politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Half of those who told YouGov that they’ll vote UKIP in the May Euros supported the Tories at GE210
UKIP WAS included in the opening prompt for YouGov's EP2014 poll & firm indicates possible change for Westminster http://t.co/J61mBrOrCf
Read the full story here
Comments
A senior Labour figure today warned Ed Miliband that his plan to reset his party’s relationship with the unions is a "disaster waiting to happen".
He predicted the Labour leader was likely to “get a kicking” regardless of whether or not he can strike a deal with union chiefs. And the prospect of any agreement weakened today when GMB union leader Paul Kenny said discussions with Labour on reform had “broken down”.
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/ed-miliband-set-for-a-kicking-over-his-union-reform-plan-9063998.html
Labour 13/8 with William Hill for Labour to win the Euros has to be value?
That's a terrible system. It's ripe for ethnic interest groups managing to get special approvals for a month plus, because schools in such areas need to be "culturally sensitive", while those in more integrated areas wanting far less time off (just a two week holiday), don't get this option. Particularly for kids who already are falling behind/with special needs, it hurts their prospects further. There are ten weeks of school holiday a year, including six weeks in the summer. That's plenty of time to visit family. Anyone else should be treated equally, whether or not they get to buy off the headmaster.
They'll find some formula for fudging it, and of course voters won't care a fig anyway, but it will add to the strains within the Labour Party and weaken Ed's position further, and probably damage funding as well.
ooo er
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-25756973
Of course it's possible it won't happen this time because they're already doing so much better in the polls at this early stage.
I believe the funeral is today so the writ will probably be moved next week?
Con 35%, Lab 29%, LD 15%, UKIP 7%
Result
Con 28%, Lab 16%, LD 14%, UKIP 16%
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Parliament_election,_2009_(United_Kingdom)#Opinion_polls
His approval ratings may have dipped again, but Miliband has a foundation from which he can rise to No 10
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jan/16/ed-miliband-opposition-leader-approval-ratings?CMP=twt_gu
A little bit of early May sunshine should see the kippers cast off their thermals and shun the risk of hypothermia.
Strangely, even UKIP's vote didn't move up very much. It was the Tory and Labour vote (particularly Labour) that got hit the most.
Although none of those 'events' are likely this year. Labour have always tended to outpoll their actual performance in the election. Furthermore, there is virtually no coverage of the euros at the moment, so the focus isn't there. Also, as (antifrank?) said Miliband has tended to underperform in his other elections to date. The libdem squeeze (I think) won't be as great. And I see little evidence of 'trust' returning to the big parties - the anger is still there - it's just now there is a very clear rallying point unlike the scattergun of last time. And that's UKIP.
Oddschecker @Oddschecker 1m
Murray 2 sets up but 4-1 down in the 3rd, Millot still evens to win the set & 100/1 to stun the Scot - http://bit.ly/1m8IvpB
Is with Paddy Power and Coral.
I think the collective reaction would be:
"you mean these people [F&Ls] are now representing us, Britain, me??"
And then people will wake up and promptly, come GE2015, vote them to way <5%.
I'm more interested in the equivalent figures for how the UKIP results in 2009 Euros split from the GE? Are more Tories saying they''ll vote UKIP now than actually did in 2009?
Basically, is the 50% of the certain to vote UKIP total similar to the actual share from the last election? I don't know if the figures are even available, but my guess would be that they are roughly equivalent... That is the headline isn't exactly shocking.
2009 was weird, and Labour were led by well Gordon Brown, who released that video during the campaign
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2009/apr/29/gordon-brown-youtube-video
http://www.gazette-news.co.uk/news/10831913.Whistleblower_claims_crimes_kept_off_the_books_in_Essex/
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2540003/Its-official-Crime-numbers-NOT-trusted-statistics-watchdog-strips-police-data-seal-approval.html
etc
The latter of these has run into troubles that need some swift sorting out. However, both metrics show similar trends, with crimes generally falling over a number of years.
I can imagine the police recorded figures being manipulated in some arch conspiracy, but it's much harder to imagine both being manipulated.
We might just have to face it: there are less crimes being committed than was the case. That's not a reason to take out eyes of the ball, but it's a good sign. The fear of crime has also decreased.
edit: As crime is decreasing in a lot of places and increasing in others (more or less proportional to the decrease or increase in the numbers of young men aged 14-24) then the easiest way would be fiddling the areas where the surveys were taken.
Beyond UKIP the remaining small parties are mostly on the left, so it seems like there's a lot of downside to the Labour score.
Simon and Cilic have gone to a final set decider.
The 1/1000 offered on Murray certainly wasn't !
The simplest explanation would be a mismatch between the areas being surveyed and the areas where crime was being fiddled down in the police stats.
It'll be another Labour mess that the coalition are having to sort out.
They could average the results for their headline number, and they'll then have a good dataset for reviewing their methodology after the result is known.
For one thing - although we cannot be sure until something official comes out - it looks as though much of the misreporting may be downgrading of crimes, rather than non-reporting. A mugging as a robbery, GBH reduced to ABH. The crime still gets reported, but it's not accurate.
Figures for things like murder and manslaughter are also hard to massage - they are too visible. And these have, from memory, been decreasing.
That's not to say that the Crime Survey gives a true picture - any such survey has to be done very carefully, and take in people who might not ordinarily take part in a survey, who might also stand more chance of being victims of crime. But I haven't heard a massive amount of genuine criticism of it.
TNS-BMRB perform the survey for the ONS. As for how they choose who to interview, from the FAQ (2) (1): http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/crime-stats/crime-statistics/period-ending-june-2013/sty-recorded-crime.html
(2): http://www.crimesurvey.co.uk/faqs.html
(2): http://www.crimesurvey.co.uk/faqs.html
Well, first step is everyone digesting the fact that police crime stats have been fiddled downwards for years.
Worry about the implications of that after.
(2): http://www.crimesurvey.co.uk/faqs.html
Also although the Statistics Authority seems to think it's caught them fiddling some kinds of crime down (to look successful) they may also have been fiddling other figures up (to justify requests for more money and power).
Sky sources: Bernie Ecclestone to stand down as the boss of Formula One and will go on trial on bribery charges in Germany in April
Opinium list all the parties so do in fact prompt.
Survation Westminster polling offers UKIP in the initial prompt but to indicate the rest you have to click "others".
The biggest factor is not prompting but the party id or past vote weightings. These compress the UKIP total by varying degrees.
The more that UKIP's share is compressed the better it is for the Tories.
It is possible for the police to manipulate the police stats because they are involved in the collection. It is not possible for the police to manipulate the crime survey because they are not involved in the collection nor anything else.
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/8594
But he shaped F1 so much. In many ways he was F1.
Name-dropping time: I once had a conversation for ten minutes or so with Bernie. I had no idea who he was until the very end, and we ended up talking about tarmac and concrete. As you can imagine, it was an exciting conversation. ;-)
My impression was that he was exceptionally sharp and knowledgeable. He was also surprisingly friendly (this was 20 or so years ago).
There are so many stories about him, it's hard to split fact from fiction. Who knows what this court case will unveil.
Do you not agree that Labour will underperform then? I wonder if we overestimate the effect of things like Brown's 'special' performances. The Gillian Duffy incident in 2010 also didn't make much notable difference, except to those who'd already made up their mind.
I can see a upswing of 7-8% to Labour (to take them up to perhaps 23-24% of the vote, Blair 2004 levels) but I can't see them beating UKIP. I think UKIP will take perhaps 26-27% of the vote. They will prob also slightly underperform the final polls they get, for similar reasons to Labour.
http://oscar.go.com/nominees
For those from afar, rooms and bed sits are being arranged. Strong proof of an all out effort here.
And this is before the date is announced.
And I am semi-resigned to an Ed Miliband win at the next GE. The confluence of the rising UKIP vote, lack of boundary changes, the unmoving labour poll lead, Lib Dem switchers, Labour's built in bias and the tendency of the public at large to believe we can keep on spending (really, even intelligent people I know refuse to believe the finances are that bad, and that the Tories are ideological haters of the poor) makes me think the Tories can't win the most seats. Worrisome though that is*.
Which got me thinking, will an Ed Miliband rise to power be the most unexciting and unappealing and enthusiasm-sapping government ever? A bit bleugh. A bit whatever. I really can't detect much enthusiasm for him anywhere. He's an 'oh well, anything to get rid of the Tories' candidate.
And if Ed Miliband does win, what on earth does that say about the ongoing electability of the Tories? Ouch.
*I have no massive dislike of Labour, or their wish to do well for the poor. I just think the finances need sorting, and an Ed Miliband government will lose a fight with the Unions, and give in, with the finances ending up in an even bigger mess come 2020. And I don't dislike Ed himself either. I basically think he is a nice enough, clever enough, pleasant enough non-entity, leading a party that is borderline unleadable outside of its parliamentary members.
I fear the ambitions of the Unions under McCluskey. I really do. And I think he will become a massive figure in British politics post 2015. Oh well, oh f*ck.
I've netted over £450 off my last ~ 14 bets with Victor (~ £120 staked). Obviously I've had losers elsewhere but on a scale of 1-Victor how likely is the account to go up the swanny ?
After a set and a half of getting his arse kicked, Simon won 3:2, which was a pleasant surprise.
I can't ever envisage something like the miner's happening again, unions just ain't that powerful anymore, and I say that as a member of what the tabloids call a militant union!
They closed mine in early 2010 and quite a few other PBers at the same time, I think it's a two fold strategy with them, they look at your past winnings and their exposure on your bets that haven't concluded yet.
Green councillors in Brighton to push for referendum on council tax rise
Council leaders say they need 4.75% rise to fund adult social care services because of coalition government cuts
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/jan/16/green-councillors-brighton-referendum-council-tax-rise
I think the finances will still need a lot of work. We'll still probably have an £80billion deficit by 2015.
With Labour in power, and the vested interests feeling emboldened after their work during this parliament (see the well organised opposition to schools, NHS, welfare reforms), and with more Unison-backed MPs in parliament, it will be very tough for Miliband to square the deficit away. That's if he even intends to.
I don't think Miliband has enough power or inter-party support to see off the demands of McCluskey and co. Demands which will essentially be: no more cuts and more spending.
ps - it's not the union members (like yourself) or the unions per se that are the problem, it's the union power bods. Those at the top. And those like the pilgrims who are embedded and essentially immovable and totally against any serious economic reform.
However it is difficult, as when you need to transfer money from your bank card to your bookie online account they ask for your address and postcode for the payment to go through, it theoretically flags up at the bookies that someone at an address at previously closed account is active again so they close down your new account.
There's nothing stopping you going to that bookies shop however.
It seems a bit daft. Why not, as someone here suggested, flag a successful account and use their bets to help determine and change betting odds?
Stan James (My closed account) seems to like to go top price on plenty of decent horses though...
As Isam pointed out a few weeks ago, there's more bet on the first goalscorer in a Premier League match than there has been on the Indy referendum.
It was great when they opened up the Eastleigh markets for example.