….and the “Hug-a-Hoodie” prize competition winner is for…
October 6th, 2006In July we launched a competition on what Cameron would do in his speech to follow “hug a hoodie”. We asked what’s going to be next? Clearly it had to be something that was so distant from what you would expect to hear from a Tory leader that it will, at first, appear totally shocking.
We’ve had three or four entrants making claims but I’ve decided to award the prize to David Herdson. His entry posted on July 23rrd was:- “”There won’t be a big policy announcement at all, any more than hug a hoodie was a policy announcement (more a repositioning on social inclusion). In the same vein, there will be a highly publicised section on the NHS in which he praises Bevan and decries New Labour for abandoning its founding principles” (post 54).
I think that gets reasonably close. David will receive the prize, a copy of my book on Politics and Betting, as soon as it is published sometime next year.
Well done David.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
Fix !!!!!!
2. Second prize, two copies…?
Well done David Henderson for winning, and Mike for comming up with an interesting competition.
That said have had many visitors to my blog today
Mind you I have not had the time to write a new article yet. I am either going to do one on the BNP leaflet I got through my door yesterday, or global warming.
RE 2, peter the punter, that was a bit harsh
2 Peter P. Better get your coat !!
4. LOL! If there was any danger of being taken seriously, I wouldn’t have said it. Seriously, I’m looking forward to reading it. I understand I may even be amongst the acknowledgements!
RE 6, It was taken seriously by me
A worthy winner…
RE 7, Peter, sorry I misses the n’t in wasn’t. I realy ought to read what I have typed before posting
Benedict White @ 3 — can’t you combine the two themes and tell us the BNP position on global warming? We know David Cameron is in favour of sunshine.
9. I’m terrible with typos and the like and I rarely get the number right. Keeps my lawyers busy though.
RE 10, Good point, though I was hoping for something else on global warming. It is just that the BNP leaflet makes promises that councils can’t keep, as well as ones which are to some extent mutualy contradictory.
RE 11, Peter I know the feeling
Third recount at Leicester South !!!!!!
12. A leaflet makes promises councils can’t keep?…and is contradictory…? surely a first…
Scottish Tories look set for 21 seats and 28% of the poll !!
RE 14, PM
I was refering to promises which are not within a councils remit. A bit like Crawley declaring it self a nuclear free zone in the 1980’s.
I take it that nice Mr Benn hasn’t had any trouble holding his seat?
Benedict White @ 12 — I think there are at least three points about the BNP making impossible promises.
From the party, it may be Trotskyite impossibilism.
For the voters, it probably doesn’t matter. It must be obvious to most BNP voters they are making a protest vote; I don’t suppose many of them either expect or want a BNP government.
More seriously, do our major parties have use for policies any more? Blair seems to use policies dreamed up by bright young things in Number Ten which rarely work out in practice (probably because the details have not been chewed through in Cabinet, so the government implements slogans). Thatcher almost lied when denying her plan to double VAT (from 8 to 15 per cent is not quite double).
Now we have Cameron following Bush in making what sound like policy statements but aren’t. His speech seemed to imply unaffordable spending commitments (hat-tip to Snowflake’s blog and Kaletsky in The Times). It is the Luntz ploy of sounding like you care.
Our politics is debased, and not just by the BNP.
Mike,the conferences are over and various posters have set out what they think the voters reaction will be .Unbelievably some of the comments are quite biased.
Why not put our posters to the test and ask them to predict what next weeks Times/Populus poll will be comparet to the last early September poll of Con 36,Lab 32,Lib 20,Oth 12.
I would start by hazarding Con 37,Lab 34,Lib 17 Oth 12.
Roger H
19. “Unbelievably some of the comments are quite biased”
Haha, very good.
Con 36, Lab 34, LD 19
Re 18, Your point about policy formation is well made, as to some extent is the jibe about tax and promises.
Policies do need to be tested by debate, within teh cabinet, the party, and bizarely parliament. I personaly think Tony Blair treats parliament with complete contempt, but that is just me.
Your comments on a protest vote are fair enough.
Chanell 4 news also did a fact check on Camerons speech. I suppose I had better look them all up.
Snowflake does make me laugh from time to time.
Re 19, My prediction:
Con 38 Lab 33 LD 18 others 11
(BTW, the “Others” are not the same ones that are in Lost
)
20. Lib Dem 50 Con 30 Lab 25 Oth -5
Kris Ramone is going back to his constituency,and preparing for government!
:lol:
Times/Populus Poll Prediction :
Lab (SDP MkII) .. 34%
Con (SDP MkIII) .. 36%
Lib Dem (SDP MkIV) .. 18%
Others (Not the SDP) .. 12%
Con 40
Lab 34
LD 16
Con 38
Lab 35
LD 15
Others 12
25 - you mean you didn’t read Polly Toynbee in the Guardian this morning Jack?
By-Election Results: Thursday 5th October 2006.
Charnwood BC, Loughborough Shelthorpe
Lab 643 (38.7; -17.0), BNP 478 (28.8; +28.8), Con 386 (23.2; -21.1), LD Paul Tyler 155 (9.3; +9.3).
Majority 165. Turnout 33.5%. Lab hold. Last fought 2003.
Eden DC, Penrith Carleton
LD Patricia Bell 223 (54.1), Con 189 (45.9).
Majority 34. Turnout 32.8%. LD hold. LD elected unopposed in 2003.
Ellesmere Port and Neston DC, Little Neston
Lab 420 (47.4; -2.1), Con 386 (43.5; +5.4), LD Graham Handley 81 (9.1; +9.1), [Green (0.0; -12.5)].
Majority 34. Turnout 32.5%. Lab gain from Con. Last fought 2006.
Please note:
The figures for percentage change are based on the details of the results from the last time that there was an election in the ward by statute in the May (or sometimes June) elections, rather than by any by-election. We use the figures in The Local Elections Handbook by Colin Rallings & Michael Thrasher.
The Party-defending seat is the party that the former Councillor (who has died, resigned or been disqualified) belonged to when she or he was elected not the one that she or he may have subsequently belonged to as a result of any defection.
re 19. A good idea which seems to have been taken up. I’ve often wondered whether you could have betting on poll outcomes.
The things to remember with Populus is that its past vote weighting formula gives Labour a 2% bigger margin than ICM and that it does not mention the main parties in its main voting intention question. The last element hurts the Lib Dems.
So my prediction is CON 37: LAB 35: LD 16
Con 35
Lab 35
Lib Dem 20
Others 10
I think Cameron has blown it!
Don’t want to stir up the whole Muslim thing again, but I just found this while idly Googling:
“Objection To Blind Woman’s “Dirty Dog” Lands Muslim Minicab Driver In Court
A Muslim minicab driver refused to take a blind woman with her guide dog because of religious objections. In Islam, dogs are regarded as being “unclean” in the same way that pigs are. But his refusal has led to his being convicted under the Disability Discrimination Act 1995.
Bernie Reddington, 37, was furious when London taxi driver Basir Miah refused to take her and her guide dog Orla in his private hire vehicle. Mrs Reddington, from Norwich, along with her son Christopher, 13, who is also blind, attended a hospital appointment at Great Ormond Street children’s hospital in London last November.
Taxi driver Basir Miah arrived in his cab to collect Mrs Reddington to take her to Liverpool Street station, but when he saw her guide dog, he said: “No dogs”. After ignoring Mrs Reddington’s insistence that his refusal to take the dog was illegal, Miah left the group with a hospital receptionist. This week, at London’s Horseferry Road Magistrates’ Court, he admitted refusing to carry out a booking made by a disabled person on the grounds that the disabled person was accompanied by her assistance dog. He was fined £150 and agreed to pay £250 compensation.”
I mean, they really are trying hard to fit in, aren’t they? Refusing to carry blind people. Nice.
SeanT, He broke the law and got punished for it. End.
32. That is not an account of “they”, it is an account of one taxi driver.
P.S. I’m on page 5 of Cheek Perforation Dance.
31 Damn you Icarus !!
I’ll have to go C 35 L 36 LD 18 instead then.
Re: 32 I’m not sure what your point is - apart from to have a go at Islam.
It’s clear that this taxi driver was simply a berk, sadly you do get the odd bus driver or taxi driver who wants to act like a little dictator. My wife had a recent experience on an overnight coach where the driver threatened £50 on the spot fines to anyone who laid down to go to sleep.
I think the real story is that this lady was able to use the Disability Discrimination Act in order to obtain redress after being treated unfairly. Nothing like a bit of regulation is there…!
My poll prediction:
Con 37
Lab 31
LD 20
…and not happy aout it either.
C 36
L 34
LD 17
My populas poll prediction.
Con 39 Lab 34 Lib 15 Oth 12.
29. Wasn’t it Neston ward, not Little Neston that was contested in May?
C 39
L 33
LD 17
39. yes, it seems that Little Neston has not been contested in May (it’s a 2 members ward):
http://www.ellesmereport-neston.gov.uk/news/news.htm?mode=10&pk_news=193
32, SeanT, nice to see you appreciate the workings of Labour’s Disability Discrimination Act!
Us ‘mewling lefties’ do have our good points…
Can’t see much point in predicting opinion poll results - whatever the figures are, they will inevitably be a disaster for David Cameron and the Conservatives anyway if you listen to the Labs and Libs on here along with suicidal purists from our own side like Tory Boy.
29. The vote share changes for the Ellesmere Port contest are incorrect. They are confusing Little Neston ward (last fought 2004) with Neston ward (last fought 2006).
The actual changes since 2004 are Lab +12.0, Con +4.6, LD -5.8, [Green -11.0]
33, 34, 36….
The BBC Radio 4 report indicated that the tribunals were extremely reluctant to prosecute the case, because of the ’sensibilities’.
Enough of these ’sensibilities’, already.
Moreover, it is not an isolated case, nor is it restricted to the UK. From the website blindcanadians.ca:
“I wish to thank The Minaret for giving me the opportunity
to inform its readers about a problem which, while it pales
in significance when compared to the crises faced by our
brothers and sisters in Kosovo and elsewhere, is
nonetheless worthy of our attention. This issue concerns us
because it is happening right here in cities across the
United States, and because it involves a violation of the
civil rights of disabled persons in the name of Islam. I am
referring to the refusal by some of our Muslim brothers who
own businesses or drive taxis to serve blind and other
disabled people who are accompanied by guide and service
dogs on the grounds that their religion prohibits them from
allowing these persons into their businesses, taxis, etc”
Cincinatti:
For Annie McEachrin, her 4-year-old black Labrador, Jessica, is more than a companion. Blind since birth, Ms. McEachrin relies on Jessica for mobility, traveling everywhere with a hand on the dog guide’s harness.
Hassan Taher is a devout Muslim who adheres strictly to his interpretation of Islamic law. It’s a law, he believes, that considers dogs impure. He won’t allow them in his taxicab.
On Feb. 4, when Ms. McEachrin, 43, tried to hail Mr. Taher’s cab, their rights clashed — setting up a battle between the rights of the disabled and religious freedom that hadn’t been seen before.
Lancashire, England:
“Lancashire Evening Post (Preston)
Friday, April 30, 2004
Cabbies hail the decision to strip driver’s licence
Taxi drivers today welcomed a decision to strip a fellow driver of his
licence - because he refused to allow a blind man’s guide dog in his cab.
Hackney carriage driver Abdul Shah yesterday had his licence taken away for
three months by Lancaster Licensing Committee.
Mr Shah argued he could not let dogs on board because of religious grounds -
he is a Muslim - but the move has drawn little sympathy from other taxi
drivers.”
And Walthamstow:
“Minicab drivers are refusing to carry working dogs, citing religious objections, says a blind man from Walthamstow.
Allan Brooks knows of only two drivers out of ninety locally who will accept his guide dog Illya.”
We might not laugh off the problem so glibly if we were blind, and relied on a dog to get us around - not just in cabs.
34. Good luck! & Bravo!
Before you continue you should know that Time Out said of the book:
‘it makes the Night Porter look like Bagpuss’.
43. AHM - remember also that however low the Lib Dem share is, that is because the pollsters have got it wrong. In fact the only possible result at the next GE is for the Lib Dems to gain dozens of seats, if not win outright…
“Be in no doubt,that outside the incestuous world of Victoria St, things are stiring.” Tory Boy yesterday.
If Tory boy is a Tory Boy, when will the challenge to Cameron come or will they just drift away?
I’m afraid its another case of people putting their own religious law above the law of the land. We are told these things are one offs, but they seen to be conforming to a pattern.
Next Populus poll prediction -
CON 37
LAB 35
LD 17
Lib dems suffer from being the first conference and the coverage of main parties takes support away from ‘others’. Labour have a Blair bounce as, with Derren Brown-like ability, he makes some voters forget the past nine years…….
How many muslims have you hissed at today Sean?
49. Precisely. What we are seeing is a pattern of behaviour from a minority, which has been encouraged by the tenets of multiculturalism to believe that its own values are superior to, and take precedence over, the essential moral norms of the host society. The veil issue is similar to the guide dog issue in that way.
Why haven’t Muslims been educated into the basic values that the rest of us have? Why have they been allowed to ghettoise themselves, morally, physically, intellectually? Why do they believe they have the right to do stuff like this?
I’m afraid the multiculturalist left must carry the can. It’s your fault, guys. We told you this stuff would happen. Now you need to make amends.
48 - About the same time Lib Dems rise up to overthrow the gerontocracy currently presiding over them, perhaps?
RE 42, IanG, The Dissability Discrimination Act (1995) was passed in er…….
1995 (Shocking I know)
I not Peirs Moron thinks St Tony was in Power then (according to comments about his memoirs in Private Eye), but I am reliably informed that is not in fact the case
See:
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts1995/1995050.htm
51. IanC.
I’m off out for a beer in a minute down in Soho. I don’t think many niqab-wearers frequent the Groucho. However, if I see a gaggle of women in full black bodyshrouds and facial ‘grilles’, taggling along behind a single smug Muslim male - a sight I see regularly in other parts of the West End - then I shall do what I normally do. Give the man a good, disapproving glare.
That’s all. Just a glare. It makes these men uncomfortable. Good.
What do you do when you see someone flaunting their repression of women? Cheer?
Or perhaps you just walk on by muttering about diversity?
So it’s glare not hiss. Gotcha.
56. Ian.
What do you do when you see someone flaunting their repression of women? Cheer?
Or perhaps you just walk on by muttering about diversity?
O/T - the 1983 election is on BBC Parliament at the moment.
seanT - I find the following that you quoted important: “I am
referring to the refusal by some of our Muslim brothers who
own businesses or drive taxis to serve blind and other
disabled people who are accompanied by guide and service
dogs on the grounds that their religion prohibits them”
I take this to mean that it is a muslim who is complaining in this instance. Consequently the problem is not with “Muslims” or “Islam” as a monolithic block as you seek to present it, but with the usual minority of pig-headed bigots who will use whatever excuse comes to hand.
In the absence of a religion, some of these people will clutch onto “political-correctness” or “health and safety”, but it all comes down to the same thing: A minority of berks.
This isn’t an issue about “muslims not fitting in” as you wish to make it, since there are muslims who are standing up and arguing against it Get a grip.
BW - I also found that comment amusing - but then according to Blair’s acolytes history virtually started in 1994, anyway…
Re 59, Timothy, many thanks, and yes to some extent you can tell that by the way he acts. He does not seem to bother checking if something is already ilegal before passing a new law, or checking to see if some policy has been tried, and failed before either.
59. What the F are you talking about?
‘Use whatever excuse comes to hand’???
Why do you think they are doing this? The taxi drivers? 98% of the cab drivers in Walthamstow, if we are to believe the blind man I quoted?
What are they trying to excuse, these taxi drivers? Are they trying to avoid earning money so they can therefore be poor? Are they using Islam an an excuse for their workshyness?
Face facts. Islam IS the problem. It prohibits them from taking dogs. That’s why they do it. And it’s not a tiny minority, it’s 98% of the cab drivers in one part of London. Who knows how many elsewhere.
They are perfectly entitled to believe what they like about dogs, and perfectly entitled to refuse entry to dogs when they are at home.
What they are not allowed to do is refuse giving lifts to blind people with guide dogs. For most people this would be a moral imperative - i.e. just bleeding obvious.
For Moslems it is not. They think their values override the moral norms of the host society.
THAT is the problem. Wake up and drink yer latte.
25 Jack. You forgot that the ‘others’ (12 %) include the SDP Mk IV in kilts, otherwise known as the SNP!
Can anyone here confirme that David Icke-Chameroeon’s webblog thing has progressed in a non-green direction from washing-up to loading the dishwashe? Presumably the next one will be him handing ovber his ironing to the DIALANIRON service wagon at his front gate?
55. Sean you are a brave man. Your disapproving glare could easily be seen as ‘insulting islam’ in their eyes. One book I read (written and produced here in the UK) states how murder is wrong but that killing those who insult islam is right and not viewed as murder.
The same book also states how if you come across two men having sex, you should kill the one performing the act and then the one receiving. My first thought was suppose one man is being raped? Would he be killed for being so? Poor bloke!
I had an interesting discusion with the 20 year old hijab waring girl who showed me her book. She agreed in principle with the content of this book but accepted in reality you could and should not carry out the acts in this Country.
Seeing this radicalism in a young girl, born here, whose parents and family were not devout, is a great concern.
63. But that’s me point, innit?
We are all too scared. If everyone in Britain expressed their disapproval of the full-face veil - and polygamy for that matter - by simple tutting and glaring - it would soon stop, or at least disappear off our streets.
That’s much better than any silly French-type anti-veil laws, which are probably unenforceable anyway.
Societal disapproval used to be one of the glues that kept us all together. We seem to have lost the knack. We need it to come back. I’m not saying we should go around tutting at transsexuals, but obious repression of women? - Yes. We should tut at that.
Diversity my arse.
BTW The police-embassy thing is yet another case of Moslems believing their values and sensibilities must override society’s values.
That’s three stories in one day, with the same theme. Weird.
Austen Mitchell used to give the impression of a respectable politician.
WRT Populus, I’d say Con 35%, Lab 34%, Lib Dem 19%, Others 12%.
I can’t really take issue with Jack Straw’s comments which seem quite measured to me.
Populus prediction:
Cons 36%
Lab 33%
Lib Dem 19%
Others 12%
65. He also was on the right of the party…now he’s on the Left (and he claims he hasn’t moved: it’s the party that moved)
64. Indeed. We are scared for our safety and of being accussed of racism. Remember that Dutch journalist? Murdered for free speech. Then there was Hirsh Ali, the Dutch MP who spoke out against the repression of women. She had to live in hiding with armed guards 24 hours a day.
You are my perfect picture of a Tory DC. Keep it up. I thought for one horrible moment that they really were changing.
54, Apologies. I knew that many of it’s powers came into force in 2004, it didn’t occur to me it could have been passed nine years previously!
64, In any other context wouldn’t you be defending the rights of busnessmen to conduct their business in any way they damn well like, and cater to whoever they like, and never mind who it offends? On another day you might even claim that was a ‘British value’…
Re 71, IanG some of the requirements are so arduous for business to meet that a long run in time became appropriate. The potential modification necessary can be expensive.
70. Well that’s a helpful remark Roger. Why don’t you get your wanger out and wave it at us, shouting ‘look at little mister jellysausage! tiny tiny winklepoo!’
That would be about as constructive.
71. Er, nope.
(and congratulations on winning this Year’s Nobel Prize for Most Idiotic Analogy - I know you’ve been working hard for it.)
But, if you must. If these businessmen were viciously repressed by their religion, and were wearing gimp masks to symbolise that repression, I’d probably take issue with that, too.
The taxi sage is one example there are many others.
It is now tpical of western media to placate the problem and present it as something else. I’m afraid my patience was broken, when there was moral outrage by Muslims at the Popes remarks, backed by the cowardly media, and hardly nothing of the murder of a catholic nun, shot in the back in response. Her last words were to forgive her murderers - a true martyr.
SeanT. Almost every day you try to spread your prejudices on to this site-and I believe others as well. You find spome obscure incident that paints a minority in a bad light and then in traditional racist style blow up the incident out of all proportion and invite others to join you in castigating that minority.
There have been people like you through the ages. But It seems most people on this board don’t want to join you and neither do I.
74, you seem to always bring gimp masks into it!
I agree with you entirely that taxi drivers refusing to take guide dogs is disgraceful. I’m just a little surprised that such a fierce opponent of any state intervention as yourself would be in favour of the government telling people what they can and can’t do with their businesses (ie taxis).
77. What’s your point Burbachchris. That Catholics are better people than Muslims? All Catholics?
70. Roger. I have tried twice to post this. A shorter version is that I am proud to be a Conservative who supports people like Hirsh Ali.
76. Islam is not a race. There are about as many Muslims worldwide as Christians. So in what sense was SeanT being racist or castigating a minority?
Re 78, Roger, I think his point was that a woman working in a hospital being shot in the back is oh so very wrong, and we ought to condemn those who did it. (And I do)
74 seanT. I see this merry Friday afternnon you’re entertaining the site with more ribaldry from the your next book “Millions of Muslim Women Are Waiting To Mince Me”
I’m sure it’ll hit the heights in the BNP best seller lists, but it’s unlikely to merit other than disdain from most on PB.
tho I have to admit I’m not sure what it has to do with betting on politics
Excellent - A public flogging from AHM - Suicidal purist - moi !
I think the only thing I would say is that parochial party politics come a long way behind Country and principles in my book.
Others may disagree (and evidently do) but as someone brought up to believe in Grammar Schools, Low Taxation, Strong immigration and policing et al … why should I pretend otherwise (even if others choose to do so)
Like many others(of all parties)I remain to be convinced about the new regime’s directon.
I’ve personally chosen to stay and fight from within to reverse the recent changes, even though it looks like being a long haul as things stand today. Others may not.
Either way, my contribution in terms of funding and assistance to the voluntary Party has been suspended. I suspect I’m not alone.
Populus prediction
Cons 37%
Lab 34%
Libdems 17%
Others 12%
76, 82. Blah blah, racism, blah blah, BNP, blah blah, close down all arguments, shut up you horrible racist, I am morally perfect, hooray for my liberal sensibilities, blah blah bluurgh [and so on and so forth for the last fifty years]
Zzzz!
I’m off for a bevvy.
I’d never heard of gimp masks before I started reading political weblogs, and I still don’t really know what they are.
86 seanT. Off you go then.
88. Careful. I might hang around just to annoy you, Jack.
87. Gimp masks! -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bondage_hood
Interesting and I suspect significant post TB. Before the last election michael Howard gave us a vision of Conservatism that I suspect is one that most Tory voters were happy with. It is impossible for those same voters to be equally happy with Cameron’s version. This 33% of thge electorate aren’t paid up members of the party. Why should they continue to vote Conservative?
Tory 35 Labour 37 Lib Dem 20
90 - roger - impossible?!
Just as it was “impossible” for any Labour voter in 1983 to vote Labour in 1997?!
No party platform is 100% what any voter wants. Surely voters chose the platform that accords best with their views…..and then there is tribal party loyalty!
89 seanT. I’m sure the bottom of a glass is more deserving of your attentions than my little observations.
Trundle off my child ! …. Make sure you get a cab home .. Muslim drive of course !
Rik. Putting aside tribal loyalty is it Michael Howard who best reflects the majority of Tory voters or David Cameron? It’s a basic tenet of marketing that the first thing you do is identify your target market and then find a way to get through to them. Having found a formula that appeals to 33% of the population it seems an odd strategy now to ignore them
92-Jack. I don’t think Sean would mind who drove him. It sounds like you are implying some kind of intolerance about Sean’s postings. In fact he is posting against intolerence which is more prolific in some communities than others.
93 - an incisive insight to our electoral system if ever i heard one.
BTW it’s 33% of the voting population, about 20% of the actual population
94 DC. Wonderful double-speak.
So anyway Jack, forget sean for a while, what do you actually think, personally, of the Muslim veil?
94. Quite so DC. But don’t worry about me, I’m kinda used to being called racist - its the reflex of lefties at bay, and I hear it a lot - and I do raise provocative issues, sometimes in an incendiary way.
This is partly cause I like a good argument, and partly cause I really really do care about this. Along with global warming, this whole Muslim integration thing seems, to me, to be the paramount issue of our time.
In raising the taxi driver thing I wasn’t just trying to poke lefties in the eye. I was trying, as I think Burbachris noted, to show that there is a pattern here. These things seem isolated, but when you step back you see the overall picture: which is of moslems believing that their values and fragile sensibilities are so important they override the basic moral norms of our society. This isn’t the fault of Moslems, they’ve been encouraged in this misperception by the idiocy of multiculturalism. But it is a big and growing problem.
I think a lot of us are starting to realise this now. but some aren’t. And here I think we have a generational divide. People over 35-40 are so marinated in multiculturalism, its such a given, they cannot quite grasp the paradigm shift. that the model is flawed.
OK I’m over 40 but I like to think I’m a hepcat keeping up to date with the sociopolitical hit parade. Alternatively I am an embarrassing dad dancing at the ideological disco, but my point abides.
93. “Having found a formula that appeals to 33% of the population it seems an odd strategy now to ignore them” Roger you do make laugh sometimes! No major political party would be happy to have a formula which would appeal to just 33% of all voters. Why don’t you just say that you want the tories to jump back into that little 30-33% box which has helped keep Labour in power for 10years it would be a lot more honest.
Marketing is not politics.
If you have a 33% market share then you can be happy with that. Politics is (pretty much) winner takes all however so if 33% leaves you short of power you have to attempt to appeal to a wider range of people, losing some and hoping to gain others.
The real tragedy is watching the supposedly left wing labour party appealing to the Peter Hitchens and Janet Daley’s of this world in the the way that they are. Tories have been rightly castigated for having fellow travellers such as those two, labour were when they were linked to Militant etc. Be careful the company you keep.
93 - roger - it is not some absolute sum game. I was very happy with Michael Howard and his campaign (with the exception of a bit too much emphasis on immigration) and I am broadly happy with what DC is doing now. I suspect most Conservative voters and members are of similar view.
96 alex. “So anyway Jack … what do you actually think, pesonally, of the Muslim veil?”
Well I wouldn’t wear one myself !! …. probably … but then I don’t care what people wear.
In religious terms if a small minority of muslim women choose to wear the veil as a sign of their modesty then so be it. Oddly part of the custom in the Christian wedding service is for the bride to wear a veil !
Overall I’m secure in my own culture and respect for others that I don’t fear what others choose to wear, be they Orthodox Jews, conservative Muslims, blue rinse Tories, sandal decked Lib Dems or especially Scottish nobles in ermine clad regalia and that is a sight to behold !!!!!!!!
WRT the taxi driver, this is a country where one is horrible to dogs at one’s peril!
Just noted on Guido that a few labourtes are patting themselves on the back because they think they swung it for the most left wing candidate to win the Battersea conservative primary.
Are these people dimmer than a zero watt light bulb or something? They voted for the person who is most likely to take away votes from them and they parade their stupidity to all and sundry? Who were these people, Gerald Ratner, Homer Simpson and Howard Dean?
Tory boy said that ….as someone brought up to believe in Grammar Schools, Low Taxation, Strong immigration and policing et al … why should I pretend otherwise (even if others choose to do so)
Well, you could always break free and think afresh for yourself?
106 - I could if I wanted to, but I don’t.
When you’ve chosen the best, why look at the rest ?
Tory Boy is that not called prejudice?
prejudice |ˌprɛdʒʊdɪs| noun preconceived opinion that is not based on reason or actual experience :
105.”Are these people dimmer than a zero watt light bulb or something? They voted for the person who is most likely to take away votes from them and they parade their stupidity to all and sundry? ”
No, they wanted Jane Ellison because she was the most pro Europe in the shortlist and she was likely to create splits in the party more than the other 3 candidates (none of them was a mad right winger, btw).
108 No, it’s called faith and is based on personal experience, beliefs and knowledge.
110 (Obviously) Correct Andrea … (another cracking idea, I wonder who the hell we will end up with as our Mayoral Candidate ! )
108 In fairness, I don’t think Jane Ellison will be the mad lefty that some people imagine. She’s also fought a lot of truly horrible elections for the Conservatives, so in terms of the hard work she’s put in, she deserves the chance to fight somewhere winnable.
Battersea is, in any case, a leftward leaning association.
110 - Fine if this was to find someone who tory members are going to vote on but it’s not. They’ve just helped to select the candidate most likely to appeal to their own voters. Quite incredibly hamfisted, it almost beggars belief.
What they should do in this situation, of course, is try and choose the most right wing and objectionable to centrist voters. Certain people on ConHome are clearly agents provocateurs doing something similar.
I just find it funny that they are going around thinking they’ve done themselves proud!
14 - Addendum, and if none were totally right wing, either don’t bother or choose the one who has one policy area that can be picked on and described as right wing to the electorate.
113 Sean, if 113 is directed at me I’m happy to confirm I’m not commenting on JE in person (who I don’t know).
Merely that ‘open primaries’ offer up opportunities for non Conservatives to interfere with ‘our’ own processes and influence ‘our’ decisions.
Kind regards
114. I don’t think Ellison would bring many more votes to the tories than Louise Bagshaw, Sam Gyimah and James Cleverly (the other people shortlisted)
if there’s no a mad right wing fan of Tebbit on the shortlist, going for the most “divisive” candidate sounds a not so stupid idea for me.
17 - At the expense of selecting the one *most* likely to take labour votes? They really didn’t think this one through.
118. Why do you think Jane Ellison is the most likely to take Labour votes away?
Btw, I think it’s debatable how much impact the constituency candidate (excluding the Libdems) can have….they certainly can have an impact if the seat is down to recount territory….but if Battersea is still at recount territory next time, it won’t probably be a good night for the tories.
19 - Pro-Europe for a start, Battersea is the sort of urban area which can only benefit from a centrist (avowed Ken Clarke supporting) candidate, it’s not exactly the home of whinging tory suburbanites (with apologies to whinging tory suburbanites).
With Battersea being marginal they’ve been crazy to attempt any manipulation, I would think that someone in the Battersea Labour party is hunting them with a big stick at this moment.
103 - A revealing answer jack. If you read sean’s posts you would, I think, see that his motivation for opposing the veil is his belief that behind every veil-wearing woman is a man who is subjugating her. Either directly through a dominant husband, or more subtly through religious doctrine which some women (in his opinion misguidedly) follow. And a religious doctrine upon which their views can be influenced and changed by others. He is not suggesting that he goes up to the women and hisses at them, rather at the men who they are “following 10 paces behind”. In your answer (103) you implicitly added the caveat of “women who wish to protect their modesty” because introducing the idea that some women may be wearing the veil against their will would leave you with a problem in your universal denunciation of sean.
Of course sean is left with a problem with the women who genuinely believe in the veil and genuinely don’t see themselves as subjugated. Maybe he doesn’t believe they exist. On some level it is the same as the bewilderment felt by men at the fact that the strongest opponent of positive discrimination schemes are often women themselves.
120. So do you think being pro-European is a vote winner in Battersea in your opinion?
I thought it could have been pretty neutral with Battersea people not being obsessed by Europe as some tories are (both pro or against)
I still think that the difference in the final result potentially produced by the 4 candidates shortlisted would have probably be down to their hard-work (or lack of it) and the campaign more than to the wings of the party they belong to (especially as Portillo- who chaired the selection meeting- said that none of them was a loony)
In 1997 leftist Labour candidates didn’t do worse than Blairites candidates…the big swing to Labour happened even when the local candidate was against the New Labour project.
Being pro-Europe can’t do any harm in a constituency like that. At the very least it’s a reason taken away for other party supporters not to switch their vote.
I don’t think it will make any differece either, I can imagine that Battersea labour party supporters are quite resigned to losing it next time in any case so better to have an MP that they would dislike less.
As for the difference that candidates make, it might be minimal but it might not. Why add to the potential variables against you?
BTW David Steel just glimpsed on 1983 election in an Arran sweater that looks like it’s still on the sheep.
133. “As for the difference that candidates make, it might be minimal but it might not. Why add to the potential variables against you?”
but you could have said it for the other 3 candidates.
Personally if I had been a Battersea Lab supporter I would have not voted in the Tory primary…but I would have started to insult the ones who did it either (your comment at 105…which didn’t sound very nice)
I would have thought the advantage of a candidate being “pro-Europe” is that they are unlikely to use the issue to campaign upon.
121 alex. I don’t doubt that some women who wear the veil do so under pressure. However I have also heard in the media a number of young and articulate Muslim women who advocate the wearing of the veil.
In the final analysis this is a case of whether irrational fear should trump choice in a matter of dress. For me it’s an easy decision.
125. “Vote Tory, More Europe!” “Sign in if you want to receive a weekly newsletter about the joy of the EU. Pics of Mandelson included”
Back to my comment about if the constituency candidate counts or not….I think that different candidates can produce more or less the same results…..but certainly there’re situation where a particular candidate produce a worse (or better) result by a considerable margin (more than a 2% difference)…for ex I think that Petersborough could have been still Labour if in mid-90’s the CLP wasn’t mad enough to pick up the Venerable Helen
121. Mt impression of SeanT is that he is rather misogynistic, so tend to take with a pinch of salt his concern for Islamic women - they are probably just an excuse for Islamic bashing.
BTW, if you read Jack Straw’s article, he has no problem with Islamic women wearing whatever they want at all, he just feels that in face-to-face meetings indoors, communication is easier if you can see each others faces, so he asks the lady concerned if she would remove her veil - and she has the right to refuse, though none have done so yet. And when the meeting is over, they can put their veils back on. I expect that if he’s having a meeting indoors with someone wearing dark sunglasses, he also asks them to remove them, for similar reasons. I’m not sure what the fuss is about, it’s not an exceptional position to take.
32. When I read that, I thought he was being prejudiced against taxi-drivers not Muslims.
19 I predict:
OMRLP 49%
UKIP 48%
RCPBML 3%
130. what does RCPBML stand for?
Mike and other posters the average of the Populus poll predictions is Con 37+1,Lab 34+2,Lib,18-2,Oth -1.
Roger H
131. Apologies for the delay in replying. RCPBML stands for the Evolutionary Ommunist Arty of Ritain (Arxist-Eninist).
http://www.rcpbml.org.uk
133. P.S. About 7 hours ago I was on a train sitting next to a member of the Central Committee of the RCPBML who (among other things) asked me to sing “How much is that doggy in the window” with the words backwards (as written by Tim Rice).