Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Options

The return of an old by-election tradition – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 11,688
edited March 12 in General
imageThe return of an old by-election tradition – politicalbetting.com

If you thought things couldn't get any worse for Labour in Rochdale, a friend messaged me: "In a dark omen, the sewage pipes burst in the Rochdale Labour campaign office yesterday, and the whole downstairs is covered with the proverbial."

Read the full story here

«134567

Comments

  • Options
    I love giving people history lessons.
  • Options
    Unfortunately this is a by-election dominated by a quarrel in a far-away country between people of whom we know far, far too much.

    There are conflicts all around the world that don't get a fraction of the spotlight or attention that this one has had. I wonder what is so unique about this one conflict, that every moment becomes headline news unlike all the others?
  • Options
    LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 15,304
    I thought the thread title was referring to the Labour claim about polling on Wellingborough showing it was neck and neck between Labour and the Tories, as highlighted by isam on the previous thread.
  • Options
    Have the postal votes gone out in Rochdale yet?

    That could really add to the gaiety of the nation.
  • Options
    EndillionEndillion Posts: 4,976
    The point about the "quarrel in a far-away country between people of whom we know nothing" quote is that it was completely wrong - less than a year later, we'd declared war on one those peoples.

    So, this header only really works if the UK is somehow involved in the Israel-Hamas conflict by the end of the year.
  • Options

    I love giving people history lessons.

    ARE YOU NOT ENTERTAINED? 😀
  • Options
    OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 32,008
    Could Rochdale give us the first Monster Raving Loony MP?

    Must be tempting for Rochdale’s voters.
  • Options
    Premier league approve Ratcliffe 25% Man United stake
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,648
    Russian Military Objectives and Capacity in Ukraine Through 2024

    https://www.rusi.org/explore-our-research/publications/commentary/russian-military-objectives-and-capacity-ukraine-through-2024
    ...Russia still maintains the strategic objective of bringing about the subjugation of Ukraine. It now believes that it is winning. Surrender terms currently being proposed by Russian intermediaries include Ukraine ceding the territory already under Russian control along with Kharkiv, and in some versions Odessa; agreeing not to join NATO; and maintaining a head of state approved by Russia. The only significant concession Russia proposes is that what is left of Ukraine can join the EU...
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 47,302
    Fpt for @BartholomewRoberts


    "That's not many people.

    The US is a country of 331 million so that's less than 1%.

    Net the migration rate is the lowest in decades."


    +++


    So in your eyes an illegal immigration rate of 1% of the population, per year, is nothing to worry about?

    Right. Let's break this down

    If this was the UK, it would mean that 670,000 people are arriving on the boats every year, nearly 2000 every day, every day of the year

    You don't think that might be a tiny bit of an issue? The boats are a massive issue for HMG at around 50,000 a year, or whatever it is. America is taking more than ten times that, under Biden

    It occurs to me, after all this time, that you aren't dogmatic, or amusingly obsessive, you are just thick
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,997
    Leon said:

    Fpt for @BartholomewRoberts


    "That's not many people.

    The US is a country of 331 million so that's less than 1%.

    Net the migration rate is the lowest in decades."


    +++


    So in your eyes an illegal immigration rate of 1% of the population, per year, is nothing to worry about?

    Right. Let's break this down

    If this was the UK, it would mean that 670,000 people are arriving on the boats every year, nearly 2000 every day, every day of the year

    You don't think that might be a tiny bit of an issue? The boats are a massive issue for HMG at around 50,000 a year, or whatever it is. America is taking more than ten times that, under Biden

    It occurs to me, after all this time, that you aren't dogmatic, or amusingly obsessive, you are just thick

    You have Bart to a tee, lights are on but no-one home.
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 47,302
    Christ CNN is Woke shit

    Endless endless bleating about Gaza. Endless

    I get that it is bad, but there is other stuff going on. You would not know about it, from CNN

    They spend 30 minutes on the horror of Gaza, then do a quick whiparound the world, Ukraine, AI, Superbowl, then right back to Gaza, for another hour, maybe this time the charities and the starvation and the role of - I do not joke - data in the Gaza conflict

    It is perverse
  • Options
    MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 12,423
    On topic. This is actually a brilliant header all the way through 👏🏻

    The bit about the people of Rochdale deserving a good MP for them is a good one. Ali was actually shaping up to be that.

    In many ways Ali is a strong candidate, a Labour moderate, media savvy in how he walks the walk and talks the talk, his apology why he was wrong with repeating the conspiracy theory came across well. I agree He’s definitely got to be the political betting favourite to win from here.

    In fact there’s still a strong argument Labour should even have toughed this one out, what has Ali said now in public domain that’s anti semitic?

    He’s deffo a passionate hater of the Netanyahu government and questioning of their politics and motives, and that’s certainly not anti semitism by itself, in fact with 30K Palestinians dead in one sided duck shoot, you don’t even need to be Muslim or left wing for this to be getting under your skin about now - just listen to David Cameron and the frustration with which he is saying no to Netanyahu this week.

    The “former” Labour strategist on R4 this morning put it down to the Mail being very clever in how they held on to what they had for just the right moment. Is it really the Mail’s own work how they got hold of the information in the first place, or even when they are allowed to publish it?
  • Options
    LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 15,304
    Nigelb said:

    Russian Military Objectives and Capacity in Ukraine Through 2024

    https://www.rusi.org/explore-our-research/publications/commentary/russian-military-objectives-and-capacity-ukraine-through-2024
    ...Russia still maintains the strategic objective of bringing about the subjugation of Ukraine. It now believes that it is winning. Surrender terms currently being proposed by Russian intermediaries include Ukraine ceding the territory already under Russian control along with Kharkiv, and in some versions Odessa; agreeing not to join NATO; and maintaining a head of state approved by Russia. The only significant concession Russia proposes is that what is left of Ukraine can join the EU...

    And that's why the "we should convince the Ukrainians to agree a ceasefire" brigade are wrongheaded.
  • Options

    Unfortunately this is a by-election dominated by a quarrel in a far-away country between people of whom we know far, far too much.

    There are conflicts all around the world that don't get a fraction of the spotlight or attention that this one has had. I wonder what is so unique about this one conflict, that every moment becomes headline news unlike all the others?

    Bart, you know perfectly well why every moment becomes headline news, unlike the others.
  • Options
    Pro_RataPro_Rata Posts: 4,816
    I'm going to veer away from Rochdale for a moment, as I've belatedly compiled the Kingswood LE vote shares.

    I'm not doing Wellingborough as their last LEs were in 2021, which is a different planet.

    Kingswood:
    Con, 8351, 37.4%
    Lab, 8112, 36.3%
    LD, 3279, 14.7%
    Green, 1952, 8.7%
    Ind, 626, 2.8%
    RefUK, 6, 0.0%

    By the time you account that Labour did not stand candidates in 2 wards covering about 12% of the constituency, plus a generous LLG share which Labour will drink from to an extent, then I expect Labour to be home with some comfort. (Con and LD managed full coverage, and the Independent stood where Labour didn't).

    Also RefUK stood in a ward only a small part of which is in Kingswood, so covered only 0.4% of the electorate - it wasn't an unusually terrible result for them.

    I'll look at Rochdale for any insights that might give when I have a few minutes, as they had a 2023 round.
  • Options

    Could Rochdale give us the first Monster Raving Loony MP?

    Must be tempting for Rochdale’s voters.

    It is a truly appalling slate of candidates.

    If I had a vote in it, I would definitely be checking out the MRLP candidate.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,930
    Gorgeous is favourite !
  • Options
    I'm not sure that the Rochdale situation will harm Starmer and the Labour Party very much. There is a case to be made in fact that it strengthens Starmer's argument regarding the selection process. The constituencies cannot be trusted to vet a candidate properly - in other words, turn a blind eye because they have a similar view - and Labour HQ should instead be in charge of the whole process.

    Can anybody argue that Paul Waugh would have been such a poor choice to represent the people of Rochdale as opposed to Azhar Ali? Waugh is a local lad who has succeeded in a vicious industry, has strong links with the area still and understands Westminster. Starmer can justifiably say "this wouldn't have happened if you'd listened" and then say "I hoped that I'd changed the Party sufficiently. It's clear there are still some fringe elements who are whack jobs. From now on, Sue Gray I choose who is a candidate".
  • Options
    MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 12,423

    Could Rochdale give us the first Monster Raving Loony MP?

    Must be tempting for Rochdale’s voters.

    Is that the one whose a fluffy mammal, or the one whose a brick?

    I hope they come to the count dressed like that.

    If I was a monster raving loony, I would be a giant squid with a massive costume metres wide right across the stage 🦑
  • Options
    The Betfair book is not comprehensive. It has no 'Other' option. So what if the Monster RLP candidate did win? All bets void?

    This is pretty unusual for a major firm (although after their abject performance at the last US Election, nothing should surprise.)
  • Options
    LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 15,304

    Could Rochdale give us the first Monster Raving Loony MP?

    Must be tempting for Rochdale’s voters.

    It is a truly appalling slate of candidates.

    If I had a vote in it, I would definitely be checking out the MRLP candidate.
    I would vote for the vicar. Wikipedia has this to say.

    Mark Coleman is a climate change activist and former vicar of Rochdale who is campaigning for "radical action on climate". He was jailed in April 2023 for his part in a Just Stop Oil protest in Bishopsgate, London. Despite running as an independent, he has the support of two local Labour Party officers. He formerly ran as a Green Party candidate for council elections in Liverpool.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,296
    edited February 13
    Bit of a disaster here.

    One of the candidates is a Nazi who is full of shit.

    While Labour have a dodgy candidate and their office is flooded with sewage.
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,079
    edited February 13

    Could Rochdale give us the first Monster Raving Loony MP?

    Must be tempting for Rochdale’s voters.

    The other parties just need to agree on the Monster Raving Loony as the Stop Galloway candidate.
  • Options
    Leon said:

    Fpt for @BartholomewRoberts


    "That's not many people.

    The US is a country of 331 million so that's less than 1%.

    Net the migration rate is the lowest in decades."


    +++


    So in your eyes an illegal immigration rate of 1% of the population, per year, is nothing to worry about?

    Right. Let's break this down

    If this was the UK, it would mean that 670,000 people are arriving on the boats every year, nearly 2000 every day, every day of the year

    You don't think that might be a tiny bit of an issue? The boats are a massive issue for HMG at around 50,000 a year, or whatever it is. America is taking more than ten times that, under Biden

    It occurs to me, after all this time, that you aren't dogmatic, or amusingly obsessive, you are just thick

    Yes its nothing to worry about. Especially for a country that was founded on mass migration and has had mass migration for centuries.

    50,000 people arriving by boats is not a massive issue in this country. If it weren't for the people drowning, I couldn't give less of a shit.

    If you're not a dogmatic racist, why does it matter? And if you are a dogmatic racist, shouldn't you be happy the migration figures are down?
  • Options
    MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 12,423

    I'm not sure that the Rochdale situation will harm Starmer and the Labour Party very much. There is a case to be made in fact that it strengthens Starmer's argument regarding the selection process. The constituencies cannot be trusted to vet a candidate properly - in other words, turn a blind eye because they have a similar view - and Labour HQ should instead be in charge of the whole process.

    Can anybody argue that Paul Waugh would have been such a poor choice to represent the people of Rochdale as opposed to Azhar Ali? Waugh is a local lad who has succeeded in a vicious industry, has strong links with the area still and understands Westminster. Starmer can justifiably say "this wouldn't have happened if you'd listened" and then say "I hoped that I'd changed the Party sufficiently. It's clear there are still some fringe elements who are whack jobs. From now on, Sue Gray I choose who is a candidate".

    Yes I can speak against Paul Waugh, if what BJO posted this morning is true.

    Waugh is not even a Labour member? so what was he doing at a Labour selection meeting? why should he gazump someone like Ali who has worked as a local leader for Labour for many years?
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,296

    Could Rochdale give us the first Monster Raving Loony MP?

    Must be tempting for Rochdale’s voters.

    The other parties just need to agree on the Monster Raving Loony as the Stop Galloway candidate.
    well, he is a Rodent, so he's presumably not a big fan of cats:

    https://www.loonyparty.com/5017/8563/rochdale-by-election/
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,907
    Pulpstar said:

    Gorgeous is favourite !

    The only thing worse than him being favourite, is him winning by a short head at 50/1.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,296

    I'm not sure that the Rochdale situation will harm Starmer and the Labour Party very much. There is a case to be made in fact that it strengthens Starmer's argument regarding the selection process. The constituencies cannot be trusted to vet a candidate properly - in other words, turn a blind eye because they have a similar view - and Labour HQ should instead be in charge of the whole process.

    Can anybody argue that Paul Waugh would have been such a poor choice to represent the people of Rochdale as opposed to Azhar Ali? Waugh is a local lad who has succeeded in a vicious industry, has strong links with the area still and understands Westminster. Starmer can justifiably say "this wouldn't have happened if you'd listened" and then say "I hoped that I'd changed the Party sufficiently. It's clear there are still some fringe elements who are whack jobs. From now on, Sue Gray I choose who is a candidate".

    Yes I can speak against Paul Waugh, if what BJO posted this morning is true.

    Waugh is not even a Labour member? so what was he doing at a Labour selection meeting? why should he gazump someone like Ali who has worked as a local leader for Labour for many years?
    Well, I think we're seeing why, actually.
  • Options

    Unfortunately this is a by-election dominated by a quarrel in a far-away country between people of whom we know far, far too much.

    There are conflicts all around the world that don't get a fraction of the spotlight or attention that this one has had. I wonder what is so unique about this one conflict, that every moment becomes headline news unlike all the others?

    Bart, you know perfectly well why every moment becomes headline news, unlike the others.
    Indeed.
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 47,302
    FPT for @rcs1000
    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    CNN is reporting that Russia hit Kyiv with a hypersonic missile, which is a missile so fast it cannot be shot down

    I have no idea if this is true. CNN is pretty pro-Ukraine, so I am not sure why they would boost Putin's military propaganda

    If it IS true, isn't that the end of navies as we know them? A single unstoppable missile can take out a carrier. That's it

    Ah, like the V2 huh?

    How much impact did that have on the war again?
    Have you suddenly become a bit stupid, like the rest of PB? This is quite depressing

    I wasn't even commenting on the impact this might have on the outcome of the present Ukraine war. I thought that was fairly clear

    I was commenting on how this will influence war-making from here on, just as the advent of the V2 - which led to the ICBM - massively impacted geopolitics - and warfare - from the end of WW2 onwards

    If hypersonic missiles, which cannot be shot down, are a thing (and this is what CNN are claiming) then I do not see how traditonal navies can operate. How do you defend a £3bn capital ship like an aircraft carrier against a £3m hypersonic missile which cannot be shot down? If it cannot be shot down, or deflected, then you can't defend the ship. So that's the end of the carrier, the carrier group, the navy as we htave known it, they make no sense, they are merely very expensive and easy targets

    No?

    Of course CNN might have got this wrong, maybe the Ukes are lying for propaganda purposes - I have no idea, on that front

  • Options

    Could Rochdale give us the first Monster Raving Loony MP?

    Must be tempting for Rochdale’s voters.

    Is that the one whose a fluffy mammal, or the one whose a brick?

    I hope they come to the count dressed like that.

    If I was a monster raving loony, I would be a giant squid with a massive costume metres wide right across the stage 🦑
    I'd go as the five of spades - black gloves, black shoes, and a black thong.
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 47,302

    Leon said:

    Fpt for @BartholomewRoberts


    "That's not many people.

    The US is a country of 331 million so that's less than 1%.

    Net the migration rate is the lowest in decades."


    +++


    So in your eyes an illegal immigration rate of 1% of the population, per year, is nothing to worry about?

    Right. Let's break this down

    If this was the UK, it would mean that 670,000 people are arriving on the boats every year, nearly 2000 every day, every day of the year

    You don't think that might be a tiny bit of an issue? The boats are a massive issue for HMG at around 50,000 a year, or whatever it is. America is taking more than ten times that, under Biden

    It occurs to me, after all this time, that you aren't dogmatic, or amusingly obsessive, you are just thick

    Yes its nothing to worry about. Especially for a country that was founded on mass migration and has had mass migration for centuries.

    50,000 people arriving by boats is not a massive issue in this country. If it weren't for the people drowning, I couldn't give less of a shit.

    If you're not a dogmatic racist, why does it matter? And if you are a dogmatic racist, shouldn't you be happy the migration figures are down?
    Fair enough. You're just a thicko. Glad we got that sorted
  • Options
    Leon said:

    FPT for @rcs1000


    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    CNN is reporting that Russia hit Kyiv with a hypersonic missile, which is a missile so fast it cannot be shot down

    I have no idea if this is true. CNN is pretty pro-Ukraine, so I am not sure why they would boost Putin's military propaganda

    If it IS true, isn't that the end of navies as we know them? A single unstoppable missile can take out a carrier. That's it

    Ah, like the V2 huh?

    How much impact did that have on the war again?
    Have you suddenly become a bit stupid, like the rest of PB? This is quite depressing

    I wasn't even commenting on the impact this might have on the outcome of the present Ukraine war. I thought that was fairly clear

    I was commenting on how this will influence war-making from here on, just as the advent of the V2 - which led to the ICBM - massively impacted geopolitics - and warfare - from the end of WW2 onwards

    If hypersonic missiles, which cannot be shot down, are a thing (and this is what CNN are claiming) then I do not see how traditonal navies can operate. How do you defend a £3bn capital ship like an aircraft carrier against a £3m hypersonic missile which cannot be shot down? If it cannot be shot down, or deflected, then you can't defend the ship. So that's the end of the carrier, the carrier group, the navy as we htave known it, they make no sense, they are merely very expensive and easy targets

    No?

    Of course CNN might have got this wrong, maybe the Ukes are lying for propaganda purposes - I have no idea, on that front

    The Russian navy has been destroyed by drones, its flagships now lying on the sea floor, so I'm not sure "hypersonic missiles" are the future.
  • Options
    BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 18,726
    edited February 13
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Fpt for @BartholomewRoberts


    "That's not many people.

    The US is a country of 331 million so that's less than 1%.

    Net the migration rate is the lowest in decades."


    +++


    So in your eyes an illegal immigration rate of 1% of the population, per year, is nothing to worry about?

    Right. Let's break this down

    If this was the UK, it would mean that 670,000 people are arriving on the boats every year, nearly 2000 every day, every day of the year

    You don't think that might be a tiny bit of an issue? The boats are a massive issue for HMG at around 50,000 a year, or whatever it is. America is taking more than ten times that, under Biden

    It occurs to me, after all this time, that you aren't dogmatic, or amusingly obsessive, you are just thick

    Yes its nothing to worry about. Especially for a country that was founded on mass migration and has had mass migration for centuries.

    50,000 people arriving by boats is not a massive issue in this country. If it weren't for the people drowning, I couldn't give less of a shit.

    If you're not a dogmatic racist, why does it matter? And if you are a dogmatic racist, shouldn't you be happy the migration figures are down?
    Fair enough. You're just a thicko. Glad we got that sorted
    What's thick about what I wrote? Just a difference of priorities.

    You are a white supremacist who prioritises migration, but doesn't care about migration figures, while I care about standard of living, democracy, education and the economy.

    America has had illegal migration for centuries, the "undocumented gardener" meme is not an original thought. This isn't something new under Biden.

    EDIT: It wasn't me that flagged your comment though.
  • Options
    Of course, Brown's "bigoted woman", Gillian Duffy, was a Rochdale resident too. I wonder what she makes of it all? Probably quite an attractive line-up for her.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,907

    The Betfair book is not comprehensive. It has no 'Other' option. So what if the Monster RLP candidate did win? All bets void?

    This is pretty unusual for a major firm (although after their abject performance at the last US Election, nothing should surprise.)

    They had a full list of candidates on the day nominations closed, how the hell did they manage to mess that up? It’s a simple administrative task for an exchange, no expert odds setter required.
  • Options
    david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,419
    Guido dropping another teaser too. Though without comment on who or what it's about.
  • Options
    MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 12,423
    Pro_Rata said:

    I'm going to veer away from Rochdale for a moment, as I've belatedly compiled the Kingswood LE vote shares.

    I'm not doing Wellingborough as their last LEs were in 2021, which is a different planet.

    Kingswood:
    Con, 8351, 37.4%
    Lab, 8112, 36.3%
    LD, 3279, 14.7%
    Green, 1952, 8.7%
    Ind, 626, 2.8%
    RefUK, 6, 0.0%

    By the time you account that Labour did not stand candidates in 2 wards covering about 12% of the constituency, plus a generous LLG share which Labour will drink from to an extent, then I expect Labour to be home with some comfort. (Con and LD managed full coverage, and the Independent stood where Labour didn't).

    Also RefUK stood in a ward only a small part of which is in Kingswood, so covered only 0.4% of the electorate - it wasn't an unusually terrible result for them.

    I'll look at Rochdale for any insights that might give when I have a few minutes, as they had a 2023 round.

    The issue I have with Labour in Kingswood is the your certainty “generous LLG share which Labour will drink from to an extent”. Labour really need to drink it, yet it’s so close to where Greens are exploding with such popularity they have scrapped a Labour mayor and will knock a popular Labour front bencher out of parliament at the next general election. those LD and green votes you identify might be green on the day, and Tory’s pip Labour in Kingswood.
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 47,302

    Leon said:

    FPT for @rcs1000


    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    CNN is reporting that Russia hit Kyiv with a hypersonic missile, which is a missile so fast it cannot be shot down

    I have no idea if this is true. CNN is pretty pro-Ukraine, so I am not sure why they would boost Putin's military propaganda

    If it IS true, isn't that the end of navies as we know them? A single unstoppable missile can take out a carrier. That's it

    Ah, like the V2 huh?

    How much impact did that have on the war again?
    Have you suddenly become a bit stupid, like the rest of PB? This is quite depressing

    I wasn't even commenting on the impact this might have on the outcome of the present Ukraine war. I thought that was fairly clear

    I was commenting on how this will influence war-making from here on, just as the advent of the V2 - which led to the ICBM - massively impacted geopolitics - and warfare - from the end of WW2 onwards

    If hypersonic missiles, which cannot be shot down, are a thing (and this is what CNN are claiming) then I do not see how traditonal navies can operate. How do you defend a £3bn capital ship like an aircraft carrier against a £3m hypersonic missile which cannot be shot down? If it cannot be shot down, or deflected, then you can't defend the ship. So that's the end of the carrier, the carrier group, the navy as we htave known it, they make no sense, they are merely very expensive and easy targets

    No?

    Of course CNN might have got this wrong, maybe the Ukes are lying for propaganda purposes - I have no idea, on that front

    The Russian navy has been destroyed by drones, its flagships now lying on the sea floor, so I'm not sure "hypersonic missiles" are the future.
    Drones can theoretically be fended off, albeit it is complicated, and tiresome

    If these hypersonic missiles are real (and I am relying on Woke Mad CNN here, so veracity is an issue) then that to me says the era of the aircraft carrier and the trad navy is over. It's not just more difficult to operate enormous ships, it is pointless, they will be zapped

    It's great we just spent £6bn on two of these things. I guess we can use them for "humanitarian" purposes

    Indeed I have a feeling that is the only way we will ever use them, they will never be risked in battle, for the reasons I have cited
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,930

    The Betfair book is not comprehensive. It has no 'Other' option. So what if the Monster RLP candidate did win? All bets void?

    This is pretty unusual for a major firm (although after their abject performance at the last US Election, nothing should surprise.)

    Presumably if you've laid every listed candidate you'll collect, whereas if you've backed everyone you're out of cash.

    If you've done a mix then profit = Lay stakes - back stakes ?
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,296

    Guido dropping another teaser too. Though without comment on who or what it's about.

    Usually, him.
  • Options
    MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 25,229
    edited February 13
    A great header TSE. As a Baggie the Smethwick election is close to my heart. So a name check is most welcome. I was barely out of nappies in 1964 but my Dad had worked at Smethwick Hall Boys School and Cape Hill Secondary so he knew the area well, but from a few years earlier. He was shocked at the Peter Griffiths campaign and it's success.

    From that story alone I have always been uncomfortable with the Conservative Party, particularly at its fringes. My concern may be rational, it may be irrational, much like most people on here couldn't vote Labour (quite justifiably) because of Corbyn- Labour's anti-Semitism.
  • Options

    Could Rochdale give us the first Monster Raving Loony MP?

    Must be tempting for Rochdale’s voters.

    It is a truly appalling slate of candidates.

    If I had a vote in it, I would definitely be checking out the MRLP candidate.
    I would vote for the vicar. Wikipedia has this to say.

    Mark Coleman is a climate change activist and former vicar of Rochdale who is campaigning for "radical action on climate". He was jailed in April 2023 for his part in a Just Stop Oil protest in Bishopsgate, London. Despite running as an independent, he has the support of two local Labour Party officers. He formerly ran as a Green Party candidate for council elections in Liverpool.
    Sorry, but stopping the traffic in Bishopsgate is unacceptable.

    Next?
  • Options
    SirNorfolkPassmoreSirNorfolkPassmore Posts: 6,259
    edited February 13

    The Betfair book is not comprehensive. It has no 'Other' option. So what if the Monster RLP candidate did win? All bets void?

    This is pretty unusual for a major firm (although after their abject performance at the last US Election, nothing should surprise.)

    Why do they need a comprehensive book and why would bets be void if, say, OMRLP won?

    Everyone who bet on the candidates who they did list would simply lose, and everyone who laid those candidates would win.

    Lots of Betfair markets don't have every possible winner listed and indeed can't do (e.g. SPOTY before the shortlist is drawn up, Presidential candidates before the Convention etc).
  • Options
    MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 12,423
    ydoethur said:

    I'm not sure that the Rochdale situation will harm Starmer and the Labour Party very much. There is a case to be made in fact that it strengthens Starmer's argument regarding the selection process. The constituencies cannot be trusted to vet a candidate properly - in other words, turn a blind eye because they have a similar view - and Labour HQ should instead be in charge of the whole process.

    Can anybody argue that Paul Waugh would have been such a poor choice to represent the people of Rochdale as opposed to Azhar Ali? Waugh is a local lad who has succeeded in a vicious industry, has strong links with the area still and understands Westminster. Starmer can justifiably say "this wouldn't have happened if you'd listened" and then say "I hoped that I'd changed the Party sufficiently. It's clear there are still some fringe elements who are whack jobs. From now on, Sue Gray I choose who is a candidate".

    Yes I can speak against Paul Waugh, if what BJO posted this morning is true.

    Waugh is not even a Labour member? so what was he doing at a Labour selection meeting? why should he gazump someone like Ali who has worked as a local leader for Labour for many years?
    Well, I think we're seeing why, actually.
    Not at all. I’m sure it’s come as a surprise to the Labour hierarchy that the moderate and capable Ali came unstuck like this.
  • Options
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    FPT for @rcs1000


    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    CNN is reporting that Russia hit Kyiv with a hypersonic missile, which is a missile so fast it cannot be shot down

    I have no idea if this is true. CNN is pretty pro-Ukraine, so I am not sure why they would boost Putin's military propaganda

    If it IS true, isn't that the end of navies as we know them? A single unstoppable missile can take out a carrier. That's it

    Ah, like the V2 huh?

    How much impact did that have on the war again?
    Have you suddenly become a bit stupid, like the rest of PB? This is quite depressing

    I wasn't even commenting on the impact this might have on the outcome of the present Ukraine war. I thought that was fairly clear

    I was commenting on how this will influence war-making from here on, just as the advent of the V2 - which led to the ICBM - massively impacted geopolitics - and warfare - from the end of WW2 onwards

    If hypersonic missiles, which cannot be shot down, are a thing (and this is what CNN are claiming) then I do not see how traditonal navies can operate. How do you defend a £3bn capital ship like an aircraft carrier against a £3m hypersonic missile which cannot be shot down? If it cannot be shot down, or deflected, then you can't defend the ship. So that's the end of the carrier, the carrier group, the navy as we htave known it, they make no sense, they are merely very expensive and easy targets

    No?

    Of course CNN might have got this wrong, maybe the Ukes are lying for propaganda purposes - I have no idea, on that front

    The Russian navy has been destroyed by drones, its flagships now lying on the sea floor, so I'm not sure "hypersonic missiles" are the future.
    Drones can theoretically be fended off, albeit it is complicated, and tiresome

    If these hypersonic missiles are real (and I am relying on Woke Mad CNN here, so veracity is an issue) then that to me says the era of the aircraft carrier and the trad navy is over. It's not just more difficult to operate enormous ships, it is pointless, they will be zapped

    It's great we just spent £6bn on two of these things. I guess we can use them for "humanitarian" purposes

    Indeed I have a feeling that is the only way we will ever use them, they will never be risked in battle, for the reasons I have cited
    Russia haven't found a way to defend themselves from drones yet, and instead have had to retreat what survives of their navy out of Sevastopol.

    They'll never be risked in battle due to the threat of drones, but £6bn warship versus £200k drones means the era of traditional navy is already over. Missiles isn't what's changed that, drones already have.
  • Options
    NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,344

    Pro_Rata said:

    I'm going to veer away from Rochdale for a moment, as I've belatedly compiled the Kingswood LE vote shares.

    I'm not doing Wellingborough as their last LEs were in 2021, which is a different planet.

    Kingswood:
    Con, 8351, 37.4%
    Lab, 8112, 36.3%
    LD, 3279, 14.7%
    Green, 1952, 8.7%
    Ind, 626, 2.8%
    RefUK, 6, 0.0%

    By the time you account that Labour did not stand candidates in 2 wards covering about 12% of the constituency, plus a generous LLG share which Labour will drink from to an extent, then I expect Labour to be home with some comfort. (Con and LD managed full coverage, and the Independent stood where Labour didn't).

    Also RefUK stood in a ward only a small part of which is in Kingswood, so covered only 0.4% of the electorate - it wasn't an unusually terrible result for them.

    I'll look at Rochdale for any insights that might give when I have a few minutes, as they had a 2023 round.

    The issue I have with Labour in Kingswood is the your certainty “generous LLG share which Labour will drink from to an extent”. Labour really need to drink it, yet it’s so close to where Greens are exploding with such popularity they have scrapped a Labour mayor and will knock a popular Labour front bencher out of parliament at the next general election. those LD and green votes you identify might be green on the day, and Tory’s pip Labour in Kingswood.
    MoonRabbit ramping Greens in Bristol again, I see. Convenient to have a by-election to test his theory.
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,320
    Leon said:

    FPT for @rcs1000


    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    CNN is reporting that Russia hit Kyiv with a hypersonic missile, which is a missile so fast it cannot be shot down

    I have no idea if this is true. CNN is pretty pro-Ukraine, so I am not sure why they would boost Putin's military propaganda

    If it IS true, isn't that the end of navies as we know them? A single unstoppable missile can take out a carrier. That's it

    Ah, like the V2 huh?

    How much impact did that have on the war again?
    Have you suddenly become a bit stupid, like the rest of PB? This is quite depressing

    I wasn't even commenting on the impact this might have on the outcome of the present Ukraine war. I thought that was fairly clear

    I was commenting on how this will influence war-making from here on, just as the advent of the V2 - which led to the ICBM - massively impacted geopolitics - and warfare - from the end of WW2 onwards

    If hypersonic missiles, which cannot be shot down, are a thing (and this is what CNN are claiming) then I do not see how traditonal navies can operate. How do you defend a £3bn capital ship like an aircraft carrier against a £3m hypersonic missile which cannot be shot down? If it cannot be shot down, or deflected, then you can't defend the ship. So that's the end of the carrier, the carrier group, the navy as we htave known it, they make no sense, they are merely very expensive and easy targets

    No?

    Of course CNN might have got this wrong, maybe the Ukes are lying for propaganda purposes - I have no idea, on that front

    Plenty of analysts believe that this is what an invasion of Taiwan might look like - hypersonic missiles in case the US fleet was thinking of getting involved.
  • Options
    Pulpstar said:

    The Betfair book is not comprehensive. It has no 'Other' option. So what if the Monster RLP candidate did win? All bets void?

    This is pretty unusual for a major firm (although after their abject performance at the last US Election, nothing should surprise.)

    Presumably if you've laid every listed candidate you'll collect, whereas if you've backed everyone you're out of cash.

    If you've done a mix then profit = Lay stakes - back stakes ?
    Dunno.

    Not sure a bookie is allowed to run a book with one or more runners missing, but of course this is an exchange, not a bookie.

    They also are pretty clueless. Don't even bother asking customer services. It is manned by Youths too stupid to get a job with the Post Office.
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,320

    A great header TSE. As a Baggie the Smethwick election is close to my heart. So a name check is most welcome. I was barely out of nappies in 1964 but my Dad had worked at Smethwick Hall Boys School and Cape Hill Secondary so he knew the area well, but from a few years earlier. He was shocked at the Peter Griffiths campaign and it's success.

    From that story alone I have always been uncomfortable with the Conservative Party, particularly at its fringes. My concern may be rational, it may be irrational, much like most people on here couldn't vote Labour (quite justifiably) because of Corbyn- Labour's anti-Semitism.

    Many people on here could not only vote for Corbyn-Labour's anti-semitism but were vocal champions of Corbyn-Labour at the time.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,907
    edited February 13

    The Betfair book is not comprehensive. It has no 'Other' option. So what if the Monster RLP candidate did win? All bets void?

    This is pretty unusual for a major firm (although after their abject performance at the last US Election, nothing should surprise.)

    Why do they need a comprehensive book and why would bets be void if, say, OMRLP won?

    Everyone who bet on the candidates who they did list would simply lose, and everyone who laid those candidates would win.
    Short answer: because what would it look like if a bookie only offered offered prices on 8 of the 10 horses running in the 1:45 at Sandown, an hour before they go off?

    Long answer: Punters in political markets try and build a book over time, backing and laying various candidates as the prices change. Betfair will add any outside shot if they’re in the news and someone requests it. Betfair really needs to make this a complete market ASAP, and someone with an interest should log a complaint with them.
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,079

    Guido dropping another teaser too. Though without comment on who or what it's about.

    It seems to be about who attended the candidate selection meeting.
  • Options

    Pro_Rata said:

    I'm going to veer away from Rochdale for a moment, as I've belatedly compiled the Kingswood LE vote shares.

    I'm not doing Wellingborough as their last LEs were in 2021, which is a different planet.

    Kingswood:
    Con, 8351, 37.4%
    Lab, 8112, 36.3%
    LD, 3279, 14.7%
    Green, 1952, 8.7%
    Ind, 626, 2.8%
    RefUK, 6, 0.0%

    By the time you account that Labour did not stand candidates in 2 wards covering about 12% of the constituency, plus a generous LLG share which Labour will drink from to an extent, then I expect Labour to be home with some comfort. (Con and LD managed full coverage, and the Independent stood where Labour didn't).

    Also RefUK stood in a ward only a small part of which is in Kingswood, so covered only 0.4% of the electorate - it wasn't an unusually terrible result for them.

    I'll look at Rochdale for any insights that might give when I have a few minutes, as they had a 2023 round.

    The issue I have with Labour in Kingswood is the your certainty “generous LLG share which Labour will drink from to an extent”. Labour really need to drink it, yet it’s so close to where Greens are exploding with such popularity they have scrapped a Labour mayor and will knock a popular Labour front bencher out of parliament at the next general election. those LD and green votes you identify might be green on the day, and Tory’s pip Labour in Kingswood.
    MoonRabbit ramping Greens in Bristol again, I see. Convenient to have a by-election to test his theory.
    Her?
  • Options
    NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,344

    Could Rochdale give us the first Monster Raving Loony MP?

    Must be tempting for Rochdale’s voters.

    It is a truly appalling slate of candidates.

    If I had a vote in it, I would definitely be checking out the MRLP candidate.
    I would vote for the vicar. Wikipedia has this to say.

    Mark Coleman is a climate change activist and former vicar of Rochdale who is campaigning for "radical action on climate". He was jailed in April 2023 for his part in a Just Stop Oil protest in Bishopsgate, London. Despite running as an independent, he has the support of two local Labour Party officers. He formerly ran as a Green Party candidate for council elections in Liverpool.
    A fine point for rule lawyers. Party members are not allowed to support candidates standing against their party's candidate. Does that apply in this case? I would think not.
  • Options

    Guido dropping another teaser too. Though without comment on who or what it's about.

    It seems to be about who attended the candidate selection meeting.
    Guido's Site is for PB rejects.

    I guess it's where all the sad Russian trolls end up after being hammered.
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,261

    Guido dropping another teaser too. Though without comment on who or what it's about.

    It's out now. Graham Jones PPC tape.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,930

    Pulpstar said:

    The Betfair book is not comprehensive. It has no 'Other' option. So what if the Monster RLP candidate did win? All bets void?

    This is pretty unusual for a major firm (although after their abject performance at the last US Election, nothing should surprise.)

    Presumably if you've laid every listed candidate you'll collect, whereas if you've backed everyone you're out of cash.

    If you've done a mix then profit = Lay stakes - back stakes ?
    Dunno.

    Not sure a bookie is allowed to run a book with one or more runners missing, but of course this is an exchange, not a bookie.

    They also are pretty clueless. Don't even bother asking customer services. It is manned by Youths too stupid to get a job with the Post Office.
    I've got a bet at evens in a nominally one horse race taking place on Sunday 17th March with Smarkets, which is also an exchange. Now I thought his price should be perhaps a tad lower than evens, but I presume if someone else manages to win said race I lose my money. Same thing here I think.
  • Options
    MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 12,423

    Pro_Rata said:

    I'm going to veer away from Rochdale for a moment, as I've belatedly compiled the Kingswood LE vote shares.

    I'm not doing Wellingborough as their last LEs were in 2021, which is a different planet.

    Kingswood:
    Con, 8351, 37.4%
    Lab, 8112, 36.3%
    LD, 3279, 14.7%
    Green, 1952, 8.7%
    Ind, 626, 2.8%
    RefUK, 6, 0.0%

    By the time you account that Labour did not stand candidates in 2 wards covering about 12% of the constituency, plus a generous LLG share which Labour will drink from to an extent, then I expect Labour to be home with some comfort. (Con and LD managed full coverage, and the Independent stood where Labour didn't).

    Also RefUK stood in a ward only a small part of which is in Kingswood, so covered only 0.4% of the electorate - it wasn't an unusually terrible result for them.

    I'll look at Rochdale for any insights that might give when I have a few minutes, as they had a 2023 round.

    The issue I have with Labour in Kingswood is the your certainty “generous LLG share which Labour will drink from to an extent”. Labour really need to drink it, yet it’s so close to where Greens are exploding with such popularity they have scrapped a Labour mayor and will knock a popular Labour front bencher out of parliament at the next general election. those LD and green votes you identify might be green on the day, and Tory’s pip Labour in Kingswood.
    MoonRabbit ramping Greens in Bristol again, I see. Convenient to have a by-election to test his theory.
    Yes bring it on, test my theory.

    Scrapped a Labour mayor - already happened.
    Unseat Thangham Debonaire - almost certain to happen
    Strong green showing in Kingswood by election making it squeaky bum time for Labour - let’s see if I’m right.

    These votes I claim green will get are Lib Dem transfers to Green, not to Labour. It’s not that crazy you know Nick.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,907

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    FPT for @rcs1000


    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    CNN is reporting that Russia hit Kyiv with a hypersonic missile, which is a missile so fast it cannot be shot down

    I have no idea if this is true. CNN is pretty pro-Ukraine, so I am not sure why they would boost Putin's military propaganda

    If it IS true, isn't that the end of navies as we know them? A single unstoppable missile can take out a carrier. That's it

    Ah, like the V2 huh?

    How much impact did that have on the war again?
    Have you suddenly become a bit stupid, like the rest of PB? This is quite depressing

    I wasn't even commenting on the impact this might have on the outcome of the present Ukraine war. I thought that was fairly clear

    I was commenting on how this will influence war-making from here on, just as the advent of the V2 - which led to the ICBM - massively impacted geopolitics - and warfare - from the end of WW2 onwards

    If hypersonic missiles, which cannot be shot down, are a thing (and this is what CNN are claiming) then I do not see how traditonal navies can operate. How do you defend a £3bn capital ship like an aircraft carrier against a £3m hypersonic missile which cannot be shot down? If it cannot be shot down, or deflected, then you can't defend the ship. So that's the end of the carrier, the carrier group, the navy as we htave known it, they make no sense, they are merely very expensive and easy targets

    No?

    Of course CNN might have got this wrong, maybe the Ukes are lying for propaganda purposes - I have no idea, on that front

    The Russian navy has been destroyed by drones, its flagships now lying on the sea floor, so I'm not sure "hypersonic missiles" are the future.
    Drones can theoretically be fended off, albeit it is complicated, and tiresome

    If these hypersonic missiles are real (and I am relying on Woke Mad CNN here, so veracity is an issue) then that to me says the era of the aircraft carrier and the trad navy is over. It's not just more difficult to operate enormous ships, it is pointless, they will be zapped

    It's great we just spent £6bn on two of these things. I guess we can use them for "humanitarian" purposes

    Indeed I have a feeling that is the only way we will ever use them, they will never be risked in battle, for the reasons I have cited
    Russia haven't found a way to defend themselves from drones yet, and instead have had to retreat what survives of their navy out of Sevastopol.

    They'll never be risked in battle due to the threat of drones, but £6bn warship versus £200k drones means the era of traditional navy is already over. Missiles isn't what's changed that, drones already have.
    Who’d have thought that parking half your navy 50nm from the enemy, would mean they could be easily taken out with low-cost solutions? Russia bet on Ukraine not really having a traditional navy, to mean they had no seaborne offensive capability. Well they did, and it’s relatively easy to do these days. Thanks Elon.
  • Options
    Sandpit said:

    The Betfair book is not comprehensive. It has no 'Other' option. So what if the Monster RLP candidate did win? All bets void?

    This is pretty unusual for a major firm (although after their abject performance at the last US Election, nothing should surprise.)

    Why do they need a comprehensive book and why would bets be void if, say, OMRLP won?

    Everyone who bet on the candidates who they did list would simply lose, and everyone who laid those candidates would win.
    Short answer: because what would it look like if a bookie only offered offered prices on 8 of the 10 horses running in the 1:45 at Sandown, an hour before they go off?

    Long answer: Punters in political markets try and build a book over time, backing and laying various candidates as the prices change. Betfair will add any outside shot if they’re in the news and someone requests it. Betfair really needs to make this a complete market ASAP, and someone with an interest should log a complaint with them.
    You may as well log a complaint with the dead.
  • Options
    MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 25,229
    The current series of by elections are bizarre. They do nonetheless confirm the shocking bias of the Conservative client media. Now Ali appears to be guilty as charged in Rochdale, so yes it is a fair cop. Starmer left looking ridiculous with his trousers around his ankles.

    Meanwhile in Wellingborough we have the girlfriend of the disgraced and rejected by scandal former MP running as a proxy for that disgraceful and rejected by scandal former MP.

    One story is unpleasant and should be condemned. The other is an assault on democracy.
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 47,302
    edited February 13
    TOPPING said:

    Leon said:

    FPT for @rcs1000


    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    CNN is reporting that Russia hit Kyiv with a hypersonic missile, which is a missile so fast it cannot be shot down

    I have no idea if this is true. CNN is pretty pro-Ukraine, so I am not sure why they would boost Putin's military propaganda

    If it IS true, isn't that the end of navies as we know them? A single unstoppable missile can take out a carrier. That's it

    Ah, like the V2 huh?

    How much impact did that have on the war again?
    Have you suddenly become a bit stupid, like the rest of PB? This is quite depressing

    I wasn't even commenting on the impact this might have on the outcome of the present Ukraine war. I thought that was fairly clear

    I was commenting on how this will influence war-making from here on, just as the advent of the V2 - which led to the ICBM - massively impacted geopolitics - and warfare - from the end of WW2 onwards

    If hypersonic missiles, which cannot be shot down, are a thing (and this is what CNN are claiming) then I do not see how traditonal navies can operate. How do you defend a £3bn capital ship like an aircraft carrier against a £3m hypersonic missile which cannot be shot down? If it cannot be shot down, or deflected, then you can't defend the ship. So that's the end of the carrier, the carrier group, the navy as we htave known it, they make no sense, they are merely very expensive and easy targets

    No?

    Of course CNN might have got this wrong, maybe the Ukes are lying for propaganda purposes - I have no idea, on that front

    Plenty of analysts believe that this is what an invasion of Taiwan might look like - hypersonic missiles in case the US fleet was thinking of getting involved.
    Doing some digging it does seem a very live debate. Some say it is the end of the aircraft carrier, some say the missiles are hyped and not THAT dangerous

    I am not a ballistic missile engineer/strategic defence analyst, I dunno

    The importance of this CNN report (if it is acccurate) is that they, and the Ukes, are claiming this is the first time a "hypersonic" missile has been used in actual warfare, rather than just a test or a wargame. DYOR!

    "CNN

    Ukraine claims it has evidence Russia fired an advanced hypersonic missile – one that experts say is almost impossible to shoot down – for the first time in the almost 2-year-old war.

    The government-run Kyiv Scientific Research Institute of Forensic Expertise said in a Telegram post that debris recovered after a February 7 attack on the Ukrainian capital pointed to the use of a Zircon hypersonic cruise missile by the Russian military."


    https://edition.cnn.com/2024/02/13/europe/ukraine-russia-zircon-hypersonic-missile-intl-hnk-ml/index.html
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 39,044
    TOPPING said:

    Leon said:

    FPT for @rcs1000


    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    CNN is reporting that Russia hit Kyiv with a hypersonic missile, which is a missile so fast it cannot be shot down

    I have no idea if this is true. CNN is pretty pro-Ukraine, so I am not sure why they would boost Putin's military propaganda

    If it IS true, isn't that the end of navies as we know them? A single unstoppable missile can take out a carrier. That's it

    Ah, like the V2 huh?

    How much impact did that have on the war again?
    Have you suddenly become a bit stupid, like the rest of PB? This is quite depressing

    I wasn't even commenting on the impact this might have on the outcome of the present Ukraine war. I thought that was fairly clear

    I was commenting on how this will influence war-making from here on, just as the advent of the V2 - which led to the ICBM - massively impacted geopolitics - and warfare - from the end of WW2 onwards

    If hypersonic missiles, which cannot be shot down, are a thing (and this is what CNN are claiming) then I do not see how traditonal navies can operate. How do you defend a £3bn capital ship like an aircraft carrier against a £3m hypersonic missile which cannot be shot down? If it cannot be shot down, or deflected, then you can't defend the ship. So that's the end of the carrier, the carrier group, the navy as we htave known it, they make no sense, they are merely very expensive and easy targets

    No?

    Of course CNN might have got this wrong, maybe the Ukes are lying for propaganda purposes - I have no idea, on that front

    Plenty of analysts believe that this is what an invasion of Taiwan might look like - hypersonic missiles in case the US fleet was thinking of getting involved.
    My current view is that a conflict between China and Taiwan would not involve a landing - at least, not at first. It would involve a military blockade of the island, and a "come and get us if you think you're hard enough" attitude from the PRC towards the US and Taiwan's allies. They will also try to control the airspace around, and probably over, the island as well.

    With a total blockade, how long would Taiwan be able to hold out? What can Taiwan's allies do to prevent it?

    This is much less risky for the PRC than a land invasion.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,930
    Sandpit said:

    The Betfair book is not comprehensive. It has no 'Other' option. So what if the Monster RLP candidate did win? All bets void?

    This is pretty unusual for a major firm (although after their abject performance at the last US Election, nothing should surprise.)

    Why do they need a comprehensive book and why would bets be void if, say, OMRLP won?

    Everyone who bet on the candidates who they did list would simply lose, and everyone who laid those candidates would win.
    Short answer: because what would it look like if a bookie only offered offered prices on 8 of the 10 horses running in the 1:45 at Sandown, an hour before they go off?

    Long answer: Punters in political markets try and build a book over time, backing and laying various candidates as the prices change. Betfair will add any outside shot if they’re in the news and someone requests it. Betfair really needs to make this a complete market ASAP, and someone with an interest should log a complaint with them.
    What Norfolk describes is what happens.

    Every new candidate added to the US presidential election I start off at + £251.69 for instance.
  • Options
    MattWMattW Posts: 18,591
    edited February 13
    Good afternoon, everyone.

    Which way are ginger cats predicted to be voting?

  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,245
    edited February 13

    Unfortunately this is a by-election dominated by a quarrel in a far-away country between people of whom we know far, far too much.

    There are conflicts all around the world that don't get a fraction of the spotlight or attention that this one has had. I wonder what is so unique about this one conflict, that every moment becomes headline news unlike all the others?

    The physical carnage, the huge civilian casualties, the mass displacement of people, the resulting humanitarian disaster, the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west - these do make for a big story.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,296
    I knew this guy.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ckveyze03e1o

    And he's not the first person I know who's had significant delays waiting for an ambulance.
  • Options
    MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 25,229
    TOPPING said:

    A great header TSE. As a Baggie the Smethwick election is close to my heart. So a name check is most welcome. I was barely out of nappies in 1964 but my Dad had worked at Smethwick Hall Boys School and Cape Hill Secondary so he knew the area well, but from a few years earlier. He was shocked at the Peter Griffiths campaign and it's success.

    From that story alone I have always been uncomfortable with the Conservative Party, particularly at its fringes. My concern may be rational, it may be irrational, much like most people on here couldn't vote Labour (quite justifiably) because of Corbyn- Labour's anti-Semitism.

    Many people on here could not only vote for Corbyn-Labour's anti-semitism but were vocal champions of Corbyn-Labour at the time.
    Not many, but name them if you like. Many of us found distasteful in equal measure Corbyn and Boris Johnson's satire. James O'Brien reminded me today of the numerous anti-Semitic tropes peppering the chapters of Boris Johnson's bodice ripping novel, 72 Virgins
  • Options
    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    The Betfair book is not comprehensive. It has no 'Other' option. So what if the Monster RLP candidate did win? All bets void?

    This is pretty unusual for a major firm (although after their abject performance at the last US Election, nothing should surprise.)

    Presumably if you've laid every listed candidate you'll collect, whereas if you've backed everyone you're out of cash.

    If you've done a mix then profit = Lay stakes - back stakes ?
    Dunno.

    Not sure a bookie is allowed to run a book with one or more runners missing, but of course this is an exchange, not a bookie.

    They also are pretty clueless. Don't even bother asking customer services. It is manned by Youths too stupid to get a job with the Post Office.
    I've got a bet at evens in a nominally one horse race taking place on Sunday 17th March with Smarkets, which is also an exchange. Now I thought his price should be perhaps a tad lower than evens, but I presume if someone else manages to win said race I lose my money. Same thing here I think.
    I don't know. I'm pretty sure this would not be allowed with a traditional bookie. They have to offer every runner, notionally at least.

  • Options
    SelebianSelebian Posts: 7,450

    Could Rochdale give us the first Monster Raving Loony MP?

    Must be tempting for Rochdale’s voters.

    It is a truly appalling slate of candidates.

    If I had a vote in it, I would definitely be checking out the MRLP candidate.
    I would vote for the vicar. Wikipedia has this to say.

    Mark Coleman is a climate change activist and former vicar of Rochdale who is campaigning for "radical action on climate". He was jailed in April 2023 for his part in a Just Stop Oil protest in Bishopsgate, London. Despite running as an independent, he has the support of two local Labour Party officers. He formerly ran as a Green Party candidate for council elections in Liverpool.
    A fine point for rule lawyers. Party members are not allowed to support candidates standing against their party's candidate. Does that apply in this case? I would think not.
    Presumably, from the Party POV at least, there is no candidate and so supporting another candidate is fine as he/she is not standing against the Party candidate (as there isn't one).

    I guess one can also be a Labour Party member and travel to NI to campaign for another party there? Or indeed be a member resident in NI and campaigning for one of the local candidates?
  • Options
    LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 15,304
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    FPT for @rcs1000


    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    CNN is reporting that Russia hit Kyiv with a hypersonic missile, which is a missile so fast it cannot be shot down

    I have no idea if this is true. CNN is pretty pro-Ukraine, so I am not sure why they would boost Putin's military propaganda

    If it IS true, isn't that the end of navies as we know them? A single unstoppable missile can take out a carrier. That's it

    Ah, like the V2 huh?

    How much impact did that have on the war again?
    Have you suddenly become a bit stupid, like the rest of PB? This is quite depressing

    I wasn't even commenting on the impact this might have on the outcome of the present Ukraine war. I thought that was fairly clear

    I was commenting on how this will influence war-making from here on, just as the advent of the V2 - which led to the ICBM - massively impacted geopolitics - and warfare - from the end of WW2 onwards

    If hypersonic missiles, which cannot be shot down, are a thing (and this is what CNN are claiming) then I do not see how traditonal navies can operate. How do you defend a £3bn capital ship like an aircraft carrier against a £3m hypersonic missile which cannot be shot down? If it cannot be shot down, or deflected, then you can't defend the ship. So that's the end of the carrier, the carrier group, the navy as we htave known it, they make no sense, they are merely very expensive and easy targets

    No?

    Of course CNN might have got this wrong, maybe the Ukes are lying for propaganda purposes - I have no idea, on that front

    The Russian navy has been destroyed by drones, its flagships now lying on the sea floor, so I'm not sure "hypersonic missiles" are the future.
    Drones can theoretically be fended off, albeit it is complicated, and tiresome

    If these hypersonic missiles are real (and I am relying on Woke Mad CNN here, so veracity is an issue) then that to me says the era of the aircraft carrier and the trad navy is over. It's not just more difficult to operate enormous ships, it is pointless, they will be zapped

    It's great we just spent £6bn on two of these things. I guess we can use them for "humanitarian" purposes

    Indeed I have a feeling that is the only way we will ever use them, they will never be risked in battle, for the reasons I have cited
    People have been worrying about missiles taking out naval ships for a while. China notably has bucketloads of smaller missile ships, presumably on the basis that they will be able to use a barrage of missiles to take out an opposing navy.

    It's not the case that this missile would be impossible to shoot down, though. Harder, yes, perhaps too hard for the deployed technology right now - but people will have been working on better technology to cope with it for a while. And, also, the faster the missile is going the harder it is for it to hit a specific target.

    It will be interesting to see how many of these missiles Russia is able to produce, and whether they are able to hit anything specific with them.
  • Options
    MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 12,423

    TOPPING said:

    Leon said:

    FPT for @rcs1000


    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    CNN is reporting that Russia hit Kyiv with a hypersonic missile, which is a missile so fast it cannot be shot down

    I have no idea if this is true. CNN is pretty pro-Ukraine, so I am not sure why they would boost Putin's military propaganda

    If it IS true, isn't that the end of navies as we know them? A single unstoppable missile can take out a carrier. That's it

    Ah, like the V2 huh?

    How much impact did that have on the war again?
    Have you suddenly become a bit stupid, like the rest of PB? This is quite depressing

    I wasn't even commenting on the impact this might have on the outcome of the present Ukraine war. I thought that was fairly clear

    I was commenting on how this will influence war-making from here on, just as the advent of the V2 - which led to the ICBM - massively impacted geopolitics - and warfare - from the end of WW2 onwards

    If hypersonic missiles, which cannot be shot down, are a thing (and this is what CNN are claiming) then I do not see how traditonal navies can operate. How do you defend a £3bn capital ship like an aircraft carrier against a £3m hypersonic missile which cannot be shot down? If it cannot be shot down, or deflected, then you can't defend the ship. So that's the end of the carrier, the carrier group, the navy as we htave known it, they make no sense, they are merely very expensive and easy targets

    No?

    Of course CNN might have got this wrong, maybe the Ukes are lying for propaganda purposes - I have no idea, on that front

    Plenty of analysts believe that this is what an invasion of Taiwan might look like - hypersonic missiles in case the US fleet was thinking of getting involved.
    My current view is that a conflict between China and Taiwan would not involve a landing - at least, not at first. It would involve a military blockade of the island, and a "come and get us if you think you're hard enough" attitude from the PRC towards the US and Taiwan's allies. They will also try to control the airspace around, and probably over, the island as well.

    With a total blockade, how long would Taiwan be able to hold out? What can Taiwan's allies do to prevent it?

    This is much less risky for the PRC than a land invasion.
    Will you stop giving them idea’s! You PB Top General you.
  • Options
    noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 20,779

    Pulpstar said:

    The Betfair book is not comprehensive. It has no 'Other' option. So what if the Monster RLP candidate did win? All bets void?

    This is pretty unusual for a major firm (although after their abject performance at the last US Election, nothing should surprise.)

    Presumably if you've laid every listed candidate you'll collect, whereas if you've backed everyone you're out of cash.

    If you've done a mix then profit = Lay stakes - back stakes ?
    Dunno.

    Not sure a bookie is allowed to run a book with one or more runners missing, but of course this is an exchange, not a bookie.

    They also are pretty clueless. Don't even bother asking customer services. It is manned by Youths too stupid to get a job with the Post Office.
    Of course bookies can offer odds without listing all possible runners. Consider the FA Cup outright for example. Have you ever seen any of these listed in the betting?

    Briscombe & Thrupp FC, Chipstead FC, New Salamis FC, Real Bedford FC, FC Clacton etc.....
  • Options
    Jim_MillerJim_Miller Posts: 2,508
    There are many problems with immigration to the US, legal and illegal. But it appears to be a net benefit, economically:

    'Consider a few numbers: Last week, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office released updated 10-year economic and budget forecasts. The numbers look significantly better than they did a year earlier, and immigration is a key reason.
    . . .
    This will in turn lead to better economic growth. As CBO Director Phill Swagel wrote in a note accompanying the forecasts: As a result of these immigration-driven revisions to the size of the labor force, “we estimate that, from 2023 to 2034, GDP will be greater by about $7 trillion and revenues will be greater by about $1 trillion than they would have been otherwise.'
    source$: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2024/02/13/immigration-economy-jobs-cbo-report/

    Here's the CBO forecast: https://www.cbo.gov/publication/59946
  • Options
    LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 15,304
    TOPPING said:

    Leon said:

    FPT for @rcs1000


    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    CNN is reporting that Russia hit Kyiv with a hypersonic missile, which is a missile so fast it cannot be shot down

    I have no idea if this is true. CNN is pretty pro-Ukraine, so I am not sure why they would boost Putin's military propaganda

    If it IS true, isn't that the end of navies as we know them? A single unstoppable missile can take out a carrier. That's it

    Ah, like the V2 huh?

    How much impact did that have on the war again?
    Have you suddenly become a bit stupid, like the rest of PB? This is quite depressing

    I wasn't even commenting on the impact this might have on the outcome of the present Ukraine war. I thought that was fairly clear

    I was commenting on how this will influence war-making from here on, just as the advent of the V2 - which led to the ICBM - massively impacted geopolitics - and warfare - from the end of WW2 onwards

    If hypersonic missiles, which cannot be shot down, are a thing (and this is what CNN are claiming) then I do not see how traditonal navies can operate. How do you defend a £3bn capital ship like an aircraft carrier against a £3m hypersonic missile which cannot be shot down? If it cannot be shot down, or deflected, then you can't defend the ship. So that's the end of the carrier, the carrier group, the navy as we htave known it, they make no sense, they are merely very expensive and easy targets

    No?

    Of course CNN might have got this wrong, maybe the Ukes are lying for propaganda purposes - I have no idea, on that front

    Plenty of analysts believe that this is what an invasion of Taiwan might look like - hypersonic missiles in case the US fleet was thinking of getting involved.
    Although it also works the same way, if the Chinese navy tries to enforce a blockade on Taiwan, or is used to support an invasion.
  • Options
    El_CapitanoEl_Capitano Posts: 3,870

    Pro_Rata said:

    I'm going to veer away from Rochdale for a moment, as I've belatedly compiled the Kingswood LE vote shares.

    I'm not doing Wellingborough as their last LEs were in 2021, which is a different planet.

    Kingswood:
    Con, 8351, 37.4%
    Lab, 8112, 36.3%
    LD, 3279, 14.7%
    Green, 1952, 8.7%
    Ind, 626, 2.8%
    RefUK, 6, 0.0%

    By the time you account that Labour did not stand candidates in 2 wards covering about 12% of the constituency, plus a generous LLG share which Labour will drink from to an extent, then I expect Labour to be home with some comfort. (Con and LD managed full coverage, and the Independent stood where Labour didn't).

    Also RefUK stood in a ward only a small part of which is in Kingswood, so covered only 0.4% of the electorate - it wasn't an unusually terrible result for them.

    I'll look at Rochdale for any insights that might give when I have a few minutes, as they had a 2023 round.

    The issue I have with Labour in Kingswood is the your certainty “generous LLG share which Labour will drink from to an extent”. Labour really need to drink it, yet it’s so close to where Greens are exploding with such popularity they have scrapped a Labour mayor and will knock a popular Labour front bencher out of parliament at the next general election. those LD and green votes you identify might be green on the day, and Tory’s pip Labour in Kingswood.
    MoonRabbit ramping Greens in Bristol again, I see. Convenient to have a by-election to test his theory.
    Yes bring it on, test my theory.

    Scrapped a Labour mayor - already happened.
    Unseat Thangham Debonaire - almost certain to happen
    Strong green showing in Kingswood by election making it squeaky bum time for Labour - let’s see if I’m right.

    These votes I claim green will get are Lib Dem transfers to Green, not to Labour. It’s not that crazy you know Nick.
    Now now. You know that Labour believes it has a divine right to all left-of-centre voters and anyone considering voting Green or LibDem is an apostate who deserves condemnation.
  • Options
    kjhkjh Posts: 10,646
    ydoethur said:

    I knew this guy.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ckveyze03e1o

    And he's not the first person I know who's had significant delays waiting for an ambulance.

    My sister broke her hip yesterday at the Gym (competing with me with my broken legs two years ago while just walking out of the door for the most stupid way to have an accident) and is going to have a hip replacement tomorrow. Five and a half hours wait for the ambulance.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,907
    edited February 13
    Leon said:

    TOPPING said:

    Leon said:

    FPT for @rcs1000


    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    CNN is reporting that Russia hit Kyiv with a hypersonic missile, which is a missile so fast it cannot be shot down

    I have no idea if this is true. CNN is pretty pro-Ukraine, so I am not sure why they would boost Putin's military propaganda

    If it IS true, isn't that the end of navies as we know them? A single unstoppable missile can take out a carrier. That's it

    Ah, like the V2 huh?

    How much impact did that have on the war again?
    Have you suddenly become a bit stupid, like the rest of PB? This is quite depressing

    I wasn't even commenting on the impact this might have on the outcome of the present Ukraine war. I thought that was fairly clear

    I was commenting on how this will influence war-making from here on, just as the advent of the V2 - which led to the ICBM - massively impacted geopolitics - and warfare - from the end of WW2 onwards

    If hypersonic missiles, which cannot be shot down, are a thing (and this is what CNN are claiming) then I do not see how traditonal navies can operate. How do you defend a £3bn capital ship like an aircraft carrier against a £3m hypersonic missile which cannot be shot down? If it cannot be shot down, or deflected, then you can't defend the ship. So that's the end of the carrier, the carrier group, the navy as we htave known it, they make no sense, they are merely very expensive and easy targets

    No?

    Of course CNN might have got this wrong, maybe the Ukes are lying for propaganda purposes - I have no idea, on that front

    Plenty of analysts believe that this is what an invasion of Taiwan might look like - hypersonic missiles in case the US fleet was thinking of getting involved.
    Doing some digging it does seem a very live debate. Some say it is the end of the aircraft carrier, some say the missiles are hyped and not THAT dangerous

    I am not a ballistic missile engineer/strategic defence analyst, I dunno

    The importance of this CNN report (if it is acccurate) is that they, and the Ukes, are claiming this is the first time a "hypersonic" missile has been used in actual warfare, rather than just a test or a wargame. DYOR!

    "CNN

    Ukraine claims it has evidence Russia fired an advanced hypersonic missile – one that experts say is almost impossible to shoot down – for the first time in the almost 2-year-old war.

    The government-run Kyiv Scientific Research Institute of Forensic Expertise said in a Telegram post that debris recovered after a February 7 attack on the Ukrainian capital pointed to the use of a Zircon hypersonic cruise missile by the Russian military."


    https://edition.cnn.com/2024/02/13/europe/ukraine-russia-zircon-hypersonic-missile-intl-hnk-ml/index.html
    See @Malmesbury’s post above.

    There’s a difference between an ICBM (a rocket launched from the ground), a rocket-powered missile launched from an aircraft, and a revolutionary mach 5 jet-powered missile. The first two are old technology, can be seen from space, and aren’t going to do much in modern warfare.

    The third is an interesting innovation if it works to lock a target, rather than simply heading for a fixed co-ordinate. It would need air defence elements to be positioned along the trajectory to anticipate its arrival, as it goes faster than the defence missiles. There’s no evidence that Russia, China, or North Korea actually have any of these, despite several demonstrations they claim to have given.
  • Options

    Pulpstar said:

    The Betfair book is not comprehensive. It has no 'Other' option. So what if the Monster RLP candidate did win? All bets void?

    This is pretty unusual for a major firm (although after their abject performance at the last US Election, nothing should surprise.)

    Presumably if you've laid every listed candidate you'll collect, whereas if you've backed everyone you're out of cash.

    If you've done a mix then profit = Lay stakes - back stakes ?
    Dunno.

    Not sure a bookie is allowed to run a book with one or more runners missing, but of course this is an exchange, not a bookie.

    They also are pretty clueless. Don't even bother asking customer services. It is manned by Youths too stupid to get a job with the Post Office.
    Of course bookies can offer odds without listing all possible runners. Consider the FA Cup outright for example. Have you ever seen any of these listed in the betting?

    Briscombe & Thrupp FC, Chipstead FC, New Salamis FC, Real Bedford FC, FC Clacton etc.....
    No, but if you ever wanted to back one of those you would pretty soon find a taker.

    In fact you can have them me if you like. :)
  • Options
    algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 10,551
    MattW said:

    Good afternoon, everyone.

    Which way are ginger cats predicted to be voting?

    Curiously this is what George Galloway would look like if he were a young cat.
  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,245
    On Topic: Not Galloway please. I'd rather a shock Tory win than that.
  • Options
    MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 25,229
    ydoethur said:

    I knew this guy.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ckveyze03e1o

    And he's not the first person I know who's had significant delays waiting for an ambulance.

    I was tempted to come in with some chippy partisan comment, but to be honest the story paints it's own vivid picture. Commentary is superfluous.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,907
    edited February 13
    ydoethur said:

    I knew this guy.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ckveyze03e1o

    And he's not the first person I know who's had significant delays waiting for an ambulance.

    How long before someone sets up a private ‘ambulance service’, which is little more than a paramedic in a taxi with a big first aid kit, who charges £100 to patch you up and give you a ride to the hospital?

    That’s not the same as a ‘private amblulance’ service, which is something slightly different.
  • Options
    MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 12,423
    edited February 13

    Pro_Rata said:

    I'm going to veer away from Rochdale for a moment, as I've belatedly compiled the Kingswood LE vote shares.

    I'm not doing Wellingborough as their last LEs were in 2021, which is a different planet.

    Kingswood:
    Con, 8351, 37.4%
    Lab, 8112, 36.3%
    LD, 3279, 14.7%
    Green, 1952, 8.7%
    Ind, 626, 2.8%
    RefUK, 6, 0.0%

    By the time you account that Labour did not stand candidates in 2 wards covering about 12% of the constituency, plus a generous LLG share which Labour will drink from to an extent, then I expect Labour to be home with some comfort. (Con and LD managed full coverage, and the Independent stood where Labour didn't).

    Also RefUK stood in a ward only a small part of which is in Kingswood, so covered only 0.4% of the electorate - it wasn't an unusually terrible result for them.

    I'll look at Rochdale for any insights that might give when I have a few minutes, as they had a 2023 round.

    The issue I have with Labour in Kingswood is the your certainty “generous LLG share which Labour will drink from to an extent”. Labour really need to drink it, yet it’s so close to where Greens are exploding with such popularity they have scrapped a Labour mayor and will knock a popular Labour front bencher out of parliament at the next general election. those LD and green votes you identify might be green on the day, and Tory’s pip Labour in Kingswood.
    MoonRabbit ramping Greens in Bristol again, I see. Convenient to have a by-election to test his theory.
    Yes bring it on, test my theory.

    Scrapped a Labour mayor - already happened.
    Unseat Thangham Debonaire - almost certain to happen
    Strong green showing in Kingswood by election making it squeaky bum time for Labour - let’s see if I’m right.

    These votes I claim green will get are Lib Dem transfers to Green, not to Labour. It’s not that crazy you know Nick.
    Now now. You know that Labour believes it has a divine right to all left-of-centre voters and anyone considering voting Green or LibDem is an apostate who deserves condemnation.
    What they get and when is both geographical and narrational. Geographically Bristol is the UKs Green Bastion right now, and all the former Labour, Conservative and Lib Dem voters there who have switched green seem to be very happy with it. On the ‘get Sunak out’ narration of general election day these same voters thwarting Labour this week would probably go Labour to give Labour Kingswood, (and possibly Uxbridge too). Whilst at same time, a bus ride away, green votes unseat Thangham Debonaire.
  • Options
    kjhkjh Posts: 10,646
    Sandpit said:

    Leon said:

    TOPPING said:

    Leon said:

    FPT for @rcs1000


    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    CNN is reporting that Russia hit Kyiv with a hypersonic missile, which is a missile so fast it cannot be shot down

    I have no idea if this is true. CNN is pretty pro-Ukraine, so I am not sure why they would boost Putin's military propaganda

    If it IS true, isn't that the end of navies as we know them? A single unstoppable missile can take out a carrier. That's it

    Ah, like the V2 huh?

    How much impact did that have on the war again?
    Have you suddenly become a bit stupid, like the rest of PB? This is quite depressing

    I wasn't even commenting on the impact this might have on the outcome of the present Ukraine war. I thought that was fairly clear

    I was commenting on how this will influence war-making from here on, just as the advent of the V2 - which led to the ICBM - massively impacted geopolitics - and warfare - from the end of WW2 onwards

    If hypersonic missiles, which cannot be shot down, are a thing (and this is what CNN are claiming) then I do not see how traditonal navies can operate. How do you defend a £3bn capital ship like an aircraft carrier against a £3m hypersonic missile which cannot be shot down? If it cannot be shot down, or deflected, then you can't defend the ship. So that's the end of the carrier, the carrier group, the navy as we htave known it, they make no sense, they are merely very expensive and easy targets

    No?

    Of course CNN might have got this wrong, maybe the Ukes are lying for propaganda purposes - I have no idea, on that front

    Plenty of analysts believe that this is what an invasion of Taiwan might look like - hypersonic missiles in case the US fleet was thinking of getting involved.
    Doing some digging it does seem a very live debate. Some say it is the end of the aircraft carrier, some say the missiles are hyped and not THAT dangerous

    I am not a ballistic missile engineer/strategic defence analyst, I dunno

    The importance of this CNN report (if it is acccurate) is that they, and the Ukes, are claiming this is the first time a "hypersonic" missile has been used in actual warfare, rather than just a test or a wargame. DYOR!

    "CNN

    Ukraine claims it has evidence Russia fired an advanced hypersonic missile – one that experts say is almost impossible to shoot down – for the first time in the almost 2-year-old war.

    The government-run Kyiv Scientific Research Institute of Forensic Expertise said in a Telegram post that debris recovered after a February 7 attack on the Ukrainian capital pointed to the use of a Zircon hypersonic cruise missile by the Russian military."


    https://edition.cnn.com/2024/02/13/europe/ukraine-russia-zircon-hypersonic-missile-intl-hnk-ml/index.html
    See @Malmesbury’s post above.

    There’s a difference between an ICBM (a rocket-launched from the ground), a rocket-powered missile launched from an aircraft, and a revolutionary mach 5 jet-powered missile. The first two are old technology, can be seen from space, and aren’t going to do much in modern warfare.

    The third is an interesting innovation if it works to lock a target, rather than simply heading for a fixed co-ordinate. It would need air defence elements to be positioned along the trajectory to anticipate its arrival, as it goes faster than the defence missiles. There’s no evidence that Russia, China, or North Korea actually have any of these, despite several demonstrations they claim to have given.
    I suspect he doesn't know the difference between a rocket and a jet.
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 39,044
    Leon said:

    TOPPING said:

    Leon said:

    FPT for @rcs1000


    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    CNN is reporting that Russia hit Kyiv with a hypersonic missile, which is a missile so fast it cannot be shot down

    I have no idea if this is true. CNN is pretty pro-Ukraine, so I am not sure why they would boost Putin's military propaganda

    If it IS true, isn't that the end of navies as we know them? A single unstoppable missile can take out a carrier. That's it

    Ah, like the V2 huh?

    How much impact did that have on the war again?
    Have you suddenly become a bit stupid, like the rest of PB? This is quite depressing

    I wasn't even commenting on the impact this might have on the outcome of the present Ukraine war. I thought that was fairly clear

    I was commenting on how this will influence war-making from here on, just as the advent of the V2 - which led to the ICBM - massively impacted geopolitics - and warfare - from the end of WW2 onwards

    If hypersonic missiles, which cannot be shot down, are a thing (and this is what CNN are claiming) then I do not see how traditonal navies can operate. How do you defend a £3bn capital ship like an aircraft carrier against a £3m hypersonic missile which cannot be shot down? If it cannot be shot down, or deflected, then you can't defend the ship. So that's the end of the carrier, the carrier group, the navy as we htave known it, they make no sense, they are merely very expensive and easy targets

    No?

    Of course CNN might have got this wrong, maybe the Ukes are lying for propaganda purposes - I have no idea, on that front

    Plenty of analysts believe that this is what an invasion of Taiwan might look like - hypersonic missiles in case the US fleet was thinking of getting involved.
    Doing some digging it does seem a very live debate. Some say it is the end of the aircraft carrier, some say the missiles are hyped and not THAT dangerous

    I am not a ballistic missile engineer/strategic defence analyst, I dunno

    The importance of this CNN report (if it is acccurate) is that they, and the Ukes, are claiming this is the first time a "hypersonic" missile has been used in actual warfare, rather than just a test or a wargame. DYOR!

    "CNN

    Ukraine claims it has evidence Russia fired an advanced hypersonic missile – one that experts say is almost impossible to shoot down – for the first time in the almost 2-year-old war.

    The government-run Kyiv Scientific Research Institute of Forensic Expertise said in a Telegram post that debris recovered after a February 7 attack on the Ukrainian capital pointed to the use of a Zircon hypersonic cruise missile by the Russian military."


    https://edition.cnn.com/2024/02/13/europe/ukraine-russia-zircon-hypersonic-missile-intl-hnk-ml/index.html
    A few points:

    Warfare has always been about weapons systems and defences to counter those weapons systems. A new weapons is developed (say, the tank), and it is brilliant. Then new weapons and tactics are developed to counter that weapon. But that can be very costly to develop and field.

    It then comes down to a cost. If a $500k weapon can down a $1 billion aircraft, that's a win for the weapon. If you have to spend $500k shooting down a $10k drone, that's ... problematic.

    This new missile is expensive. Its target (say, an aircraft carrier) is much more expensive. That's a win for the attacker. Any system (say, laser), designed to counter ideally needs to be cheaper - or hit first time. But on the other hand, the missiles are expensive, the distances large, and the targets small. If you send 20 missiles after one target, that cost builds up as well.

    There's an added issue with the fact that if the missile is nuclear-capable, then the defender does not know if it is carrying instant sunshine - and if they have nukes as well, it may lead to a nuclear response.
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,320

    TOPPING said:

    Leon said:

    FPT for @rcs1000


    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    CNN is reporting that Russia hit Kyiv with a hypersonic missile, which is a missile so fast it cannot be shot down

    I have no idea if this is true. CNN is pretty pro-Ukraine, so I am not sure why they would boost Putin's military propaganda

    If it IS true, isn't that the end of navies as we know them? A single unstoppable missile can take out a carrier. That's it

    Ah, like the V2 huh?

    How much impact did that have on the war again?
    Have you suddenly become a bit stupid, like the rest of PB? This is quite depressing

    I wasn't even commenting on the impact this might have on the outcome of the present Ukraine war. I thought that was fairly clear

    I was commenting on how this will influence war-making from here on, just as the advent of the V2 - which led to the ICBM - massively impacted geopolitics - and warfare - from the end of WW2 onwards

    If hypersonic missiles, which cannot be shot down, are a thing (and this is what CNN are claiming) then I do not see how traditonal navies can operate. How do you defend a £3bn capital ship like an aircraft carrier against a £3m hypersonic missile which cannot be shot down? If it cannot be shot down, or deflected, then you can't defend the ship. So that's the end of the carrier, the carrier group, the navy as we htave known it, they make no sense, they are merely very expensive and easy targets

    No?

    Of course CNN might have got this wrong, maybe the Ukes are lying for propaganda purposes - I have no idea, on that front

    Plenty of analysts believe that this is what an invasion of Taiwan might look like - hypersonic missiles in case the US fleet was thinking of getting involved.
    My current view is that a conflict between China and Taiwan would not involve a landing - at least, not at first. It would involve a military blockade of the island, and a "come and get us if you think you're hard enough" attitude from the PRC towards the US and Taiwan's allies. They will also try to control the airspace around, and probably over, the island as well.

    With a total blockade, how long would Taiwan be able to hold out? What can Taiwan's allies do to prevent it?

    This is much less risky for the PRC than a land invasion.
    Don't disagree. The obvious question is will the US go to war (proper war) to save Taiwan.
  • Options
    Peter_the_PunterPeter_the_Punter Posts: 13,320
    edited February 13
    Sandpit said:

    The Betfair book is not comprehensive. It has no 'Other' option. So what if the Monster RLP candidate did win? All bets void?

    This is pretty unusual for a major firm (although after their abject performance at the last US Election, nothing should surprise.)

    They had a full list of candidates on the day nominations closed, how the hell did they manage to mess that up? It’s a simple administrative task for an exchange, no expert odds setter required.
    Oh, if you've ever had any direct dealings with them, Sandy, you would quickly realise they know nothing about betting, and probably not much else besides.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,296
    edited February 13
    Sandpit said:

    ydoethur said:

    I knew this guy.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ckveyze03e1o

    And he's not the first person I know who's had significant delays waiting for an ambulance.

    How long before someone sets up a private ‘ambulance service’, which is little more than a paramedic in a taxi with a big first aid kit, who takes £100 off you to patch you up and a ride to the hospital?

    That’s not the same as a ‘private amblulance’ service, which is something slightly different.
    That's what you already get half the time. In Ken's case, the first emergency services to reach him after David had reported he'd had a cardiac arrest, were the police, as first responders.

    With due respect to the police, that's not a lot of help. They couldn't do anything that David wasn't already doing.
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 39,044
    kjh said:

    ydoethur said:

    I knew this guy.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ckveyze03e1o

    And he's not the first person I know who's had significant delays waiting for an ambulance.

    My sister broke her hip yesterday at the Gym (competing with me with my broken legs two years ago while just walking out of the door for the most stupid way to have an accident) and is going to have a hip replacement tomorrow. Five and a half hours wait for the ambulance.
    On the other hand: on Friday a man collapsed in the changing room of the swimming pool. CPR was performed by the staff, and an ambulance arrived very promptly. I chatted to the staff on Monday, and he survived. :)

    (Friday was a very bad day for me. After witnessing the CPR, I came home to discover on FB that an old schoolfriend had died. Fortunately bad luck did not happen in threes.)
  • Options
    MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 25,229
    Sandpit said:

    ydoethur said:

    I knew this guy.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ckveyze03e1o

    And he's not the first person I know who's had significant delays waiting for an ambulance.

    How long before someone sets up a private ‘ambulance service’, which is little more than a paramedic in a taxi with a big first aid kit, who charges £100 to patch you up and give you a ride to the hospital?

    That’s not the same as a ‘private amblulance’ service, which is something slightly different.
    Isn't the ambulance in the US a bit like vehicle recovery after a car wreck? The handlers follow the police radio frequency and send vehicles to the incident. First come first served.
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 39,044
    edited February 13
    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    Leon said:

    FPT for @rcs1000


    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    CNN is reporting that Russia hit Kyiv with a hypersonic missile, which is a missile so fast it cannot be shot down

    I have no idea if this is true. CNN is pretty pro-Ukraine, so I am not sure why they would boost Putin's military propaganda

    If it IS true, isn't that the end of navies as we know them? A single unstoppable missile can take out a carrier. That's it

    Ah, like the V2 huh?

    How much impact did that have on the war again?
    Have you suddenly become a bit stupid, like the rest of PB? This is quite depressing

    I wasn't even commenting on the impact this might have on the outcome of the present Ukraine war. I thought that was fairly clear

    I was commenting on how this will influence war-making from here on, just as the advent of the V2 - which led to the ICBM - massively impacted geopolitics - and warfare - from the end of WW2 onwards

    If hypersonic missiles, which cannot be shot down, are a thing (and this is what CNN are claiming) then I do not see how traditonal navies can operate. How do you defend a £3bn capital ship like an aircraft carrier against a £3m hypersonic missile which cannot be shot down? If it cannot be shot down, or deflected, then you can't defend the ship. So that's the end of the carrier, the carrier group, the navy as we htave known it, they make no sense, they are merely very expensive and easy targets

    No?

    Of course CNN might have got this wrong, maybe the Ukes are lying for propaganda purposes - I have no idea, on that front

    Plenty of analysts believe that this is what an invasion of Taiwan might look like - hypersonic missiles in case the US fleet was thinking of getting involved.
    My current view is that a conflict between China and Taiwan would not involve a landing - at least, not at first. It would involve a military blockade of the island, and a "come and get us if you think you're hard enough" attitude from the PRC towards the US and Taiwan's allies. They will also try to control the airspace around, and probably over, the island as well.

    With a total blockade, how long would Taiwan be able to hold out? What can Taiwan's allies do to prevent it?

    This is much less risky for the PRC than a land invasion.
    Don't disagree. The obvious question is will the US go to war (proper war) to save Taiwan.
    I don't know. My gut instinct is it depends on China. If they do something stupid like sink a US carrier, then the US will, for vengeance's sake, if nothing else. And China's military often does aggressively dumb stuff.

    e.g.
    "The U.S. Department of Defense says there have been more than 180 instances of Chinese military aircraft flying dangerously close to U.S. aircraft since the fall of 2021."

    https://asia.nikkei.com/Politics/International-relations/South-China-Sea/Chinese-fighter-jet-nearly-crashes-into-U.S.-bomber
  • Options
    david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,419
    edited February 13

    Leon said:

    TOPPING said:

    Leon said:

    FPT for @rcs1000


    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    CNN is reporting that Russia hit Kyiv with a hypersonic missile, which is a missile so fast it cannot be shot down

    I have no idea if this is true. CNN is pretty pro-Ukraine, so I am not sure why they would boost Putin's military propaganda

    If it IS true, isn't that the end of navies as we know them? A single unstoppable missile can take out a carrier. That's it

    Ah, like the V2 huh?

    How much impact did that have on the war again?
    Have you suddenly become a bit stupid, like the rest of PB? This is quite depressing

    I wasn't even commenting on the impact this might have on the outcome of the present Ukraine war. I thought that was fairly clear

    I was commenting on how this will influence war-making from here on, just as the advent of the V2 - which led to the ICBM - massively impacted geopolitics - and warfare - from the end of WW2 onwards

    If hypersonic missiles, which cannot be shot down, are a thing (and this is what CNN are claiming) then I do not see how traditonal navies can operate. How do you defend a £3bn capital ship like an aircraft carrier against a £3m hypersonic missile which cannot be shot down? If it cannot be shot down, or deflected, then you can't defend the ship. So that's the end of the carrier, the carrier group, the navy as we htave known it, they make no sense, they are merely very expensive and easy targets

    No?

    Of course CNN might have got this wrong, maybe the Ukes are lying for propaganda purposes - I have no idea, on that front

    Plenty of analysts believe that this is what an invasion of Taiwan might look like - hypersonic missiles in case the US fleet was thinking of getting involved.
    Doing some digging it does seem a very live debate. Some say it is the end of the aircraft carrier, some say the missiles are hyped and not THAT dangerous

    I am not a ballistic missile engineer/strategic defence analyst, I dunno

    The importance of this CNN report (if it is acccurate) is that they, and the Ukes, are claiming this is the first time a "hypersonic" missile has been used in actual warfare, rather than just a test or a wargame. DYOR!

    "CNN

    Ukraine claims it has evidence Russia fired an advanced hypersonic missile – one that experts say is almost impossible to shoot down – for the first time in the almost 2-year-old war.

    The government-run Kyiv Scientific Research Institute of Forensic Expertise said in a Telegram post that debris recovered after a February 7 attack on the Ukrainian capital pointed to the use of a Zircon hypersonic cruise missile by the Russian military."


    https://edition.cnn.com/2024/02/13/europe/ukraine-russia-zircon-hypersonic-missile-intl-hnk-ml/index.html
    A few points:

    Warfare has always been about weapons systems and defences to counter those weapons systems. A new weapons is developed (say, the tank), and it is brilliant. Then new weapons and tactics are developed to counter that weapon. But that can be very costly to develop and field.

    It then comes down to a cost. If a $500k weapon can down a $1 billion aircraft, that's a win for the weapon. If you have to spend $500k shooting down a $10k drone, that's ... problematic.

    This new missile is expensive. Its target (say, an aircraft carrier) is much more expensive. That's a win for the attacker. Any system (say, laser), designed to counter ideally needs to be cheaper - or hit first time. But on the other hand, the missiles are expensive, the distances large, and the targets small. If you send 20 missiles after one target, that cost builds up as well.

    There's an added issue with the fact that if the missile is nuclear-capable, then the defender does not know if it is carrying instant sunshine - and if they have nukes as well, it may lead to a nuclear response.
    Very good final point. And almost certainly, yes, it would be nuclear-capable both because of the physics of relative size, propulsion and dynamics, and because if you're a nuclear-capable country, why wouldn't you put your most powerful warheads on your most uninterceptable missiles? And they would be trackable. One thing about a hypersonic missile is that it has to fly high. You can't go at mach 5 at ground- / sea-level: it takes too long to turn and there's too much clutter in the way. They'll probably also get quite hot. So the targets should be able to see them coming.
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 39,044

    TOPPING said:

    Leon said:

    FPT for @rcs1000


    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    CNN is reporting that Russia hit Kyiv with a hypersonic missile, which is a missile so fast it cannot be shot down

    I have no idea if this is true. CNN is pretty pro-Ukraine, so I am not sure why they would boost Putin's military propaganda

    If it IS true, isn't that the end of navies as we know them? A single unstoppable missile can take out a carrier. That's it

    Ah, like the V2 huh?

    How much impact did that have on the war again?
    Have you suddenly become a bit stupid, like the rest of PB? This is quite depressing

    I wasn't even commenting on the impact this might have on the outcome of the present Ukraine war. I thought that was fairly clear

    I was commenting on how this will influence war-making from here on, just as the advent of the V2 - which led to the ICBM - massively impacted geopolitics - and warfare - from the end of WW2 onwards

    If hypersonic missiles, which cannot be shot down, are a thing (and this is what CNN are claiming) then I do not see how traditonal navies can operate. How do you defend a £3bn capital ship like an aircraft carrier against a £3m hypersonic missile which cannot be shot down? If it cannot be shot down, or deflected, then you can't defend the ship. So that's the end of the carrier, the carrier group, the navy as we htave known it, they make no sense, they are merely very expensive and easy targets

    No?

    Of course CNN might have got this wrong, maybe the Ukes are lying for propaganda purposes - I have no idea, on that front

    Plenty of analysts believe that this is what an invasion of Taiwan might look like - hypersonic missiles in case the US fleet was thinking of getting involved.
    My current view is that a conflict between China and Taiwan would not involve a landing - at least, not at first. It would involve a military blockade of the island, and a "come and get us if you think you're hard enough" attitude from the PRC towards the US and Taiwan's allies. They will also try to control the airspace around, and probably over, the island as well.

    With a total blockade, how long would Taiwan be able to hold out? What can Taiwan's allies do to prevent it?

    This is much less risky for the PRC than a land invasion.
    Will you stop giving them idea’s! You PB Top General you.
    Fuck off.
  • Options
    SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 20,634

    Could Rochdale give us the first Monster Raving Loony MP?

    Must be tempting for Rochdale’s voters.

    It is a truly appalling slate of candidates.

    If I had a vote in it, I would definitely be checking out the MRLP candidate.
    I would vote for the vicar. Wikipedia has this to say.

    Mark Coleman is a climate change activist and former vicar of Rochdale who is campaigning for "radical action on climate". He was jailed in April 2023 for his part in a Just Stop Oil protest in Bishopsgate, London. Despite running as an independent, he has the support of two local Labour Party officers. He formerly ran as a Green Party candidate for council elections in Liverpool.
    A climate change activist. No wonder the Green Party didn't want him as their candidate again. Once bitten and all that.
  • Options
    MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 12,423
    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    Leon said:

    FPT for @rcs1000


    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    CNN is reporting that Russia hit Kyiv with a hypersonic missile, which is a missile so fast it cannot be shot down

    I have no idea if this is true. CNN is pretty pro-Ukraine, so I am not sure why they would boost Putin's military propaganda

    If it IS true, isn't that the end of navies as we know them? A single unstoppable missile can take out a carrier. That's it

    Ah, like the V2 huh?

    How much impact did that have on the war again?
    Have you suddenly become a bit stupid, like the rest of PB? This is quite depressing

    I wasn't even commenting on the impact this might have on the outcome of the present Ukraine war. I thought that was fairly clear

    I was commenting on how this will influence war-making from here on, just as the advent of the V2 - which led to the ICBM - massively impacted geopolitics - and warfare - from the end of WW2 onwards

    If hypersonic missiles, which cannot be shot down, are a thing (and this is what CNN are claiming) then I do not see how traditonal navies can operate. How do you defend a £3bn capital ship like an aircraft carrier against a £3m hypersonic missile which cannot be shot down? If it cannot be shot down, or deflected, then you can't defend the ship. So that's the end of the carrier, the carrier group, the navy as we htave known it, they make no sense, they are merely very expensive and easy targets

    No?

    Of course CNN might have got this wrong, maybe the Ukes are lying for propaganda purposes - I have no idea, on that front

    Plenty of analysts believe that this is what an invasion of Taiwan might look like - hypersonic missiles in case the US fleet was thinking of getting involved.
    My current view is that a conflict between China and Taiwan would not involve a landing - at least, not at first. It would involve a military blockade of the island, and a "come and get us if you think you're hard enough" attitude from the PRC towards the US and Taiwan's allies. They will also try to control the airspace around, and probably over, the island as well.

    With a total blockade, how long would Taiwan be able to hold out? What can Taiwan's allies do to prevent it?

    This is much less risky for the PRC than a land invasion.
    Don't disagree. The obvious question is will the US go to war (proper war) to save Taiwan.
    I thought holding nuclear arsenals are supposed to stop proper wars?
  • Options
    RogerRoger Posts: 18,891
    OT. Russell Brand on the Putin-Carlson interview. After our clustering around Israel -the country that can do no wrong -I found his perspective on our automatic assumptions interesting

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J96koY0EQ48
This discussion has been closed.