QuicheFontaine
Member
I have some mates that are like that, and I wouldn't want them leading any political parties!
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
UK PoliGAF thread of tell me about the rabbits again, Dave.
- Thread starter Chinner
- Start date
I have some mates that are like that, and I wouldn't want them leading any political parties!
That poll is a bit more realistic than the IPSOS-MORI poll.
CyclopsRock
Member
I don't really see the Tory voteshare in Scotland changing much (as suggested by the YouGov poll). It seems that Labour (especially) and the Lib Dems (generally) might bleed votes to the SNP but I can't see too many defections from Tory to SNP, really, given their wildly differing platforms. As such, I think the Tories will get at least one seat - who knows, maybe more if the left ends up eating itself.
Basically the opposite to England.
Basically the opposite to England.
I actually reckon the Tories have a decent shot at three, maybe 4 seats at a push. The Tories are second place in a number of the Lib Dem held scottish seats
Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale & Tweeddale (currently Con 9% margin)
Aberdeenshire West & Kincardine (LD but Con where second place 8% behind)
Argyll and Bute (LD, Con 2nd place 8% margin)
Perth & North Perthshire (SNP, Con 2nd place 9% margin) *this is a push as I don't see the SNP vote dropping but if the 12% LD votes break towards Con then it could conceivably be in play.
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
YouGov one looks more in line with what the aggregated crossbreaks are telling us. Admittedly, there's an inherent danger in doing that insofar as they're weighted to GB not Scotland standards, but the fact the two are so close together is promising. I think there's a number of observations there: firstly, the Unionist parties done fuck up good, but I think everyone knew that. Secondly, it feels... worrying that the SNP could take 47% of the vote but essentially 100% of the seats. Obviously not their fault and congratulations for them for presenting a policy platform that so many of the public want, but it does just feel fucked up.
Thirdly, the Conservatives are making absolutely no ground on Labour in England, where Labour still hold a narrow lead. I've seen some people citing swing-back finally emerging, but absolutely no evidence of it - this is Labour-SNP swing, the Conservatives have remained more or less unchanged which should be really worrying for them this close to the election. Fourthly, and this is worrying for both the big parties and also the Lib Dems, they are perilously close to hitting their "minimum vote" - if you poll people, and ask them if there is a party they would definitely for regardless of the context (sort of a worrying concept in itself, but whatever), then you end up with CON 27%, LAB 29%, LD 5% - both the Conservatives and Labour are close to this point. If they start getting driven below this, we are seeing the total collapse of British politics as we know it, as in, the very baseline of how people consider politics is being irreparably changed.
Fifthly, if you use the YouGov projection for Scotland specifically then forecast from their general GB polls for the rest of the UK, it's getting veeeery close to the point it wil be impossible to form a majority government without the SNP. I cannot see this actually happening, though - the SNP would never agree to enter such a coalition, simply because they can then spout about an "English government for England" (p.s., wales exists guys). There is no chance either Labour or the Conservatives will simply let that happen. IMO, that would be the birth of the PR system, if only because then the Conservatives can return ~6-7 Scottish seats, and Labour ~16-17, and therefore be slightly more assured of not needing SNP support.
Thirdly, the Conservatives are making absolutely no ground on Labour in England, where Labour still hold a narrow lead. I've seen some people citing swing-back finally emerging, but absolutely no evidence of it - this is Labour-SNP swing, the Conservatives have remained more or less unchanged which should be really worrying for them this close to the election. Fourthly, and this is worrying for both the big parties and also the Lib Dems, they are perilously close to hitting their "minimum vote" - if you poll people, and ask them if there is a party they would definitely for regardless of the context (sort of a worrying concept in itself, but whatever), then you end up with CON 27%, LAB 29%, LD 5% - both the Conservatives and Labour are close to this point. If they start getting driven below this, we are seeing the total collapse of British politics as we know it, as in, the very baseline of how people consider politics is being irreparably changed.
Fifthly, if you use the YouGov projection for Scotland specifically then forecast from their general GB polls for the rest of the UK, it's getting veeeery close to the point it wil be impossible to form a majority government without the SNP. I cannot see this actually happening, though - the SNP would never agree to enter such a coalition, simply because they can then spout about an "English government for England" (p.s., wales exists guys). There is no chance either Labour or the Conservatives will simply let that happen. IMO, that would be the birth of the PR system, if only because then the Conservatives can return ~6-7 Scottish seats, and Labour ~16-17, and therefore be slightly more assured of not needing SNP support.
Whitechocolatekrispies
Banned
Politicians are such dirty fucking cunts.
Only 21 out of 650 MPs Attend Parliamentary Debate on UK Drug Laws
Never mind the consistently failing war on drugs in this country is costing us billions.
It's affecting millions of us, it's damaging lives and it's tearing families apart. All while funnelling money into criminal gangs, ruining young peoples lives and been in general a massive fucking problem.
Less than 4% of our representatives barely even give a shit.
Absolute fucking cunts the lot of them.
Only 21 out of 650 MPs Attend Parliamentary Debate on UK Drug Laws
Never mind the consistently failing war on drugs in this country is costing us billions.
It's affecting millions of us, it's damaging lives and it's tearing families apart. All while funnelling money into criminal gangs, ruining young peoples lives and been in general a massive fucking problem.
Less than 4% of our representatives barely even give a shit.
Absolute fucking cunts the lot of them.
CyclopsRock
Member
Politicians are such dirty fucking cunts.
Only 21 out of 650 MPs Attend Parliamentary Debate on UK Drug Laws
Never mind the consistently failing war on drugs in this country is costing us billions.
It's affecting millions of us, it's damaging lives and it's tearing families apart. All while funnelling money into criminal gangs, ruining young peoples lives and been in general a massive fucking problem.
Less than 4% of our representatives barely even give a shit.
Absolute fucking cunts the lot of them.
Why are you being such a negative nancy?! Did you not see that graph?! Look how cheap cocaine is!
This is one of those times when the political consensus is out of kilter with the public opinion. Nick Clegg really needs to push this as one of the few differentiators between them and Lab/Con. It's a matter of principle, not party line;
Note that 9/21 MPs attending this were Conservative, and Cameron has switched opinion since becoming PM. He's obviously not a conviction politician (neither is Miliband), which is where the rise of smaller parties originates. They have nothing to lose, LibDems really should be pushing this as a matter of principle.
Note that 9/21 MPs attending this were Conservative, and Cameron has switched opinion since becoming PM. He's obviously not a conviction politician (neither is Miliband), which is where the rise of smaller parties originates. They have nothing to lose, LibDems really should be pushing this as a matter of principle.
Yeah, that's generally the rule they use in third world countries to stop the "uneducated" lower class majority from dominating the minority "educated" elite. See; Thailand.
A university course in Scotland is 3 years for a degree, 4 years for a degree with honours. I'm not saying that someone without a degree shouldn't be able to be an MP or lead a party, I'm saying the selfish prick who gamed the system to attend university so he could get access to student politics, but couldn't be bothered to actually complete his degree at any point shouldn't really be a suitable candidate for higher office.
Murphy's a dick who took the free grant to attend Uni for 9 years during which time he spent almost no time attending class as he was too busy running for various student bodies until he clawed his way up to head of the National Union of Students, at which point he unilaterally changed the NUS's position on keeping the grant system pulling up the ladder of free university tuition he had abused. That he didn't even have the decency to complete his degree after defrauding the taxpayer for 9 years tells you everything you need to know about him.
Nicktendo86
Member
Sunday times poll has Ed on lowest personal rating ever, now even behind Clegg.
That our broken system means someone so inept and disliked has a real shot at being PM is a joke.
That our broken system means someone so inept and disliked has a real shot at being PM is a joke.
WayneMorse
Banned
Anyone?
I still can't believe out of all the talent they have on Labour frontbench they managed to pick the two worst people (Balls and Miliband) imaginable.
But it's really more of a testament to how evil the Tories are in the eyes of the British people for Ed's Labour Party to still be on the path to a majority.
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
I think we're both wrong, for different reasons. You thought the Conservatives would pull back voters from Labour and UKIP (swing-back) to draw equal; which hasn't happened - Labour still have roughly the same lead in England over the Conservatives they always did and there's no evidence of a Labour -> Conservative shift looking at the cross-break aggregates for the last few weeks and if anything voters are moving Con -> UKIP even faster, not reversing. I thought that there wouldn't be a swing-back, and therefore Labour would keep a lead - and in doing so, totally overlooking the complete and total collapse of Labour in Scotland and also the continued surge of the Greens, a.k.a. all the other ways Labour can lose votes aside from swing-back. Although, I guess it is sort of the same mistake from both of us in a way - assuming the two big parties are still masters of their own fate. We all multiparty up in this shit now.
(also I think I said 3 point lead - 35/32? - but w/e, still not right)
broadwayrock
Member
LBC:
http://www.lbc.co.uk/
They're a news talk radio station that regularly have politicians on for interviews and phone ins. Their podcasts are paid only so you have to listen live.
Nigel Farage v James O'Brien:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-pyYoL9ngtE
Ken Livingstone and David Mellor's show gives some pretty good insight on politics from some older politicians.
Nicktendo86
Member
I think the only thing we can be sure of is this election will be very unpredictable.
WayneMorse
Banned
http://www.lbc.co.uk/alistair-darling-to-stand-down-as-labour-mp-99704
Damn I was kind of hoping Miliband would swap out Balls for Darling after the referendum.
Damn I was kind of hoping Miliband would swap out Balls for Darling after the referendum.
Nicktendo86
Member
Just beat me to it. Will miss his eyebrows.
Jezbollah
Member
Masquerader
Member
You must have had a short lifetime then
This. I'd say he's the worst I've experienced in my short lifetime too. But honestly, in comparison to about 30-40 years ago, he's a big step up.
And, on that note, let's have a little bit of fun, people... Of all the old Prime Ministers of the UK, who do you think was the absolute worst?
My vote goes to Lord North, a man commonly cited as the worst Prime Minister ever to have existed, ever.
Bear in mind that paintings of high-up figures are generous caricatures of what they actually look like. And that's the best that they could make him look. Imagine how hideous he must be in real life... Like the primevial ancestor of Eric Pickles. Blergh! But of course, appearances aren't everything...
Fortunately, Lord North was even worse politically than he looked. His legacy involved falling asleep in Parliament and losing America to Washington. Seeing as he got the job via being a playmate of George III when they were children, Private Eye would have a field day with him, every day.
WayneMorse
Banned
Renegotiation will be an utter disaster and the British public will most likely vote to stay in the EU come 2017.
What the hell can Dave actually renegotiate anyway? There's no chance in hell Merkel will ever let an EU member have special privileges on free movement, cause then you'll have every government across Europe seeking concessions from the EU.
What the hell can Dave actually renegotiate anyway? There's no chance in hell Merkel will ever let an EU member have special privileges on free movement, cause then you'll have every government across Europe seeking concessions from the EU.
QuicheFontaine
Member
Hmm, the latest on UK polling report says 37% of people say they would vote to stay in, 43% would vote to leave. But I think "most likely" is that it never even comes to a referendum anyway. A Conservative majority isn't looking super likely at this point (although anything is still possible).
SmugAgentCoulson
Banned
There will be two elections next year.
CyclopsRock
Member
I always though one next year and one in 2016 but you may be right.
As for the EU, there's something wryly amusing about the idea of "If you give this power to one, they'll all want it!" As if the nations that make up the EU are naughty pupils in remedial Maths class who've had their phones taken away from them, not sovereign states.
WayneMorse
Banned
It's ridiculous that the British people somehow think they're special when it comes to free movement and that while they can go where they like in the EU other countries can't especially those inferior Eastern Europeans.
anonymous_abc
Member
*shocking
You'd be surprised how many would be fine with that. Germans (heck most other Europeans) see the advantages of the EU et al. much more clearly than the UK population ever has.
CyclopsRock
Member
Yet they do. So what's Cameron meant to do?
Act like a statesman for once instead of responding to UKIP taunts and bad polling numbers?
Try to lead a conversation and debate on the issue rather than issue toothless threats and pointless statements to appease his rabidly insane back benchers?
You know, actually act like someone who is Prime Minister rather than someone whose only concern is his internal party wrangling?
Try to lead a conversation and debate on the issue rather than issue toothless threats and pointless statements to appease his rabidly insane back benchers?
You know, actually act like someone who is Prime Minister rather than someone whose only concern is his internal party wrangling?
I doubt that many lower income British people actually use or care about their right to work in other EU countries. I certainly haven't seen anyone arguing that British people should be exempt from any negotiated agreement. Still, whilst you may mock British people as considering Eastern Europeans to be inferior, the fact remains that their economies are inferior, and that results in completely unbalanced migration between them and the UK.
Whilst I'm sure that there are many Germans who would be fine at seeing complete German domination of Europe, there are many others who are concerned about the costs of EU integration. In a recent annual survey "six out of 10 were concerned about the impact on German taxpayers of euro zone bailouts", that kind of sentiment has in turn seen the rise of the anti-Euro AfD party.
CyclopsRock
Member
And this manifests itself ... How? You say he should "try to lead a conversation and debate on the issue" of immigration - how? What does this look like? Merkel has shot it down, and Cameron's not threatening to pull the UK out of the EU, he's saying that the people of the UK will be more likely to do so of they don't get concessions on an issue that's important to them. I think he's certainly right that it'll make a UK exit more likely, though whether they'd win a referendum, I don't know. But when you're promising a referendum about leaving the EU, the context of *any* discussion you have is going to be the UK leaving. It seems to me that what you actually want Cameron to do is ask nicely of we can get concessions, be told no and then for him to simply shrug. What else is there?
He should never have raised it in the first place - I said it was stupid at the time, and lo and behold it was. There's this thing called 'diplomacy' which the UK used to be quite good at, which we now appear to have banned in favour of catchy statements to get headlines in the Mail.
I also think that the reflex of 'I'm doing what the British public wants' is no defense at all because, as we all know, the public is hilariously badly informed about the debate. We elect politicians to make informed decisions, not to just use polling numbers as a guide to overall policy.
I think all parties have failed at this challenge, to be frank - Labour are just as bad. But at least with them I can understand more part of their reasoning (free movement of labour impacts more on their voting base than the conservatives). But for the supposedly business orientated party to be flailing around like this and utterly failing to accomplish anything other than make our exit from the EU more likely, and piss off any allies who want us to stay, sums up Cameron's astonishing levels of competence with these things. He cares more about the headline than the result.
(Let's be fair, this is hardly the first time he's been criticised for screwing up EU diplomacy big style, and everything being developed on the back of a fag packet in response to the press and / or a poll).
I also think that the reflex of 'I'm doing what the British public wants' is no defense at all because, as we all know, the public is hilariously badly informed about the debate. We elect politicians to make informed decisions, not to just use polling numbers as a guide to overall policy.
I think all parties have failed at this challenge, to be frank - Labour are just as bad. But at least with them I can understand more part of their reasoning (free movement of labour impacts more on their voting base than the conservatives). But for the supposedly business orientated party to be flailing around like this and utterly failing to accomplish anything other than make our exit from the EU more likely, and piss off any allies who want us to stay, sums up Cameron's astonishing levels of competence with these things. He cares more about the headline than the result.
(Let's be fair, this is hardly the first time he's been criticised for screwing up EU diplomacy big style, and everything being developed on the back of a fag packet in response to the press and / or a poll).
anonymous_abc
Member
Yea I don't think many here see it as German 'domination' of Europe.
Merkel might be the most powerful national leader in Europe at the moment but that has a lot to do with the weakness of many others. And just look at the commission, the German commissioner has a very low key and weak post in Junkers semi-government.
It is well established that the political class here is very hesitant to take more responsibility in Europe for precisely that reason.
titusandronicus
Member
What y'all think about the Manchester devolution thing?
SmugAgentCoulson
Banned
It's twistin' my melon man.
Nicktendo86
Member
I think it is a good thing, they say there is a disconnect between people and Westminster so the more power held locally the better, let's see if a locally elected Mayor can do a better job.
Feels a bit odd though seeing as people voted against having a Mayor two years ago, but there you go. People can't moan about Westminster being remote, be offered more powers to be held locally, refuse, then continue to moan.
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
I approve of the devolution process but I disapprove of mayors. I'd much rather the extended powers were simply given to a council; presidential systems are meh.
Guerrillas in the Mist
Member
The closer we move to a federal system the better.
Actually, we should just copy Germany in just about everything.
anonymous_abc
Member
Of course they can.
Nicktendo86
Member
I dunno, I like that someone is there to be held account and be the face of the council. When councils are in charge it is too easy to just pass the buck and blame others for things not going well.
Saying that, fat lot of good that has done us in Tower Hamlets.
fizzelopeguss
Banned
Politicians are such dirty fucking cunts.
Only 21 out of 650 MPs Attend Parliamentary Debate on UK Drug Laws
Never mind the consistently failing war on drugs in this country is costing us billions.
It's affecting millions of us, it's damaging lives and it's tearing families apart. All while funnelling money into criminal gangs, ruining young peoples lives and been in general a massive fucking problem.
Less than 4% of our representatives barely even give a shit.
Absolute fucking cunts the lot of them.
we have drug dealers literally in the town square in bolton just across from the main hall.
CyclopsRock
Member
This more or less all sounds like "He's not doing what I'd do". Which isn't really the same thing as what he should do. And I'm sure we've discussed the "we can't trust the people with their own food" argument before - it gets deployed exclusively when one's opinions run counter to that of the general public.
Think that's unfair and a bit dismissive. Cameron has been slated from all sides for his failure to engage with Europe properly at all. Personally I am in favour of immigration and the free movement of,people (I'm a capitalist!), but even coming from his position and needs what he has done, repeatedly, is just *dumb*. It is bad politics and bad diplomacy.
And I'm in favour of politicians making informed choices regardless of my personal leanings. I've voted for each party in my lifetime, and I'm heavily influenced by the evidence (it's my day job after all). Also, to be frank, as a gay man I am heavily swayed by the argument that sometimes politicians have to lead and the public will follow.
Let me flip it around - do you think Cameron has done a good job with his approach to Europe? Has it got us closer to what he, and his party wants? Is this an effective policy?
EDIT: in order to clarify on the personal biases bit - I voted lib dem last time around, and was happy with the coalition government that formed. I thought it was the right choice given the electoral result, and offered us a unique chance to do something new with government. I am absolutely not a dye in the wool left wing voter wedded to a party - far from it in fact.
And I'm in favour of politicians making informed choices regardless of my personal leanings. I've voted for each party in my lifetime, and I'm heavily influenced by the evidence (it's my day job after all). Also, to be frank, as a gay man I am heavily swayed by the argument that sometimes politicians have to lead and the public will follow.
Let me flip it around - do you think Cameron has done a good job with his approach to Europe? Has it got us closer to what he, and his party wants? Is this an effective policy?
EDIT: in order to clarify on the personal biases bit - I voted lib dem last time around, and was happy with the coalition government that formed. I thought it was the right choice given the electoral result, and offered us a unique chance to do something new with government. I am absolutely not a dye in the wool left wing voter wedded to a party - far from it in fact.
It's a start, and hopefully we'll see similar in other major built up areas. We could do with devolving power to the cities and regions.
Nicktendo86
Member
Report into tower hamlets FINALLY to be published tomorrow! Will have my popcorn on standby...
fizzelopeguss
Banned
Gotta be careful with this shit. Greater manchester, yorkshire and the midlands are decent enough for a testbed. The last thing we need is to give rotten boroughs like rotherham more powers.