General Election 2015

[eFestivals]

I don't disagree with any of that, I just think that the rise will be large and significant, rather than meteoric as predicted by some polls, due to the SNP ideology and degree of bullying by a small minority of their supporters

It's certainly true that those more-aggressive types of nats are scaring away plenty who might otherwise be tempted to support the SNP. That's been clear for more than the last year.

But also, the tipping point to SNP wins is a big gap to bridge in lots of constituencies, and current polling has lots of those fairly close to that tipping point, rather than the SNP being clear winners - so it won't take too many doubts when voting to tip those back the other way.

I'll be very surprised if the SNP go as badly as just 15 seats tho. I'd put them at definitely more than 20, and 30 is more around how I think they'll actually do as a minimum.

[kaosmark2]

It's certainly true that those more-aggressive types of nats are scaring away plenty who might otherwise be tempted to support the SNP. That's been clear for more than the last year.

But also, the tipping point to SNP wins is a big gap to bridge in lots of constituencies, and current polling has lots of those fairly close to that tipping point, rather than the SNP being clear winners - so it won't take too many doubts when voting to tip those back the other way.

I'll be very surprised if the SNP go as badly as just 15 seats tho. I'd put them at definitely more than 20, and 30 is more around how I think they'll actually do as a minimum.

But those aggresive types are also scaring people into saying they'll vote Snp when they won't, leading to inaccuracy of polls.

[eFestivals]

But those aggresive types are also scaring people into saying they'll vote Snp when they won't, leading to inaccuracy of polls.

I'd say you've got it wrong.

Think about how it works for the tories in Scotland.

[LJS]

I'd say you've got it wrong.

Think about how it works for the tories in Scotland.

Phew! Made it home safe and sound, successfully dodging the gangs of vigilante nationalists roaming the streets terrifying the population into voting SNP.

If only you guys knew the fear + terror we live in!

Edited February 13, 2015 by LJS

[LJS]

It's certainly true that those more-aggressive types of nats are scaring away plenty who might otherwise be tempted to support the SNP. That's been clear for more than the last year.

But also, the tipping point to SNP wins is a big gap to bridge in lots of constituencies, and current polling has lots of those fairly close to that tipping point, rather than the SNP being clear winners - so it won't take too many doubts when voting to tip those back the other way.

I'll be very surprised if the SNP go as badly as just 15 seats tho. I'd put them at definitely more than 20, and 30 is more around how I think they'll actually do as a minimum.

So Neil, you start this post with the words "it's certainly true" . Would you care to share with us exactly how, from your ideal vantage point some 400+ miles from the (imaginary) border, you know this?

It's a frankly astonishing claim. With the polls showing massive SNP leads which, if they hold would leave Labour, Tories and lib dems struggling to hold 10 seats between them. If only we could stop these "more aggressive " nats the "plenty' that are being "scared away" would presumably return & the SNP would win every seat in Scotland.

Yet again, you demonstrate your complete ignorance of what is happening in Scotland.

[LJS]

Switched the wireless on when I got in tonight in time to hear Harriet Harman on any questions wriggling & squirming to avoid saying keeping nuclear weapons would be a 'red line" in any potential post election deal. By doing so , she refuses to rule out a deal with the SNP: a deal you say would be toxic for Labour. If you are right she would be mad not to rule it out.

It looks increasingly like Labour are at least prepared to consider some sort of a deal.

[eFestivals]

Phew! Made it home safe and sound, successfully dodging the gangs of vigilante nationalists roaming the streets terrifying the population into voting SNP.

If only you guys knew the fear + terror we live in!

and you believe all the tories in Scotland died in 1983, too.

Mind you, when you're still believing that Scotland's economy isn't dependent on oil, thinking all the tories died in 1983 is much more sane.

[eFestivals]

So Neil, you start this post with the words "it's certainly true" . Would you care to share with us exactly how, from your ideal vantage point some 400+ miles from the (imaginary) border, you know this?

from the many Scottish people who's words I've read where they've said they support independence but couldn't support a party that would lead an iScotland to financial ruin.

Are you going to tell me you've never heard the same from a Scot yourself? lol:

No one like that exists in Scotland? Perhaps they died out along with all the Scottish tories?

Or maybe you only mix with financial incompetents?

It's a frankly astonishing claim.

Sorry, i'm lost. What's an astonishing claim? That there's Scots who think the SNP financially incompetent?

When you Scots claim great financial acumen (words: Fred Goodwin; letter to Fred; Alex Salmond; less financial regulation; White Paper; Oil prices;), what is really surprising is how (comparatively) few they number.

But as those 'words' get to prove, it's yet another false claim of Scottish exceptionalism, so not really a surprise at all.

With the polls showing massive SNP leads which, if they hold would leave Labour, Tories and lib dems struggling to hold 10 seats between them. If only we could stop these "more aggressive " nats the "plenty' that are being "scared away" would presumably return & the SNP would win every seat in Scotland.

Yet again, you demonstrate your complete ignorance of what is happening in Scotland.

If only you could actually attract enough Scots to win an indyref, do you mean? I've realised that you couldn't, and by doing so prove myself perfectly informed of the facts.

Do those aggressive nats exist? Yep, they can be seen all over. They're the types who still won't accept the oil price reality, for example. In fact, plenty don't even accept the white paper they voted in support of.

But you know that. You knew it perfectly when you were trying to convince people to vote indy, while knowingly hiding from them pertinent and important information that would have helped better inform their choice. You deliberately chose to present them with limited info in an attempt to con them.

But there's no conmen or frauds or aggressive types or fact-avoiding types in the SNP, or even in Scotland. All of those live in Westminster including plenty of ex-communicated Scots who have dared to have their own differing opinions to the SNP and their threatened 'day of reckoning'.

That "day of reckoning" alone might have caused you to lose, but you'll never know. You'll only know you lost.

You're right. My ignorance overflows.

Edited February 14, 2015 by eFestivals

[eFestivals]

Switched the wireless on when I got in tonight in time to hear Harriet Harman on any questions wriggling & squirming to avoid saying keeping nuclear weapons would be a 'red line" in any potential post election deal. By doing so , she refuses to rule out a deal with the SNP: a deal you say would be toxic for Labour. If you are right she would be mad not to rule it out.

It looks increasingly like Labour are at least prepared to consider some sort of a deal.

Perhaps Labour's plan is to give the SNP everything they want? It would be the smartest political move they could do.

After all, the SNP would last about ten minutes from the implementation of its demanded "full fiscal autonomy" for Scotland - when cuts much bigger than the tories plan hit home.

[LJS]

and you believe all the tories in Scotland died in 1983, too.

Mind you, when you're still believing that Scotland's economy isn't dependent on oil, thinking all the tories died in 1983 is much more sane.

Yet again you make up my mind for me! I have regurarly pointed out that there are plenty of conservatives in Scotland...they just tend not to vote Tory!

[zero000]

Did anyone see the inside the commons documentary bbc broadcast recently. It's enough to put anyone of voting. Horrible antiquated, pompous pubic school boy, pomp and ceremony left, right and centre.

[LJS]

from the many Scottish people who's words I've read where they've said they support independence but couldn't support a party that would lead an iScotland to financial ruin.

Are you going to tell me you've never heard the same from a Scot yourself? lol:

No one like that exists in Scotland? Perhaps they died out along with all the Scottish tories?

Or maybe you only mix with financial incompetents?

Of course they exist & I've never denied it. Where we differ is how many there are & how much influence they wield & that might just be observed better from north of the border than from Bristol.

Sorry, i'm lost. What's an astonishing claim? That there's Scots who think the SNP financially incompetent?

The astonishing claim is that these crazy nats are "scaring away plenty who might otherwise be tempted to support the SNP" With the SNP running at up to 20% ahead of Labour in the polls they're clearly not doing a very good job of scaring folk away .. or are you saying the SNP's lead could be even higher?

When you Scots claim great financial acumen (words: Fred Goodwin; letter to Fred; Alex Salmond; less financial regulation; White Paper; Oil prices;), what is really surprising is how (comparatively) few they number.

But as those 'words' get to prove, it's yet another false claim of Scottish exceptionalism, so not really a surprise at all.

I have no idea what this has to do with my post.

If only you could actually attract enough Scots to win an indyref, do you mean? I've realised that you couldn't, and by doing so prove myself perfectly informed of the facts.

We aren't discussing the Indyref - this thread is about the general election

Do those aggressive nats exist? Yep, they can be seen all over. They're the types who still won't accept the oil price reality, for example. In fact, plenty don't even accept the white paper they voted in support of.

But you know that. You knew it perfectly when you were trying to convince people to vote indy, while knowingly hiding from them pertinent and important information that would have helped better inform their choice. You deliberately chose to present them with limited info in an attempt to con them.

Where exactly are you getting this from? Did you employ a private detective to spy on me? You appear to know my every thought and action - better than I do myself. Oh & for the record, I don't recognise your description of my methods of persuasion & even if it was accurate, there was hardly a lack of media coverage for the opposing point of view.

But there's no conmen or frauds or aggressive types or fact-avoiding types in the SNP, or even in Scotland. All of those live in Westminster including plenty of ex-communicated Scots who have dared to have their own differing opinions to the SNP and their threatened 'day of reckoning'.

That "day of reckoning" alone might have caused you to lose, but you'll never know. You'll only know you lost.

Not quite sure what the purpose of this is.

You're right. My ignorance overflows.

Ahh, finally you got something right. Well done

[LJS]

On a lighter note, let's have a laugh at George Osborne's finger.

[eFestivals]

Yet again you make up my mind for me! I have regurarly pointed out that there are plenty of conservatives in Scotland...they just tend not to vote Tory!

Might that be because voting tory gets no representation in Scotland - the very thing you say is so wrong when it happens to your choice of vote?

[eFestivals]

Not quite sure what the purpose of this is.

No, nor am I.

You got upset at something I said, and then agreed that what I said was correct.

Anyone might think you're playing hide and seek with the squirrels.

But anyway, your admission that I was correct puts this to bed.

Edited February 15, 2015 by eFestivals

[LJS]

No, nor am I.

You got upset at something I said, and then agreed that what I said was correct.

Anyone might think you're playing hide and seek with the squirrels.

But anyway, your admission that I was correct puts this to bed.

Good to see you've kept your sense of humour.

[zahidf]

excellent article on ED and how the tax cheat stuff is working for him..

'It’s easy to look at British politics as though it were boxing. Journalists will often speak of whether there were any ‘knock out blows’ in Prime Minister’s. Instead I look at the it through the prism of sport I love, which PB old hands know is tennis. Of course there are some key points in a set but overall it’s a rhythmic battle in which small margins can give a player a big advantage if sustained long enough.

Every player has a weakness and the more you bring that out over the course of a match the more likely you are to win. Right now Ed Miliband looks like he has a new coach and has identified a form of play that has linked his opponent’s weaknesses into his strength. Ed Miliband is beginning to play like Lleyton Hewitt approaching his prime.

Fourteen years ago Hewitt was the best counter-puncher around. He didn’t have a big serve, or big forehand or backhand. Despite this for several years he took the booming ground-shots and serves of opponents and steered them back with interest.

Hewitt would look like he shouldn’t have any chance but developed a knack of dissembling his supposedly superior opponents’ game and ensure the ball landed at the most awkward point. As with Ed, it took a while for the tennis commentators to understand how the Aussie could and did win.

This last two weeks has seen a different Ed Miliband on court and there’s every sign he’s got an effective gameplan at his disposal at the time that matters most. Like Hewitt, Miliband has turned huge crunching groundshots against him into winning returns his opponent isn’t used to seeing fly back past the net.

1. The response to the orchestrated attack through Boots boss Stefano Pessina and other big businesses close to the Tory party is the most significant political event of the election campaign.

   Over two weeks Ed Miliband and Labour have turned an assault on his business credibility into a issues of tax fairness which voters can identify with.

He’s drawn on the HSBC revelations and steered it onto the arrangements of Conservative donors. As a result it is now David Cameron and his party that is now stretching and is badly off balance.

After PMQs David Cameron was overheard complaining of Miliband’s “horrid” line of attack. In a revealing remark he said that it was only because Ed Miliband was losing. But that’s the point, if you aren’t winning in tennis you change your game.

The Ed Miliband I see right now is different to the leader at the time of the Murdoch crisis. He’s scrapping, harrying and resilient and he shows signs of having read and sussed his opponent’s plays. In the next few months the attacks will keep on raining down on him, but the signs are this is precisely what he needs to capture public support.

Like Hewitt, Ed cannot easily generate huge shots on his own. We’ve seen several listless years in opposition broken only by a challenge to energy companies. Ed needs his opponents to inject the pace for him to get his winning returns. If he can continue to do this under his new coaching team then he will likely become Prime Minister in May. How his counter-punching style will work in Downing Street against a different leader Tory remains to be seen. But for now, Ed has more earned himself a trademark Hewitt scream of ‘C’mon!’'

[LJS]

excellent article on ED and how the tax cheat stuff is working for him..

'It’s easy to look at British politics as though it were boxing. Journalists will often speak of whether there were any ‘knock out blows’ in Prime Minister’s. Instead I look at the it through the prism of sport I love, which PB old hands know is tennis. Of course there are some key points in a set but overall it’s a rhythmic battle in which small margins can give a player a big advantage if sustained long enough.

Every player has a weakness and the more you bring that out over the course of a match the more likely you are to win. Right now Ed Miliband looks like he has a new coach and has identified a form of play that has linked his opponent’s weaknesses into his strength. Ed Miliband is beginning to play like Lleyton Hewitt approaching his prime.

Fourteen years ago Hewitt was the best counter-puncher around. He didn’t have a big serve, or big forehand or backhand. Despite this for several years he took the booming ground-shots and serves of opponents and steered them back with interest.

Hewitt would look like he shouldn’t have any chance but developed a knack of dissembling his supposedly superior opponents’ game and ensure the ball landed at the most awkward point. As with Ed, it took a while for the tennis commentators to understand how the Aussie could and did win.

This last two weeks has seen a different Ed Miliband on court and there’s every sign he’s got an effective gameplan at his disposal at the time that matters most. Like Hewitt, Miliband has turned huge crunching groundshots against him into winning returns his opponent isn’t used to seeing fly back past the net.

1. The response to the orchestrated attack through Boots boss Stefano Pessina and other big businesses close to the Tory party is the most significant political event of the election campaign.

   Over two weeks Ed Miliband and Labour have turned an assault on his business credibility into a issues of tax fairness which voters can identify with.

He’s drawn on the HSBC revelations and steered it onto the arrangements of Conservative donors. As a result it is now David Cameron and his party that is now stretching and is badly off balance.

After PMQs David Cameron was overheard complaining of Miliband’s “horrid” line of attack. In a revealing remark he said that it was only because Ed Miliband was losing. But that’s the point, if you aren’t winning in tennis you change your game.

The Ed Miliband I see right now is different to the leader at the time of the Murdoch crisis. He’s scrapping, harrying and resilient and he shows signs of having read and sussed his opponent’s plays. In the next few months the attacks will keep on raining down on him, but the signs are this is precisely what he needs to capture public support.

Like Hewitt, Ed cannot easily generate huge shots on his own. We’ve seen several listless years in opposition broken only by a challenge to energy companies. Ed needs his opponents to inject the pace for him to get his winning returns. If he can continue to do this under his new coaching team then he will likely become Prime Minister in May. How his counter-punching style will work in Downing Street against a different leader Tory remains to be seen. But for now, Ed has more earned himself a trademark Hewitt scream of ‘C’mon!’'

i think you make some valid points here and I do think Ed has raised his game in the last couple of weeks & it is refreshing to see a Labour leader not only having some principles but trying to stick to them. It will be interesting to see how it plays out - as the Yes side found out in the Indyref when the massed ranks of big business line up against you, they are formidable & influential opponents. Ed has the additional problem of the likes of Tony Blair & Peter Mandelson carping from the wings if he is not "business-friendly" enough.

[lost]

Could backfire on Milliband that though. Andrew Marr this morning pulled Ed Balls up on Milliband's own tax avoidance and Balls gave the standard Jimmy Carr answer:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/ed-miliband/11413940/Ed-Balls-refuses-to-back-Ed-Miliband-tax-loophole.html

[zahidf]

i think you make some valid points here and I do think Ed has raised his game in the last couple of weeks & it is refreshing to see a Labour leader not only having some principles but trying to stick to them. It will be interesting to see how it plays out - as the Yes side found out in the Indyref when the massed ranks of big business line up against you, they are formidable & influential opponents. Ed has the additional problem of the likes of Tony Blair & Peter Mandelson carping from the wings if he is not "business-friendly" enough.

The more they attack him, the better excuse he has: they have their own self interest at heart, as he has had a go at their tax avoidance.

[LJS]

The more they attack him, the better excuse he has: they have their own self interest at heart, as he has had a go at their tax avoidance.

yup, it might work that way ... or it could go the other way... & of course as lost points out there are likely to be some tax avoidance skeletons in the Labour party closet, which you can bet the torygraph & mail will make merry hell with.

Don't get me wrong, it is something that has irked (understatement) me for years: But you take on the British establishment at you peril. Interestingly Scotland is talking tough on tax although we are only beginning to collect tax & first off it landfill & stamp duty. I notice that once we are responsible for setting our own income tax rates, the responsibility for collecting & enforcement will be with... (guess who?) ... yup, HMRC, well that's just great!!!

I think it is time that tax avoidance was seen as at least as bad as fiddling benefits. In my view it is much worse. Having lived on benefits, I would have fiddled a few extra quid if i could, simply because you get so little. That to me is understandable. people with 3 houses, a yacht and a private jet trying to get out of paying their taxes is much worse because it is sheer greed for which there is no moral justification at all.

[LJS]

yup, it might work that way ... or it could go the other way... & of course as Lost points out there are likely to be some tax avoidance skeletons in the Labour party closet, which you can bet the torygraph & mail will make merry hell with.

Don't get me wrong, it is something that has irked (understatement) me for years: But you take on the British establishment at you peril. Interestingly Scotland is talking tough on tax although we are only beginning to collect tax & first off it landfill & stamp duty. I notice that once we are responsible for setting our own income tax rates, the responsibility for collecting & enforcement will be with... (guess who?) ... yup, HMRC, well that's just great!!!

I think it is time that tax avoidance was seen as at least as bad as fiddling benefits. In my view it is much worse. Having lived on benefits, I would have fiddled a few extra quid if i could, simply because you get so little. That to me is understandable. people with 3 houses, a yacht and a private jet trying to get out of paying their taxes is much worse because it is sheer greed for which there is no moral justification at all.

[pink_triangle]

excellent article on ED and how the tax cheat stuff is working for him..

'It’s easy to look at British politics as though it were boxing. Journalists will often speak of whether there were any ‘knock out blows’ in Prime Minister’s. Instead I look at the it through the prism of sport I love, which PB old hands know is tennis. Of course there are some key points in a set but overall it’s a rhythmic battle in which small margins can give a player a big advantage if sustained long enough.

Every player has a weakness and the more you bring that out over the course of a match the more likely you are to win. Right now Ed Miliband looks like he has a new coach and has identified a form of play that has linked his opponent’s weaknesses into his strength. Ed Miliband is beginning to play like Lleyton Hewitt approaching his prime.

Being a tennis fan I would say that Hewitt benefited by the fact that he peaked during a relatively weak time in mens tennis (between the Sampras and Federer eras) and hopefully Ed will take advantage of a pretty non descript PM in the same way.

[eFestivals]

as the Yes side found out in the Indyref when the massed ranks of big business line up against you, they are formidable & influential opponents.

because the only truth about Scotland is told by the SNP? It's funny how their supporters won't accept the truth of Salmond's GERS.

[5co77ie]

linky

Spite is main reason people support Conservatives

13-02-14

TORY voters are motivated mostly by spite, it has been claimed.

After an elderly lady antagonised relatives by leaving £769,000 to the party, lifelong Tories confirmed that their political allegiance was based on a desire to annoy others.

Lifelong Conservative Tom Logan said: "When the Great Dominatrix died last year, I treasonously wondered why I even bother voting Tory anymore.

"They're economically incompetent and don't pander to my homophobia as much as I'd like.

"But I keep doing it just to piss off the lefties."

Political sciences lecturer Eleanor Shaw said: "We vote with others in mind. Conservatives think everyone else is out to shaft them so try and shaft them first.

"Labour voters are idealists who want to believe they're doing good without going to any effort, so they vote for anyone with an attractive set of lies.

"Lib Dem voters just want to be noticed even if the attention they get is negative, much like a small boy urinating in his pants.

"And voting UKIP is the political equivalent of asking the police to arrest you before you hurt someone."

The Conservatives' next election campaign will work the spite angle, with the slogan "Just To See The Look On Miliband's Face".