You nats are funny though. Not being able to shove 40 left wing labour MPs up the tories' backsides is a very, very heavy price to pay for independence isn't it???? come on, you know you want to....
Not sure how to get my head round a conflation of tumescence and menses, but my point was the expressed certainty of No-ers seems a lot more sustained and unchanging than Yes-ers. I've never thought it was a done deal but I feel at least I can have a (very small) effect on the result through my own efforts.
I think we've at least dispensed with the meme that the referendum is a drag and uninteresting to the majority of (Scottish) folk; the next 7 months is going to be a hell of a ride.
As I am in a benign mood (a hint of spring down here in Cornwall), I will agree with that. It's a more interesting and tantalising contest than many anticipated.
My focus now is on Labour. They must be worried, yet they will be loathe to expend energy on Scotland when they see Cameron as the real enemy. Yet they will have to attend to Scotland, because if they lose it they face a nightmare scenario. Yet precious time and money expended in Scotland might cripple efforts at the GE.
I'm trying to think of a suitable analogy from military history. Perhaps Labour are Hitler, who was fatally but inevitably diverted into the Balkans, crucially delaying Operation Barbarossa. Arguably that lost him the whole war.
It's more complex than just resources, I'd suggest. Because fighting on the Unionist, and therefore Tory, side risks losing Labour support in their critical Scottish seats even if the No side wins. So they may win one war and lose the other. The Scots have shown themselves well able to vote differently and tactically at Westminster, Holyrood and (at least as far as VI goes) the Indyref, so a No doesn't guarantee a Labour victory in Scotland either for MPs or MSPs (insofar as the fiddled system can give a victory at all). I can see quite the reverse happening, in fact, if the SNP is seen as the new natural party of government in Scotland whether indy or not..
Can't think of a modern analogy - I wondered about the Finns in the Continuation War of 1941-5, and the way they ended up fighting the retreating Germans and being invaded and losing territory to the Russians, and losing sympathy from the Western Allies, but it doesn't seem to work out. Perhaps something specifically Balkan would work. Or perhaps simply the way in which the UK planned to fight a Far Eastern war but ended up being involved in an European war first; or on a smaller scale having to cope with the threat of invasion at home but with Suez, the Empire and oil fields being threatened by the Italians and then the Germans in the Western Desert.
As I am in a benign mood (a hint of spring down here in Cornwall), I will agree with that. It's a more interesting and tantalising contest than many anticipated.
My focus now is on Labour. They must be worried, yet they will be loathe to expend energy on Scotland when they see Cameron as the real enemy. Yet they will have to attend to Scotland, because if they lose it they face a nightmare scenario. Yet precious time and money expended in Scotland might cripple efforts at the GE.
I'm trying to think of a suitable analogy from military history. Perhaps Labour are Hitler, who was fatally but inevitably diverted into the Balkans, crucially delaying Operation Barbarossa. Arguably that lost him the whole war.
I'd suggest an analogy with some kind of shoogly military alliance (Bettertogether) with Labour providing the manpower, Tories money, and Libdems, well who the **** knows what they're providing. Maybe US providing Lend Lease to the Soviets, and straight into the Cold War after 1945.
I like your Allies analogy. Labour/Soviets, Tories/US, LibDems/UK. What does make the Nats ?
I don't know Monica, what does make the Nats?
Since the Allies were winners. I'd guess your analogy makes the Nats losers.
Moving on, do Nats really believe Salmond can go seven months without putting forward a costed, explicit Plan B on the currency issue?
I can see why he is loathe to do it. Any detail at all just gives unionists something to aim at, and tear apart. Vagueness is his friend.
But now Ed Miliband has expressly ruled out a sterling union, so the pressure is growing. Can Salmond busk it all the way to September with vague promises? Maybe he can. On this question the whole campaign will turn, as it will decide the undecideds.
Alternatively, he could explain the degree of control over Scottish economic policy the rUK would need to agree to a currency union.
His problem is that neither scenario is an attractive one to him politically. He has no choice but to carry on avoiding going into any detail.
have yet to see any pronouncement on what will be outcome if they unexpectedly get a NO vote. Will any of the 3 get anything coherent and remotely believable out before the vote. Sure benefits cuts, more foodbanks , etc will be well received.
The thing about Devomax is that it can't be Scotland-specific, it means a rework of everything. Independence is, in theory at least, a lot cleaner. If there is a No I'd expect big changes, but ones that have been discussed widely across the UK as a whole.
SO, we will see only bollocks and lies, but as it will be YES it will not matter.
Building on my last post: one of those 13 seats the Lib Dems lost in 2010 was of course Montgomeryshire. Their winning margin the Libs held in that seat in the previous election, was almost as big as the winning margin they achieved in Hallam in 2010. And the national Lib->Tory swing in 2010 will surely be a fraction of what the national Lib->Lab swing will be next year....
You nats are funny though. Not being able to shove 40 left wing labour MPs up the tories' backsides is a very, very heavy price to pay for independence isn't it???? come on, you know you want to....
Now Ed Miliband has expressly ruled out a sterling union.
I wonder what the voters who gave labour 40 seats in Scotland at the last election will think about Ed's decision to take exactly the same line as the hated tories.
Give him 40 seats again ?
They won't if Scotland votes Indy. All those Labour MPs will be gone for ever. Imagine.
There must be people at Labour HQ who are, about now, getting serious cold sweats. If they aren't they are catastrophically complacent.
As complacent as you?
How the F am I complacent? I think Salmond could pull it off, and I am frustrated by the uselessness of Labour, who seem unable to perceive that they are staring down the barrel of a gun. Only now do we get an intervention from Miliband, for instance.
I know Labour hate to agree with the Tories but that fact is, a Yes vote is apocalyptic for Labour - the loss of their great heartland. The damage will go way beyond the mere loss of MPs.
I should add that I still expect No to win, but it is uncomfortably close.
I'd pretty much agree with that - although Scots MPs have not swung the election result as much as people think. Even in 2005 Labour would have won without them.
But it is uncomfortably close - and the sheer passion and energy of Yes supporters make them a very worthy and formidable opponent. The nightmare scenario is that they squeak 50% on differential turnout.
As I am in a benign mood (a hint of spring down here in Cornwall), I will agree with that. It's a more interesting and tantalising contest than many anticipated.
My focus now is on Labour. They must be worried, yet they will be loathe to expend energy on Scotland when they see Cameron as the real enemy. Yet they will have to attend to Scotland, because if they lose it they face a nightmare scenario. Yet precious time and money expended in Scotland might cripple efforts at the GE.
I'm trying to think of a suitable analogy from military history. Perhaps Labour are Hitler, who was fatally but inevitably diverted into the Balkans, crucially delaying Operation Barbarossa. Arguably that lost him the whole war.
I'd suggest an analogy with some kind of shoogly military alliance (Bettertogether) with Labour providing the manpower, Tories money, and Libdems, well who the **** knows what they're providing. Maybe US providing Lend Lease to the Soviets, and straight into the Cold War after 1945.
I like your Allies analogy. Labour/Soviets, Tories/US, LibDems/UK. What does make the Nats ?
I don't know Monica, what does make the Nats?
Since the Allies were winners. I'd guess your analogy makes the Nats losers.
Ah, in English this time. If you can live with the UK being the Libdems (snigger), I can live with whatever half-cocked allusion you're making about the Nats.
Regional tensions clearly are at a fresh high. As well as Ukraine's own forces, security and military of the following countries have all heightened alert status and increased the deployment of intelligence resources in the last 24-hours to watch for a possible move by Russia:
Poland Romania Georgia Bulgaria Turkey
Obviously no co-incidence that they are all NATO or firmly within NATO's orbit. Whilst this is precautionary rather than a firm suggestion of an outright crisis on the way, it is a signal.
Ouch. I had (an amazing) dinner there just 2 weeks ago.
Stay away from all protest areas, esp at night.
You are still far more likely to die in a Bangkok road accident than by bullet or bomb.
I had a ride on a motorcycle taxi a few days ago which included going on one of the freeways or whatever they're called It was exciting but I won't be doing it again: it was by far the most dangerous thing I've ever done.
Damn straight. The bike taxis are vastly quicker than cars, but also horribly dangerous. I hate them and only take them when desperate.
Essentially the LibDem GE strategy is to focus entirely on about 75 of the 631 seats not held in Ulster or held by the Speaker and let the others wither on the vine.
But that's their strategy in EVERY election. And yet they still managed to lose 13 of their seats in the last election, when the general climate was much MUCH more favourable to them than it will be in 2015.
An excellent post save for the fact that it's utter drivel.
I suggest you research the net losses of the LibDems at the last GE. Your studies might also bimble in the direction of Lib/LibDem vote/seat share since Feb 74.
Further the LibDems targeted approx 125 seats last time not the approx 75 this time.
Feel free to post again when you've done your homework.
As I am in a benign mood (a hint of spring down here in Cornwall), I will agree with that. It's a more interesting and tantalising contest than many anticipated.
My focus now is on Labour. They must be worried, yet they will be loathe to expend energy on Scotland when they see Cameron as the real enemy. Yet they will have to attend to Scotland, because if they lose it they face a nightmare scenario. Yet precious time and money expended in Scotland might cripple efforts at the GE.
I'm trying to think of a suitable analogy from military history. Perhaps Labour are Hitler, who was fatally but inevitably diverted into the Balkans, crucially delaying Operation Barbarossa. Arguably that lost him the whole war.
I'd suggest an analogy with some kind of shoogly military alliance (Bettertogether) with Labour providing the manpower, Tories money, and Libdems, well who the **** knows what they're providing. Maybe US providing Lend Lease to the Soviets, and straight into the Cold War after 1945.
I like your Allies analogy. Labour/Soviets, Tories/US, LibDems/UK. What does make the Nats ?
I don't know Monica, what does make the Nats?
Since the Allies were winners. I'd guess your analogy makes the Nats losers.
Ah, in English this time. If you can live with the UK being the Libdems (snigger), I can live with whatever half-cocked allusion your making about the Nats.
In your pathetic eagerness to denigrate the YooKay, you formulated a beautiful analogy that I will cherish and repeat.
As I am in a benign mood (a hint of spring down here in Cornwall), I will agree with that. It's a more interesting and tantalising contest than many anticipated.
My focus now is on Labour. They must be worried, yet they will be loathe to expend energy on Scotland when they see Cameron as the real enemy. Yet they will have to attend to Scotland, because if they lose it they face a nightmare scenario. Yet precious time and money expended in Scotland might cripple efforts at the GE.
I'm trying to think of a suitable analogy from military history. Perhaps Labour are Hitler, who was fatally but inevitably diverted into the Balkans, crucially delaying Operation Barbarossa. Arguably that lost him the whole war.
I'd suggest an analogy with some kind of shoogly military alliance (Bettertogether) with Labour providing the manpower, Tories money, and Libdems, well who the **** knows what they're providing. Maybe US providing Lend Lease to the Soviets, and straight into the Cold War after 1945.
I like your Allies analogy. Labour/Soviets, Tories/US, LibDems/UK. What does make the Nats ?
I don't know Monica, what does make the Nats?
Since the Allies were winners. I'd guess your analogy makes the Nats losers.
Ah, in English this time. If you can live with the UK being the Libdems (snigger), I can live with whatever half-cocked allusion your making about the Nats.
In your pathetic eagerness to denigrate the YooKay, you formulated a beautiful analogy that I will cherish and repeat.
Come on Monica, admit it, this is the only place you get hot indy action. The rest of your life is property prices, bowel regularity and the weather. Your family's eyes must roll when you start blowing about 'Eck'.
Now Ed Miliband has expressly ruled out a sterling union.
I wonder what the voters who gave labour 40 seats in Scotland at the last election will think about Ed's decision to take exactly the same line as the hated tories.
Give him 40 seats again ?
They won't if Scotland votes Indy. All those Labour MPs will be gone for ever. Imagine.
There must be people at Labour HQ who are, about now, getting serious cold sweats. If they aren't they are catastrophically complacent.
As complacent as you?
How the F am I complacent? I think Salmond could pull it off, and I am frustrated by the uselessness of Labour, who seem unable to perceive that they are staring down the barrel of a gun. Only now do we get an intervention from Miliband, for instance.
I know Labour hate to agree with the Tories but that fact is, a Yes vote is apocalyptic for Labour - the loss of their great heartland. The damage will go way beyond the mere loss of MPs.
I should add that I still expect No to win, but it is uncomfortably close.
The nightmare scenario is that they squeak 50% on differential turnout.
See my "Anecdote Alert" 2 threads ago. You are right to be concerned by differential turnout. We are much better organised on the ground than the No side. Experienced SLab and trade unionist ground-workers and canvassers are unmotivated and unwilling to be Cameron's little helpers. The Scottish Tories are notoriously crap at the ground-war stuff, and the SLDs hardly exist on the ground any more, except in a few tiny pockets.
We are years ahead of No in terms of identifying our support. And we know from decades of bitter experience how vital it is to get those postal votes in and to get our vote out on the day.
If No is hoping to win by air war alone (primarily via the BBC) then they had better think again. Unless No starts getting door knocking, and door knocking very, very soon, your databases are going to be simply too sparse. Then it is seat of the pants time.
Building on my last post: one of those 13 seats the Lib Dems lost in 2010 was of course Montgomeryshire. Their winning margin the Libs held in that seat in the previous election, was almost as big as the winning margin they achieved in Hallam in 2010. And the national Lib->Tory swing in 2010 will surely be a fraction of what the national Lib->Lab swing will be next year....
Moving on, do Nats really believe Salmond can go seven months without putting forward a costed, explicit Plan B on the currency issue?
I can see why he is loathe to do it. Any detail at all just gives unionists something to aim at, and tear apart. Vagueness is his friend.
But now Ed Miliband has expressly ruled out a sterling union, so the pressure is growing. Can Salmond busk it all the way to September with vague promises? Maybe he can. On this question the whole campaign will turn, as it will decide the undecideds.
Alternatively, he could explain the degree of control over Scottish economic policy the rUK would need to agree to a currency union.
His problem is that neither scenario is an attractive one to him politically. He has no choice but to carry on avoiding going into any detail.
My guess is he will propose some flavour of sterlingisation; Osborne will say sterlingisation is fine (why wouldn't he?); Salmond will claim that the sterlingisation agreed to by Osborne = a currency union and that he has scored an epic victory over a feartie English numpty; and those who wish to believe Salmond will do so.
Moving on, do Nats really believe Salmond can go seven months without putting forward a costed, explicit Plan B on the currency issue?
I can see why he is loathe to do it. Any detail at all just gives unionists something to aim at, and tear apart. Vagueness is his friend.
But now Ed Miliband has expressly ruled out a sterling union, so the pressure is growing. Can Salmond busk it all the way to September with vague promises? Maybe he can. On this question the whole campaign will turn, as it will decide the undecideds.
Alternatively, he could explain the degree of control over Scottish economic policy the rUK would need to agree to a currency union.
His problem is that neither scenario is an attractive one to him politically. He has no choice but to carry on avoiding going into any detail.
My guess is he will propose some flavour of sterlingisation; Osborne will say sterlingisation is fine (why wouldn't he?); Salmond will claim that the sterlingisation agreed to by Osborne = a currency union and that he has scored an epic victory over a feartie English numpty; and those who wish to believe Salmond will do so.
Hopefully I wasn't the only one who mis-read that as "sterilisation"?
As I am in a benign mood (a hint of spring down here in Cornwall), I will agree with that. It's a more interesting and tantalising contest than many anticipated.
My focus now is on Labour. They must be worried, yet they will be loathe to expend energy on Scotland when they see Cameron as the real enemy. Yet they will have to attend to Scotland, because if they lose it they face a nightmare scenario. Yet precious time and money expended in Scotland might cripple efforts at the GE.
I'm trying to think of a suitable analogy from military history. Perhaps Labour are Hitler, who was fatally but inevitably diverted into the Balkans, crucially delaying Operation Barbarossa. Arguably that lost him the whole war.
I'd suggest an analogy with some kind of shoogly military alliance (Bettertogether) with Labour providing the manpower, Tories money, and Libdems, well who the **** knows what they're providing. Maybe US providing Lend Lease to the Soviets, and straight into the Cold War after 1945.
I like your Allies analogy. Labour/Soviets, Tories/US, LibDems/UK. What does make the Nats ?
I don't know Monica, what does make the Nats?
Since the Allies were winners. I'd guess your analogy makes the Nats losers.
Ah, in English this time. If you can live with the UK being the Libdems (snigger), I can live with whatever half-cocked allusion your making about the Nats.
In your pathetic eagerness to denigrate the YooKay, you formulated a beautiful analogy that I will cherish and repeat.
Come on Monica, admit it, this is the only place you get hot indy action. The rest of your life is property prices, bowel regularity and the weather. Your family's eyes must roll when you start blowing about 'Eck'.
Regional tensions clearly are at a fresh high. As well as Ukraine's own forces, security and military of the following countries have all heightened alert status and increased the deployment of intelligence resources in the last 24-hours to watch for a possible move by Russia:
Poland Romania Georgia Bulgaria Turkey
Obviously no co-incidence that they are all NATO or firmly within NATO's orbit. Whilst this is precautionary rather than a firm suggestion of an outright crisis on the way, it is a signal.
I was on holiday in Varna when the Georgia - Russia war was on. You'd have never have guessed what was happening on the other side of the Black sea from the beaches of Bulgaria.
As I am in a benign mood (a hint of spring down here in Cornwall), I will agree with that. It's a more interesting and tantalising contest than many anticipated.
My focus now is on Labour. They must be worried, yet they will be loathe to expend energy on Scotland when they see Cameron as the real enemy. Yet they will have to attend to Scotland, because if they lose it they face a nightmare scenario. Yet precious time and money expended in Scotland might cripple efforts at the GE.
I'm trying to think of a suitable analogy from military history. Perhaps Labour are Hitler, who was fatally but inevitably diverted into the Balkans, crucially delaying Operation Barbarossa. Arguably that lost him the whole war.
I'd suggest an analogy with some kind of shoogly military alliance (Bettertogether) with Labour providing the manpower, Tories money, and Libdems, well who the **** knows what they're providing. Maybe US providing Lend Lease to the Soviets, and straight into the Cold War after 1945.
I like your Allies analogy. Labour/Soviets, Tories/US, LibDems/UK. What does make the Nats ?
I don't know Monica, what does make the Nats?
Since the Allies were winners. I'd guess your analogy makes the Nats losers.
Ah, in English this time. If you can live with the UK being the Libdems (snigger), I can live with whatever half-cocked allusion your making about the Nats.
In your pathetic eagerness to denigrate the YooKay, you formulated a beautiful analogy that I will cherish and repeat.
Come on Monica, admit it, this is the only place you get hot indy action. The rest of your life is property prices, bowel regularity and the weather. Your family's eyes must roll when you start blowing about 'Eck'.
Essentially the LibDem GE strategy is to focus entirely on about 75 of the 631 seats not held in Ulster or held by the Speaker and let the others wither on the vine.
But that's their strategy in EVERY election. And yet they still managed to lose 13 of their seats in the last election, when the general climate was much MUCH more favourable to them than it will be in 2015.
An excellent post save for the fact that it's utter drivel.
I suggest you research the net losses of the LibDems at the last GE. Your studies might also bimble in the direction of Lib/LibDem vote/seat share since Feb 74.
Further the LibDems targeted approx 125 seats last time not the approx 75 this time.
Feel free to post again when you've done your homework.
Who said anything about NET losses? Yes, it's true, the Lib Dems did make quite a few gains last time, almost enough to compensate for the losses they suffered (though I don't think even the most optimistic Lib Dem seriously expects any gains in 2015). But that doesn't change the fact that they were toppled in 20% of the seats they won in 2005, even with so much going in their favour in 2010. It's just something which contradicts the theory that all Lib Dem-held seats are all utterly impregnable fortresses.
Interesting article in today's Sunday Times.-paywall http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/news/uk_news/National/article1379075.ece?CMP=OTH-gnws-standard-2014_02_22 The article refers to a list of constituencies affected by fracking in the HoC library but includes 28 Labour seats,22 Tory,4 LibDems and 1 Independent.55 seats in all and more than half the area in those seats is covered by a single exploration licence. If the Sussex protests are any thing to go by the political impact of fracking is significant,significant enough for one of the Balcombe protesters to set up a "Conservatives Against Fracking" group. This is likely to have an impact too on some constituency betting.It is worth having a gander at the map.
Essentially the LibDem GE strategy is to focus entirely on about 75 of the 631 seats not held in Ulster or held by the Speaker and let the others wither on the vine.
But that's their strategy in EVERY election. And yet they still managed to lose 13 of their seats in the last election, when the general climate was much MUCH more favourable to them than it will be in 2015.
An excellent post save for the fact that it's utter drivel.
I suggest you research the net losses of the LibDems at the last GE. Your studies might also bimble in the direction of Lib/LibDem vote/seat share since Feb 74.
Further the LibDems targeted approx 125 seats last time not the approx 75 this time.
Feel free to post again when you've done your homework.
Who said anything about NET losses? Yes, it's true, the Lib Dems did make quite a few gains last time, almost enough to compensate for the losses they suffered (though I don't think even the most optimistic Lib Dem seriously expects any gains in 2015). But that doesn't change the fact that they were toppled in 20% of the seats they won in 2005, even with so much going in their favour in 2010. It's just something which contradicts the theory that all Lib Dem-held seats are all utterly impregnable fortresses.
There are plenty of people and not just Lib Dems who expect 2 or 3 gains in 2015 .
Essentially the LibDem GE strategy is to focus entirely on about 75 of the 631 seats not held in Ulster or held by the Speaker and let the others wither on the vine.
But that's their strategy in EVERY election. And yet they still managed to lose 13 of their seats in the last election, when the general climate was much MUCH more favourable to them than it will be in 2015.
An excellent post save for the fact that it's utter drivel.
I suggest you research the net losses of the LibDems at the last GE. Your studies might also bimble in the direction of Lib/LibDem vote/seat share since Feb 74.
Further the LibDems targeted approx 125 seats last time not the approx 75 this time.
Feel free to post again when you've done your homework.
Who said anything about NET losses? Yes, it's true, the Lib Dems did make quite a few gains last time, almost enough to compensate for the losses they suffered (though I don't think even the most optimistic Lib Dem seriously expects any gains in 2015). But that doesn't change the fact that they were toppled in 20% of the seats they won in 2005, even with so much going in their favour in 2010. It's just something which contradicts the theory that all Lib Dem-held seats are all utterly impregnable fortresses.
Most of the seats that the LDs "lost" in 2010 were notional ones because of the boundary changes. A few incumbents standing again. Lembit the most notable, did lose but not the 20% figure that you quote.
''Experienced SLab and trade unionist ground-workers and canvassers are unmotivated and unwilling to be Cameron's little helpers.''
That is a fascinating, fascinating comment.
So now we have it.
Scottish labour would rather face final total defeat and separation and give England to the tories rather than work with Cameron.
Truly fascinating.
You misunderstand. A Yes result would not be "final total defeat" for the Scottish Labour Party. It would be a new start for them. Perhaps a very bright new start. Certainly a lot brighter than the depressing prospect of more Tory governments in London.
Do not underestimate how many Scottish Labour supporters are attracted by that new start concept. Polls indicate that anything up to 40% of Labour voters actually back independence. Many have jumped already. Some more, especially if a really big name goes public, and it could become a flood.
Essentially the LibDem GE strategy is to focus entirely on about 75 of the 631 seats not held in Ulster or held by the Speaker and let the others wither on the vine.
But that's their strategy in EVERY election. And yet they still managed to lose 13 of their seats in the last election, when the general climate was much MUCH more favourable to them than it will be in 2015.
An excellent post save for the fact that it's utter drivel.
I suggest you research the net losses of the LibDems at the last GE. Your studies might also bimble in the direction of Lib/LibDem vote/seat share since Feb 74.
Further the LibDems targeted approx 125 seats last time not the approx 75 this time.
Feel free to post again when you've done your homework.
Who said anything about NET losses? Yes, it's true, the Lib Dems did make quite a few gains last time, almost enough to compensate for the losses they suffered (though I don't think even the most optimistic Lib Dem seriously expects any gains in 2015). But that doesn't change the fact that they were toppled in 20% of the seats they won in 2005, even with so much going in their favour in 2010. It's just something which contradicts the theory that all Lib Dem-held seats are all utterly impregnable fortresses.
Nobody has suggested that LibDem seats are "impregnable fortresses" but many yellow peril seats are far more resistant to ordinary swing and nominal national vote share than might at first be apparent
These numbers for LibDem/Lib vote share/seats might also give pause for thought.
Feb 74 - 19.3% - 14 seats Oct 74 - 18.3% - 13 May 79 - 13.8% - 11 Jun 83 - 25.4% - 23 Jun 87 - 22.6% - 22 Apr 92 - 17.8% - 20 May 97 - 16.8% - 46 Jun 01 - 18.3% - 52 May 05 - 22.0% - 62 May 10 - 23.0% - 57
Essentially the LibDem GE strategy is to focus entirely on about 75 of the 631 seats not held in Ulster or held by the Speaker and let the others wither on the vine.
But that's their strategy in EVERY election. And yet they still managed to lose 13 of their seats in the last election, when the general climate was much MUCH more favourable to them than it will be in 2015.
An excellent post save for the fact that it's utter drivel.
I suggest you research the net losses of the LibDems at the last GE. Your studies might also bimble in the direction of Lib/LibDem vote/seat share since Feb 74.
Further the LibDems targeted approx 125 seats last time not the approx 75 this time.
Feel free to post again when you've done your homework.
Who said anything about NET losses? Yes, it's true, the Lib Dems did make quite a few gains last time, almost enough to compensate for the losses they suffered (though I don't think even the most optimistic Lib Dem seriously expects any gains in 2015). But that doesn't change the fact that they were toppled in 20% of the seats they won in 2005, even with so much going in their favour in 2010. It's just something which contradicts the theory that all Lib Dem-held seats are all utterly impregnable fortresses.
There are plenty of people and not just Lib Dems who expect 2 or 3 gains in 2015 .
Essentially the LibDem GE strategy is to focus entirely on about 75 of the 631 seats not held in Ulster or held by the Speaker and let the others wither on the vine.
But that's their strategy in EVERY election. And yet they still managed to lose 13 of their seats in the last election, when the general climate was much MUCH more favourable to them than it will be in 2015.
An excellent post save for the fact that it's utter drivel.
I suggest you research the net losses of the LibDems at the last GE. Your studies might also bimble in the direction of Lib/LibDem vote/seat share since Feb 74.
Further the LibDems targeted approx 125 seats last time not the approx 75 this time.
Feel free to post again when you've done your homework.
Who said anything about NET losses? Yes, it's true, the Lib Dems did make quite a few gains last time, almost enough to compensate for the losses they suffered (though I don't think even the most optimistic Lib Dem seriously expects any gains in 2015). But that doesn't change the fact that they were toppled in 20% of the seats they won in 2005, even with so much going in their favour in 2010. It's just something which contradicts the theory that all Lib Dem-held seats are all utterly impregnable fortresses.
There are plenty of people and not just Lib Dems who expect 2 or 3 gains in 2015 .
Oh you teaser! Spill the beans!
Oxford West & Abingdon and Camborne & Redruth look ripe for Lib Dem gains.
Essentially the LibDem GE strategy is to focus entirely on about 75 of the 631 seats not held in Ulster or held by the Speaker and let the others wither on the vine.
But that's their strategy in EVERY election. And yet they still managed to lose 13 of their seats in the last election, when the general climate was much MUCH more favourable to them than it will be in 2015.
An excellent post save for the fact that it's utter drivel.
I suggest you research the net losses of the LibDems at the last GE. Your studies might also bimble in the direction of Lib/LibDem vote/seat share since Feb 74.
Further the LibDems targeted approx 125 seats last time not the approx 75 this time.
Feel free to post again when you've done your homework.
Who said anything about NET losses? Yes, it's true, the Lib Dems did make quite a few gains last time, almost enough to compensate for the losses they suffered (though I don't think even the most optimistic Lib Dem seriously expects any gains in 2015). But that doesn't change the fact that they were toppled in 20% of the seats they won in 2005, even with so much going in their favour in 2010. It's just something which contradicts the theory that all Lib Dem-held seats are all utterly impregnable fortresses.
Most of the seats that the LDs "lost" in 2010 were notional ones because of the boundary changes. A few incumbents standing again. Lembit the most notable, did lose but not the 20% figure that you quote.
Lembit lost, what was a Lib/LibDem stronghold for over a century, because voters started to laugh at him not with him. He became more a figure of fun and constituents are resistant to being represented by someone who was becoming a laughing stock for far too many.
Apparently, if Antony Beevor is to be believed ("The Second World War", Phoenix Books, 2013), the Yugoslav/Greek campaign did NOT significantly delay Barbarossa.
Moscow could have been a realistic objective before the Russian winter set in if forces from Army Group Centre had not been diverted south to assist in the conquest of Ukraine.
Essentially the LibDem GE strategy is to focus entirely on about 75 of the 631 seats not held in Ulster or held by the Speaker and let the others wither on the vine.
But that's their strategy in EVERY election. And yet they still managed to lose 13 of their seats in the last election, when the general climate was much MUCH more favourable to them than it will be in 2015.
An excellent post save for the fact that it's utter drivel.
I suggest you research the net losses of the LibDems at the last GE. Your studies might also bimble in the direction of Lib/LibDem vote/seat share since Feb 74.
Further the LibDems targeted approx 125 seats last time not the approx 75 this time.
Feel free to post again when you've done your homework.
Who said anything about NET losses? Yes, it's true, the Lib Dems did make quite a few gains last time, almost enough to compensate for the losses they suffered (though I don't think even the most optimistic Lib Dem seriously expects any gains in 2015). But that doesn't change the fact that they were toppled in 20% of the seats they won in 2005, even with so much going in their favour in 2010. It's just something which contradicts the theory that all Lib Dem-held seats are all utterly impregnable fortresses.
There are plenty of people and not just Lib Dems who expect 2 or 3 gains in 2015 .
Oh you teaser! Spill the beans!
There was a discussion recently on the Vote2012 website and around 12 seats were identified with a 25 to 50 % chance of a Lib Dem gain , they included OxW and Abingdon , Cornwall SE , Falmouth and Camborne .
I'd also add in Truro and Newton Abbott as other possible Lib Dem gains.
I'm looking at the possibility of a reverse @FrankBooth / @Danny565 moment and Ed Miliband is decapitated by his brother standing for the Natural Law Party.
Moscow could have been a realistic objective before the Russian winter set in if forces from Army Group Centre had not been diverted south to assist in the conquest of Ukraine.
As I remember Moscow wasn;t that strategically important for either side. Hitler wanted Russia's southern oilfields - and he wanted Stalingrad to humiliate Stalin.
I'd also add in Truro and Newton Abbott as other possible Lib Dem gains.
I'm looking at the possibility of a reverse @FrankBooth / @Danny565 moment and Ed Miliband is decapitated by his brother standing for the Natural Law Party.
I'd also add in Truro and Newton Abbott as other possible Lib Dem gains.
I'm looking at the possibility of a reverse @FrankBooth / @Danny565 moment and Ed Miliband is decapitated by his brother standing for the Natural Law Party.
Yogic Flyers Winning Here !!
Lib Dems gaining Doncaster North would be funnier
I'll put to my ARSE .... but I'm not hopeful .... sadly.
But here's one for PBers to chew on over on a winter Sunday evening with your favourite tipple to hand :
I'd also add in Truro and Newton Abbott as other possible Lib Dem gains.
I'm looking at the possibility of a reverse @FrankBooth / @Danny565 moment and Ed Miliband is decapitated by his brother standing for the Natural Law Party.
Yogic Flyers Winning Here !!
Lib Dems gaining Doncaster North would be funnier
I'll put to my ARSE .... but I'm not hopeful .... sadly.
But here's one for PBers to chew on over on a winter Sunday evening with your favourite tipple to hand :
I'd also add in Truro and Newton Abbott as other possible Lib Dem gains.
I'm looking at the possibility of a reverse @FrankBooth / @Danny565 moment and Ed Miliband is decapitated by his brother standing for the Natural Law Party.
Yogic Flyers Winning Here !!
Lib Dems gaining Doncaster North would be funnier
I'll put to my ARSE .... but I'm not hopeful .... sadly.
But here's one for PBers to chew on over on a winter Sunday evening with your favourite tipple to hand :
A bit more on the Euro draw, which I think offers some interesting betting opportunities, particularly if you get on early.
The top two in each group qualify automatically (plus the highest scoring third place). The rest of the third placed teams play off. Given that the top 16 teams (France being one of them as host) will qualify automatically, the play offs are likely to be fairly weak - so Scotland and Wales have decent shouts if they can just finish third.
As an aside, Gibraltar enter the tournament for the first time - they were drawn against Spain but moved to avoid inflaming the political situation. I don't think that is right or fair - Northern Ireland have faced Ireland in recent years, while Croatia have met Serbia.
I'm hunting for a 'to qualify' market - it's bound to offer a lot more value than the group winner market.
Regional tensions clearly are at a fresh high. As well as Ukraine's own forces, security and military of the following countries have all heightened alert status and increased the deployment of intelligence resources in the last 24-hours to watch for a possible move by Russia:
Poland Romania Georgia Bulgaria Turkey
Obviously no co-incidence that they are all NATO or firmly within NATO's orbit. Whilst this is precautionary rather than a firm suggestion of an outright crisis on the way, it is a signal.
First Y0kel, the only country in NATO on your list is Turkey, who now have enough problems of it's own internally, and more on the borders of Syria and Lebanon.
Secondly Poland, Romania and Bulgaria are in the EU, but the only major armed forces are Polish, and while they would love to liberate such lost towns ads Lvov (now Lviv), they are not going to get embroiled with Russia if it makes a military move. As for Georgia, I doubt they want another round with Russia.
Third and last, I cannot see Germany or France (The only major military formations in the EU on mainland Europe) wishing to be physically embroiled in the Ukraine, unless Merkel and Hollande do a 100% about face.
A bit more on the Euro draw, which I think offers some interesting betting opportunities, particularly if you get on early.
The top two in each group qualify automatically (plus the highest scoring third place). The rest of the third placed teams play off. Given that the top 16 teams (France being one of them as host) will qualify automatically, the play offs are likely to be fairly weak - so Scotland and Wales have decent shouts if they can just finish third.
As an aside, Gibraltar enter the tournament for the first time - they were drawn against Spain but moved to avoid inflaming the political situation. I don't think that is right or fair - Northern Ireland have faced Ireland in recent years, while Croatia have met Serbia.
I'm hunting for a 'to qualify' market - it's bound to offer a lot more value than the group winner market.
The only real prospects of potential Labour losses in 2015 are in Scotland to the SNP (Falkirk maybe the best bet?). Other than that, I can't really see anything. Southampton Itchen is the only one which even stands out as a potential possibility, with the incumbent standing down and it being generally in a Labour desert.
Ouch. I had (an amazing) dinner there just 2 weeks ago.
Stay away from all protest areas, esp at night.
You are still far more likely to die in a Bangkok road accident than by bullet or bomb.
I had a ride on a motorcycle taxi a few days ago which included going on one of the freeways or whatever they're called It was exciting but I won't be doing it again: it was by far the most dangerous thing I've ever done.
Damn straight. The bike taxis are vastly quicker than cars, but also horribly dangerous. I hate them and only take them when desperate.
However, they're the only way to get around Paris.
I get to spend a lot of the next three months in Paris rather than rural Germany. Yah for me!
A bit more on the Euro draw, which I think offers some interesting betting opportunities, particularly if you get on early.
The top two in each group qualify automatically (plus the highest scoring third place). The rest of the third placed teams play off. Given that the top 16 teams (France being one of them as host) will qualify automatically, the play offs are likely to be fairly weak - so Scotland and Wales have decent shouts if they can just finish third.
As an aside, Gibraltar enter the tournament for the first time - they were drawn against Spain but moved to avoid inflaming the political situation. I don't think that is right or fair - Northern Ireland have faced Ireland in recent years, while Croatia have met Serbia.
I'm hunting for a 'to qualify' market - it's bound to offer a lot more value than the group winner market.
Thanks. What I cannot fathom is whether their qualifying through the play off counts as a winner. If so, Wales are ludicrous value. The trouble with doing this on the iphone is that you get a stripped back version that lacks detail and is hard to navigate.
A bit more on the Euro draw, which I think offers some interesting betting opportunities, particularly if you get on early.
The top two in each group qualify automatically (plus the highest scoring third place). The rest of the third placed teams play off. Given that the top 16 teams (France being one of them as host) will qualify automatically, the play offs are likely to be fairly weak - so Scotland and Wales have decent shouts if they can just finish third.
As an aside, Gibraltar enter the tournament for the first time - they were drawn against Spain but moved to avoid inflaming the political situation. I don't think that is right or fair - Northern Ireland have faced Ireland in recent years, while Croatia have met Serbia.
I'm hunting for a 'to qualify' market - it's bound to offer a lot more value than the group winner market.
Thanks. What I cannot fathom is whether their qualifying through the play off counts as a winner. If so, Wales are ludicrous value. The trouble with doing this on the iphone is that you get a stripped back version that lacks detail and is hard to navigate.
A bit more on the Euro draw, which I think offers some interesting betting opportunities, particularly if you get on early.
The top two in each group qualify automatically (plus the highest scoring third place). The rest of the third placed teams play off. Given that the top 16 teams (France being one of them as host) will qualify automatically, the play offs are likely to be fairly weak - so Scotland and Wales have decent shouts if they can just finish third.
As an aside, Gibraltar enter the tournament for the first time - they were drawn against Spain but moved to avoid inflaming the political situation. I don't think that is right or fair - Northern Ireland have faced Ireland in recent years, while Croatia have met Serbia.
I'm hunting for a 'to qualify' market - it's bound to offer a lot more value than the group winner market.
Thanks. What I cannot fathom is whether their qualifying through the play off counts as a winner. If so, Wales are ludicrous value. The trouble with doing this on the iphone is that you get a stripped back version that lacks detail and is hard to navigate.
''Experienced SLab and trade unionist ground-workers and canvassers are unmotivated and unwilling to be Cameron's little helpers.''
That is a fascinating, fascinating comment.
So now we have it.
Scottish labour would rather face final total defeat and separation and give England to the tories rather than work with Cameron.
Truly fascinating.
You misunderstand. A Yes result would not be "final total defeat" for the Scottish Labour Party. It would be a new start for them. Perhaps a very bright new start. Certainly a lot brighter than the depressing prospect of more Tory governments in London.
Do not underestimate how many Scottish Labour supporters are attracted by that new start concept. Polls indicate that anything up to 40% of Labour voters actually back independence. Many have jumped already. Some more, especially if a really big name goes public, and it could become a flood.
If I was Salmond, I would have a couple of big names in my back pocket to use closer to the event.
Are there any big SLAB names that have been uncharacteristically quiet of late?
A bit more on the Euro draw, which I think offers some interesting betting opportunities, particularly if you get on early.
The top two in each group qualify automatically (plus the highest scoring third place). The rest of the third placed teams play off. Given that the top 16 teams (France being one of them as host) will qualify automatically, the play offs are likely to be fairly weak - so Scotland and Wales have decent shouts if they can just finish third.
As an aside, Gibraltar enter the tournament for the first time - they were drawn against Spain but moved to avoid inflaming the political situation. I don't think that is right or fair - Northern Ireland have faced Ireland in recent years, while Croatia have met Serbia.
I'm hunting for a 'to qualify' market - it's bound to offer a lot more value than the group winner market.
Thanks. What I cannot fathom is whether their qualifying through the play off counts as a winner. If so, Wales are ludicrous value. The trouble with doing this on the iphone is that you get a stripped back version that lacks detail and is hard to navigate.
Unfortunately the ludicrous value on Wales is with V Chandler, so those of us who have taken serious advantage of that company in the past aren't allowed to do so again.
I'd also add in Truro and Newton Abbott as other possible Lib Dem gains.
I'm looking at the possibility of a reverse @FrankBooth / @Danny565 moment and Ed Miliband is decapitated by his brother standing for the Natural Law Party.
Yogic Flyers Winning Here !!
Lib Dems gaining Doncaster North would be funnier
I'll put to my ARSE .... but I'm not hopeful .... sadly.
But here's one for PBers to chew on over on a winter Sunday evening with your favourite tipple to hand :
Which seats might Labour lose in the 2015 GE ??
Chesterfield?
I think not.
Historically, and certainly since 1966, it is not unusual for a party gaining many seats to lose the odd one :
1966 - Lab gained 48 but lost 1 1970 - Con gained 77 and lost 3 1979 - Con gained 62 and lost 1 1983 - Con gained 58 and lost 10 1992 - Lab gained 42 and lost 1
I'd also add in Truro and Newton Abbott as other possible Lib Dem gains.
I'm looking at the possibility of a reverse @FrankBooth / @Danny565 moment and Ed Miliband is decapitated by his brother standing for the Natural Law Party.
Yogic Flyers Winning Here !!
Lib Dems gaining Doncaster North would be funnier
I'll put to my ARSE .... but I'm not hopeful .... sadly.
But here's one for PBers to chew on over on a winter Sunday evening with your favourite tipple to hand :
Which seats might Labour lose in the 2015 GE ??
Chesterfield?
I think not.
Historically, and certainly since 1966, it is not unusual for a party gaining many seats to lose the odd one :
1966 - Lab gained 48 but lost 1 1970 - Con gained 77 and lost 3 1979 - Con gained 62 and lost 1 1983 - Con gained 58 and lost 10 1992 - Lab gained 42 and lost 1
I'd also add in Truro and Newton Abbott as other possible Lib Dem gains.
I'm looking at the possibility of a reverse @FrankBooth / @Danny565 moment and Ed Miliband is decapitated by his brother standing for the Natural Law Party.
Yogic Flyers Winning Here !!
Lib Dems gaining Doncaster North would be funnier
I'll put to my ARSE .... but I'm not hopeful .... sadly.
But here's one for PBers to chew on over on a winter Sunday evening with your favourite tipple to hand :
Which seats might Labour lose in the 2015 GE ??
Chesterfield?
I think not.
Historically, and certainly since 1966, it is not unusual for a party gaining many seats to lose the odd one :
1966 - Lab gained 48 but lost 1 1970 - Con gained 77 and lost 3 1979 - Con gained 62 and lost 1 1983 - Con gained 58 and lost 10 1992 - Lab gained 42 and lost 1
A lot of food for thought in there for BetoryTogether fans.
... The frontline in the battle for Scotland is Glasgow, in its long-neglected and poverty-stricken housing schemes. It is there that the 18 September referendum will be won and lost...
... Although I was born in Glasgow, educated at Glasgow University and worked for both the Herald and the Scotsman, I come fresh to the conversation, after working in the US for the Guardian for the past seven years... My own family, still living in Glasgow, whom I had expected to be voting no after backing Labour decade after decade are among the don't knows, leaning towards independence, with a nephew already decided in favour.
Another surprise comes from my contemporaries at university, who in our student days were all well to the left and viewed the Scottish National party (SNP) with contempt as the "Tartan Tories". One of those friends, John Henry, a retired history teacher, has only ever voted Labour or Communist but will vote for independence.
... Labour worries about two kinds of voter. Those like Henry who came from the working class, went to university and on into the professions and are now thoroughly disillusioned with Labour. The other, bigger worry, though, is among the disenchanted still living in deprived areas in Dundee, Edinburgh and pockets elsewhere in Lothian and Lanarkshire, but primarily in Glasgow.
... Another surprise is the make-up of a group of yes campaigners out on a soggy night delivering leaflets round Barmulloch, another of the deprived areas of Glasgow's East End. It was led by an SNP member but, contrary to expectations, the other volunteers were an eclectic mix: a Green, two Labour supporters and a former Liberal Democrat. Also in the mix was Graham Campbell, 47, originally from Jamaica, who arrived in Glasgow a decade ago...
''Experienced SLab and trade unionist ground-workers and canvassers are unmotivated and unwilling to be Cameron's little helpers.''
That is a fascinating, fascinating comment.
So now we have it.
Scottish labour would rather face final total defeat and separation and give England to the tories rather than work with Cameron.
Truly fascinating.
You misunderstand. A Yes result would not be "final total defeat" for the Scottish Labour Party. It would be a new start for them. Perhaps a very bright new start. Certainly a lot brighter than the depressing prospect of more Tory governments in London.
Do not underestimate how many Scottish Labour supporters are attracted by that new start concept. Polls indicate that anything up to 40% of Labour voters actually back independence. Many have jumped already. Some more, especially if a really big name goes public, and it could become a flood.
If I was Salmond, I would have a couple of big names in my back pocket to use closer to the event.
Are there any big SLAB names that have been uncharacteristically quiet of late?
All of them, maybe? Apart from Mr Darling of course. And presumably Ms Lamont, and the likes of Mr Davidson MP and Mr Hood MP who have pretty much burnt their bridges. OK, this is a bit of an exaggeration but they are so quiet those days that it is not far enough from the apparent truth to be excluded as an interesting working hypothesis.
Note, the Scottish Football team have NOT qualified for a major football tournament since the Scottish Parliament opened.
Just saying.
And I thought Scottish rugby had a recent bad record .... but heck I'm sure our footballers have won the odd match since the Scottish Parliament opened in around AD1225 ?!?
Note, the Scottish Football team have NOT qualified for a major football tournament since the Scottish Parliament opened.
Just saying.
And I thought Scottish rugby had a recent bad record .... but heck I'm sure our footballers have won the odd match since the Scottish Parliament opened in around AD1225 ?!?
Trying for the life of me to get a bet on Wales with Victor - their mobile site is almost as dreadful as Laddys. It's by no means clear to me that the 12/1 includes via the play off. It says "top two finish", which strongly suggests not...
Trying for the life of me to get a bet on Wales with Victor - their mobile site is almost as dreadful as Laddys. It's by no means clear to me that the 12/1 includes via the play off. It says "top two finish", which strongly suggests not...
Trying for the life of me to get a bet on Wales with Victor - their mobile site is almost as dreadful as Laddys. It's by no means clear to me that the 12/1 includes via the play off. It says "top two finish", which strongly suggests not...
A bit more on the Euro draw, which I think offers some interesting betting opportunities, particularly if you get on early.
The top two in each group qualify automatically (plus the highest scoring third place). The rest of the third placed teams play off. Given that the top 16 teams (France being one of them as host) will qualify automatically, the play offs are likely to be fairly weak - so Scotland and Wales have decent shouts if they can just finish third.
As an aside, Gibraltar enter the tournament for the first time - they were drawn against Spain but moved to avoid inflaming the political situation. I don't think that is right or fair - Northern Ireland have faced Ireland in recent years, while Croatia have met Serbia.
I'm hunting for a 'to qualify' market - it's bound to offer a lot more value than the group winner market.
Thanks. What I cannot fathom is whether their qualifying through the play off counts as a winner. If so, Wales are ludicrous value. The trouble with doing this on the iphone is that you get a stripped back version that lacks detail and is hard to navigate.
Can't you tell the browser to "force desktop site"?
I am not so sure that the deviation of the Panzer groups to the Kiev encirclement was a mistake, the mistake was in underestimating Soviet resilience and capacity to absorb suffering.
The German Infantry Divisions were quite heavily battered by the reduction of the Minsk encirclement, as well as the first battle of Smolensk, and struggling for supplies. They needed preparation before Operation Typhoon could commence. This may well have kicked off a bit earlier, but the cost may well have been a long southern flank exposed for a Stalingrad style encirclement from the Ukranian front.
Moscow could have been a realistic objective before the Russian winter set in if forces from Army Group Centre had not been diverted south to assist in the conquest of Ukraine.
As I remember Moscow wasn;t that strategically important for either side. Hitler wanted Russia's southern oilfields - and he wanted Stalingrad to humiliate Stalin.
Trying for the life of me to get a bet on Wales with Victor - their mobile site is almost as dreadful as Laddys. It's by no means clear to me that the 12/1 includes via the play off. It says "top two finish", which strongly suggests not...
Yet another CALAMITOUS result after playing a Europa League game just before it...
Same old, same old.
Look on the bright side, next weekend you play on Sunday after a Europa League game AND THE ENGLAND CRICKET TEAM ARE PLAYING ON THE SAME DAY!
Oh.
Home to Cardiff, who lost 4-0 at home to Hull - you think Spurs could possibly muck that up? We don't even need those other omens to do that...
Spurs Season Endings - domestically 23/2/2014, in europe 27/2/2014.
The only cause for hope?
Lord Sugar@Lord_Sugar·1h With prospect of playing Chelsea ,Arsenal and Liverpool in next few games. Some might say with the loss at Norwich. Spurs season is over
Trying for the life of me to get a bet on Wales with Victor - their mobile site is almost as dreadful as Laddys. It's by no means clear to me that the 12/1 includes via the play off. It says "top two finish", which strongly suggests not...
With Skybet it is to qualify
To Qualify as per their website and app
SkyBet is 7/4...
Yeah but BetVictor closed my account.
Not to worry – the BetVictor price is top two finish only – definitely. I double checked it. I've not taken the 7/4 from SkyBet as I think it's only marginal value. 12/1 would have been a monster bet!
Yet another CALAMITOUS result after playing a Europa League game just before it...
Same old, same old.
Look on the bright side, next weekend you play on Sunday after a Europa League game AND THE ENGLAND CRICKET TEAM ARE PLAYING ON THE SAME DAY!
Oh.
Home to Cardiff, who lost 4-0 at home to Hull - you think Spurs could possibly muck that up? We don't even need those other omens to do that...
Spurs Season Endings - domestically 23/2/2014, in europe 27/2/2014.
The only cause for hope?
Lord Sugar@Lord_Sugar·1h With prospect of playing Chelsea ,Arsenal and Liverpool in next few games. Some might say with the loss at Norwich. Spurs season is over
I backed Norwich to win today and Emmanuel as FGS.
Cardiff don't tempt me, even at 19/2 to win at the Lane.
A bit more on the Euro draw, which I think offers some interesting betting opportunities, particularly if you get on early.
The top two in each group qualify automatically (plus the highest scoring third place). The rest of the third placed teams play off. Given that the top 16 teams (France being one of them as host) will qualify automatically, the play offs are likely to be fairly weak - so Scotland and Wales have decent shouts if they can just finish third.
As an aside, Gibraltar enter the tournament for the first time - they were drawn against Spain but moved to avoid inflaming the political situation. I don't think that is right or fair - Northern Ireland have faced Ireland in recent years, while Croatia have met Serbia.
I'm hunting for a 'to qualify' market - it's bound to offer a lot more value than the group winner market.
Thanks. What I cannot fathom is whether their qualifying through the play off counts as a winner. If so, Wales are ludicrous value. The trouble with doing this on the iphone is that you get a stripped back version that lacks detail and is hard to navigate.
Can't you tell the browser to "force desktop site"?
It's just as bad, but in a different way
Sadly the 12/1 price is a mirage as it does not allow qualification via the playoffs – you have been warned!
Trying for the life of me to get a bet on Wales with Victor - their mobile site is almost as dreadful as Laddys. It's by no means clear to me that the 12/1 includes via the play off. It says "top two finish", which strongly suggests not...
With Skybet it is to qualify
To Qualify as per their website and app
SkyBet is 7/4...
Yeah but BetVictor closed my account.
Not to worry – the BetVictor price is top two finish only – definitely. I double checked it. I've not taken the 7/4 from SkyBet as I think it's only marginal value. 12/1 would have been a monster bet!
This is still a good bet
Luis Suarez to outscore the England World Cup Team 7/2
Note, the Scottish Football team have NOT qualified for a major football tournament since the Scottish Parliament opened.
Just saying.
And I thought Scottish rugby had a recent bad record .... but heck I'm sure our footballers have won the odd match since the Scottish Parliament opened in around AD1225 ?!?
Huh? You are missing out about 250 years of the parliament's history. In 978 Kenneth II held at least one parliament at Lanark Castle.
Yet another CALAMITOUS result after playing a Europa League game just before it...
Same old, same old.
Look on the bright side, next weekend you play on Sunday after a Europa League game AND THE ENGLAND CRICKET TEAM ARE PLAYING ON THE SAME DAY!
Oh.
Home to Cardiff, who lost 4-0 at home to Hull - you think Spurs could possibly muck that up? We don't even need those other omens to do that...
Spurs Season Endings - domestically 23/2/2014, in europe 27/2/2014.
The only cause for hope?
Lord Sugar@Lord_Sugar·1h With prospect of playing Chelsea ,Arsenal and Liverpool in next few games. Some might say with the loss at Norwich. Spurs season is over
I backed Norwich to win today and Emmanuel as FGS.
Cardiff don't tempt me, even at 19/2 to win at the Lane.
Nailed on Spurs win next weekend.
(And I'm going to back you to win on Thursday)
You have an amazing knack of having winning bets after the event!
Trying for the life of me to get a bet on Wales with Victor - their mobile site is almost as dreadful as Laddys. It's by no means clear to me that the 12/1 includes via the play off. It says "top two finish", which strongly suggests not...
With Skybet it is to qualify
To Qualify as per their website and app
SkyBet is 7/4...
Yeah but BetVictor closed my account.
Not to worry – the BetVictor price is top two finish only – definitely. I double checked it. I've not taken the 7/4 from SkyBet as I think it's only marginal value. 12/1 would have been a monster bet!
This is still a good bet
Luis Suarez to outscore the England World Cup Team 7/2
Yet another CALAMITOUS result after playing a Europa League game just before it...
Same old, same old.
Look on the bright side, next weekend you play on Sunday after a Europa League game AND THE ENGLAND CRICKET TEAM ARE PLAYING ON THE SAME DAY!
Oh.
Home to Cardiff, who lost 4-0 at home to Hull - you think Spurs could possibly muck that up? We don't even need those other omens to do that...
Spurs Season Endings - domestically 23/2/2014, in europe 27/2/2014.
The only cause for hope?
Lord Sugar@Lord_Sugar·1h With prospect of playing Chelsea ,Arsenal and Liverpool in next few games. Some might say with the loss at Norwich. Spurs season is over
I backed Norwich to win today and Emmanuel as FGS.
Cardiff don't tempt me, even at 19/2 to win at the Lane.
Nailed on Spurs win next weekend.
(And I'm going to back you to win on Thursday)
You have an amazing knack of having winning bets after the event!
Presumably you'll have us to win 2-1 vs Dnipro and thus we go out anyway?
Spurs & Nailed On are not words to ever be used positively in a sentence... this summed up my feelings during today...
Stephen Pollard@stephenpollard·3h I must have done something truly awful in a past life to be cursed with supporting Spurs #COYS
We are approaching that point where even the most optimistic of Liberal supporters (Mark Senior) will see no way back under Clegg. Cable has probably combined emergency talks with a spot of skiing.
Yet another CALAMITOUS result after playing a Europa League game just before it...
Same old, same old.
Look on the bright side, next weekend you play on Sunday after a Europa League game AND THE ENGLAND CRICKET TEAM ARE PLAYING ON THE SAME DAY!
Oh.
Home to Cardiff, who lost 4-0 at home to Hull - you think Spurs could possibly muck that up? We don't even need those other omens to do that...
Spurs Season Endings - domestically 23/2/2014, in europe 27/2/2014.
The only cause for hope?
Lord Sugar@Lord_Sugar·1h With prospect of playing Chelsea ,Arsenal and Liverpool in next few games. Some might say with the loss at Norwich. Spurs season is over
I backed Norwich to win today and Emmanuel as FGS.
Cardiff don't tempt me, even at 19/2 to win at the Lane.
Nailed on Spurs win next weekend.
(And I'm going to back you to win on Thursday)
You have an amazing knack of having winning bets after the event!
Not really, I tip a lot of my bets beforehand on here.
I've been busy this weekend, or would have posted them on here.
As Scrapheap can attest, a lot of my winning bets this year have involved Spurs matches.
Trying for the life of me to get a bet on Wales with Victor - their mobile site is almost as dreadful as Laddys. It's by no means clear to me that the 12/1 includes via the play off. It says "top two finish", which strongly suggests not...
With Skybet it is to qualify
To Qualify as per their website and app
SkyBet is 7/4...
Yeah but BetVictor closed my account.
Not to worry – the BetVictor price is top two finish only – definitely. I double checked it. I've not taken the 7/4 from SkyBet as I think it's only marginal value. 12/1 would have been a monster bet!
This is still a good bet
Luis Suarez to outscore the England World Cup Team 7/2
Suarez is a flat track bully, he hasn't scored against the top three or Utd this season, he hasn't scored for six games despite Liverpool rattling them in for fun.
For sure he'll score against Costa Rica but so will England, his record against decent teams is woeful and while this bet may win I most definitely would not consider it a decent bet.
Comments
You nats are funny though. Not being able to shove 40 left wing labour MPs up the tories' backsides is a very, very heavy price to pay for independence isn't it???? come on, you know you want to....
Can't think of a modern analogy - I wondered about the Finns in the Continuation War of 1941-5, and the way they ended up fighting the retreating Germans and being invaded and losing territory to the Russians, and losing sympathy from the Western Allies, but it doesn't seem to work out. Perhaps something specifically Balkan would work. Or perhaps simply the way in which the UK planned to fight a Far Eastern war but ended up being involved in an European war first; or on a smaller scale having to cope with the threat of invasion at home but with Suez, the Empire and oil fields being threatened by the Italians and then the Germans in the Western Desert.
And labour almost faced evisceration in England in 1983. Only Scotland and Wales stopped them becoming a rump.
But it is uncomfortably close - and the sheer passion and energy of Yes supporters make them a very worthy and formidable opponent. The nightmare scenario is that they squeak 50% on differential turnout.
If you can live with the UK being the Libdems (snigger), I can live with whatever half-cocked allusion you're making about the Nats.
Regional tensions clearly are at a fresh high. As well as Ukraine's own forces, security and military of the following countries have all heightened alert status and increased the deployment of intelligence resources in the last 24-hours to watch for a possible move by Russia:
Poland
Romania
Georgia
Bulgaria
Turkey
Obviously no co-incidence that they are all NATO or firmly within NATO's orbit. Whilst this is precautionary rather than a firm suggestion of an outright crisis on the way, it is a signal.
Effectively giving the tories a working majority nine months before the election.
Unless of course labour were to keep using their Scotsmen. In which case they face annihilation.
http://www.election.demon.co.uk/ge1997.html
http://www.election.demon.co.uk/ge2001.html
I suggest you research the net losses of the LibDems at the last GE. Your studies might also bimble in the direction of Lib/LibDem vote/seat share since Feb 74.
Further the LibDems targeted approx 125 seats last time not the approx 75 this time.
Feel free to post again when you've done your homework.
Fair enough and I would agree with your point. Labour can win.
I still think a labour party with a left wing agenda could never win in England, however.
A yes vote would change labour fundamentally.
We are years ahead of No in terms of identifying our support. And we know from decades of bitter experience how vital it is to get those postal votes in and to get our vote out on the day.
If No is hoping to win by air war alone (primarily via the BBC) then they had better think again. Unless No starts getting door knocking, and door knocking very, very soon, your databases are going to be simply too sparse. Then it is seat of the pants time.
That is a fascinating, fascinating comment.
So now we have it.
Scottish labour would rather face final total defeat and separation and give England to the tories rather than work with Cameron.
Truly fascinating.
http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/scott-walker-urged-county-staff-campaign-aides-to-promote-him-online-b99210902z1-246713991.html
http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/news/uk_news/National/article1379075.ece?CMP=OTH-gnws-standard-2014_02_22
The article refers to a list of constituencies affected by fracking in the HoC library but includes 28 Labour seats,22 Tory,4 LibDems and 1 Independent.55 seats in all and more than half the area in those seats is covered by a single exploration licence.
If the Sussex protests are any thing to go by the political impact of fracking is significant,significant enough for one of the Balcombe protesters to set up a "Conservatives Against Fracking" group.
This is likely to have an impact too on some constituency betting.It is worth having a gander at the map.
Do not underestimate how many Scottish Labour supporters are attracted by that new start concept. Polls indicate that anything up to 40% of Labour voters actually back independence. Many have jumped already. Some more, especially if a really big name goes public, and it could become a flood.
These numbers for LibDem/Lib vote share/seats might also give pause for thought.
Feb 74 - 19.3% - 14 seats
Oct 74 - 18.3% - 13
May 79 - 13.8% - 11
Jun 83 - 25.4% - 23
Jun 87 - 22.6% - 22
Apr 92 - 17.8% - 20
May 97 - 16.8% - 46
Jun 01 - 18.3% - 52
May 05 - 22.0% - 62
May 10 - 23.0% - 57
Moscow could have been a realistic objective before the Russian winter set in if forces from Army Group Centre had not been diverted south to assist in the conquest of Ukraine.
Its interesting then, that the real explosion in Nationalist sentiment came after 13 years of labour government controlled by - er - Scots.
Maybe the nation worked out that was as good as it was ever going to get - and that was nowhere near good enough.
Yogic Flyers Winning Here !!
As I remember Moscow wasn;t that strategically important for either side. Hitler wanted Russia's southern oilfields - and he wanted Stalingrad to humiliate Stalin.
The real key to the astonishing SNP majority in 2011, and thus the looming IndyRef in September, probably lies in six words:
Jack
McConnell
Wendy
Alexander
Iain
Gray
Unionists took their eye off the Holyrood ball and let a bunch of amateurs run their North British branch. Big mistake. Big, big mistake.
It's the hope etc....Our defending, when you think it couldn't get any worse, he brings on Kolo the Clown, from the guardian
Simon Mignolet is starting to develop the thousand yard stare of a witness at a war crimes tribunal.
"And then your honour, and then... he brought on Kolo Toure..." (breaks down in tears)
Its was you who brought up tory government run in London as a driver of the independence movement - but I see your point.
But here's one for PBers to chew on over on a winter Sunday evening with your favourite tipple to hand :
Which seats might Labour lose in the 2015 GE ??
Oh.
The top two in each group qualify automatically (plus the highest scoring third place). The rest of the third placed teams play off. Given that the top 16 teams (France being one of them as host) will qualify automatically, the play offs are likely to be fairly weak - so Scotland and Wales have decent shouts if they can just finish third.
As an aside, Gibraltar enter the tournament for the first time - they were drawn against Spain but moved to avoid inflaming the political situation. I don't think that is right or fair - Northern Ireland have faced Ireland in recent years, while Croatia have met Serbia.
I'm hunting for a 'to qualify' market - it's bound to offer a lot more value than the group winner market.
Secondly Poland, Romania and Bulgaria are in the EU, but the only major armed forces are Polish, and while they would love to liberate such lost towns ads Lvov (now Lviv), they are not going to get embroiled with Russia if it makes a military move. As for Georgia, I doubt they want another round with Russia.
Third and last, I cannot see Germany or France (The only major military formations in the EU on mainland Europe) wishing to be physically embroiled in the Ukraine, unless Merkel and Hollande do a 100% about face.
http://www.oddschecker.com/football/euro-2016
England are 1/16
Scotland 7/2
Wales 12/1
I'm backing the Welsh and Scots to qualify.
Is a crying shame that the Tartan Army haven't graced an international since 1998.
http://www.oddschecker.com/football/euro-2016
Just saying.
I get to spend a lot of the next three months in Paris rather than rural Germany. Yah for me!
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/feb/23/glasgow-east-end-frontline-battle-scotland-independence
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/feb/23/scotland-uneasy-independence-referendum-alliance-fray
Last time around she managed to back every GOP crazy in the right order...
Just saying, for those who want to try a lay-the-crazy strategy
Are there any big SLAB names that have been uncharacteristically quiet of late?
Historically, and certainly since 1966, it is not unusual for a party gaining many seats to lose the odd one :
1966 - Lab gained 48 but lost 1
1970 - Con gained 77 and lost 3
1979 - Con gained 62 and lost 1
1983 - Con gained 58 and lost 10
1992 - Lab gained 42 and lost 1
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/ukip/10656533/Ukip-should-be-dismissed-as-a-modern-day-CND-says-Lord-Heseltine.html
The sooner his WMD is dismantled the better!
... The frontline in the battle for Scotland is Glasgow, in its long-neglected and poverty-stricken housing schemes. It is there that the 18 September referendum will be won and lost...
... Although I was born in Glasgow, educated at Glasgow University and worked for both the Herald and the Scotsman, I come fresh to the conversation, after working in the US for the Guardian for the past seven years... My own family, still living in Glasgow, whom I had expected to be voting no after backing Labour decade after decade are among the don't knows, leaning towards independence, with a nephew already decided in favour.
Another surprise comes from my contemporaries at university, who in our student days were all well to the left and viewed the Scottish National party (SNP) with contempt as the "Tartan Tories". One of those friends, John Henry, a retired history teacher, has only ever voted Labour or Communist but will vote for independence.
... Labour worries about two kinds of voter. Those like Henry who came from the working class, went to university and on into the professions and are now thoroughly disillusioned with Labour. The other, bigger worry, though, is among the disenchanted still living in deprived areas in Dundee, Edinburgh and pockets elsewhere in Lothian and Lanarkshire, but primarily in Glasgow.
... Another surprise is the make-up of a group of yes campaigners out on a soggy night delivering leaflets round Barmulloch, another of the deprived areas of Glasgow's East End. It was led by an SNP member but, contrary to expectations, the other volunteers were an eclectic mix: a Green, two Labour supporters and a former Liberal Democrat. Also in the mix was Graham Campbell, 47, originally from Jamaica, who arrived in Glasgow a decade ago...
Fermanagh & S Tyrone
Mid-Ulster (by-election loss confirmed)
All held previously by Unionists who took the Tory whip.
Any inspired thoughts on demographic changes to other Greater London seats and similar trends in the south east of England ?
..............................................
@JohnO
Absolutely .....
Cable holds 'secret ski summit' in French Alps with peer plotting to oust Nick Clegg
Vince Cable met with Lib Dem peer Lord Oakeshott in Courcheval, France
The get-together is likely to reignite speculation about the Business Secretary's ambition to succeed Nick Clegg as leader of the party
Lord Oakeshott is known for his regular anti-Clegg interventions
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2565808/Cable-holds-secret-ski-summit-French-Alps-peer-plotting-oust-Nick-Clegg.html
Thank you.
To Qualify as per their website and app
The German Infantry Divisions were quite heavily battered by the reduction of the Minsk encirclement, as well as the first battle of Smolensk, and struggling for supplies. They needed preparation before Operation Typhoon could commence. This may well have kicked off a bit earlier, but the cost may well have been a long southern flank exposed for a Stalingrad style encirclement from the Ukranian front.
It is worth bearing in mind that the capture of Moscow would have involved a lot of bloody street fighting, where tanks are less useful, and in any case may not have put the Soviets out of the war. Capturing Moscow did not do Napoleon much good in 1812. Much industry was already in the Urals, and Stalin was preparing to fight on further East, with his new bunker in Samara: http://www.tripadvisor.co.uk/Attraction_Review-g298521-d1106934-Reviews-Stalin_s_Bunker-Samara_Samara_Oblast_Volga_District.html
For those wanting to try alternative strategies I highly recommend Joni Nuutinens Barbarossa game, a traditional hex based wargame on android. I see he has done a Market Garden game recently also: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.cloudworth.operationbarbarossa&hl=en_GB
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/eu/9845442/EU-to-set-up-euro-election-troll-patrol-to-tackle-Eurosceptic-surge.html
We don't even need those other omens to do that...
Spurs Season Endings - domestically 23/2/2014, in europe 27/2/2014.
The only cause for hope?
Lord Sugar@Lord_Sugar·1h
With prospect of playing Chelsea ,Arsenal and Liverpool in next few games. Some might say with the loss at Norwich. Spurs season is over
Cardiff don't tempt me, even at 19/2 to win at the Lane.
Nailed on Spurs win next weekend.
(And I'm going to back you to win on Thursday)
Sadly the 12/1 price is a mirage as it does not allow qualification via the playoffs – you have been warned!
Luis Suarez to outscore the England World Cup Team 7/2
http://www.oddschecker.com/football/football-specials/luis-suarez/to-outscore-england-at-world-cup
Spurs & Nailed On are not words to ever be used positively in a sentence... this summed up my feelings during today...
Stephen Pollard@stephenpollard·3h
I must have done something truly awful in a past life to be cursed with supporting Spurs #COYS
I've been busy this weekend, or would have posted them on here.
As Scrapheap can attest, a lot of my winning bets this year have involved Spurs matches.
Suarez is a flat track bully, he hasn't scored against the top three or Utd this season, he hasn't scored for six games despite Liverpool rattling them in for fun.
For sure he'll score against Costa Rica but so will England, his record against decent teams is woeful and while this bet may win I most definitely would not consider it a decent bet.