters off voting UKIP?
    Interesting point.

    I have used the idea of innoculation of public opinion to describe the effect of these stories on UKIP support.

    Now, what this means is this tactic won't work at the GE, when it really matters. They've wasted it on the Euro elections, a grandiose by-election.
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 40,901
    saddened said:

    isam said:

    Interesting that Labour isn't going to try in a constituency it won in 1997. Hardly the actions of a party sure of winning next year. Tories will also be able to truthfully claim a vote for UKIP helps Labour since Labour is trying to help Roger Helmer win.

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/ukip-boosted-by-labour-decision-to-soft-pedal-in-newark-byelection-9350087.html

    Especially since the tabloids have started digging on Helmer:

    Married UKIP politician, 70, accused of taking young female researcher to a strip club, threatening to 'trash' her reputation if she told and then pressuring her to resign
    Former UKIP researcher accuses MEP of sacking her after strip club visit
    Alexandra Swann said she felt 'deeply uncomfortable' about Roger Helmer's behaviour


    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2625285/Married-UKIP-politician-70-accused-taking-young-female-researcher-strip-club-threatening-trash-reputation-told-pressuring-resign.html#ixzz31OZ2S4xd

    When you post stuff like this, do you really think it is going to put UKIP supporters off voting UKIP?
    Why wouldn't it?
    So you think the article is a lie?

    You don't think that what is alleged is an issue?

    Another reason?

    Genuinely interested in your mind set over issues like this, that for an NO of any other party would be seen as a real problem.
    The main reason is that many non PC people just don't care about stuff like this enough

    They went to a bar where there were strippers, so what? Its not like she was 15

    I am not saying its something I would do myself, I just don't think your average bloke down the pub, where UKIP supporters seem to be drawn from, would bat an eyelid at something like this.
  • Options
    CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    So I see that none of the Conservative cheerleaders are able to explain what 'For real change in Europe' actually means.

    Nor why the present Conservative MEPs haven't already achieved this 'real change in Europe'.

    Real change in Europe = (a) renegotiation of the terms of our relationship followed by an in/out referendum and (b) fighting for the UK's interests rather than rolling over as Labour too often does or not engaging as UKIP does

    Why haven't they achieved it yet? On (a) because it is a project for the next parliament and (b) because they are in a minority int he European Parliament, but they can and do make plenty of incremental changes that are a positive
  • Options
    CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    edited May 2014

    Charles said:

    GIN1138 said:

    David Cameron makes clear he will not be PM if he cannot guarantee an In-Out Referendum after next GE

    I wonder whether Dave and Nick have already had discussions about what it would take for the Lib-Dems to agree to an IN/OUT?
    I'm sure that is right. The referendum would be the key item for the Tories in any coalition negotiations and at the end of the day the LDs would agree.

    Frankly I don't see how they could refuse it: the optics of preventing the British people from having a vote would be absolutely terrible.

    The trick is how to extract the maximum price for a concession they will ultimately make.
    The key aspect of the referendum in any coalition negotiations is that it would make a deal easier for CON back-benchers to swallow.

    I'd put it stronger than that: they wouldn't accept a coalition agreement without a referendum. Cameron has pledged to seek their approval (but don't know how binding that is) - but in any even if he didn't seek their approval and they didn't like the deal he'd be defenestrated in short order
  • Options
    anotherDaveanotherDave Posts: 6,746

    Interesting that Labour isn't going to try in a constituency it won in 1997. Hardly the actions of a party sure of winning next year. Tories will also be able to truthfully claim a vote for UKIP helps Labour since Labour is trying to help Roger Helmer win.

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/ukip-boosted-by-labour-decision-to-soft-pedal-in-newark-byelection-9350087.html

    Especially since the tabloids have started digging on Helmer:
    I don't think this was the Mail "digging on" Mr Helmer (he's too obscure a figure). This seems to have been Ms Swann approaching the Mail with a story.

    http://www.alexandraswann.co.uk/2014/05/1272/
  • Options
    FalseFlagFalseFlag Posts: 1,801
    Scotland will vote no. Indepence votes are overwhelming, like Crimea, not close run. A close run vote that was yes has sad consequences and questionable legitimacy.

    The interesting element will be the reaction to no, devo-max with the neutering of labour in England? Don't count on it with Osbourne, the master strategist, determining affairs.
  • Options
    CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    isam said:

    saddened said:

    isam said:

    Interesting that Labour isn't going to try in a constituency it won in 1997. Hardly the actions of a party sure of winning next year. Tories will also be able to truthfully claim a vote for UKIP helps Labour since Labour is trying to help Roger Helmer win.

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/ukip-boosted-by-labour-decision-to-soft-pedal-in-newark-byelection-9350087.html

    Especially since the tabloids have started digging on Helmer:

    Married UKIP politician, 70, accused of taking young female researcher to a strip club, threatening to 'trash' her reputation if she told and then pressuring her to resign
    Former UKIP researcher accuses MEP of sacking her after strip club visit
    Alexandra Swann said she felt 'deeply uncomfortable' about Roger Helmer's behaviour


    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2625285/Married-UKIP-politician-70-accused-taking-young-female-researcher-strip-club-threatening-trash-reputation-told-pressuring-resign.html#ixzz31OZ2S4xd

    When you post stuff like this, do you really think it is going to put UKIP supporters off voting UKIP?
    Why wouldn't it?
    So you think the article is a lie?

    You don't think that what is alleged is an issue?

    Another reason?

    Genuinely interested in your mind set over issues like this, that for an NO of any other party would be seen as a real problem.
    The main reason is that many non PC people just don't care about stuff like this enough

    They went to a bar where there were strippers, so what? Its not like she was 15

    I am not saying its something I would do myself, I just don't think your average bloke down the pub, where UKIP supporters seem to be drawn from, would bat an eyelid at something like this.
    You're completely missing the point.

    It's not going to a strip club. It's that she felt she *had* to go because otherwise it would damage her career.

    That's as bad as groping junior staff who don't want to complain because they may lose their jobs.

    It's all about *attitude* and abuse of power.
  • Options
    Steven_WhaleySteven_Whaley Posts: 313
    I wasn't convinced by either side in the AV referendum. I voted to keep FPTP not because I like it but because I dislike AV even more. I'd jump at the chance to vote for some kind of genuine PR.
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,818
    SeanT said:

    Better Together ‏@UK_Together 40m
    NEW POLL Sunday Mail Yougov poll for Progressive has NO lead growing by 6 points. YES 34% NO 54% #indyref pic.twitter.com/5plBNJXukG

    Has Prof Curtice made a mistake or has someone been economical with the truth or using misleading headline there. So both Scottp and his twin SeanT now trying to mislead or are mentally confused.
    Prof Curtice highlights it slightly differently.

    Progressive: Big Swing to Yes but Yes Still Far Behind!
    Until now, Progressive Scottish Opinion had conducted only a couple of polls of voting intentions in the referendum – one last September, on the occasion of a year to go to polling day, and one at the very end of November, immediately after the publication of the Scottish Government’s White Paper. Even so, those two polls were enough to suggest that the company was amongst the more pessimistic of the pollsters so far as the Yes side was concerned.

    Once the Don’t Knows were excluded, the poll in September put Yes on 31% and the one in November on 33%. Both polls represented a lower Yes tally than recorded by any other poll conducted at around the same time.

    So we should not be surprised that in its third outing, after a gap of nearly six months, the company (for the Sunday Mail) should have once again produced a relatively low Yes vote. It puts Yes on 34%, twenty points behind No on 54%. Once the Don’t Knows are excluded this represents a Yes vote of 39% – the lowest in any poll since the end of February.

    Yet at the same time, this also means that the poll shows a six point swing to Yes compared with last November. Since then, of course, every other pollster has recorded a narrowing of the No lead. To that extent today’s poll is simply further evidence of that narrowing.
    http://blog.whatscotlandthinks.org/2014/05/progressive-big-swing-to-yes-but-yes-still-far-behind/
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 40,901
    edited May 2014

    isam said:

    Interesting that Labour isn't going to try in a constituency it won in 1997. Hardly the actions of a party sure of winning next year. Tories will also be able to truthfully claim a vote for UKIP helps Labour since Labour is trying to help Roger Helmer win.

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/ukip-boosted-by-labour-decision-to-soft-pedal-in-newark-byelection-9350087.html

    Especially since the tabloids have started digging on Helmer:

    Married UKIP politician, 70, accused of taking young female researcher to a strip club, threatening to 'trash' her reputation if she told and then pressuring her to resign
    Former UKIP researcher accuses MEP of sacking her after strip club visit
    Alexandra Swann said she felt 'deeply uncomfortable' about Roger Helmer's behaviour


    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2625285/Married-UKIP-politician-70-accused-taking-young-female-researcher-strip-club-threatening-trash-reputation-told-pressuring-resign.html#ixzz31OZ2S4xd
    When you post stuff like this, do you really think it is going to put UKIP supporters off voting UKIP?
    Of course not, but it might make potential UKIP voters (both significantly more important and numerous) who read it in the Sunday Mail think that this "different from all the others" political party, isn't so different after all.

    Continued UKIP sensitivity to scrutiny of their candidates (something Con & Lab have learned to live with) is however noted.

    Not t all.

    I am just saying that the type of person that is attracted to voting UKIP, in the main doesn't bat an eyelid at this kind of stuff..

    "Old bloke takes young assistant to strip bar"... so what?

    If it was that he had sexually assaulted her in some way, of course that would be completely different

    You only have to look at the other "terrible stories" that have emerged about UKIP members, even Farage and his "allowances", over the last month, and the lack of impact they have, to see that these things don't hamper UKIP in the way they might other parties

    Its like bowling bouncers to a batsman because it worked against other batsman, then wondering why they keep getting hit for six.. then bowling another bouncer

    I voted Labour at the last election, am a relatively new convert to UKIP... these stories barely register, and I am a political anorak. But most important, it doesn't even make me consider not voting for them.
  • Options
    taffystaffys Posts: 9,753
    I think Dave is in a bit of trouble here.

    Its not surprising. He's an imposter.

    No conservative would dream of proposing that an organ of state like HRMC to run riot unchecked with the bank accounts of ordinary citizens.
  • Options
    CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    SeanT said:

    Charles said:

    isam said:

    saddened said:

    isam said:

    Interesting that Labour isn't going to try in a constituency it won in 1997. Hardly the actions of a party sure of winning next year. Tories will also be able to truthfully claim a vote for UKIP helps Labour since Labour is trying to help Roger Helmer win.

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/ukip-boosted-by-labour-decision-to-soft-pedal-in-newark-byelection-9350087.html

    Especially since the tabloids have started digging on Helmer:

    Married UKIP politician, 70, accused of taking young female researcher to a strip club, threatening to 'trash' her reputation if she told and then pressuring her to resign
    Former UKIP researcher accuses MEP of sacking her after strip club visit
    Alexandra Swann said she felt 'deeply uncomfortable' about Roger Helmer's behaviour


    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2625285/Married-UKIP-politician-70-accused-taking-young-female-researcher-strip-club-threatening-trash-reputation-told-pressuring-resign.html#ixzz31OZ2S4xd

    When you post stuff like this, do you really think it is going to put UKIP supporters off voting UKIP?
    Why wouldn't it?
    So you think the article is a lie?

    You don't think that what is alleged is an issue?

    Another reason?

    Genuinely interested in your mind set over issues like this, that for an NO of any other party would be seen as a real problem.
    The main reason is that many non PC people just don't care about stuff like this enough

    They went to a bar where there were strippers, so what? Its not like she was 15

    I am not saying its something I would do myself, I just don't think your average bloke down the pub, where UKIP supporters seem to be drawn from, would bat an eyelid at something like this.
    You're completely missing the point.

    It's not going to a strip club. It's that she felt she *had* to go because otherwise it would damage her career.

    That's as bad as groping junior staff who don't want to complain because they may lose their jobs.

    It's all about *attitude* and abuse of power.
    Total tripe. Taking someone to a strip bar, however reprehensible, is NOT the same as sexually assaulting them. You are insulting victims of real sexual abuse.
    I disagree. Just because it is psychological not physical that doesn't make it not bullying.
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,818
    SeanT said:

    Since I am still in a jolly mood after last night's Eurovision here is my 1st prediction for the General Election next year:
    Tories 38
    Labour 32
    LibDem 15
    UKIP 10

    David Cameron will in effect form a majority government as he will be promised support by the DUP/UUP.

    What's your latest predix for the indyref? I have recovered my composure, somewhat, and I now think NO will win, maybe 56/44. This latest poll is pretty hard evidence that YES has a long way to go. But who knows.

    However I am interested in an insider's viewpoint (i.e. a Scot like yourself, but not a Nat).

    What's yr hunch right now?
    Unless he has had a knock on the head since yesterday he will be of the same opinion as he has been stating for the last year at least , YES will win. Read his posts from yesterday or Friday and hear what is really the position in Scotland, not the wet dreams of some London hack after a liquid lunch.
  • Options
    EasterrossEasterross Posts: 1,915

    So I see that none of the Conservative cheerleaders are able to explain what 'For real change in Europe' actually means.

    Nor why the present Conservative MEPs haven't already achieved this 'real change in Europe'.

    Do you understand how the EU works? MEPs don't make any laws of any relevance in the way domestic MPs do. Most EU laws come from either the Commission or Council of Ministers. MEPs just tinker with clauses etc at the edges. The real policy comes from member governments, all 28 of them. That is why DC needs to renegotiate with his 27 fellow heads of government.
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @JGForsyth: Cameron’s 1st class reply 2 Miliband’s intellectual self-confidence boast, ‘I’m sure he worked very hard for his 2:1’ http://t.co/BfhfEvoNxB
  • Options
    another_richardanother_richard Posts: 25,046
    Charles said:

    So I see that none of the Conservative cheerleaders are able to explain what 'For real change in Europe' actually means.

    Nor why the present Conservative MEPs haven't already achieved this 'real change in Europe'.

    Real change in Europe = (a) renegotiation of the terms of our relationship followed by an in/out referendum and (b) fighting for the UK's interests rather than rolling over as Labour too often does or not engaging as UKIP does

    Why haven't they achieved it yet? On (a) because it is a project for the next parliament and (b) because they are in a minority int he European Parliament, but they can and do make plenty of incremental changes that are a positive
    The usual meaninglessly vague crap and mealy-mouthed excuses.

    Perhaps you might like to be more specific as to what 'renegotiation of the terms of our membership' actually means.

  • Options
    anotherDaveanotherDave Posts: 6,746
    "...washing my hair after a visit to the barber I realised that I wasn’t so much washing my hair as washing my head. The forehead went on forever."

    Ouch.

    http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/andrewmcfbrown/100270900/would-politicians-rather-thought-vain-than-bald/
  • Options
    taffystaffys Posts: 9,753
    They'd be better off attacking UKIP for their economic innumeracy; it might even be better to simply ignore them.

    For many voters, the main parties have not done what it says on the tin.

    Labour did many un labour things in government to keep the middle classes on side. The tories are doing some un tory things to keep the liberals in government.

    The main parties would all rather be in power than campaign for what they believe in and lose.
  • Options
    FluffyThoughtsFluffyThoughts Posts: 2,420
    Charles said:

    I'm always wary of reaching conclusions based on a Mail story ;-)

    However - if true - this is far far more important than the crap stories that people post about "random UKIP candidate says something vaguely nasty".

    Helmer is a senior member of the party - and this is (a) a breach of employment law (b) sexual harassment and (c) deeply deeply unpleasant.

    And yet 'Lurd Taffie (Fat-[MODERATED]) of ''Ull' shagged his employee and got the English taxpayer to fund her silence-clause! Very dubious to complain about others when Sven's mob legitimised* it...!

    * Prostitution in all but name. 'Arriet must be happy-clappy!
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,818
    FalseFlag said:

    Scotland will vote no. Indepence votes are overwhelming, like Crimea, not close run. A close run vote that was yes has sad consequences and questionable legitimacy.

    The interesting element will be the reaction to no, devo-max with the neutering of labour in England? Don't count on it with Osbourne, the master strategist, determining affairs.

    Quebec? proves you are talking bollocks and just trolling
  • Options
    CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    Scott_P said:

    @JGForsyth: Cameron’s 1st class reply 2 Miliband’s intellectual self-confidence boast, ‘I’m sure he worked very hard for his 2:1’ http://t.co/BfhfEvoNxB

    That just comes across as arrogant and sneering.

    (Admittedly, Miliband's comment was ludicrous in the first place)
  • Options
    GrandioseGrandiose Posts: 2,323

    So I see that none of the Conservative cheerleaders are able to explain what 'For real change in Europe' actually means.

    Nor why the present Conservative MEPs haven't already achieved this 'real change in Europe'.

    Do you understand how the EU works? MEPs don't make any laws of any relevance in the way domestic MPs do. Most EU laws come from either the Commission or Council of Ministers. MEPs just tinker with clauses etc at the edges. The real policy comes from member governments, all 28 of them. That is why DC needs to renegotiate with his 27 fellow heads of government.
    Almost all law is now (thankfully, because for a long time it was perverse) initiated by the Commission (like the government in government bills in the UK) and then passed by a tennis match of a procedure between Council and Parliament. Some power does lie in the Parliament, but I agree governmental support is important - but Treaty change isn't needed. Important aspects of regulation, e.g. Directive 2004/38/EC on residence and immigration would not so require.
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,818
    Charles said:

    isam said:

    saddened said:

    isam said:

    Interesting that Labour isn't going to try in a constituency it won in 1997. Hardly the actions of a party sure of winning next year. Tories will also be able to truthfully claim a vote for UKIP helps Labour since Labour is trying to help Roger Helmer win.

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/ukip-boosted-by-labour-decision-to-soft-pedal-in-newark-byelection-9350087.html

    Especially since the tabloids have started digging on Helmer:

    Married UKIP politician, 70, accused of taking young female researcher to a strip club, threatening to 'trash' her reputation if she told and then pressuring her to resign
    Former UKIP researcher accuses MEP of sacking her after strip club visit
    Alexandra Swann said she felt 'deeply uncomfortable' about Roger Helmer's behaviour


    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2625285/Married-UKIP-politician-70-accused-taking-young-female-researcher-strip-club-threatening-trash-reputation-told-pressuring-resign.html#ixzz31OZ2S4xd

    When you post stuff like this, do you really think it is going to put UKIP supporters off voting UKIP?
    Why wouldn't it?
    So you think the article is a lie?

    You don't think that what is alleged is an issue?

    Another reason?

    Genuinely interested in your mind set over issues like this, that for an NO of any other party would be seen as a real problem.
    The main reason is that many non PC people just don't care about stuff like this enough

    They went to a bar where there were strippers, so what? Its not like she was 15

    I am not saying its something I would do myself, I just don't think your average bloke down the pub, where UKIP supporters seem to be drawn from, would bat an eyelid at something like this.
    You're completely missing the point.

    It's not going to a strip club. It's that she felt she *had* to go because otherwise it would damage her career.

    That's as bad as groping junior staff who don't want to complain because they may lose their jobs.

    It's all about *attitude* and abuse of power.
    She is a pathetic brown noser then. If she had any principles or morals she would have told him where to get off and where to stick his career. Too many of these yes sir no sir ar** lickers about nowadays.
  • Options
    EasterrossEasterross Posts: 1,915
    FalseFlag said:

    Scotland will vote no. Indepence votes are overwhelming, like Crimea, not close run. A close run vote that was yes has sad consequences and questionable legitimacy.

    The interesting element will be the reaction to no, devo-max with the neutering of labour in England? Don't count on it with Osbourne, the master strategist, determining affairs.

    Not true. In 1979 Scotland voted YES to the devolution on offer but as Callaghan had inserted an artificial threshold of 40%, it was ruled to have failed. This time YES just needs to win by a single vote. The worst possible result is a NO vote with a majority under 5%. That would just result in 5 more years of uncertainty until the next vote.

    Sean T has asked my view on how things are going? In the past couple of days I posted a couple of detailed thoughts as to why I believe the pollsters are not reaching most of the YES voters. My greatest worry is that it is getting really nasty and over the summer it is only going to get worse.
  • Options
    CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    Charles said:

    So I see that none of the Conservative cheerleaders are able to explain what 'For real change in Europe' actually means.

    Nor why the present Conservative MEPs haven't already achieved this 'real change in Europe'.

    Real change in Europe = (a) renegotiation of the terms of our relationship followed by an in/out referendum and (b) fighting for the UK's interests rather than rolling over as Labour too often does or not engaging as UKIP does

    Why haven't they achieved it yet? On (a) because it is a project for the next parliament and (b) because they are in a minority int he European Parliament, but they can and do make plenty of incremental changes that are a positive
    The usual meaninglessly vague crap and mealy-mouthed excuses.

    Perhaps you might like to be more specific as to what 'renegotiation of the terms of our membership' actually means.

    No. Because that would be a crap negotiating strategy.

    Cameron has to get in a room and see what he can deliver. And then take it to the principals (the voters) for their decision.

    Personally, I'd like to see (a) an opt-out from CAP (b) competence on financial services returned to the UK government (c) restrictions on welfare benefits for EU migrants for a period of time (say 3 years). I'm sure there will be others, but that's just off the top of my head.
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    That is an interesting piece by a woman who was at the Centre of UKIP and now disillusioned. The culture of mysogyny is not very different politics is it?

    Also interesting book review here: http://www.spiked-online.com/review_of_books/article/ukip-the-revolt-of-the-left-behind/15000

    Interesting that Labour isn't going to try in a constituency it won in 1997. Hardly the actions of a party sure of winning next year. Tories will also be able to truthfully claim a vote for UKIP helps Labour since Labour is trying to help Roger Helmer win.

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/ukip-boosted-by-labour-decision-to-soft-pedal-in-newark-byelection-9350087.html

    Especially since the tabloids have started digging on Helmer:
    I don't think this was the Mail "digging on" Mr Helmer (he's too obscure a figure). This seems to have been Ms Swann approaching the Mail with a story.

    http://www.alexandraswann.co.uk/2014/05/1272/
  • Options
    GrandioseGrandiose Posts: 2,323
    Haven't read the rest of the thread, but if Labour voters are not turning out in safe seats, and for that reason Labour's seat/vote ratio is improved, then I would struggle to describe that result as perverse.
  • Options
    BobaFettBobaFett Posts: 2,789
    @SeanT

    Some odd polls about this weekend. I'm not setting much store by the Scottish poll, nor the very Red YouGov, nor the two polls showing the Tories in the 20s. None of the surveys seem plausible to me.
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,818
    SeanT said:

    malcolmg said:

    SeanT said:

    Since I am still in a jolly mood after last night's Eurovision here is my 1st prediction for the General Election next year:
    Tories 38
    Labour 32
    LibDem 15
    UKIP 10

    David Cameron will in effect form a majority government as he will be promised support by the DUP/UUP.

    What's your latest predix for the indyref? I have recovered my composure, somewhat, and I now think NO will win, maybe 56/44. This latest poll is pretty hard evidence that YES has a long way to go. But who knows.

    However I am interested in an insider's viewpoint (i.e. a Scot like yourself, but not a Nat).

    What's yr hunch right now?
    Unless he has had a knock on the head since yesterday he will be of the same opinion as he has been stating for the last year at least , YES will win. Read his posts from yesterday or Friday and hear what is really the position in Scotland, not the wet dreams of some London hack after a liquid lunch.
    Latest indyref poll:

    YES 34%
    NO 54%

    20 points behind. I think this calls for a modest...

    CHORTLE.
    They have always been the lowest of the low and do very few polls. As Prof Curtice , that great unionist , said , it shows the trend to YES continues. Every poll this year has had an increase for YES.
    I note you are also emulating Mick Pork by stealing his trade marked "CHORTLE".
    It is not the YES camp that are panicking. Where is Alastair Darling , not seen for months, where are labour in Scotland , again nowhere to be seen. All is not well.
  • Options
    GrandioseGrandiose Posts: 2,323
    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    So I see that none of the Conservative cheerleaders are able to explain what 'For real change in Europe' actually means.

    Nor why the present Conservative MEPs haven't already achieved this 'real change in Europe'.

    Real change in Europe = (a) renegotiation of the terms of our relationship followed by an in/out referendum and (b) fighting for the UK's interests rather than rolling over as Labour too often does or not engaging as UKIP does

    Why haven't they achieved it yet? On (a) because it is a project for the next parliament and (b) because they are in a minority int he European Parliament, but they can and do make plenty of incremental changes that are a positive
    The usual meaninglessly vague crap and mealy-mouthed excuses.

    Perhaps you might like to be more specific as to what 'renegotiation of the terms of our membership' actually means.

    No. Because that would be a crap negotiating strategy.

    Cameron has to get in a room and see what he can deliver. And then take it to the principals (the voters) for their decision.

    Personally, I'd like to see (a) an opt-out from CAP (b) competence on financial services returned to the UK government (c) restrictions on welfare benefits for EU migrants for a period of time (say 3 years). I'm sure there will be others, but that's just off the top of my head.
    What does an optout from the CAP look like? I mean, if we're in a free trade area of agricultural goods, whose French production in being subsidised, then aren't we inextricably linked with it anyway?
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,818
    Charles said:

    Scott_P said:

    @JGForsyth: Cameron’s 1st class reply 2 Miliband’s intellectual self-confidence boast, ‘I’m sure he worked very hard for his 2:1’ http://t.co/BfhfEvoNxB

    That just comes across as arrogant and sneering.

    (Admittedly, Miliband's comment was ludicrous in the first place)
    Charles , that describes Scott to a tee, though I doubt he understood what 2:1 meant.
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,578
    Trouble at t'mill:

    Lib Dems accused of 'smearing' David Cameron's marriage and spreading lies that it is 'in trouble' in vicious feud which threatens to wreck the Coalition

    Conservatives angry over Liberal Democrat rumours that the Prime Minister's marriage is 'on the rocks'

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2625379/Coaliting-feud-hits-vicious-new-low-Lib-Dems-smear-PMs-marriage.html
  • Options
    anotherDaveanotherDave Posts: 6,746
    edited May 2014
    Scott_P said:

    @JGForsyth: Cameron’s 1st class reply 2 Miliband’s intellectual self-confidence boast, ‘I’m sure he worked very hard for his 2:1’ http://t.co/BfhfEvoNxB

    "Mention the [Labour PEB] broadcast to senior Labour figures and reactions vary from a shake of the head to nervous laughter.

    Their defence is that the leadership had to reassure the party it was fighting the Lib Dems and not preparing for a coalition."
  • Options
    NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,322
    malcolmg said:



    She is a pathetic brown noser then. If she had any principles or morals she would have told him where to get off and where to stick his career. Too many of these yes sir no sir ar** lickers about nowadays.

    Without judging the specific case, I don't agree at all - you're not in the real world where people worry about their jobs and the availability of alternatives. I'm a confident bloke with at least three career options but in the unimaginable event that my boss suggested visiting somewhere I'd never heard of that might conceivably be dodgy, I would be very unlikely to take the line that you suggest. To expect it of a young woman assistant is ridiculous.

  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,578
    Charles said:

    Scott_P said:

    @JGForsyth: Cameron’s 1st class reply 2 Miliband’s intellectual self-confidence boast, ‘I’m sure he worked very hard for his 2:1’ http://t.co/BfhfEvoNxB

    That just comes across as arrogant and sneering.

    (Admittedly, Miliband's comment was ludicrous in the first place)
    Which is why it was axed from his PMQ responses.......

  • Options
    taffystaffys Posts: 9,753
    None of the surveys seem plausible to me.

    I think the UKIP factor means the ground is shifting very fast, and the polls are struggling to reflect that.
  • Options
    EasterrossEasterross Posts: 1,915
    Just a point of clarification, Malcolm is incorrect. In the past week alone I have seen more than 50 photos on Twitter of Tory, Labour or LibDem politicians and activists out promoting Better Together. Indeed Murdo Fraser has shared a platform with Labour and LibDem MSPs in 3 or 4 hustings in the past week alone. There is some cross-party shared campaigning but there is no doubt Gordon Brown seriously holed the Better Together campaign below the waterline because of his pathological hatred of all things Tory.
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,578
    The latest SINDYRef poll does affect the What Scotland Thinks "Poll of Polls" - showing the gap widening, after steadily closing;

    http://blog.whatscotlandthinks.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/Slide11.jpg
  • Options
    RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737
    edited May 2014
    Such a result would by delivered by an ENP (Effective number of Parties) of 4.2.

    As predicted, when ENP rises above 4, FPTP... implodes.

    We would join Grenada, Bhutan, Monaco, Singapore and a couple of other tinpot places as having the most disproportional election results in the world.

    A quasi-democracy, at best...

    No other large, mature 'democracy' has ever suffered such a freakish election outcome.

    We would be a laughing-stock.
  • Options
    anotherDaveanotherDave Posts: 6,746


    Also interesting book review here: http://www.spiked-online.com/review_of_books/article/ukip-the-revolt-of-the-left-behind/15000

    Interesting that Labour isn't going to try in a constituency it won in 1997. Hardly the actions of a party sure of winning next year. Tories will also be able to truthfully claim a vote for UKIP helps Labour since Labour is trying to help Roger Helmer win.

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/ukip-boosted-by-labour-decision-to-soft-pedal-in-newark-byelection-9350087.html

    Especially since the tabloids have started digging on Helmer:
    I don't think this was the Mail "digging on" Mr Helmer (he's too obscure a figure). This seems to have been Ms Swann approaching the Mail with a story.

    http://www.alexandraswann.co.uk/2014/05/1272/
    That is a good piece. Many thanks for pointing it out.
  • Options
    anotherDaveanotherDave Posts: 6,746
    taffys said:

    None of the surveys seem plausible to me.

    I think the UKIP factor means the ground is shifting very fast, and the polls are struggling to reflect that.

    Would you like to make a prediction for the local elections result?

  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,578
    malcolmg said:

    Charles said:

    Scott_P said:

    @JGForsyth: Cameron’s 1st class reply 2 Miliband’s intellectual self-confidence boast, ‘I’m sure he worked very hard for his 2:1’ http://t.co/BfhfEvoNxB

    That just comes across as arrogant and sneering.

    (Admittedly, Miliband's comment was ludicrous in the first place)
    Charles , that describes Scott to a tee, though I doubt he understood what 2:1 meant.
    I doubt he understood what 2:1 meant.

    That wouldn't be "arrogant and sneering" by any chance, would it?
This discussion has been closed.