Kantar/TNS/BMRB

[The Bishop]

Their latest:

Lab 41 (+2)
Con 31
UKIP 8 (+1)
LibDem 8 (-3)

Confirming the recent UKIP upward trend........

[Tony Otim]

Which goes to show that in some circumstances there may be no such thing as bad publicity, Winston...

[The Bishop]

I think most of the current polling (certainly this one) was taken before his implosion.

[Tony Otim]

The YouGov daily tracker would certainly include a significant part taken afterwards. Will be interesting to see if it has any effect going onwards.

[Deleted]

Nov 28, 2012 11:19:28 GMT Tony Otim said:

Which goes to show that in some circumstances there may be no such thing as bad publicity, Winston...

Paddy Ashdown got a big boost in the polls when he was found to have had an extra-marital affair.

[Pete Whitehead]

There seems to be an assumption that not only are 100% of the population supportive of gay adoption but that they would be so horrified by any expressions of opposition that should anybody have the temerity to do that it must result in an instant collapse of their party in the opinion polls. I really think a lot of people on this site live in a bubble at times

[The Bishop]

Nov 28, 2012 16:09:48 GMT swanarcadian said:

Nov 28, 2012 11:19:28 GMT Tony Otim said:

Which goes to show that in some circumstances there may be no such thing as bad publicity, Winston...

Paddy Ashdown got a big boost in the polls when he was found to have had an extra-marital affair.

But quite a few suspect it still hurt him when it came to actually voting a few months later........

As for Pete's comment, a lot won't look at the details of McKenzies comments - but they might think it makes UKIP look a tad hypocritical.

[greatkingrat]

I suspect the people most likely to be offended by his comments are the people least likely to vote for UKIP in the first place.

[Tony Otim]

Nov 28, 2012 16:30:22 GMT Pete Whitehead said:

There seems to be an assumption that not only are 100% of the population supportive of gay adoption but that they would be so horrified by any expressions of opposition that should anybody have the temerity to do that it must result in an instant collapse of their party in the opinion polls. I really think a lot of people on this site live in a bubble at times

Whilst I agree with this, I also think that people are affected by negative headlines even if they agree with the sentiment that provoked the negative headline. So, whilst people might not disagree with Winston MacKenzie's remarks, they are also aware that these things are being negatively portrayed and come away with a negative impression of the party even if they don't actually disagree. I think that's what happened with the Tories at points over the last 15 years (I remember Anthony Wells doing a post on that at some point).

[Tony Otim]

Nov 28, 2012 17:44:48 GMT @boogieeck said:

I have views of my own. The object of adoption is to find a safe and loving home for a child who does not have one. Adoption does not exist to validate or complete anyone's relationship.

For the second time today I agree with you. I object to the loose terminology of the right to adopt - people have a right to be considered for adoption. The authorities have a right to tell them to take a hike if they don't think they're suitable. The interests of the child should be the foremost consideration. That's why in some cases I would say that a same sex couple can provide a safe and loving home for a child and should be allowed to do so.

[Deleted]

Nov 28, 2012 17:44:48 GMT @boogieeck said:

I have views of my own. The object of adoption is to find a safe and loving home for a child who does not have one. Adoption does not exist to validate or complete anyone's relationship.

WHAT A COMPLETE LOAD OF RUBBISH

I am adopted and yes it benefited me but also equally benefited my parents who had two kids who before IVF etc would never have had any. It is a mutually beneficial partnership and Adoption works equally on both sides.

[greatkingrat]

As usual you have completely missed the point.

[innocentabroad]

Nov 29, 2012 10:53:13 GMT @ianrobo said:

Nov 28, 2012 17:44:48 GMT @boogieeck said:

I have views of my own. The object of adoption is to find a safe and loving home for a child who does not have one. Adoption does not exist to validate or complete anyone's relationship.

WHAT A COMPLETE LOAD OF RUBBISH

I am adopted and yes it benefited me but also equally benefited my parents who had two kids who before IVF etc would never have had any. It is a mutually beneficial partnership and Adoption works equally on both sides.

I also was adopted and the reality - as all the Agencies admit - is that the process is driven by supply and demand. If there are more babies than couples offering, the criteria are relaxed (sixty years ago solvency was pretty much all that was looked for). To-day it's vice versa so no doubt there are couples who would make fine parents who will have to live with a hole in their lives. Ian, you should say "adoption can work equally on both sides" - nothing is guaranteed in this life...

[Deleted]

no nothing is but adoption is a two way thing, parents adopt because they want a lifetime family (the ideal) and kids need families and parents

If parents did not want to 'validate' their relationship they would not adopt

Under the law now, adoption is a much more a long term fostering deal but back in 1971 my Mum and Dad took two years to be accepted even then and I have seen the paperwork to confirm this.

whether straight or gay the same thing applies

it is quite possible to be gay and still want kids.

[Deleted]

Has adopting two children validated my relationship with my wife? No, it felt pretty valid to me before.
Would I have adopted if we'd been able to have our children biologically? Probably not, but mainly because we couldn't afford to look after more than 2 children properly.
Having our son and daughter has brought a lot of happiness to our lives, and I think they'd feel the same (looking at my daughter as I write this, I'd say she's quite happy).

[Deleted]

so in fact you are confirming it is a mutually beneficial process for two parties.

[Tony Otim]

Nov 29, 2012 13:15:45 GMT @ianrobo said:

so in fact you are confirming it is a mutually beneficial process for two parties.

No one is disputing that this may be the case, Ian. You are missing the point.

The point is that the benefit or otherwise to the adoptive parents is only of at best marginal relevance in considering whether an adoption should proceed. It is the benefit to the child that is key.

Therefore a gay couple shouldn't be allowed to adopt because it would benefit or validate their relationship. However, they should be considered as adoptive parents if they are able to provide a stable, loving home to allow the child to prosper.

[Deleted]

Yes, ian, I am, but also yes to tony - the adoption is arranged for the child's benefit, but the parents will hopefully benecit as well

Sent from my Dell Streak using proboards

[Deleted]

that is my point James, when some one basically says it is a status symbol they are wrong. Whatever the couple's sexual preference there is no doubt no one goes on a 2/3 year process to get such a symbol.

[greatkingrat]

Unless you are Madonna :-)