Lib-Dem wipeout. SNP clean sweep. Ukip moderate gains. Ed Milliband unelectable, so I can see the Tories making gains but no natural coalition left for them (can't see Ukip getting enough seats). Recipe for a right mess.
It was a long time ago but I seem to remember the Lib-Dems promising no rise in Tuition Fees. Anybody who believes one word from any front bench politician of any party this close to an election should not be allowed the vote!
Does anyone here actually follow opinion polls? There's very little in it at present.
Labour with SNP seemed a very likely coalition.
Depending on what poll you read there is only 2 or 3 points in it either way. My personal opinion is that Labour will win purely down to the Tory diswaiders voting Ukip .
Statistics show that UKIP take almost as many Labour voters as Tory voters.
Does anyone here actually follow opinion polls? There's very little in it at present.
Labour with SNP seemed a very likely coalition.
Depending on what poll you read there is only 2 or 3 points in it either way. My personal opinion is that Labour will win purely down to the Tory diswaiders voting Ukip .
Unfortunatly for you, the votes for UKIP have not just come from the Tories.
There may be a few confused Labour supporters and deserting Liberals but most will have voted conservative if Ukip didn't exist.
I disagree. A large chunk would have come from conservatives. A large chunk is coming from working class labour supporters who are disillusioned with labour but would never ever vote Tory under any circumstances because they made me get out of bed in the morning etc. Then the other chunk is those that just.... Don't vote.
UKIP are a worry for all parties. That's why all parties are suddenly nattering on about immigration, because it effects all of their core voters.
Does anyone here actually follow opinion polls? There's very little in it at present.
Labour with SNP seemed a very likely coalition.
Depending on what poll you read there is only 2 or 3 points in it either way. My personal opinion is that Labour will win purely down to the Tory diswaiders voting Ukip .
Statistics show that UKIP take almost as many Labour voters as Tory voters.
I read somewhere, and it could be cock as I can't recall the source, but possibly the excellent ukpollingreport.co.uk that the labour voters disillusioned with the EU and immigration - and I suspect there are quite a few - shifted their allegiance to ukip some time ago, and that the current shift to ukip is mainly Tory. But yes, ukip get support from former voters of both parties. Also, the ukip support is very regionalised rather than a blanket swing nationwide
Statistics show that UKIP take almost as many Labour voters as Tory voters.
No they don't. There's been plenty of opinion polls asking UKIP voters who they voted at the 2010 election. Yougov did a metaanalysis combining all of their opinion polls in October. 48% of UKIP supporters voted Tory at the last election, 15% Labour, 16% LibDem and 20% others (including UKIP).
I'm still waiting for English representation in Westminster. Cameron muttered about it after the Scottish referendum. But it seems to have returned to the 'long grass'
Statistics show that UKIP take almost as many Labour voters as Tory voters.
No they don't. There's been plenty of opinion polls asking UKIP voters who they voted at the 2010 election. Yougov did a metaanalysis combining all of their opinion polls in October. 48% of UKIP supporters voted Tory at the last election, 15% Labour, 16% LibDem and 20% others (including UKIP).
Statistics show that UKIP take almost as many Labour voters as Tory voters.
No they don't. There's been plenty of opinion polls asking UKIP voters who they voted at the 2010 election. Yougov did a metaanalysis combining all of their opinion polls in October. 48% of UKIP supporters voted Tory at the last election, 15% Labour, 16% LibDem and 20% others (including UKIP).
Yeah and you can really take notice of a yougov poll. Ukip are gaining large support in the north(a traditional Labour stronghold)due to Labour's contempt and abandonment of the white working classes.
Also, a large amount of UKIP support have never voted before or have not voted for a considerable amount of time.
Who people may or may not have voted for in 2010 is not relevant to today because a lot has changed and people have become even more disillusioned with the Con/Lib/Lab triplets who simply refuse to listen to people's concerns.
Whether people like it or not, any party that wins the European elections in the manner that Ukip did needs to taken seriously as a threat. Hence the unabated, cynical smear and lie campaigns of the other 3 and the media who are firmly tucked into the pocket of the establishment.
The big lie at the moment is that UKIP support is plummeting. It clearly isn't and although they won't gain as many seats as they would like to, the election in 2020 will be a different story.
The problem the others have is that they have no idea how to compete with the UKIP threat. Instead of thinking things through and coming up with real policies that will make a positive difference in people's lives they resort to the only thing they know. Immature Lies, deceit, smears, con tricks, scare-mongering,etc. The problem is the people don't believe anything they say. Their credibility is completely screwed and they are incapable of regaining trust.
I'd like to agree with those that suggest we are in for a hung Parliament, prompt disagreement between those parties that try to form a Government and another election within 12 months.
BUT the Fixed-term Parliaments Act 2011 MIGHT put the kibosh on that scenario.
It states that: the date of the next general election will be 7 May 2015 and on the first Thursday in May in every fifth year thereafter. Early elections can be held only:
• if a motion for an early general election is agreed either by at least two-thirds of the whole House or without division or;
• if a motion of no confidence is passed and no alternative government is confirmed by the Commons within 14 days.
So, unless political parties are prepared to look even more dysfunctional than usual, they'd have to think long and hard about how the electorate would view them throwing their toys out of the pram rather than coming to a sensible compromise. We shall see I suppose.
UKIP are a threat to Labour and much more so than a year or two ago. But they are a significantly greater threat to the Tories. That's shown in poll after poll by all of the companies, Mori, Ashcroft, Survation, Populus, ICM. It's also demonstrated by UKIP's list of 12 target seats - nine are held by Tories, two by the LibDems and one by Labour drawn up following polling commissioned by UKIP and undertake by Survation. But it's much easier to dismiss evidence that doesn't support your position than to adapt that position in the light of the evidence.
Nobody is saying UKIP's support is plummeting. It appears to be quite stable at 13-16%. If they hold on to that level of support through an election campaign, it will be a remarkable achievement whether you love them or hate them.
Yeah and you can really take notice of a yougov poll. Ukip are gaining large support in the north(a traditional Labour stronghold)due to Labour's contempt and abandonment of the white working classes.
Also, a large amount of UKIP support have never voted before or have not voted for a considerable amount of time.
Who people may or may not have voted for in 2010 is not relevant to today because a lot has changed and people have become even more disillusioned with the Con/Lib/Lab triplets who simply refuse to listen to people's concerns.
Whether people like it or not, any party that wins the European elections in the manner that Ukip did needs to taken seriously as a threat. Hence the unabated, cynical smear and lie campaigns of the other 3 and the media who are firmly tucked into the pocket of the establishment.
The big lie at the moment is that UKIP support is plummeting. It clearly isn't and although they won't gain as many seats as they would like to, the election in 2020 will be a different story.
The problem the others have is that they have no idea how to compete with the UKIP threat. Instead of thinking things through and coming up with real policies that will make a positive difference in people's lives they resort to the only thing they know. Immature Lies, deceit, smears, con tricks, scare-mongering,etc. The problem is the people don't believe anything they say. Their credibility is completely screwed and they are incapable of regaining trust.
The main issue is that the main political parties can't use a "immigration is good for us" rhetoric when it is proven that it is, because it's not what voters want to hear. People want someone to blame for their miseries, and many do have people to blame, but it's not immigrants. They are the easy target for political parties because they can't vote.
• if a motion of no confidence is passed and no alternative government is confirmed by the Commons within 14 days.
This has always been the process of bringing down a minority government - exactly this happened in 1979 to bring an end to Jim Callaghan's minority Labour government.
Yeah and you can really take notice of a yougov poll. Ukip are gaining large support in the north(a traditional Labour stronghold)due to Labour's contempt and abandonment of the white working classes.
Also, a large amount of UKIP support have never voted before or have not voted for a considerable amount of time.
Who people may or may not have voted for in 2010 is not relevant to today because a lot has changed and people have become even more disillusioned with the Con/Lib/Lab triplets who simply refuse to listen to people's concerns.
Whether people like it or not, any party that wins the European elections in the manner that Ukip did needs to taken seriously as a threat. Hence the unabated, cynical smear and lie campaigns of the other 3 and the media who are firmly tucked into the pocket of the establishment.
The big lie at the moment is that UKIP support is plummeting. It clearly isn't and although they won't gain as many seats as they would like to, the election in 2020 will be a different story.
The problem the others have is that they have no idea how to compete with the UKIP threat. Instead of thinking things through and coming up with real policies that will make a positive difference in people's lives they resort to the only thing they know. Immature Lies, deceit, smears, con tricks, scare-mongering,etc. The problem is the people don't believe anything they say. Their credibility is completely screwed and they are incapable of regaining trust.
The main issue is that the main political parties can't use a "immigration is good for us" rhetoric when it is proven that it is, because it's not what voters want to hear. People want someone to blame for their miseries, and many do have people to blame, but it's not immigrants. They are the easy target for political parties because they can't vote.
I'd like to agree with those that suggest we are in for a hung Parliament, prompt disagreement between those parties that try to form a Government and another election within 12 months.
BUT the Fixed-term Parliaments Act 2011 MIGHT put the kibosh on that scenario.
It states that: the date of the next general election will be 7 May 2015 and on the first Thursday in May in every fifth year thereafter. Early elections can be held only:
• if a motion for an early general election is agreed either by at least two-thirds of the whole House or without division or;
• if a motion of no confidence is passed and no alternative government is confirmed by the Commons within 14 days.
So, unless political parties are prepared to look even more dysfunctional than usual, they'd have to think long and hard about how the electorate would view them throwing their toys out of the pram rather than coming to a sensible compromise. We shall see I suppose.
Belgium not only went for nearly 2 years without a government but it would appear that there was little, if any, negative measurable effect from such a period. A caretaker government was installed to utilise the executive powers but otherwise the country actually ran pretty well compared to other EU states.
Instead of coalitions, why not take a hung parliament as an indication we're happy with the status quo? The current cabinet remains in place for their executive powers but otherwise all sitting MPs are expelled and those MPs staying behind to run the country would lose the MP portion of their salary. Maybe 5 years in the real world might give those MPs, especially those who have never had a real job outside politics, a much-needed reality check. The House of Commons and the MPs offices can be turned into food banks, soup kitchens or homeless shelters or refuges in the meantime. 5 years without new laws or pointless tinkering with existing legislation frankly sounds amazing.
Yeah and you can really take notice of a yougov poll. Ukip are gaining large support in the north(a traditional Labour stronghold)due to Labour's contempt and abandonment of the white working classes.
Also, a large amount of UKIP support have never voted before or have not voted for a considerable amount of time.
Who people may or may not have voted for in 2010 is not relevant to today because a lot has changed and people have become even more disillusioned with the Con/Lib/Lab triplets who simply refuse to listen to people's concerns.
Whether people like it or not, any party that wins the European elections in the manner that Ukip did needs to taken seriously as a threat. Hence the unabated, cynical smear and lie campaigns of the other 3 and the media who are firmly tucked into the pocket of the establishment.
The big lie at the moment is that UKIP support is plummeting. It clearly isn't and although they won't gain as many seats as they would like to, the election in 2020 will be a different story.
The problem the others have is that they have no idea how to compete with the UKIP threat. Instead of thinking things through and coming up with real policies that will make a positive difference in people's lives they resort to the only thing they know. Immature Lies, deceit, smears, con tricks, scare-mongering,etc. The problem is the people don't believe anything they say. Their credibility is completely screwed and they are incapable of regaining trust.
The main issue is that the main political parties can't use a "immigration is good for us" rhetoric when it is proven that it is, because it's not what voters want to hear. People want someone to blame for their miseries, and many do have people to blame, but it's not immigrants. They are the easy target for political parties because they can't vote.
is it bollox ! Why if its so fecking good did ALL you right on Labour twats and gauridianistas tell us it wasnt happening for 13 years ! why did u say only 6,000 Poles would come why did you say only 12,000 Romians would come---keep sticking your fecking heads in the sand.
300,000 a year net increase a city the size of Hull to be buit EVERY year ---but its all gravy.
is it bollox ! Why if its so fecking good did ALL you right on Labour twats and gauridianistas tell us it wasnt happening for 13 years ! why did u say only 6,000 Poles would come why did you say only 12,000 Romians would come---keep sticking your fecking heads in the sand.
300,000 a year net increase a city the size of Hull to be buit EVERY year ---but its all gravy.
It's a damning indictment of the political landscape of this country that someone who believes in open borders is referred to as a "labour twat" despite having no affiliation to any political party.
In response to Stu, yes it is my opinion, one that I have based upon the facts presented to me. I don't expect anyone to share it if they don't want to.
is it bollox ! Why if its so fecking good did ALL you right on Labour twats and gauridianistas tell us it wasnt happening for 13 years ! why did u say only 6,000 Poles would come why did you say only 12,000 Romians would come---keep sticking your fecking heads in the sand.
300,000 a year net increase a city the size of Hull to be buit EVERY year ---but its all gravy.
I love EVERYBODY. I think Kumbaya should be OUR national anthem (with the wording changed to take out all reference to God, religious belief and anything that will remotely offend anyone of course...), lovely tune.
The facts may be perfectly true that overall immigrants contribute positively to the nation's finances, but the conclusion that this makes everything better is what's flawed.
Remove immigrants from the argument and decide whether it is good for the nation and its inhabitants if there is unplanned population growth. The pros - More tax gets paid and if there is full employment there is a net gain to the nations finances. The cons - it outpaces the need for infrastructure growth. The additional taxes do not cover the costs of additional infrastructure. The more infrastructure you build the higher are the maintenance costs for that infrastructure.
So the argument for immigration holds good if it stops increasing occasionally so that eventually the additional finances catch up with the infrastructure costs. If population grows incessantly it will be a continual catch up and a constant imbalance between population and infrastructure to support it.
It is understandable why right minded people are very careful before calling for immigration to be curbed, the disturbing programme shown recently about Smethick in the 1960s is testament to how naked racism can become insidious, but we are not in the 1960s.
It is a pity that many in the pro immigration lobby carry on as if their opponents must be still in the 1960s. They feed patronising Guardian messages in an effort to encourage us to embrace immigration. It is almost as if they don't need others to believe it, they know we are not stupid, I can only assume it is to polish up their socialist badge of honour.
Dip. Would you then agree that the problem isn't with immigration, as such, but it is that the government are not spending enough in terms of infrastructure?
Dip. Would you then agree that the problem isn't with immigration, as such, but it is that the government are not spending enough in terms of infrastructure?
Money isn't the only concern. You have to consider the fact that building new infrastructure takes a lot of time, with all of the planning, permission, building and opening that goes with it. Then you need enough skilled workers to build these buildings, enough skilled workers to maintain the buildings and enough skilled workers to operate in the buildings (teachers, doctors etc). Then you need enough houses, schools, hospitals, roads for all THOSE people. Now consider the fact that we're one of the most densely populated developed nations in the world and that every year our rivers get more polluted, our environment gets more destroyed and our sustainability as an island gets diminished, all because of overpopulation itself. We're running out of room - homes have to be built on top of homes, sometimes 20 or 30 homes high or more, communities have to live underneath flight paths or next to airports with all the health effects that has, and any remotely desirable space is bought up by millionaires from overseas who make their fortune off the backs of cheap, limitless migrant labour. Why do you think councils are continuously having to make unpopular decisions such as the sites of sewage plants, incinerators or other undesirable plants near or in communities, instead of somewhere where there is no or little impact on people's lives? Because there is no room left.
We aren't running out of room. Something like 11% of the UK is urban.
Fully agree - overpopulated my arse! There are surely more valid arguments against mass immigration than the population/space one.
Even 54% of urban is open space - add in private gardens and so on and the actual built area of the UK is just over 2% - this compares with woodland that comes in at 12%.
The perception is that it's far more overcrowded primarily because most of us live in the 2%.
But most immigrants want to come to London or one of the other major cities where there are jobs. They don't want to go to the Highlands or rural west Wales.
Immigration is a very good thing for the country as a whole. Most immigrants are young and hard-working and add to the tax base while consuming little in the way of services. But some people suffer as a result. Working class wages are depressed as there is always a ready supply of immigrants and housing, in particular, is put under pressure. You can also have too much of a good thing and it is hard to see how our infrastructure can cope with net migration rates of 250k plus for a sustained length of time. OTOH, the only way to achieve this would be to leave the EU, which would be an even greater disaster for the economy, so I can only hope that the incipient recovery in the Eurozone gathers pace and lowers the UK's relative attractiveness.
They could have a coalition without having a coalition - by having a minority government and hoping they vote with them. Made sense to rule it out because other parties would have used against them. Might also persuade a few more scots to vote labour. If push came to shove, they could always fudge a reason to get together!
Comments
Anybody who believes one word from any front bench politician of any party this close to an election should not be allowed the vote!
UKIP are a worry for all parties. That's why all parties are suddenly nattering on about immigration, because it effects all of their core voters.
https://yougov.co.uk/news/2014/10/27/ukip-greens-and-new-politics-protest/
Chortle...
I do agree that more ex Tories vote for Ukip.
However I believe the most of the ' ex Labour ' voters who have defected to UKIP didn't vote for Brown in 2010.
Many UKIP target seats had Labour MP's throughout the Blair years.
Also, a large amount of UKIP support have never voted before or have not voted for a considerable amount of time.
Who people may or may not have voted for in 2010 is not relevant to today because a lot has changed and people have become even more disillusioned with the Con/Lib/Lab triplets who simply refuse to listen to people's concerns.
Whether people like it or not, any party that wins the European elections in the manner that Ukip did needs to taken seriously as a threat. Hence the unabated, cynical smear and lie campaigns of the other 3 and the media who are firmly tucked into the pocket of the establishment.
The big lie at the moment is that UKIP support is plummeting. It clearly isn't and although they won't gain as many seats as they would like to, the election in 2020 will be a different story.
The problem the others have is that they have no idea how to compete with the UKIP threat. Instead of thinking things through and coming up with real policies that will make a positive difference in people's lives they resort to the only thing they know. Immature Lies, deceit, smears, con tricks, scare-mongering,etc. The problem is the people don't believe anything they say. Their credibility is completely screwed and they are incapable of regaining trust.
BUT the Fixed-term Parliaments Act 2011 MIGHT put the kibosh on that scenario.
It states that: the date of the next general election will be 7 May 2015 and on the first Thursday in May in every fifth year thereafter. Early elections can be held only:
• if a motion for an early general election is agreed either by at least two-thirds of the whole House or without division or;
• if a motion of no confidence is passed and no alternative government is confirmed by the Commons within 14 days.
So, unless political parties are prepared to look even more dysfunctional than usual, they'd have to think long and hard about how the electorate would view them throwing their toys out of the pram rather than coming to a sensible compromise. We shall see I suppose.
Nobody is saying UKIP's support is plummeting. It appears to be quite stable at 13-16%. If they hold on to that level of support through an election campaign, it will be a remarkable achievement whether you love them or hate them.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/eu/10822956/EU-elections-2014-Is-immigration-good-for-Britain.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/10131876/The-truth-about-immigration-its-good-for-Britain.html
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/nov/05/eu-migrants-uk-gains-20bn-ucl-study
http://classonline.org.uk/docs/why_immigration_is_good_for_all_of_us.pdf
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-29906592
Instead of coalitions, why not take a hung parliament as an indication we're happy with the status quo? The current cabinet remains in place for their executive powers but otherwise all sitting MPs are expelled and those MPs staying behind to run the country would lose the MP portion of their salary. Maybe 5 years in the real world might give those MPs, especially those who have never had a real job outside politics, a much-needed reality check. The House of Commons and the MPs offices can be turned into food banks, soup kitchens or homeless shelters or refuges in the meantime. 5 years without new laws or pointless tinkering with existing legislation frankly sounds amazing.
Why if its so fecking good did ALL you right on Labour twats and gauridianistas tell us it wasnt happening for 13 years ! why did u say only 6,000 Poles would come why did you say only 12,000 Romians would come---keep sticking your fecking heads in the sand.
300,000 a year net increase a city the size of Hull to be buit EVERY year ---but its all gravy.
http://www.cream-migration.org/files/FiscalEJ.pdf
In response to Stu, yes it is my opinion, one that I have based upon the facts presented to me. I don't expect anyone to share it if they don't want to.
Remove immigrants from the argument and decide whether it is good for the nation and its inhabitants if there is unplanned population growth. The pros - More tax gets paid and if there is full employment there is a net gain to the nations finances. The cons - it outpaces the need for infrastructure growth. The additional taxes do not cover the costs of additional infrastructure. The more infrastructure you build the higher are the maintenance costs for that infrastructure.
So the argument for immigration holds good if it stops increasing occasionally so that eventually the additional finances catch up with the infrastructure costs. If population grows incessantly it will be a continual catch up and a constant imbalance between population and infrastructure to support it.
It is understandable why right minded people are very careful before calling for immigration to be curbed, the disturbing programme shown recently about Smethick in the 1960s is testament to how naked racism can become insidious, but we are not in the 1960s.
It is a pity that many in the pro immigration lobby carry on as if their opponents must be still in the 1960s. They feed patronising Guardian messages in an effort to encourage us to embrace immigration. It is almost as if they don't need others to believe it, they know we are not stupid, I can only assume it is to polish up their socialist badge of honour.
Even 54% of urban is open space - add in private gardens and so on and the actual built area of the UK is just over 2% - this compares with woodland that comes in at 12%.
The perception is that it's far more overcrowded primarily because most of us live in the 2%.
Immigration is a very good thing for the country as a whole. Most immigrants are young and hard-working and add to the tax base while consuming little in the way of services. But some people suffer as a result. Working class wages are depressed as there is always a ready supply of immigrants and housing, in particular, is put under pressure. You can also have too much of a good thing and it is hard to see how our infrastructure can cope with net migration rates of 250k plus for a sustained length of time. OTOH, the only way to achieve this would be to leave the EU, which would be an even greater disaster for the economy, so I can only hope that the incipient recovery in the Eurozone gathers pace and lowers the UK's relative attractiveness.