Ed Miliband's Labour Party on track for general election victory

First topic message reminder :






Labour are on course for election victory after enjoying an uninterrupted lead over the Tories for TWO years, our poll reveals today.

No party with an unbroken two-year lead has failed to win the following election in the past 40 years.

Today’s Sunday Mirror/ComRes survey puts Labour up two points on 37 per cent, the Tories also up two on 32 per cent, with the UK Independence Party down four on 15 per cent. The Lib Dems – up one point – trail in fourth place on nine per cent.

If a general election were held tomorrow, Labour leader Ed Miliband would be PM with a 60-seat Commons majority, our poll indicates.

The Tories would drop 59 seats while the Lib Dems would lose 36. UKIP would not win a single seat.

The last time the Tories were ahead in our poll was February 2012 when they were on 39 per cent with Labour at 38 per cent, the Lib Dems on 10 per cent and UKIP at five per cent.

ComRes expert Adam Ludlow said: “Going back to 1970, no party has ever avoided going behind in the main polls for two years without going on to form a government after the following election.”

The big losers are UKIP. Despite coming second behind Labour but ahead of the Tories in this week’s Wythenshawe and Sale East by-election, their popularity has plunged by four points.

UKIP have also lost the lead they had in our last poll as “most favoured” party. Just 24 per cent said they were most favourable towards UKIP – behind Labour on 31 per cent and the Tories on 28 per cent.

The public remained more favourable towards Mr Cameron (31 per cent) than the Tory Party (28 per cent) and less favourable towards Ed Miliband (22 per cent) than Labour generally (31 per cent).

   ComRes interviewed 2,031 adults.


http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/ed-milibands-labour-party-track-3150615#ixzz2tUbAyOa9
Follow us: @DailyMirror on Twitter | DailyMirror on Facebook



 ::sexbnan:  ::sexbnan:  ::sexbnan:

Well they might get the Paedophile vote given the number of sympathisers at the top of the party. Not sure it will go down well with decent people though.

56kevins wrote:Well they might get the Paedophile vote given the number of sympathisers at the top of the party. Not sure it will go down well with decent people though.

http://www.hopenothate.org.uk/blog/insider/article/2048/bnp-hypocrisy-over-paedophile

http://southendpatriot.blogspot.co.uk/2012/04/labour-party-welcomes-ex-bnp-members.html

sphinx wrote:http://southendpatriot.blogspot.co.uk/2012/04/labour-party-welcomes-ex-bnp-members.html

Racist blog.
Suits you, since you are UKIP after all.   

Catman wrote:

56kevins wrote:Well they might get the Paedophile vote given the number of sympathisers at the top of the party. Not sure it will go down well with decent people though.

http://www.hopenothate.org.uk/blog/insider/article/2048/bnp-hypocrisy-over-paedophile

I'm not a BNP supporter you are a Labour Paedo excuser supporter though. Wasn't it you who used to be a big supporter of Tatchell. Hmmm we all know what he wrote in favour of.

56kevins wrote:

Catman wrote:

http://www.hopenothate.org.uk/blog/insider/article/2048/bnp-hypocrisy-over-paedophile

I'm not a BNP supporter you are a Labour Paedo excuser supporter though. Wasn't it you who used to be a big supporter of Tatchell. Hmmm we all know what he wrote in favour of.

I've noticed that the RW scum on these boards are banding the word paedo quite a lot recently, completely unfair to all victims of child abuse, to be using the word in such a way.
Bastards.

Well if the cap fits.

We RWers have never excused Paediphilia I think you will find it's your lot.

Don't cry Violet.

Catman wrote:

sphinx wrote:http://southendpatriot.blogspot.co.uk/2012/04/labour-party-welcomes-ex-bnp-members.html

Racist blog.
Suits you, since you are UKIP after all.   

So you are denying Labour accepts former BNP members and puts them up for election providing them with the money and support which gets them elected are you?

Racist? You are the one supporting the party that puts ex BNP members in public positions.

Catman wrote:

56kevins wrote:

I'm not a BNP supporter you are a Labour Paedo excuser supporter though. Wasn't it you who used to be a big supporter of Tatchell. Hmmm we all know what he wrote in favour of.

I've noticed that the RW scum on these boards are banding the word paedo quite a lot recently, completely unfair to all victims of child abuse, to be using the word in such a way.
Bastards.

What is unfair to victims of child abuse is those who campaigned for it to be legalized refusing to apologize - and you are the one supporting them.

sphinx wrote:

Catman wrote:

I've noticed that the RW scum on these boards are banding the word paedo quite a lot recently, completely unfair to all victims of child abuse, to be using the word in such a way.
Bastards.

What is unfair to victims of child abuse is those who campaigned for it to be legalized refusing to apologize - and you are the one supporting them.

You better take that back you fucking old dog, you know that Doug was a victim of child abuse, and to suggest that i would support such a thing goes well beyond the pale.

You are the one supporting them Violet we are the ones asking them to apologise to Doug. Really you sqeem and sqeem and sqeem and never think. Are we supporting the Labour 3. NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You are rejoicing that they will come back to power. How hurtful is that to Doug?

56kevins wrote:You are the one supporting them Violet we are the ones asking them to apologise to Doug.

Who is violet then?

Why are you calling me by that name?

You are Violet Elizabeth Bott she sqeems and sqeems and you remind me of her.

I have to go soon are you going to apologise for supporting these paedo excusers or not?

Catman wrote:

sphinx wrote:

What is unfair to victims of child abuse is those who campaigned for it to be legalized refusing to apologize - and you are the one supporting them.

You better take that back you fucking old dog, you know that Doug was a victim of child abuse, and to suggest that i would support such a thing goes well beyond the pale.

My apologies I forgot about Doug.

I am simply sick of Labour grandees refusing to apologize for their mistaken acceptance of PIE. I cannot understand how anyone can possibly defend that refusal.

56kevins wrote:You are Violet Elizabeth Bott she sqeems and sqeems and you remind me of her.

Seems like you are just the latest RW scum, sent here to cause disruption.

Fuck off back to the flop cave c**t, on ignore.

sphinx wrote:

Catman wrote:

You better take that back you fucking old dog, you know that Doug was a victim of child abuse, and to suggest that i would support such a thing goes well beyond the pale.

My apologies I forgot about Doug.

I am simply sick of Labour grandees refusing to apologize for their mistaken acceptance of PIE.  I cannot understand how anyone can possibly defend that refusal.

There are many children who have been abused it is Violet who is defending those who supported those who violated Doug. You have nothing to apologise for.

I'm not even a member of the Flop cave whatever that is.

Got to go have a nice Sqeem

Ed will have to be careful about this. If he doesn't take some action the mud will stick. This is really damaging at a time when we were moving ahead.

Phoenix wrote:Ed will have to be careful about this. If he doesn't take some action the mud will stick. This is really damaging at a time when we were moving ahead.

I think damage has already been done - there is no way it can be claimed that it did not happen - there are too many clear public records. To start with there was no suggestion it was anything other than stupid mistakes made by young idealistic activists at a time PIE was successfully muddying the waters of what was and was not reasonable. However the longer an apology takes the more people start asking why the apology is not forthcoming, they start to say well if they are not apologising do they not consider their position a mistake - do they still hold that position now?

The apologies could have been made 4 days ago - they were not. Why?

sphinx wrote:

Phoenix wrote:Ed will have to be careful about this. If he doesn't take some action the mud will stick. This is really damaging at a time when we were moving ahead.

I think damage has already been done - there is no way it can be claimed that it did not happen - there are too many clear public records.  To start with there was no suggestion it was anything other than stupid mistakes made by young idealistic activists at a time PIE was successfully muddying the waters of what was and was not reasonable.  However the longer an apology takes the more people start asking why the apology is not forthcoming, they start to say well if they are not apologising do they not consider their position a mistake - do they still hold that position now?

The apologies could have been made 4 days ago - they were not.  Why?

I agree it sqeemer who is still defending them. I want Harmon gone she has long been a liability to the party.

I wonder how the Harmon story will play out. Milliband is backing Harmon who couldn't be bothered to make any excuse for days. Are the left quite so confident?