Thought Id start this one going because its rather dead on this board at the moment and I suppose all my usual muckers are either at the Stella tennis event watching Dim Tim (lose again) or at Henly Regatta eating cucumber sandwiches (they wish,...NOT).

Anyway please feel free to just talk to yourself blast away and let it go on any company or subject you wish. Just wish Id thought of this one before.

cheers GF.

Ukip has divided the left, not the right, and cut Labour off from its 'old' support

Labour and Ukip voters agree on more economic issues than you might think, presenting a strategic problem for Ed Miliband


Robert Ford and Matthew Goodwin


theguardian.com, Friday 16 May 2014 11.00 BST

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/may/16/ukip-divided-left-right-cut-labour-support



Ukip leader Nigel Farage … ‘Old left voters retain a strong distrust of Labour’s middle-class elites after decades of feeling ignored as New Labour chased the middle-class swing vote.' Photograph: John Stillwell/PA




According to conventional wisdom, Ukip has "divided the right". By targeting Europe, immigration and politicians in Westminster, Nigel Farage is tearing off a section of the Conservative base that David Cameron desperately needs if he is to triumph in 2015.

But while it is true that Ukip is currently winning over most of its support from people who voted Conservative in 2010, this actually tells us less than commentators often claim.

In 2010 Labour was at a low ebb, Gordon Brown was extremely unpopular and traditional Labour voters were angry about immigration and the financial crisis. Defining "the right" as 2010 Conservative voters is therefore risky. A lot of those who voted Conservative in 2010 may not have been natural Conservatives at all, backing Cameron despite their misgivings about his party, as a vote against a failed and unpopular Labour government.

A more sensible way of defining left and right is in ideological terms. Ever since Clement Attlee's 1945 Labour victory, British politics has been structured around a conflict over the economy and the proper role of the state.

The left has favoured higher taxation, redistribution and greater state intervention. The right has favoured free markets, low taxes and a small state. This is still a central dividing line today.

Ed Miliband's most celebrated policy announcement called for state regulation of gas and electricity prices, and he has shown a distrust of big business, and a desire for greater taxation of the rich, and greater government help for the less well-off. The Conservatives, meanwhile, retain their traditional faith in free markets and private enterprise.

If Ukip is just dividing the right then we would expect to see Ukip voters falling consistently on the Conservative side of this longstanding divide. But as our chart below shows (based on new data from the British Election Study), the opposite is in fact true.





An average of 71% of Ukip voters agree with five leftwing ideological statements, far above the Conservatives (43%) or even the Liberal Democrats (65%). They are only a little behind Labour (81%).

When Ed Miliband argues that big business takes advantage of ordinary people, employees on zero-hour contracts are being exploited by management, that the rich exempt themselves from the rules that apply to others, and that ordinary workers are not benefitting from a recovery for the rich, Ukip voters agree with him. On these core economic issues, Farage and Ukip do not divide the right. They divide the left.




This raises an obvious but also awkward question for progressives. If Ukip's struggling, pessimistic and left-behind voters find these economic messages appealing, why are they supporting Farage, not Miliband?

The problem for Labour is that these voters no longer think about politics in general, or Labour in particular, in economic terms. Labour has encouraged this: New Labour played down traditional leftwing ideology in favour of social liberalism and pragmatic centrism. Now many voters with longstanding "old left" economic values associate Labour more with "new left" social liberalism: feminism, multiculturalism and support for immigration.

Ukip's rise has exposed this division on the left and made it harder to heal. Many of the "new left" voters attracted to Labour by its social liberalism cannot stomach Ukip voters' strong opposition to immigration, which they regard as an expression of ignorance and prejudice, and so refuse to engage with "old left" voters on the economic issues where the two groups share common ground.

Conversely, "old left" voters retain a strong distrust of Labour's middle-class elites, after decades of feeling ignored and marginalised as New Labour chased the middle-class swing vote, and cannot abide lectures from privileged "new left" activists about the virtues of immigration and diversity.

Tony Blair's winning recipe in 1997 was to bury the traditional "old left" Labour ideology, gambling that he could expand Labour's coalition without losing traditional support, as the voters who endorsed it had nowhere else to go. Nigel Farage's rise has made this Blairite balancing act impossible. Ukip has divided the left, splitting the old from the new, and cutting Labour off from struggling voters it seeks to champion.

Natal vs Murray starting on Sky Sports 3

Another one for you to duck Haystack.

I thought you would have liked it, being as it's from the people's daily :-)

Do you mean the 'silly peoples' daily

Or

The silly 'people's daily'?

That was the Guardian Haystack, the veritable holy book of the left.


And it's speaking heresy.... :-)

I need to pick someones brains.If on transactions on buys and sells a sell of 350,000,000 is closely followed by another sell of 350,000,000 but with a minus against it what does this mean.Also not a one off its also followed by several more during the course of the day.Would be gratefull for anyones help thankyou.

What stock was that on and when?

It looks like a correction.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/general-election-2015/10838376/European-elections-Tories-leap-ahead-of-Ukip.html

European elections: Tories leap ahead of Ukip
David Cameron's Conservatives have overtaken Ukip and are now in second place behind Labour in the latest ICM/Telegraph European election poll, as voters prepare to cast their ballots on Thursday

The Conservatives have overtaken the UK Independence Party in the polls ahead of this week’s European Parliament elections.

The Tories are now in second place behind Labour in the contest to elect MEPs across Britain on Thursday, according to ICM/Sunday Telegraph results.

Labour is still in first place, but down one point to 29 per cent, the Conservatives are up four points to 26 per cent and Ukip has dropped two points to 25 per cent. The Liberal Democrats are on 7 per cent.

Martin Boon, director of ICM Research, said the volatile polling in recent weeks showed the European elections were wide open.

“Usually, polls give a pretty clear picture of what’s going to happen at any major election. Not so here. Labour could win, as could the Tories, or maybe Ukip,” he said.

ICM’s separate Wisdom Index poll put the Tories on 31.4 per cent, to Labour’s 30.7 per cent.

The slim lead of 0.7 points follows two polls last week which showed David Cameron’s party with a two-point advantage over Labour, his first poll lead since 2012.

The Liberal Democrats are on 15.1 per cent in the latest ICM results, ahead of the UK Independence Party on 13.4 per cent.

Trends and changes in the Wisdom Index ratings, which ask respondents to predict the next election result, tend to be less dramatic than conventional polls, which ask individuals how they personally intend to vote.

However, a clear pattern has emerged of declining support for Labour in recent weeks.

The previous ICM/Sunday Telegraph Wisdom Index survey, published on May 4, showed Labour’s lead cut to just one point. It has now disappeared.

Did someone mention leaping Tories?

UKIP will poll must votes in the Euro's

Voters are not going to put up with this anymore

Asylum seekers are put in 4-star hotels - at the cost of £900,000 from taxpayers

ASYLUM seekers have been secretly housed in luxury hotels at a cost to taxpayers of £900,000.

What a load of desperate bollox in that torygraph article:


Martin Boon, director of ICM Research, said the volatile polling in recent weeks showed the European elections were wide open.

“Usually, polls give a pretty clear picture of what’s going to happen at any major election. Not so here. Labour could win, as could the Tories, or maybe Ukip,” he said.

or maybe Ukip,” he said , in other words he hasn't a clue. But we all know UKIP are going to win.

The point being made was that it is anybody's election.

my major concern with ukip and their meps, and no one has gainsaid this, is that once elected they contribute absolutely zero to any debate, but merely fill their wallets with tax-free salary and expenses

therefore, without being party-biased about it, what on earth is the point of voting for ukip at all other than as a protest vote to proclaim that "i want out" regardless and without any further debate on the matter

cynic
I agree. It is completely pointless to vote for UKIP in the EU election. All it will do is decrease our influence in Europe. This is particularly pointless as even if we get a referendum, it looks like the public will vote to stay in.

It is not pointless to vote for UKIP in the MEP EU election.

UKIP are the only party who want us out of the EU.

The Lib Dems are 'pro Europe' and happy to continue as we are

The Tories are also happy for us to stay in and are happy to keep on trying to renegotiate a better position for us. Not that they seem to be any good at doing it. Indeed, the Tories and Lib Dems between them seem powerless to do anything about EU immigration laws, which currently give unlimited EU immigration into the UK without any ceiling. (How Stupid!). Furthermore, 75% of our laws are created in Brussels without us being able to do anything about it. (How stupid!)

Voting for UKIP sends the 'clearest message' any voter can think of to say "Enough". We want some stronger say in our governance whilst we are members of the EU. The current government isn't giving us it and we are telling you guys, "We want massive changes or even out of the EU".

Now, when it comes to voting in the General Election, a vote for UKIP is, for the moment apparently utterly pointless. The party don't even have any MPs or even any candidates. One might be coming along to take a position in the Commons from the Newark bi-election. However, this candidate will have to overturn a 16,000 Tory majority to get elected. If that candidate wins he will be a lone UKIP voice in the commons and will only have the position until the next General Election. This is not a good £5 bet.

In the GE the Tories (led by David Cameron) promise a Referendum. From some viewpoints, Cameron has reneged on the doing of this Referendum and might do so again.

Importantly, will he renege again if he gets a massive message from the electorate who give a massive vote to UKIP, in the MEP elections? Most UKIP voters think he will not renege on giving us this Referendum. And, when we get it, it will be 'touch and go' as to whether we vote in it and actually do continue to stay in the EU.

I for one, want us out. So does Paul Sykes, the multi-millionaire Yorkshire businessman. There are lots more like minded people too.

For a start, a strong vote for UKIP in the MEP elections will just have to do.

To ensure we get a referendum, a vote for the Tories seems a good idea. For me it is a brilliant idea. In our constituency we actually do have a very hard working Tory candidate, Andrea Leadsom, currently working as Secretary to the Treasury. They don't get better than Andrea - no matter what party she represents.

So I know who (and why) I am voting for in the next two important elections.

Actually, that's wrong. I don't actually know who the UKIP candidates were who I was voting for. For me it was irrelevant. I already just ticked the UKIP box.

If we do have a Referendum, there will be much debate.

It should clear the air about what the majority want and whether it is possible to get any or all of it. It should put levels of importance on what we can get and what we can't should we decide to stay in.

Years ago, I was deeply in favour of us joining the Common Market.

I did not vote for us to have 75% of our Laws made in Brussels by unelected EU beaurocrats.

Our political masters are horrified by Ukip. Trouble is, the voters aren’t


By Sean Thomas Politics Last updated: May 17th, 2014

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/seanthomas/100271887/our-political-masters-are-horrified-by-ukip-trouble-is-the-voters-arent/



You can almost hear the screams from Primrose Hill (Photo: PA)



You can almost hear the screams from Westminster, can’t you? Every time Nigel Farage opens his mouth, the combined political classes of Primrose Hill and Holland Park react like a chorus of flashed spinsters, exposed to the hairy buttocks of a drunken navvy. Oh my word, he’s done it again! Someone stop him! Help!

But it’s a funny thing, this metropolitan fainting fit induced by anything connected to Ukip. To me it seems overdone; to me it suggests there are deeper psychological forces at work. After all, Ukip have yet to win a single MP at Westminster. So why do they invoke all these bladder-bursting conniptions in the chatterati?

Opinion formers would have it that Ukip’s opinions are the problem; i.e. the party is a bunch of crypto-fascists, the BNP with polished brogues, a bus-load of “loonies, fruitcakes and closet racists” (according to the PM). Therefore these barely concealed bigotries need to be exposed, by the scandalised elite, so the proles can react with proper aversion, and go back to dutifully voting Lib, Lab and Con.

But what are these appalling Kipper opinions, polices and personalities which so affront the Top Ten Thousand?

First, the people. There’s no doubt that Ukip does attract a few crazies and extremists. But then, all political parties do that, indeed I’d suggest that, for most citizens, the mere act of joining a political party – any party – is the act of a dubious nerd with narcissism issues, so Ukip are hardly unique. Furthermore, Ukip – as Farage ably put it – do not have a monopoly on oddballs. Or extremists.

Here, for instance, is a list of Labour Party notables who used to be communists or Marxist fellow-travellers: Alistair Darling. Jim Murphy, Jack Straw, Peter Hain, John Reid, Peter Mandelson. Now, whatever you think of Nigel Farage or Paul Nuttall, as far as I know they have not called for the overthrow of bourgeois democracy, so let’s toss out that canard about Ukip being uniquely “full of extremists”.

How about their policies then? One Kipper position that Ukipphobes love to cite is their apparent desire to reintroduce the death penalty. And on the face of it that does seem quite “out there”. No EU nation uses the death penalty (it is forbidden by quasi-EU law), virtually no western nations use the death penalty. So this policy is indeed a fringe position, right? Wrong. On the latest polls about 50 per cent of Britons support the death penalty. Half the country. And until Ukip came along, the views of half the country, on this issue, were entirely unrepresented in mainstream politics.

Then what about Europe? You probably know what I’m going to say here but it’s worth saying anyway. All three mainstream parties are intent on remaining within the EU (after some pantomime renegotiation if you are a Tory). That means that the 30-50 per cent of the country that expressly wants to leave the EU has been wholly unrepresented in politics. Until the rise of Ukip.

Then what about immigration? Ukip’s policy is to severely restrict immigration. Again this seems pretty radical, until you look at the polls. Sixty-nine per cent of people actually want zero net immigration. In other words, most Brits, when it comes to immigration, are even further to the right than Ukip.

And so on, and so forth. Ukip are against HS2 (the only party with that position). So are 48 per cent of the British people. Ukip have considered a policy to ban the burqa (the only party to consider that position) – this is a policy supported by 61 per cent of British voters. Ukip want to cut foreign aid (the only party with that position) – this is a policy supported by 55 per cent of the British people.

Now personally, I’m not a Ukip supporter, but I can damn well read Ukip’s polling numbers. And what they tell me is that virtually all of these “cranky”, “fruitcake”, “loonytoon” positions adopted by Ukip turn out to be opinions shared by large minorities, or outright majorities, of the British electorate. They are also opinions that have, until recently, been ignored and repressed by the liberal elite.

This then, is why the political classes are horrified by Ukip. It’s not because they believe Ukip are really crazy. It’s because they are worried Ukip might be really popular.

exec - i read what you write and also sort of understand your point -"i want out, no argument, no discussion, no debate" - but if you have an mep who does nothing at all other than collect a fat tax-free salary + expenses, what is the point of having him/her there in the first place?