Friday 1st May

[tinyclanger2]

But having and using leverage does not equal having anyone else's interests at heart

Neither does it mean they don't.

We are in a ludicrous situation where the rest of the country is using the SNP as the kind of football they've used Westminster as, when it suited them. If the people of Scotland choose to vote SNP and elect SNP MPs to Westminster and make them the third biggest party, then those MPs have every right to be heard. It would be undemocratic to deny their voices, especially to try and further our own partial agenda.

i detest the SNP - hate them and think they are as blue as the Tories and as shortsighted as the Kippers. Democracy doesn't change because I dislike their choice, though. *sigh*

I don't disagree with you - at all. Am just hoping that what Sturgeon wants, is not what Scotland as a whole wants. And that if it's not they realise it in time. I am simply finding it hard to believe that Sturgeon gives a flying one, about the people of Scotland any more than Cameron does about the people England, Scotland, the UK or anywhere else.

[TheGrimSqueaker]

Isn't the point not whether he convinced her but whether he sounded convincing to everyone else?

I don't know, you tell me? It was an ambush question, yes he should have answered it better, but you've had 24 hours to come up with an answer and still can't.

That question was unanswerable. It is an integral part of the Big Lie and, you're right, that boil should have been lanced years ago; but firstly is a touch tricky to do that when the entirety of the MSM are perpetuating it the myth, secondly I doubt anybody with any degree of political sophistication believes it anyway (including Ms Shuttleworth) and thirdly anybody outside of that Bubble is unlikely to give the proverbial toss.

And, yes, of course it matters that she was a plant, if only because it proves I'm right with 'firstly'.

An ambush? In an election campaign? An ambush that followed the exact same attack line that had been used every day? If only someone could have seen it coming... oh. Erm. right.

The whole point of seeking election is you either can answer the question or you find a way to get away with not answering it. Whether I have that skill only matters if I'm the leader - and, away from the diversion, the real question is whether Ed Miliband manged it. It is disappointing he didn't, given that the two biggest and most obvious bombs he has to diffuse are the crap economy prop and the crap economy question. If you think the non-answer is less disappointing because some other people who aren't him also can't answer it, then you're welcome to a very cheap form of consolation. The front bench of the Labour party have spent five years not fighting a narrative they now can't answer. That is a tragedy regardless of who challenges them on it.

it matters to the reputation of the Tories if they planted her. But that's a different question entirely to whether the question was answered well in the view of those who don't already support Ed Miliband. I know a lot of people who've said, "yes, but I don't care who she is, why can't he answer the question?" If Ed had answered it, no one would care. A lot of people in Labour only care who she is because a very predictable ambush was very badly handled.

It's not the biggest issue. And as it is, I think the question's crap. But that doesn't mean Labour can convince people who aren't me without being able to look like they can handle it. And all the "she is a one of them" doesn't change that.

Where did I say I was happy with the non-answer? I seem to recall saying that I thought he should have answered it better, but then provided reasons why I thought it might not be possible. And considering you think this isn't the biggest issue it does seem to be getting you a touch animated.

I know a lot of people who've said, "yes, but I don't care who she is, why can't he answer the question?"

Yes, of course you do and so do I; but, as I said above, that is because they have that degree of political sophistication which is why the question engages them. To the average Jo(e) on the streets it means diddly squat, and it will have precisely zero impact on what happens in the polling booths next Thursday.

[tinyclanger2]

Dr Éoin Clarke ‏@LabourEoin 4 hrs4 hours ago
Last 4 political polls are.

Panel Base - Labour lead 2%
YouGov - Labour lead 1%
Populus - Tory & Labour level
Survation - Labour lead by 2%

Thanks Ohso - really appreciate all your updates on this stuff.

[onebuttonmonkey]

But having and using leverage does not equal having anyone else's interests at heart

Neither does it mean they don't.

We are in a ludicrous situation where the rest of the country is using the SNP as the kind of football they've used Westminster as, when it suited them. If the people of Scotland choose to vote SNP and elect SNP MPs to Westminster and make them the third biggest party, then those MPs have every right to be heard. It would be undemocratic to deny their voices, especially to try and further our own partial agenda.

i detest the SNP - hate them and think they are as blue as the Tories and as shortsighted as the Kippers. Democracy doesn't change because I dislike their choice, though. *sigh*

I don't disagree with you - at all. Am just hoping that what Sturgeon wants, is not what Scotland as a whole wants. And that if it's not they realise it in time. I am simply finding it hard to believe that Sturgeon gives a flying one, about the people of Scotland any more than Cameron does about the people England, Scotland, the UK or anywhere else.

Like you, I hope she does but I don't believe she does either - I think an awful lot of Scottish voters believe she does, though (unlike English voters think of Cameron). That's why this whole anti-SNP gibberish is so damaging to the country, rather than to any one party.

[TheGrimSqueaker]

Anyway, time for me to blow this popsicle stand. I know some don't like us to stray from politics here, and especially don't like music videos; but there are some events that just need to be marked. And, to be honest, the lyrics aren't entirely inappropriate.

Good night all. And good night Ben E King, thanks for all the good times.

[youtube]dTd2ylacYNU[/youtube]

[ohsocynical]

Duncan Hall ‏@doktordunc 8 hrs8 hours ago
@cravencollege mock election results.

Lab 30%
Con 22%
Green 19%
UKIP 19%
Lib Dem 4%
Spoilt 5%

Interesting....

[onebuttonmonkey]

I don't know, you tell me? It was an ambush question, yes he should have answered it better, but you've had 24 hours to come up with an answer and still can't.

That question was unanswerable. It is an integral part of the Big Lie and, you're right, that boil should have been lanced years ago; but firstly is a touch tricky to do that when the entirety of the MSM are perpetuating it the myth, secondly I doubt anybody with any degree of political sophistication believes it anyway (including Ms Shuttleworth) and thirdly anybody outside of that Bubble is unlikely to give the proverbial toss.

And, yes, of course it matters that she was a plant, if only because it proves I'm right with 'firstly'.

An ambush? In an election campaign? An ambush that followed the exact same attack line that had been used every day? If only someone could have seen it coming... oh. Erm. right.

The whole point of seeking election is you either can answer the question or you find a way to get away with not answering it. Whether I have that skill only matters if I'm the leader - and, away from the diversion, the real question is whether Ed Miliband manged it. It is disappointing he didn't, given that the two biggest and most obvious bombs he has to diffuse are the crap economy prop and the crap economy question. If you think the non-answer is less disappointing because some other people who aren't him also can't answer it, then you're welcome to a very cheap form of consolation. The front bench of the Labour party have spent five years not fighting a narrative they now can't answer. That is a tragedy regardless of who challenges them on it.

it matters to the reputation of the Tories if they planted her. But that's a different question entirely to whether the question was answered well in the view of those who don't already support Ed Miliband. I know a lot of people who've said, "yes, but I don't care who she is, why can't he answer the question?" If Ed had answered it, no one would care. A lot of people in Labour only care who she is because a very predictable ambush was very badly handled.

It's not the biggest issue. And as it is, I think the question's crap. But that doesn't mean Labour can convince people who aren't me without being able to look like they can handle it. And all the "she is a one of them" doesn't change that.

Where did I say I was happy with the non-answer? I seem to recall saying that I thought he should have answered it better, but then provided reasons why I thought it might not be possible. And considering you think this isn't the biggest issue it does seem to be getting you a touch animated.

I know a lot of people who've said, "yes, but I don't care who she is, why can't he answer the question?"

Yes, of course you do and so do I; but, as I said above, that is because they have that degree of political sophistication which is why the question engages them. To the average Jo(e) on the streets it means diddly squat, and it will have precisely zero impact on what happens in the polling booths next Thursday.

I'm only as animated as the person asking me to defend my points..

Regardless, this is the problem:

"it will have precisely zero impact on what happens in the polling booths next Thursday"

I couldn't disagree more. The fact (front bench) Labour don't seem to have (convincing) answers to the accusations about the economy is exactly hurting them at the polls next Thursday. The ambush adds to that impression, whoever ambushed whom and however much she's remembered after. The failure to tackle the narrative that it's a small part of is huge, horrifyingly and dangerously potent, still. If Cameron ends up being in government again it will be the false economy that puts him there more than any other issue, that's how much it hurts.

It angers me because those slurs about economic malpractice and incompetence are based on lies - but then, what's the point in us knowing that if people haven't been persuaded of it? And that's why the larger issue matters and what animates me beyond that one question - it should be handled better by the leader of the opposition. It's also why it doesn't matter who asks the question when Labour don't answer it, which was my only initial point.

[rebeccariots2]

Iain Martin ‏@iainmartin1 10m10 minutes ago
The nutty Nat anti-Labour demo in Glasgow is bizarre. They are demonstrating against a party they want to put in power next week.

I know these protestors aren't representative of all the SNP ... or I seriously hope they're not ... but the tweets I've now seen from various people attending the rally have actually shocked me about the level of anger and aggressive behaviour. Take a look at James Cook's twitter. This is just nasty out of control stuff. I'd like Sturgeon to make an announcement that disassociates the SNP from such behaviour and discourages it. Miliband asked for better, respectful behaviour when a Labour audience heckled the press - and it was the right thing to do.

[mikems]

I think Labour's strategy regarding the economic crisis and its results is that they want to focus on the future and not let the election campaign get bogged down on territory that they ceded long ago and that they have little chance of winning back. And if they did, what would they gain, in reality? So, they try to focus attention on the future; the apologies on various points is an indication that they don't want to talk about the more awkward aspects of the past at all. And why not? They are the opposition and don't need to defend their past record, they need to put this lot under the spotlight, and they've done a good job at that, imo.

[onebuttonmonkey]

Iain Martin ‏@iainmartin1 10m10 minutes ago
The nutty Nat anti-Labour demo in Glasgow is bizarre. They are demonstrating against a party they want to put in power next week.

I know these protestors aren't representative of all the SNP ... or I seriously hope they're not ... but the tweets I've now seen from various people attending the rally have actually shocked me about the level of anger and aggressive behaviour. Take a look at James Cook's twitter. This is just nasty out of control stuff. I'd like Sturgeon to make an announcement that disassociates the SNP from such behaviour and discourages it. Miliband asked for better, respectful behaviour when a Labour audience heckled the press - and it was the right thing to do.

Nationalism seems to help people feel they have permission to vent some really bitter, vicious anger. UKIP and the SNP may hate different targets, but the toxic mix of victimhood and bullying exhibited by their loudest extremities looks identical bar a few nouns.

The SNP have done a hugely successful job of co-opting people's dissatisfaction. It can only be a matter of time before the true colours of those doing the co-opting becomes more apparent - or before the newer members eclipse those with the kind of views you're rightly appalled by.

[LadyCentauria]

Rob Freeman ‏@RobFreeman 4m4 minutes ago
.@bbcnews just stated that Kathryn Shuttleworth signed the "Vote tory" small business letter yet is still undecided. Gullible, or bias?

And there's yet more confusion. Kathryn Shuttleworth is a Senior Audio Supervisor for the BBC – whereas Catherine Shuttleworth is the woman from Savvy Marketing who signed the letter...

[gilsey]

It angers me because those slurs about economic malpractice and incompetence are based on lies - but then, what's the point in us knowing that if people haven't been persuaded of it?

It angers me too, but I've long since come to accept that Labour are on a hiding to nothing trying to answer it. They've used a couple of decent soundbites, but anything longer than a soundbite isn't going to be reported by the MSM and won't get through to a large minority of the electorate - those same people who think the economy's improving, and maybe the government should get the credit. They don't understand even the most basic principles of economics, mainly because they've never tried, or seen the need to try.

[ohsocynical]

Mike Smithson ‏@MSmithsonPB 6h6 hours ago

Nearly a quarter of CON voters in E Renfrewshire look set to switch to LAB to block SNP
@LordAshcroft

[LadyCentauria]

Dr Éoin Clarke ‏@LabourEoin 4 hrs4 hours ago
Last 4 political polls are.

Panel Base - Labour lead 2%
YouGov - Labour lead 1%
Populus - Tory & Labour level
Survation - Labour lead by 2%

That's a timely reminder. Well, a timely reminder for me not to get hung up on Ashcroft's marginal polls with the stupid way the questions were posed. "In the event of a new General Election..." and "If there were a General Election tomorrow..."

Fer fucksakes, Ashcroft, we've known the exact date of the General Election for years. In fact, ever since the party you've given to so generously over the years (the one that got you a peerage) passed a law about parliaments lasting 5 bloody years; and still you can't poll on the question of "In the General Election on 7th May 2015..." but stick to questions that must have really original when you and your organisation first came up with them but just sound more and more bloody stupid as we approach the date we've all known about for – oh bollocks to it! /rant

And

[Spacedone]

I guess crossover is cancelled for another day...

Mike Smithson ‏@MSmithsonPB 3s3 seconds ago
The YouGov numbers
CON 33%, LAB 34%, LD 8%, UKIP 14%, GRN 5%

[AnatolyKasparov]

Five polls since that MORI effort that caused some to proclaim "crossover" - and no Tory leads.

[tinyclanger2]

[quote="joshua searle-white in book "they psychology of nationalism"]Nationalism and other forms of group identity underlie many of the destructive conflicts the world is experiencing today. Particularly puzzling in such conflicts is their tenacity and viciousness. Why do people cling to conflicts that are damaging them? Why are the feelings involved so vehement and intense? Understanding the fragile nature of individual and group identity, and how people perceive threats to identity, can answer these questions. By analyzing nationalism in Quebec, Armenia and Azerbaijan, and Sri Lanka, this book shows that addressing the psychological dimensions of nationalism can help us understand, and perhaps to intervene successfully in, nationalist and ethnic conflicts.[/quote]http://www.palgrave.com/page/detail/the ... 0312233693

Bit old (2002) but maybe still interesting.

[adam]

Five polls since that MORI effort that caused some to proclaim "crossover" - and no Tory leads.

Screen Shot 2015-05-01 at 22.45.20.png (109.35 KiB) Viewed 7841 times

Mike Smithson posted an interesting thing this morning - a note of all the Tory/Labour YouGov figures through the campaign. Labour are remarkably consisting on 34/35 with the conservatives more regularly hitting 33 - it's a daily poll trend that seems to show things extremely close but with Labour edging it.

[RogerOThornhill]

Wow, the Guardian leader on supporting Labour now has 4,286 comments. I'd say about 2,500 are from bitter Tories and LibDems angry that they're not backing Cameron or Clegg...

As an aside, I don't think it's been obvious up until a couple of weeks ago when there was a very guarded "Labour might be the one" comment at the end of an editorial.

Forget the columnists - for every Owen Jones taken on there's a Matthew d'Ancona - they can take whatever line they want. It's the political journalists that have to toe the paper's political standpoint and Messrs Wintour, Watt, and yes, at times Sparrow have hardly been Labour;'s best friend.

So yes, it did come as a (very welcome) surprise. As i said I'd expected a "LibDem as long as they support Labour" but not Labour outright.

[TechnicalEphemera]

Five polls since that MORI effort that caused some to proclaim "crossover" - and no Tory leads.

Very interesting, I was expecting a small Tory bounce post media coverage of the question time rubbish. However seems not.

Labour needs to continue repeating.

End bedroom tax end non doms, rental market reform. Decency, fairness.

90 billion Tory cuts, end of tax credits, end of child benefit up to 300 pounds a month worse off for families.

Cameron - career obsessed football fraud, you cant trust him.

Pretty much every time they speak on the TV or radio about anything.

Why? Because people who feel they will lose out financially vote. The door is open, let's have it.

[rebeccariots2]

Daniel Boffey ‏@DanielBoffey 25m25 minutes ago
Completely convinced that ed miliband has ruled out a coalition with lib dems and the lib dems have ruled out a coalition with labour.

[rebeccariots2]

Faisal Islam ‏@faisalislam 14m14 minutes ago
That Milibrand interview at 938,663 views, and 579,726 for the trailer. more than c4n and newsnight combined...

[TechnicalEphemera]

Daniel Boffey ‏@DanielBoffey 25m25 minutes ago
Completely convinced that ed miliband has ruled out a coalition with lib dems and the lib dems have ruled out a coalition with labour.

I think this is a bit unlikely in a couple of scenarios. First, let us assume a really big Labour victory but short of a majority by say 7. In this scenario (which is unlikely) Clegg has gone, Alexander has gone (under any scenario), Cable must also be questionable as well.

Now if the Lib Dems offered confidence and supply, or possibly a coalition they would be able to say clearly that their 15 MPs had ensured stability and held back the nationalist tide. Under those circumstances the common good probably pushes them into government.

In the second scenario, no party can secure a majority, a good result for the Tories but not a great one. Tories+LD would fall short, Labour + SNP minority would also fall short. The only real option would be Labour + Lib Dem to avoid a second immediate election. Again even Clegg might be pushed to confidence and supply in the national interest.