Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Politicalbetting.com: Ten years old today and still going s
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Politicalbetting.com: Ten years old today and still going strong
It began simply because I like talking about and making forecasts on electoral outcomes and I wanted a platform where I can could engage with like minded people. My son, Robert, was the catalyst and he’s played a huge part over the past decade handling the technical site from small beginnings. He suggested that I set up a blog and so we did.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
And Congratulations OGH & Robert!
This is a great site, something to be very proud of. I hope it gives you a decent income as well.
You're certainly doing a good job slowly educating people who should know better (e.g. old media types) about politics, betting and polling.
I can't remember when I first popped in, well in advance of the 2010 election in any event.
http://www.testosteronepit.com/home/2014/3/23/jitters-mount-over-prospect-of-catalonian-independence.html
http://cdn.yougov.com/cumulus_uploads/document/i9eok6bjvw/YG-Archive-Pol-Sunday-Times-results-140321.pdf
Best COE (vs 3/2010)
Osborne: 29 (+15)
Balls: 14 (-6 vs Darling)
Cable: 13 (-9)
Hope Mike and team are still finding it as rewarding and fulfilling as ever, and that JackW is still going strong for the 20th.
VI Lab lead 13%
Govt approval -32
Doing well:
Osbo -18
Cam -19
Mili -25
Clegg -46
Best chancellor?
Osbo 24
Balls 16
Cable 13
---
Just highlights Tory brand problem?
Con/LD coalition: 35 (+3)
Lab: 22 (-6)
So a 4 point verge of MOE gap has opened up to a 13 point lead.....
I came out as a 6. Cosmopolitan Critics: "Generally younger, more secular and urban-based, worried about growing inequality & the general direction the country is going in.”
At 75, I like the “younger”!
PB is a great site to be on with my AM cup oftea, and also when insomniac.
It is the most civilized (despite occasional lapse) and intelligent interparty blog in existence. Well worth the effort. I am happy to contribute financially from time to time for such a pleasure.
PB as a spotty acne ridden teenager, full of angst, raging hormones and no respect .... wailing "it's so unfair !!"
All to come ....
Perhaps some of the old contemptibles from 10 years back will show a leg once more as it's a celebration Sunday.
Well, I started posting way back in the first few months. I'm pretty sure I was posting long before Jack W appeared. PB and UKPR were a breath of fresh air in the political blogging world, which was really starting to take off at that point.
PB is I'm afraid a shadow of its former self. Most of the serious punters, who were the heart and soul of the site, have abandoned it long ago. They have been replaced by party staffers who are quite obviously churning out re-drafted press material, and who have access to the party rebuttal databases.
Add in some of the absolutely horrific moderating decisions over the years, and the culture of bullying which has been positively encouraged, and PB is more an agent of harm than good.
I just cannot see it lasting another 10 years, so enjoy it while it lasts.
More posters like Andrea, Edmund in Tokyo and J**** K**** please, and fewer like Mark Senior, Fitalass and Jack W.
I'm going to give it a damn good try or die in the process !!
Hhmmmm ....
Now I just lurk.
PB is really the best political discussion site on the web, and I'm thankful that non-bettors are welcome to discuss HS2 in boring details squirrelsthe latest political events.
That is Spanish (and British) nationalism in a nutshell: they cut off their noses to spite their faces.
Ed’s in cap flap
Labour in turmoil over call to axe benefits limit
LABOUR was in turmoil over benefits last night after letting slip plans to give claimants MORE money.
Welfare spokesman Rachel Reeves said she wanted to reverse changes aimed at saving cash and making work pay.
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/5525318/Labour-Party-in-turmoil-over-call-to-axe-benefits-limit.html
Well Stuart, if you find PB so much "an agent of harm" why don't you just bugger off and ask for your refund at the exit.
Tsk ....
The reason why Devomax could not have been on the ballot in September is that it would involve a decision of everyone in the UK, not just the Scots, whereas independence Yes or No is a Scottish only issue.
. A No vote is guaranteed to mean that devolution will change and develop. How do I know this? I know it because it’s already been legislated for, in the Scotland Act 2012. This Act, described at the time of its enactment by the then Secretary of State for Scotland as the largest transfer of fiscal powers within the United Kingdom in its history, will bring to Holyrood a substantial degree of fiscal devolution. These new powers — as long as Scotland votes No to independence — will come fully into force in 2015 and 2016. Now, this is not “jam tomorrow”, as Nationalists sometimes claim: it has already been legislated for.
http://notesfromnorthbritain.wordpress.com
It may not be enough for you, but to assert, as some Nats do, that a "no" will lead to a roll-back of devolution - when more is already on the statute books is to use Malcolm's favourite charge - a "lie".
Labour plan ‘boosts Yes vote’ http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/news/uk_news/scotland/article1391336.ece?CMP=OTH-gnws-standard-2014_03_2
Southam, when is Ed MIliband going to sort out his worse-than-useless North British branch operation?
Southam, when is Ed MIliband going to sort out his worse-than-useless North British branch operation?
I have no idea. It does strike me as strange, though, that Scottish Labour is not an independent party that is essentially in alliance with Labour in England. But I know little of how Labour functions. It's not a huge interest of mine.
"There’s a quiz on the BBC site ” What political tribe are you”http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-26689333: "
I got 'calm persistence' - common in all parties but it explains why I don't trust any.
Well done OGH and Robert for your calm persistence.
FPT: As I observed yesterday (and have many times in the past), it really is all down to Labour in Scotland. God help us.....
You stated on more than one occasion that 37 or was it 38% of the voters had made up their minds and wanted the Coalition out and Labour in. I call that overconfidence... just because the current state of play has been relatively stable, it doesn't mean its going to stay that way, Of course you might be right, but I wouldn't be too confident about if it I were you.
It's down to the Scots. If they want independence that's what they'll vote for. It looks like we're getting to the point where enough Scottish voters want to separate. If something is coming to an end, it's best to have a clean break. It'll be sad to see the UK go - and, no doubt, traumatic for unionist Scots - but we'll all get over it soon enough, particularly as it will give us the chance to start again from a constitutional perspective.
Agreed - which is why Salmond's horse feathers about "social unions" and "currency unions" is worrying - if Scotland wakes up to "Yes" on the 19th, it will be a very different "Yes" from the one the SNP have sold them.
I joined a year or two ago, there isn't much I don't know about punting on football, horses or sport in general but I knew next to nothing about punting on politics. Had a few nice touches as a result of PB, Eastleigh being one, so thanks to the wider audience.
The only thing that I don't like is the tribal politics but that is a reflection of the electorate in general.
Congratulations Mike - I'm a relative newbie - first turned up (I think) in about 2009. Took me 6 months to pluck up the courage to post the first time...
Nostalgia ain't what it used to be ?!? .... Certainly it would be nice to see some of the other old and bold return if only to say hello .... so come on finish breakfast and give PB a high five for old time sake.
The outstanding success of the Site owes much to your tolerance and light control of an occasionally rowdy bunch of which I am pleased to count myself a member.
Well done, and here's to the next ten years.
I don't know of any "horrifying" moderation decisions, Stuart - but then I'm just glad I haven't been roped in as part of the moderation team. I've always said that when we post on this - or indeed any other - site, we are in effect entering someone's drawing room and ought to behave accordingly. (The fact that other people, such as the wretched Paul Staines, don't see comments on a blog in this light doesn't make it any less true IMO.)
Party hacks are of course entitled to try it on here: it is up to the rest of us, if we want to, to call them out - in a civilised manner of course.
Could the site be improved? The only change I can think of is some way of allowing us all to wear our preferred rosette, if we have one.
Without question. But why would Salmond or the SNP care? They'll have what they want.
Some of each are found in each party.
I think this is true beyond this site. People on the right tend to think that their opinion matters more, have a higher opinion of themselves & so on.
I got Optimistic Contentment:
Confident & comfortable, they are more highly educated, of a higher social grade & have higher incomes than the other groups. They are patient, prudent & tolerant but also think Britain is a soft touch. They believe people can get on if they work hard & that too much is expected from government
Sounds reasonably accurate!
And curiously the "non-SNP" nationalists are indifferent to that.....
Yes even impoverished Scottish nobles !!
I recall getting my marching orders from Mike during the election campaign of 2005 when I wrote a skit on Iain Dale and his campaign to wrest Norfolk North from Norman Lamb. Twas a trifle risqué but Iain to his credit LOLed and both the article and I were reinstated on appeal.
Hopefully, the Scots would build on their good fortune, ditch the SNP and forge ahead with better and more honest politicians.
I'm in the 'Better Apart' camp; I can see the benefits of being separated. Those who might be left in rUK should have been given a say in Scottish Independence too.
Congratulations, Mr. Smithson, on reaching 10 years.
I joined in 2007. I recall because I started viewing many political blogs (this is the only one I still visit often) as I was deeply concerned Brown would call and win a snap election. That would've put me in an uncomfortable position regarding the despicable ID card scheme (either accepting something which is intolerable or breaking the law).
I started writing regular articles for pb2 (more recently on http://enormo-haddock.blogspot.co.uk/ for reasons of a purely technical nature) about F1 in 2009, around halfway through the season (the second race I ever wrote articles for remains my most profitable). So, there have been F1 articles for almost half of pb's existence (you lucky people).
On the nostalgic notes: there may be something in that, but the best way to either improve the site or return to the 'glory' days is to try and offer more objective analysis, be willing to criticise 'your own' side and to offer tips.
While I have not posted for a bit - pressure of work and family matters - it remains by far my favourite site. (And thank you also for letting my post a thread header once.)
Personally I think I have been here about 5 years and on many, many occasions I have turned to PB for better insight on the issues of the day than the MSM does. I particularly remember Edmund's posts about the Japanese tsunami and its aftermath and YOkel's contributions on Libya and more recently Syria.
I have learned a great deal about the mechanics of polling, AV (way more than might have been necessary in that case) and topics such as energy, housing and transport. Some of my own prejudices have been challenged and corrected.
As someone who is not a big gambler this has been a strength of the site for me although people have been moaning about the falling away of "serious punters" ever since I have joined. I started with the belief that following the money might give a better indication as to how things were likely to turn out. I am not sure about that now but the banter and differing viewpoints are always entertaining.
It has the makings of a "Free The PB Three" campaign.
Titters ....
They'll have got what they want too. Nationalists want an independent Scotland. Whether most Scots are better off or not as a result is a very secondary issue. But that's nationalism. Look at that article on Catalonia you linked to: Catalan nationalists are prepared to declare independence unilaterally and to fundamentally damage the Catalan economy to get what they want.
My impression is that those on here who have party positions are all more intelligent and nuanced than that, and all deviate at times from official positions.
I do find the prospect of six more months of Scotnat posting a little depressing, little rays of sunshine that they are.
As a middle aged Cosmopolitan Critic I feel I should dump the fleece and slippers, grow my hair a bit longer and start going clubbing again. But I just can't be arsed.
As one of the longest-standing contributors, I think it remains an excellent site - one of the fastest ways to pick up political trends, one of the few where people with very different views talk on a mostly amicable basis, and sometimes a good site to pick up tips too, the original intention.
People have always grumbled that it isn't something else. It's not a place where almost anything goes in the way of abuse and hysteria, like Guido. It's not a place where discussion is brief and sober, like UK Polling Report. It's not a place where partisans of a different view to yours are prevented from persistently droning on. It is what it is, and hasn't really changed that much.
My main advice for enjoying it is to pick up the hard news, eye the opinions in a detached way, enjoy the obscure discussions off topic, ignore the posters commenting on other posters, and try not to do it yourself. And if someone's unpleasant about you, just reply politely: most people will side with the more civilised side almost regardless of the issue.
As for Mike's future plans, it's up to him, obviously, but I imagine that deals are available allowing editorial freedom. If Murdoch can do it with the Times, so can others. As an old critic of Ashcroft, for instance, I'd trust him to own the site and let Mike and team be as objective and forensic as he wants to be. Equally, if Mike is happy, it doesn't need fixing and he should just relax and have fun.
"But I just can't be arsed."
That's the correct response. You could also buy a Harley.
UKIP and the Lib Dems are usually pretty forgiving of their own parties, Labour, and in particular Con, less so....
I think a Yes vote would be good for Scottish politics, it will force Scots to grow up and take responsibility for their own lives. As a contented optimist, I consider that a good thing.
They'll have got what they want too. Nationalists want an independent Scotland. Whether most Scots are better off or not as a result is a very secondary issue. But that's nationalism. Look at that article on Catalonia you linked to: Catalan nationalists are prepared to declare independence unilaterally and to fundamentally damage the Catalan economy to get what they want.
I could have chosen to go into Labour List etc. [ likeminded for me ] but what's the point.
Thanks again. You have allowed amatuer arm chair politicos like me an avenue to express opinions . I have been here since late 2009, I think.
Be honest you wanted to be a Cosmopolitan but Norfolk shone through !
http://joesaward.wordpress.com/2014/03/22/the-red-bull-appeal/#comments
Interesting that there seems to be very little sympathy for Red Bull (although more for Ricciardo), and a general feeling the team's arrogant, needs taking down a peg or two, and is trying to play politics to get the rules changes to their advantage (see Pirelli last year, although that also had some safety considerations).
Bas @Hillchaser 46m
Islamic law is adopted by British legal chiefs | via @Telegraph http://fw.to/E4bhjwG
Congrats too from another 2004 old pb timer. And Colin W's mum also sends her best wishes.
There will always be disagreements about how things are run but considering the site attracts political activists and commentators who must be amongst the most outspoken and opinionated people on planet earth then I think it is remarkable it has kept going essentially unchanged in its basic format and atmosphere for a decade.
Certainly looking forward to many more years of disagreeing with people from the comfort of my own armchair :-)
Edit... I think I joined in 2005 or 2006.
Really looking forward to the Yorkshire meet up this year and hope to meet some more PB regulars.
I've enjoyed the chance to express my views and receive (sometimes) reasoned and objective responses. Keep it up and here's to the next 10 years.
And, if Shadsy's prices are any guide (and they usually are) the long-heralded Scottish Tory "surge" is still not with us.
Ladbrokes - West Aberdeenshire & Kincardine (LD maj = 3,684)
LD 8/11
Con 6/4
SNP 8/1
Lab 33/1
UKIP 100/1
That seat really should be "nailed-on" for Davidson's bunch. Just look at its demographics. The fact that you are not FAV has a lot to do with the laughable state of the SCon GOTV operation.
No-backers: beware the GOTV.
I have given up on mine since I found out that the candles cost more than the cake.
As well as PB, it's my birthday today, and I'm having to set up a new laptop Mrs J bought me for my personal work. It now means that we now have eight PCs / laptops between the two of us, as well as a sundry of tablets, PICs and other devices.
It's my first time setting up a Win 8.1 machine, and so far I quite like it. It's nowhere near as intrusive as Apple's setup process for the iPad I got Mrs J for Christmas. (end gratuitous Apple fan baiting).