That would be “What’s he on?” Quite a variety (and quantity) of prescription painkillers.
The guy’s an entertainer whose schtick is political commentary, not an actual news source.
Pretty much, I assume Dead Badger was refering to spreadbetters. Sporting Index are showing a spread of 87-94 seats on the Labour majority as of right now.
!!!
It’s 9 now, you have to wait another hour…
A desire for power. A LibDem/Tory coalition seems to be doing pretty ok in Luton.
Umm… not exactly. The Monarch invites someone they believe capable of commanding a majority in the House of Commons. Usually this is the leader of the largest party.
For example, should Mr Blair lose his seat, the Queen might well invite Mr Brown to form a government, not John Prescott.
Somewhat of a difference when we’re talking about national issues though IMO.
Hmmm…would that really be likely to happen, or is it a theoretical ‘would be possible’? I’d have thought that whoever the Labour Party (officially) recognised as their leader in the Commons would be invited? Anything else would mean the Queen was meddling with politics?
I fear this may be my last post - i think my account runs out at midnight today and i havnt renewed yet, but which channel coverage are people going for? I notice bbc2 has David D, ITV has Johnny D, and bbc1 scotland has - well - no-one special. I’m going for bbc2 then ch4 later for Bremner, B & Fortune’s take on the whole affair.
Sin
I flick between BBC and Sky News. Oh and thanks for the heads up, didn’t know about the Bremner, Bird and Fortune thing!
BBC exit poll predicts a Labour majority of 66.
Not my election but I love the coverage.
I’m going for bbc1 foor 5mins the over to 2 for Dead Ringers, then ch4 for Bremner, Bird and Fortune and finally back to bbc1 for David B, Paxo and Snow with his swingometer.
God I love BBC.
They just forecasted Labour with a 60-70ish majority. Blair’s in trouble if that is true.
Bit drunk. Forgive the terrible typing.
Oh and David D
Cya sinical brit 
Have a good one.
Looks like Labour are going to win again though with a significantly reduced margain, polls can’t always be trusted though of course.
I voted tactically in order to, hopefully, ensure a LibDem win over a marginal Labour seat. I expect a Labour reduced-majority overall, but I’m hoping that it looks bleak enough for Labour that Blair will be given the boot after the election.
Only relative to Old Labour, wherein the very concept of one pupil out-achieving another is anathema. New Labour represents the most tentative forays into competition, attached to fluffy statist language. Elitist they most certainly are not.
So why did they start by ridding us completely of grammar schools? They’ve declared war on the “bog-standard” comprehensive, but spent their entire first term ensuring that we were equipped with nothing but. In attempting to rid public schools of their charitable status, they go further in effectively removing even those rare avenues the poor have in to top-class education by ensuring that the best schools can not afford even those scholarships that they do offer. Way to go.
Shame they removed the entire system, then. The 11-plus is obviously not the only criteria on which selection can be operated, and Labour did their damnedest in their first term to exterminate any trace of selection. Even now its tentative re-introduction is referred to as “prioritising” on the basis of “aptitude”; no reference to such horrid terms as “ability” can be permitted.
I agree that academic selection is no panacea; my point as stated above is that even a system in which richer parents are forced to prep their kids is better than one in which they can simply move to a better area. A thick rich kid can only be made to appear so clever in a test, no matter how hard they are tutored, whereas even the stupidest scion of a rich family can be moved into a suitable catchment area. You will never be able to stop rich people from gaining an advantage; but what we have at the moment is a system which ensures only people who are rich enough can choose a good school for their children. Better? I think not.
Hmm - well I can only urge you to rethink him - I do believe him to be genuine, and even the partisan press has reported his campaign in his local area as amongst the nicest in living memory. I liked the description of him I read a while back as a sort of highly intellectual Winnie the Pooh. What can I say; I like him, he seems fluffy. Try viewing him without the traditional anti-Tory filter. I agree it’s hard, but give it a go. Lest you think me a horrible Tory nut, incidentally, I should point out that I voted Labour today, albeit more on the virtues of the local candidate than for any other reason.
Where are ITV getting their numbers from? Are they just putting up ‘probable’ Labour wins before they are announced? How long before we get an embarassing retraction…
I’m sticking to the BBC’s coverage to avoid the American-style antics of seeing who can declare the winner first only to retract and change it several times. I don’t think many people are in such a great rush to find out who won that they would rather listen to wild speculation than wait for the hard facts.
ITV? What? You’re forgoing Paxo and DimbleDee, Hislop and Johnson, John Snow and the swingometer of DOOOOOOM? Fie, man. For shame, for shame. 