Daily Mail says election result may determine politics for ever.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Daily Mail headline on my mobile seems to suggest the tories might be voted back in for ever.

Is this wish fulfilment of the level of publishing a story written by House of Cards author before the 1992 election about Margaret Thatcher making a comeback to lead Britain?

[Hope]

Daily Mail headline on my mobile seems to suggest the tories might be voted back in for ever.

Is this wish fulfilment of the level of publishing a story written by House of Cards author before the 1992 election about Margaret Thatcher making a comeback to lead Britain?

I suppose it depends to a large extent on what happens in Scotland in the next 5 -10 years.  If that is lost to Labour - either as an independent nation or a source of non-Labour MPs - they are unlikely to ever be able to post a majority of MPs again - even if we move from a FPTP system to some form of PR. 

Unless there is a massive rise of another party - I understand UKIP like to think that they might be able to challenge the Tories (God forbid) - then the only chance the 'other' parties have of taking power is by coalition of some form.

[floo]

Does anyone really read that ghastly tabloid and take it seriously?

[BashfulAnthony]

Does anyone really read that ghastly tabloid and take it seriously?

The Daily Mail has been responsible for some highly important investigations and campaigns, notably their investigation and denunciation of the Unification Church ("Moonies."), and the highly regarded Stephen Lawrence campaign  It has a daily readership of some 4 million, and has been awarded the National Newspaper of the Year in 1995, 1996, 1998, 2001, 2003 and 2012 by the British Press Awards.  So it is not all bad!  There are those who condemn it, probably without reading it, as Floo does, and deride those who might, simply because they think it is the "in-thing" to do.  You cannot judge a newspaper without reading it on at least a fairly regular basis.

[Hope]

It has a daily readership of some 4 million, and has been awarded the National Newspaper of the Year in 1995, 1996, 1998, 2001, 2003 and 2012 by the British Press Awards.

I think the gap in this run, between 2003 and 2012 tells us something about how the people who decide such awards think of the Mail.  Historically, it was a good paper, but I'm afraid that in the last 5 or 6 years it has gone downhill.  I heard someone describe it as 'the thinking man's Sun' a few years ago.

So it is not all bad!  There are those who condemn it, probably without reading it, as Floo does, and deride those who might, simply because they think it is the "in-thing" to do.  You cannot judge a newspaper without reading it on at least a fairly regular basis.

I would never base a judgement on its reportage alone; I would always look for confirmmation - usually from the Guardian, Times or Independent - or a 'local' national paper if the story was from abroad.

[wigginhall]

For ever is a long time!  But it makes you wonder what the point of Labour is, if they are going to be Tory-lite, and with the loss of Scotland.   

But I think the whole Greece/EU thing could derail politics, as we know it.   It could get very messy. 

[Rhiannon]

It was already pretty well trashed. Instead of trying to glue together a broken pot from Woolworths maybe it's time to get something better even if it takes a bit of effort and mess for a while.

[wigginhall]

Cameron realized that the SNP is good news for the Tories, and now that the break-up of the union is a minor price to ensure long lasting Tory English rule!

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Cameron realized that the SNP is good news for the Tories, and now that the break-up of the union is a minor price to ensure long lasting Tory English rule!

What? You mean a cunning plan of being more influential on the world stage by making yourself much smaller?

[Sebastian Toe]

Daily Mail headline on my mobile seems to suggest the tories might be voted back in for ever.

Is this wish fulfilment of the level of publishing a story written by House of Cards author before the 1992 election about Margaret Thatcher making a comeback to lead Britain?

I suppose it depends to a large extent on what happens in Scotland in the next 5 -10 years.  If that is lost to Labour - either as an independent nation or a source of non-Labour MPs - they are unlikely to ever be able to post a majority of MPs again - even if we move from a FPTP system to some form of PR. 

Unless there is a massive rise of another party - I understand UKIP like to think that they might be able to challenge the Tories (God forbid) - then the only chance the 'other' parties have of taking power is by coalition of some form.

for 65 of the last 67 years, Scottish MPs as an entity have had no practical influence over the composition of the UK government. From a high of 72 MPs in 1983, Scotland’s representation will by 2015 have decreased to 52, substantially reducing any future possibility of affecting a change.
http://wingsoverscotland.com/why-labour-doesnt-need-scotland/

[Hope]

for 65 of the last 67 years, Scottish MPs as an entity have had no practical influence over the composition of the UK government. From a high of 72 MPs in 1983, Scotland’s representation will by 2015 have decreased to 52, substantially reducing any future possibility of affecting a change.
http://wingsoverscotland.com/why-labour-doesnt-need-scotland/

For much of that 67 years, Labour has been able to rely on between 45 and 70 MPs from Scottish constituencies.  That is a sizeable chunk of any set of figures, landslide or not.  Its not the mathematical element that is so important, its the politically psychological element.  "We can rely of X MPs from north of the border, so we can afford to concentrate our efforts on marginals south of the border".

[L.A.]

Daily Mail headline on my mobile seems to suggest the tories might be voted back in for ever.

Is this wish fulfilment of the level of publishing a story written by House of Cards author before the 1992 election about Margaret Thatcher making a comeback to lead Britain?

With Labour Hell-bent on electing another Turkey as leader - how knows 

[Harrowby Hall]

Is not the experience of the last election that UKIP did proportionally greater damage to Labour than it did to the Conservatives?

Should UKIP turn out to be anything more than a short term phenomenon, it is likely that its appeal will be to lower-middle/working class voters who have not had the benefit of higher education (C2 and D in NRS terms). In spite of UKIP's right wing position, there would seem to be a greater number of its target group supporting Labour than Conservative.

This may well prove crucial to Labour in seats where it has a small majority.

[Aruntraveller]

Historically, it was a good paper, but I'm afraid that in the last 5 or 6 years it has gone downhill.

Really?

From Wiki (but other sources are available):

Lord Rothermere was a friend of Benito Mussolini and Adolf Hitler, and directed the Mail's editorial stance towards them in the early 1930s.[32][33] Rothermere's 1933 leader "Youth Triumphant" praised the new Nazi regime's accomplishments, and was subsequently used as propaganda by them.[34] In it, Rothermere predicted that "The minor misdeeds of individual Nazis would be submerged by the immense benefits the new regime is already bestowing upon Germany". Journalist John Simpson, in a book on journalism, suggested that Rothermere was referring to the violence against Jews and Communists rather than the detention of political prisoners.[35]

So historically it was a good paper eh?

Clearly my definitions of 'historical' and 'good paper' are different to yours.

[Hope]

So historically it was a good paper eh?

Clearly my definitions of 'historical' and 'good paper' are different to yours.

Had vaguely heard about this side of Rothermere, but hadn't heard for definite.  By the time I read the paper (early 1970s) it seemed to have moved away from this.  Not saying that it was brilliant - I always preferred the Times and the Guardian (except for sport, which was the Telegraph) - but I always thought it was always a step or two above the Express and then the Sun.

[Aruntraveller]

but I always thought it was always a step or two above the Express and then the Sun.

Well yes - if you want to set the bar that low

[Shaker]

You can only set it one notch lower and that's the Star

[Hope]

You can only set it one notch lower and that's the Star

Is that below the Sun, Shakes?

[Shaker]

Yes, such a thing is actually possible.

[Hope]

Yes, such a thing is actually possible.

Only just, Shakes.  After all, any Murdoch title is pretty sleazy nowadays   

[Shaker]

Yeah 

[BashfulAnthony]

You can only set it one notch lower and that's the Star

And you must read them in order to know that!

[Hope]

You can only set it one notch lower and that's the Star

And you must read them in order to know that!

I have read them occasionally over the years.  For instance, they are generally the ones that lie on the tables when one is waiting for your car to be booked in to be looked at/serviced/MOT'd.  In years gone by, they were the papers of choice of your local barber/hair dresser, and now they are the paper of choice of Chinese/Indian/... takeaways.  As such they are pretty ubiquitous.

[King Oberon]

Does anyone really read that ghastly tabloid and take it seriously?

I think what Bible bash is trying to say is no, no-one with a brain reads this dribble which is seemingly the reason it's Vlad and his favorite source of information! 

[BashfulAnthony]

Does anyone really read that ghastly tabloid and take it seriously?

I think what Bible bash is trying to say is no, no-one with a brain reads this dribble which is seemingly the reason it's Vlad and his favorite source of information! 

I like that!