Wednesday 18th February 2015

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Wed 18 Feb, 2015 12:08 pm

On Tom Watsons page.

https://medium.com/@tom_watson/the-reve ... f6275a5194

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 18 Feb, 2015 12:18 pm

Guardian’s coverage of Liberal Democrat General Election campaign accentuates the negative
http://www.libdemvoice.org/guardians-co ... 44730.html

She's not happy with it. She is usually one for accentuating the positive ... any positive.

This piece introduces a new term / concept that sounds particularly unappealing to me - 'soft Tories'. That sounds like the sloppy liquid centred chocolates I'm usually disgusted by when I bite into one by mistake. Give me something of substance any day. Who would want to be a 'soft Tory'? Don't answer that, please.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 18 Feb, 2015 12:20 pm

Ian Dunt retweeted
Jessica Elgot ‏@jessicaelgot 8m8 minutes ago
The Telegraph appears to have removed reader comments from its HSBC story this morning. Here are the screen grabs http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2015/02 ... _hp_ref=uk" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; …

Editing to add:
I particularly like the comment that says - 'Bye bye Peter. You leave with dignity. Shame about the diminished organ you leave behind.'

pk1 · Post by **pk1** » Wed 18 Feb, 2015 12:22 pm

Health minister Dr Dan Poulter has said he is ‘leading by example’ by taking part in an eight-week fitness challenge designed to demonstrate that even people with busy lives can make time to exercise.

Dr Poulter’s challenge will be featured in Men’s Health magazine and hopefully show how changes to diet and exercise can improve both physical and mental health.

http://www.pulsetoday.co.uk/20009224.ar ... ORsFfmsXlI" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Whilst there is a definite link between exercise & mental health, I'm not sure having MPs taking part in a challenge of this nature is particularly helpful - is it ? Wouldn't it be better if they concentrated more on making sure we plebs have access to facilities ?

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Wed 18 Feb, 2015 12:24 pm

Matthew Holehouse told me at lunch at Quirinale that he had been accidentally included in a series of email exchanges between senior figures at Conservative Central Office who were speculating about which Labour sitting MPs were paedophiles and how they should deploy this ‘information’. Matthew seemed to think that this showed that CCHQ was run by a bunch of children and he said it was worse than Damian McBride.

https://medium.com/@tom_watson/the-reve ... f6275a5194

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 18 Feb, 2015 12:26 pm

LabourList @LabourList · 6m 6 minutes ago
Will CCHQ and/or The Telegraph release paedophile claim emails Labour MP says he was told about over lunch? http://labli.st/1DCGgGT" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Post by **refitman** » Wed 18 Feb, 2015 12:29 pm

IDS has accused Miliband of tax avoidance (from AS Blog):

Speaking on BBC News just now, Iain Duncan Smith has accused the Labour leader Ed Miliband of avoiding tax.

Do you want to risk that with the chaos that comes from a Labour party who are completely at odds with each other and can’t seem to get their lines right, whether it’s on the health service or whether it’s on people who pay tax, let alone the man who runs the Labour party who seems to have managed to have avoided tax as well?

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 18 Feb, 2015 12:32 pm

refitman wrote:IDS has accused Miliband of tax avoidance (from AS Blog):
Speaking on BBC News just now, Iain Duncan Smith has accused the Labour leader Ed Miliband of avoiding tax.

Do you want to risk that with the chaos that comes from a Labour party who are completely at odds with each other and can’t seem to get their lines right, whether it’s on the health service or whether it’s on people who pay tax, let alone the man who runs the Labour party who seems to have managed to have avoided tax as well?

Coming from him - expenses for underpants man - that's breathtaking.

ScarletGas · Post by **ScarletGas** » Wed 18 Feb, 2015 12:33 pm

Bore Da everyone.

Can I return to a subject raised by Rebeccariots2 last evening.This
related to an Independent article voicing their opinion that the BBC is
poor at news reporting and,in particular,commenting on their paper
reviews.

I used to be a regular viewer of both the Sky and BBC news reviews late
evening.Around a year ago I gave up on Sky after getting fed up with a
succession of LBC employees trotting out their bile on anything that
vaguely goes against a right wing narrative.

Frankly,up until around six months ago I enjoyed (for the most part) the
BBC version which seemed to give us a decent cross section of
political/societal views with the presenters (the execrable Gavin Grey
being an exception) doing a decent job of trying to tease out
alternative views.

More recently (I wonder why)?.....,it seems to me that the interviewees
are either from a political viewpoint of the right of centre or
columnists or editors of papers of a similar ilk.There are honourable
exceptions to this such as Rachel Shabib who try to fight against the
current narrative but in general we seem to get an establishment
viewpoint.

Last night,being in a masochistic mood,I watched both Sky and BBC to see
what they made of the Oborne revelations.

Sky had the fount of all wisdom Jonathan Maitland who tried to turn the
story into a diatribe against the Guardian tax affairs claiming that
this was the "elephant in the room" completely missing the point at
issue.

BBC had Anne Ashworth of the Times who voiced her opinion that we should
all be proud of our so called "free press" and seemed to be astonished
at the idea of proprietorial/commercial interference in newspaper
attitudes.Showing yet again that she inhabits a completely different
planet to me

My point here is that whilst the only viewpoints on these programmes are
from the journalist bubble itself (and a fairly narrow selection at
that) or from those talking heads who have more than sufficient
opportunity to get their viewpoint into the public domain then we will
not get a balanced and reasoned debate relating to the majority of the
population

Finally,and this is a personal issue for me.Whoever thinks inviting that
pompous clown Digby Jones on to a discussion programme and expects a
nuanced and sensible debate need to go away and submit themselves to serious
examination.

AngryAsWell · Post by **AngryAsWell** » Wed 18 Feb, 2015 12:36 pm

ohsocynical wrote:On Tom Watsons page.

https://medium.com/@tom_watson/the-reve ... f6275a5194

Posted that earlier Ohso, and still cant quite take it in.
Its unbelievable that if evidence exists they are holding on to it, putting children at risk just for political gain, or if there is no truth in it that they could contemplate smearing an innocent person in such an evil way.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 18 Feb, 2015 12:50 pm

ScarletGas wrote:Bore Da everyone.

Can I return to a subject raised by Rebeccariots2 last evening.This
related to an Independent article voicing their opinion that the BBC is
poor at news reporting and,in particular,commenting on their paper
reviews.

I used to be a regular viewer of both the Sky and BBC news reviews late
evening.Around a year ago I gave up on Sky after getting fed up with a
succession of LBC employees trotting out their bile on anything that
vaguely goes against a right wing narrative.

Frankly,up until around six months ago I enjoyed (for the most part) the
BBC version which seemed to give us a decent cross section of
political/societal views with the presenters (the execrable Gavin Grey
being an exception) doing a decent job of trying to tease out
alternative views.

More recently (I wonder why)?.....,it seems to me that the interviewees
are either from a political viewpoint of the right of centre or
columnists or editors of papers of a similar ilk.There are honourable
exceptions to this such as Rachel Shabib who try to fight against the
current narrative but in general we seem to get an establishment
viewpoint.

Last night,being in a masochistic mood,I watched both Sky and BBC to see
what they made of the Oborne revelations.

Sky had the fount of all wisdom Jonathan Maitland who tried to turn the
story into a diatribe against the Guardian tax affairs claiming that
this was the "elephant in the room" completely missing the point at
issue.

BBC had Anne Ashworth of the Times who voiced her opinion that we should
all be proud of our so called "free press" and seemed to be astonished
at the idea of proprietorial/commercial interference in newspaper
attitudes.Showing yet again that she inhabits a completely different
planet to me

My point here is that whilst the only viewpoints on these programmes are
from the journalist bubble itself (and a fairly narrow selection at
that) or from those talking heads who have more than sufficient
opportunity to get their viewpoint into the public domain then we will
not get a balanced and reasoned debate relating to the majority of the
population

Finally,and this is a personal issue for me.Whoever thinks inviting that
pompous clown Digby Jones on to a discussion programme and expects a
nuanced and sensible debate need to go away and submit themselves to serious
examination.

I thought the suggestion that the BBC and other news outlets should stop the navel gazing habit of inviting the same little clique of journalists to review the papers was a really good one - get out there and find others who can comment on the stories from a different perspective - charity reps, young people and student reps, workers, artists, business bods. The format for nearly all these press reviews means they are the equivalent of PMQs - very predictable, pre rehearsed points of view and lines, and no time allowed for any comments and discussion of substance, Punch and Judy shows the lot of them.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 18 Feb, 2015 12:54 pm

Ian Dunt ‏@IanDunt 8m8 minutes ago
Tony Blair a major 'electoral liability' with voters http://www.politics.co.uk/blogs/2015/02 ... ith-voters" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; …

Only Tony Blair himself would need a poll to tell him that.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 18 Feb, 2015 12:57 pm

Tom McTague retweeted
Peter Dominiczak ‏@peterdominiczak 55s56 seconds ago
Esther McVey asked whether she wants to be PM: "If I had to give a yes or a no, I'd say yes."

No words.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 18 Feb, 2015 1:02 pm

tom_watson ‏@tom_watson 40s41 seconds ago
The Telegraph has now confirmed the emails exist. Now David Cameron can review them: …

Blimey.

pk1 · Post by **pk1** » Wed 18 Feb, 2015 1:12 pm

rebeccariots2 wrote:
tom_watson ‏@tom_watson 40s41 seconds ago
The Telegraph has now confirmed the emails exist. Now David Cameron can review them: …
Blimey.

O

M

G

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 18 Feb, 2015 1:13 pm

Tory's U-turn over vow to return donation: High command accused of interfering to stop an MP handing back money from businessman accused of tax avoidance
Tory MP Charlotte Leslie pledged to return £5,000 given by Hugh Sloane
Tribunal had ruled his investment firm had operated tax avoidance scheme
But just hours later she retracted the promise to return millionaire's money
Questions raised over whether she had been pressured into the U-turn
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... ssman.html

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 18 Feb, 2015 1:17 pm

SMEs boycotting 'appalling' Capita government contract
Small businesses are boycotting a major Government contract that they claim gives too much power to outsourcing giant Capita, PoliticsHome has learned.
https://www.politicshome.com/economy-an ... t-contract

The £1.5bn four-year contract started in 2013 and allows Capita to control the recruitment of specialist contractors and interim managers working for government departments.

The company came under fire last week after the Independent reported claims that another Whitehall contract – the Civil Service Learning scheme – was squeezing out SMEs.

Small recruiters say they are also being squeezed out in a way that directly contradicts the Coalition’s commitment to open up government work to SMEs.

The contract, known as Contingent Labour One (CL1), was drawn up by Crown Commercial Services, the arm of the Cabinet Office charged with buying in billions of pounds worth of services for government.

But several leading recruiters are refusing to take part because they say the contract allows contractors they have signed up to be transferred to Capita without any compensation.

This is what happened in 2011 at the Department for Work and Pensions when all of the department’s IT contractors were transferred from SMEs to Capita, effectively expropriating the small firms' assets.

We appear to be in the midst of an aggressive takeover bid by Capita for running the UK.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Wed 18 Feb, 2015 1:17 pm

Has anybody got a link to the full speech by Cameron,yesterday.Totally confused by mention of carers ,loved ones and Telegraph end snippet of care workers in that context given earlier in the mistatement regarding cooking?

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Wed 18 Feb, 2015 1:18 pm

citizenJA wrote:Yanis Varoufakis
Current Finance Minister of Greece
January 2015 general election, elected to the Greek parliament, representing SYRIZA
Wednesday 18 February 2015

He writes:
In 2008, capitalism had its second global spasm. The financial crisis set off a chain reaction that pushed Europe into a downward spiral that continues to this day. Europe’s present situation is not merely a threat for workers, for the dispossessed, for the bankers, for social classes or, indeed, nations. No, Europe’s current posture poses a threat to civilisation as we know it.

If my prognosis is correct, and we are not facing just another cyclical slump soon to be overcome, the question that arises for radicals is this: should we welcome this crisis of European capitalism as an opportunity to replace it with a better system? Or should we be so worried about it as to embark upon a campaign for stabilising European capitalism?

To me, the answer is clear. Europe’s crisis is far less likely to give birth to a better alternative to capitalism than it is to unleash dangerously regressive forces that have the capacity to cause a humanitarian bloodbath, while extinguishing the hope for any progressive moves for generations to come.

For this view I have been accused, by well-meaning radical voices, of being “defeatist” and of trying to save an indefensible European socioeconomic system. This criticism, I confess, hurts. And it hurts because it contains more than a kernel of truth.

I share the view that this European Union is typified by a large democratic deficit that, in combination with the denial of the faulty architecture of its monetary union, has put Europe’s peoples on a path to permanent recession. And I also bow to the criticism that I have campaigned on an agenda founded on the assumption that the left was, and remains, squarely defeated. I confess I would much rather be promoting a radical agenda, the raison d’être of which is to replace European capitalism with a different system.

Yet my aim here is instead to offer a window into my view of a repugnant European capitalism whose implosion, despite its many ills, should be avoided at all costs. It is a confession intended to convince radicals that we have a contradictory mission: to arrest the freefall of European capitalism in order to buy the time we need to formulate its alternative.

http://www.theguardian.com/news/2015/fe ... ic-marxist" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The article is a good read, isn't it? (Although I admit that, so far, I have only skimmed it.)

This bit particularly resonated at first read:

Every non-Marxist economic theory that treats human and non-human productive inputs as interchangeable assumes that the dehumanisation of human labour is complete. But if it could ever be completed, the result would be the end of capitalism as a system capable of creating and distributing value. For a start, a society of dehumanised automata would resemble a mechanical watch full of cogs and springs, each with its own unique function, together producing a “good”: timekeeping. Yet if that society contained nothing but other automata, timekeeping would not be a “good”. It would certainly be an “output” but why a “good”? Without real humans to experience the clock’s function, there can be no such thing as “good” or “bad”.

Good afternoon, everyone.

Edited to get my "in quotes" bit right. I hope.

Edited. Again. It's afternoon - not morning. Although you all already knew that, didn't you?

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 18 Feb, 2015 1:25 pm

We did PF. We did. Good day / night and morrow to you. We really don't mind.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Wed 18 Feb, 2015 1:29 pm

rebeccariots2 wrote:
Tom McTague retweeted
Peter Dominiczak ‏@peterdominiczak 55s56 seconds ago
Esther McVey asked whether she wants to be PM: "If I had to give a yes or a no, I'd say yes."
No words.

DWP posted one of their pat themselves on the back daily Tweets, and this morning's mentioned McVey.

I replied they'd do better in the polls if they gagged her.

ScarletGas · Post by **ScarletGas** » Wed 18 Feb, 2015 1:32 pm

AngryAsWell

Britain Elects ‏@britainelects · 3h3 hours ago
Latest YouGov poll (16 - 17 Feb):

LAB - 34% (+2)
CON - 33% (+1)
UKIP - 15% (-1)
GRN - 7% (-1)
LDEM - 6% (-)

I've spoken before about how I really don't trust the polls
Putting my tin foil hat on...
I'd go as far as to say they are fixed.
Fixed?? Why on earth??
Because that makes it easier to "explain" an inexplainable tory win in may. How could they possibly announce a tory "win" if they have consistently trailed badly in the pre election polls?

Anyway - taking tin hat off and back to reality..
I joined YouGov ages ago (over 2 years) and declared myself as a Labour voter. I have had fewer than 4 political polls over that time, and the last one came in after (day after - ironic or what) I missed off the Guardian and added the Sun to the papers I read (on a totally none political poll.)
My Granddaughter joined YouGov as a joke to get the "points" to earn a bit of cash. She's found out that as a Tory voter she gets a political poll every couple of weeks. Her boyfriend joined - again to earn some cash - and is a "virtual" kipper, he gets a poll a week, which he delights in filling in as a flipped out mad cap kipper.
My daughter joined shortly after me and - as a "tory" - has already collected a YouGov cash points reward and is on her way to the next, where as I'm just about coming up to my first cash reward total.
Kids - eh?
I do wonder what the criteria on who to send out political polls to actually is.

Had pretty much the same experience as yourself Angry as Well

Joined around 18 months ago,had one political survey,declared my affiliations then although received a lot of commercial surveys not one further connected to politics until around three months ago.

Having a marketing background I saw that the most recent one was a pretty blatant (and poor at that) attempt at leading left wing voters to criticise labour.A set of "when did you last stop beating your wife" questions which were open to wild interpretation by You Gov.

Complained at the nature of the survey and gave reasons why I felt it was poor and politically motivated.Guess what.... no reply just more commercial surveys which I ignore.

Whilst I would not go so far as to say fixed I certainly understand that asking questions of a carefully selected set of respondents in a push/pull fashion will get you the answers you want.

I cannot ignore who set this company up and whilst claiming no day to day involvement I'm sure a measure of influence still pervades.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Wed 18 Feb, 2015 1:33 pm

pk1 wrote:
rebeccariots2 wrote:
tom_watson ‏@tom_watson 40s41 seconds ago
The Telegraph has now confirmed the emails exist. Now David Cameron can review them: …
Blimey.
O

M

G

I know a lot of people don't like him, but Tom Watson reminds me of a terrier with a rat. Once he has a death grip, refuses to let go.

ScarletGas · Post by **ScarletGas** » Wed 18 Feb, 2015 1:40 pm

rebeccariots2 wrote:
Tory's U-turn over vow to return donation: High command accused of interfering to stop an MP handing back money from businessman accused of tax avoidance
Tory MP Charlotte Leslie pledged to return £5,000 given by Hugh Sloane
Tribunal had ruled his investment firm had operated tax avoidance scheme
But just hours later she retracted the promise to return millionaire's money
Questions raised over whether she had been pressured into the U-turn
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... ssman.html

Similar questions being asked relative to donations from the same source to Abingdon M.P Nicola Blackwood.

Post by **refitman** » Wed 18 Feb, 2015 1:42 pm

rebeccariots2 wrote:We did PF. We did. Good day / night and morrow to you. We really don't mind.

Another board I'm on has people from all over the world, so we generally say "good morn/even-ing/afternoon" and cover all the bases at once.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 18 Feb, 2015 1:43 pm

General Election preview: Sheffield Hallam
http://www.allthatsleft.co.uk/2015/02/g ... ld-hallam/

Interesting analysis of all the recent polls - and local election results - and other factors such as boundary changes, ward variations. The outcome predictions is however not the one most of us, including the author, would like.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 18 Feb, 2015 1:56 pm

Despite two democratic defeats, the Tories are STILL privatising our forests
http://voxpoliticalonline.com/

A must read. As is Mark Avery's original piece which is linked to.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 18 Feb, 2015 2:10 pm

Exclusive: Michael Dugher promises "public control" of railways under Labour
Shadow transport secretary toughens party's stance, vowing that "the public sector will be running sections of our rail network". http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/20 ... der-labour

To date, Labour has pledged to allow the public sector to compete with private companies for rail franchises as they expire. But Dugher suggests that the bidding process itself could be abandoned. "Privatisation was a disaster for the railways. I’m adamant about putting the whole franchising system, as it stands today, in the bin," he tells me. He adds: "The public sector will be running sections of our rail network as soon as we can do that".

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Wed 18 Feb, 2015 2:14 pm

rebeccariots2 wrote:
General Election preview: Sheffield Hallam
http://www.allthatsleft.co.uk/2015/02/g ... ld-hallam/
Interesting analysis of all the recent polls - and local election results - and other factors such as boundary changes, ward variations. The outcome predictions is however not the one most of us, including the author, would like.

I read that. Interesting, but the one thing they failed to include was the hate directed at the LibDems. They overlooked emotions. Voting Clegg out is a slap in the face for his party. It's a chance to wield a little power.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 18 Feb, 2015 2:14 pm

Finally, Dugher, renowned among Labour MPs for his singing abilities (“my party piece is probably ‘Come Fly With Me’”), offers his top karaoke tip: “You should always go to karaoke with Ed Balls because he doesn’t lack enthusiasm, it’s fair to say. You’ll always come across as a pretty decent singer if you go on just after Ed Balls. He’ll be a great Chancellor of Exchequer, he’s an enthusiastic karaoke performer but he’s not a great singer.”

Always entertaining.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Wed 18 Feb, 2015 2:19 pm

The way a quite small group of people move in and out of the top jobs stumps me when it comes to a description. I can only ever think of "incestuous."

gilsey · Post by **gilsey** » Wed 18 Feb, 2015 2:23 pm

Following on from scarletgas' comment on BBC News, just wanted to comment about Newsnight. I've taken to recording it and watching after mr gilsey's gone to bed, usually fast forward through the reporters segments and watch the interviews if they're interesting.

Last night:
Bishop of Manchester
Tim Montgomerie and Giles Fraser in the studio, Evan didn't have to do much
Paul Krugman on Greece
recorded interview with Richard Dawkins.

Some good stuff there, but some execrable snippets in between.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Wed 18 Feb, 2015 2:35 pm

rebeccariots2 wrote:
Finally, Dugher, renowned among Labour MPs for his singing abilities (“my party piece is probably ‘Come Fly With Me’”), offers his top karaoke tip: “You should always go to karaoke with Ed Balls because he doesn’t lack enthusiasm, it’s fair to say. You’ll always come across as a pretty decent singer if you go on just after Ed Balls. He’ll be a great Chancellor of Exchequer, he’s an enthusiastic karaoke performer but he’s not a great singer.”
Always entertaining.

That'll be the next headline - "Ed Balls' lack of singing ability makes him unfit to be Chancellor"

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Wed 18 Feb, 2015 2:36 pm

I'm always interested to see the newspaper weightings.

Newspaper Type unW Weighted
Express / Mail 249 220
Sun / Star 210 311
Mirror / Record 124 136
Guardian
/ Independent 148 68
FT / Times
/ Telegraph 96 124
Other Paper 200 178
No Paper 521 511

Maeght · Post by **Maeght** » Wed 18 Feb, 2015 2:37 pm

I also watched Newsnight last night and enjoyed the Paul Krugman interview

Paul Krugman was asked to give his opinion on the Greek Crisis. This can be found on YouTube :

" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

But that clip misses off the bit at the end. ( at about 26.14)

Evan Davies asks Paul Krugman ( who obviously didn’t expect it) to assess George Osborne's record, given that the economy has been growing for a couple of years.

Paul Krugman said that it's still a terrible policy. Osborne was hitting Britain's head with a baseball bat. Now he's stopped for a while and Britain is feeling better because he's not hitting it with the baseball bat at the moment. Not a successful policy.

Evan Davies didn't comment just thanked him.

pk1 · Post by **pk1** » Wed 18 Feb, 2015 2:58 pm

StephenDolan wrote:I'm always interested to see the newspaper weightings.

Newspaper Type unW Weighted
Express / Mail 249 220
Sun / Star 210 311
Mirror / Record 124 136
Guardian
/ Independent 148 68
FT / Times
/ Telegraph 96 124
Other Paper 200 178
No Paper 521 511

Some corking changes there Stephen !

I don't generally dis-believe the polls unless they are obvious outliers such as the ICM & TNS polls seen this week.

Scum weighted up 101 whilst Graun weighted down 80 ? Hopefully Anatoly can explain the reasoning behind this because from where I'm sitting, it looks like bending the numbers to satisfy a pre-determined outcome !

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Wed 18 Feb, 2015 3:10 pm

Well, the reasoning behind it is fairly simple - Sun/Star readers were under-represented compared to the GB voting population in the original sample, and Graun/Indy ones overstated. So the weightings are designed to correct that - on the face of it, fair enough.

There are problems, though - as a polling rule of thumb, the smaller a sample the less reliable it is; so quite often what is a skewed group of respondents in any case gets magnified (there is no doubt this has helped the Tories in some past YouGov surveys where Sun/Star readers are concerned)

And then there is the question of whether newspaper readership should be a major factor in selecting poll respondents anyway - given their sales drop almost by the week

ScarletGas · Post by **ScarletGas** » Wed 18 Feb, 2015 3:45 pm

gilsey wrote:Following on from scarletgas' comment on BBC News, just wanted to comment about Newsnight. I've taken to recording it and watching after mr gilsey's gone to bed, usually fast forward through the reporters segments and watch the interviews if they're interesting.

Last night:
Bishop of Manchester
Tim Montgomerie and Giles Fraser in the studio, Evan didn't have to do much
Paul Krugman on Greece
recorded interview with Richard Dawkins.

Some good stuff there, but some execrable snippets in between.

Did you see the Steve Hewlett snippet on Oborne?

Thought again concentrated narrowly on the effect on the Telegraph rather than the more fundamental issue.This may be diversionary tactics at play.

What,however can you expect when expect when media man is talking with media man.

Enjoyed the Krugman interview especially when asked about Osborne policies and not giving Evan Davis the answer he required

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Wed 18 Feb, 2015 3:48 pm

AnatolyKasparov wrote:Well, the reasoning behind it is fairly simple - Sun/Star readers were under-represented compared to the GB voting population in the original sample, and Graun/Indy ones overstated. So the weightings are designed to correct that - on the face of it, fair enough.

There are problems, though - as a polling rule of thumb, the smaller a sample the less reliable it is; so quite often what is a skewed group of respondents in any case gets magnified (there is no doubt this has helped the Tories in some past YouGov surveys where Sun/Star readers are concerned)

And then there is the question of whether newspaper readership should be a major factor in selecting poll respondents anyway - given their sales drop almost by the week

When these paper sponsored polls take place for YouGov, do they typically have any input into the methodology regarding weightings, format of questions etc or is it for YouGov to decide?

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Wed 18 Feb, 2015 3:50 pm

ScarletGas wrote:
gilsey wrote:Following on from scarletgas' comment on BBC News, just wanted to comment about Newsnight. I've taken to recording it and watching after mr gilsey's gone to bed, usually fast forward through the reporters segments and watch the interviews if they're interesting.

Last night:
Bishop of Manchester
Tim Montgomerie and Giles Fraser in the studio, Evan didn't have to do much
Paul Krugman on Greece
recorded interview with Richard Dawkins.

Some good stuff there, but some execrable snippets in between.
Did you see the Steve Hewlett snippet on Oborne?

Thought again concentrated narrowly on the effect on the Telegraph rather than the more fundamental issue.This may be diversionary tactics at play.

What,however can you expect when expect when media man is talking with media man.

Enjoyed the Krugman interview especially when asked about Osborne policies and not giving Evan Davis the answer he required

Krugman references Osborne fairly regularly in his NYTimes column. Always chuckle inducing.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Wed 18 Feb, 2015 3:56 pm

The Mirror story on Ben Elton's renewed support for the Labour party is excellent.
I'm at a loss how to answer the question positioned within the article:

Should people living in expensive homes pay mansion tax? YES or NO?

When the people living in expensive homes decide to sell their dwelling, payment of the mansion tax is done upon the the sale of the home, isn't that correct? Is there another mansion tax levied at people living in expensive homes called 'mansion tax'? I think it's important to be clear.

I don't live in an expensive home & I probably won't have to pay a mansion tax. I want it understood, however, that I will treat everyone with the courtesy, honesty & fairness I ask to be treated with for myself & family. The correct answer isn't an available option given the question asked. It's not a big deal. I'll be happy to pay the mansion tax & will do so when or if the time comes for me to pay it. I have that in common with Mr. Elton. He's willing to do this too though my willingness is theoretical at this time.

The story was moving & I like a good Mirror article. I'm not familiar with a lot of Mr. Elton's work. He's seems a good man. I'm sorry he feels the oppression he expresses regarding his monetary success. Especially the home in London. It's not his fault the home he owns there quadrupled in value. I like him for feeling this, knowing assets, money, wealth & work aren't necessarily connected with each other. Wealth is now abstracted from worth or work too often.

London real estate values skyrocketing seem to be a sort of act of god or something. Except they're not an act of god. It's an act of what? Whatever it is, human beings can choose to change it. We can change our relationship with existing home values if we want to collectively do that action in the interests of the common good. For the good of society as a whole. Choosing to build housing infrastructure in creative, sustainable ways in that part of our country in particular, for example, will have an affect on real estate values in London.

Exciting, good work can be done to benefit the 64+ million people currently living in the UK, you know? Implementing those ideas to give everyone a shot at achieving their best isn't just a left wing idea, is it? How can it be? It's in my best interests, it's almost a selfishness in me, to encourage & work for some smart young person to find their way into one of the best medical schools in the UK in order to complement our destinies. My life will be saved by that young person, for example.

But not if Tories are returned to government. Tories know even less now than prior generations of Tories how to make civilisation functional.

Twenty years from now, Mr. Elton will be face to face with a young person with a baseball bat smashing into his house with nothing left to lose because society was left to die years before. Mr. Elton mentioned that hypothetical scene in the Mirror piece. Mr. Elton is supporting the Labour party by becoming a member of the Labour party again after years of not being in the party. That's more valuable to me than money, but I know money has a place too. Mr. Elton has generously given the Labour party money to help pay at least a living wage to a worker, for example, helping to create 80 page Labour party policy documents & linking those communications to accessible places on the Internet so people can see what a Labour government will do & what the Labour party has already accomplished.

Some people are so insightful, loving & they teach me a lot.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Wed 18 Feb, 2015 4:06 pm

StephenDolan wrote:
AnatolyKasparov wrote:Well, the reasoning behind it is fairly simple - Sun/Star readers were under-represented compared to the GB voting population in the original sample, and Graun/Indy ones overstated. So the weightings are designed to correct that - on the face of it, fair enough.

There are problems, though - as a polling rule of thumb, the smaller a sample the less reliable it is; so quite often what is a skewed group of respondents in any case gets magnified (there is no doubt this has helped the Tories in some past YouGov surveys where Sun/Star readers are concerned)

And then there is the question of whether newspaper readership should be a major factor in selecting poll respondents anyway - given their sales drop almost by the week
When these paper sponsored polls take place for YouGov, do they typically have any input into the methodology regarding weightings, format of questions etc or is it for YouGov to decide?

I have no idea, tbh - you could always go over to UKPR and ask Anthony Wells that

pk1 · Post by **pk1** » Wed 18 Feb, 2015 4:09 pm

AnatolyKasparov wrote:
StephenDolan wrote:
AnatolyKasparov wrote:Well, the reasoning behind it is fairly simple - Sun/Star readers were under-represented compared to the GB voting population in the original sample, and Graun/Indy ones overstated. So the weightings are designed to correct that - on the face of it, fair enough.

There are problems, though - as a polling rule of thumb, the smaller a sample the less reliable it is; so quite often what is a skewed group of respondents in any case gets magnified (there is no doubt this has helped the Tories in some past YouGov surveys where Sun/Star readers are concerned)

And then there is the question of whether newspaper readership should be a major factor in selecting poll respondents anyway - given their sales drop almost by the week
When these paper sponsored polls take place for YouGov, do they typically have any input into the methodology regarding weightings, format of questions etc or is it for YouGov to decide?
I have no idea, tbh - you could always go over to UKPR and ask Anthony Wells that

I asked that question some months back but Mr Wells ignored it

gilsey · Post by **gilsey** » Wed 18 Feb, 2015 4:11 pm

ScarletGas wrote:Did you see the Steve Hewlett snippet on Oborne?

Thought again concentrated narrowly on the effect on the Telegraph rather than the more fundamental issue.This may be diversionary tactics at play.

What,however can you expect when expect when media man is talking with media man.

Enjoyed the Krugman interview especially when asked about Osborne policies and not giving Evan Davis the answer he required

You may be doing Evan a disservice there, I suspect he did get the answer he expected.

Agree about Hewlett.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 18 Feb, 2015 4:22 pm

: Isis Lures Women with Kittens.jpg (45.72 KiB) Viewed 10661 times

Robert Hutton retweeted
Louisa Loveluck ‏@leloveluck 1h1 hour ago
Exactly the sort of dirty trick nice girls like me always fall for. ON MY GUARD.

First Fox News now CNN seems to have a very dubious grip on reality ... or are they correct ?

ScarletGas · Post by **ScarletGas** » Wed 18 Feb, 2015 4:23 pm

gilsey wrote:
ScarletGas wrote:Did you see the Steve Hewlett snippet on Oborne?

Thought again concentrated narrowly on the effect on the Telegraph rather than the more fundamental issue.This may be diversionary tactics at play.

What,however can you expect when expect when media man is talking with media man.

Enjoyed the Krugman interview especially when asked about Osborne policies and not giving Evan Davis the answer he required
You may be doing Evan a disservice there, I suspect he did get the answer he expected.

Agree about Hewlett.

Probably right there.Wouldn't want to do Evan a disservice!

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Wed 18 Feb, 2015 4:31 pm

Have we had this one?

Ian retweeted
Mike Smithson ‏@MSmithsonPB 8 hrs8 hours ago
New TNS poll
LAB 35% (+2),
CON 28% (+1),
UKIP 18% (0),
GREEN 7%
LIB DEM 6% (0),

ErnstRemarx · Post by **ErnstRemarx** » Wed 18 Feb, 2015 4:36 pm

AnatolyKasparov wrote:No mention of Bristol W, then - now considered by some informed observers to have overtaken Norwich S as their best prospect of a second Green seat.

That omission doesn't make me so confident about the rest of their "analysis".

I concur. I do find it odd that there's even talk of a Green MP in East Anglia, given that it appears to be the most unsophisticated elecorate in the UK (thinking of Lincolnshire here, mainly, plus the various seaside towns that have gone to seed over the years, and are potentially UKIP bait). Perhaps Norwich really is more sophisticated than I give it credit for.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Wed 18 Feb, 2015 4:39 pm

Is this breaking news? Didn't see it on Twitter. Cameron has agreed to a TV debate because the broadcasters revised the plans.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Wed 18 Feb, 2015 4:44 pm

AnatolyKasparov wrote:Well, the reasoning behind it is fairly simple - Sun/Star readers were under-represented compared to the GB voting population in the original sample, and Graun/Indy ones overstated. So the weightings are designed to correct that - on the face of it, fair enough.

There are problems, though - as a polling rule of thumb, the smaller a sample the less reliable it is; so quite often what is a skewed group of respondents in any case gets magnified (there is no doubt this has helped the Tories in some past YouGov surveys where Sun/Star readers are concerned)

And then there is the question of whether newspaper readership should be a major factor in selecting poll respondents anyway - given their sales drop almost by the week

Thank you, AK.

Lord Ashcroft published that poll putting Labour 8 points up - how long ago was that? A year or something? Yes, his methodology is published, I know, but looking at his work then I asked myself, 'how am I going feel when this Tory lord publishes something else less congenial to my desired outcome?'. I'm biased against Tories, I think. I never doubted there'd come a time he'd publish out liars later on. And so it happened. I'll never trust his work again after his amateur mistakes over Doncaster North.

In the new biography about Nye Bevan, the author goes into some detail about Bevan's state of mind & feelings about Tories after having made the 'lower than vermin' reference in his speech. At no point did Bevan say or write that any one individual who happened to be a Tory were 'lower than vermin'. He was specifically referring to the club that is the Tory party. Bevan said, lying is a regular Tory party tactic, for example. He was sure amongst themselves & with non-Tories under different circumstances, people who happened to be Tories, regularly told the truth & acted with integrity.

I've pondered this for months now. I've thought about political parties, clubs, groups formed over the ages & sure enough, some groups adopt behaviours, perform actions & have goals I can't support & find repugnant. I'm uninterested in 'monstering' a group of people for sport (if I've done that in my life, 'monstered' a group, it's likely to have been a defense mechanism I'd used in order to feel less powerless against a group I'm afraid of). I've wanted to communicate this with you all here for as long as I've been evaluating myself, my political allegiances, Nye Bevan & his history.

Tory values - Conservative values. What are they? What does this political group stand for? What are their accomplishments as a political party?