Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Estimating the “house effect” for each pollster. How much d

2456

Comments

  • ToryJimToryJim Posts: 4,189

    JackW said:

    Oliver_PB said:

    The Cantor thing is hilarious. The American right continues to be completely insane. #Benghazi

    Quite posibly, Oliver, but those of us that bet on US Elections have been busy recalibrating this morning.

    The implications for 2016 are far reaching.
    In what way Conchita ?

    It's a massive Tea Party win.

    Immigration reform is now off the agenda. Right wing economic policies are on. Ted Cruz is a live candidate again. It's a blow to a number of others; I should think Bush, Rubio, and Christie will be badly hampered.

    Beyond that, it won't help the GOP in 'must-win' States like Florida, Virginia and N Carolina when the 2016 Presidentials roll round.

    Apparently Nancy Pelosi could hardly contain her mirth when the result came in.

    PtP I seem to remember suggesting last time round that picking Romney wouldn't be a good idea as it would embolden the nutters. They should have picked one of the mentals last time as they might have gone moderate this time which should be on paper more winnable. By picking Romney they can cling to the theory that they lost by being too moderate. Anyway hooray for politicos learning the wrong lessons :)
  • AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    Yes.

    The big boost in income tax receipts from the top 1% last year needs to be evaluated against the figures this year. It will be mid summer before we get the stats. My guess is that income tax receipts will still increase in aggregate for the band but by nowhere near the amount recorded in 2013.

    The jury remains out on this one.

    AveryLP said:

    AveryLP said:

    As if there wasn't enough good news yesterday

    • Pay including bonuses for employees in Great Britain for February to April 2014 was 0.7% higher than a year earlier, with pay excluding bonuses 0.9% higher.

    Pay increases below inflation again - though the one year comparison appears to be complicated in this instance by the delay in bonus payments last year to take advantage of the cut in the additional rate of income tax to 45%.
    See previous comment to RobD. You are right about the distorting effect caused by the introduction of the 45% tax rate.

    Difficult to say what the true position is.

    This confirmed (but not quantified) in main body of ONS bulletin:

    The single month growth rate for total pay for April 2014 (minus 1.7%) was the lowest since March 2009. This reflects an unusually high growth rate for April 2013, due to some companies which usually paid bonuses in March paying them in April.

    Also worth bearing in mind when the government argues that the figures demonstrate the effectiveness of reducing the 50 pence tax rate.

  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    JK Rowling donates £1M to the "No Thanks" campaign on Indy ref.

  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,959
    AveryLP said:

    Lots of Harry Potter books being burnt in Nothern Britain today!

    I'm sure the cybernats will be shouting Expelliarmus at her.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,014
    The tax/bonus distortion is quite considerable and will have the somewhat unfortunate effect of keeping real pay below inflation for a good chunk of this year.

    Pay without bonus is also surprisingly low and that is harder to explain. If I was the government I would have tables showing how peoples' net pay has got on reflecting the fairly substantial increase in PA, especially for the low paid. Using the gross figures is not doing the government any favours at the moment and will not for much of this year, even if the underlying position is better.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,959
    So Alex Salmond = Voldermort

    Alistair Darling = Neville Longbottom (legend who blew up a bridge and an army in his cardigan)
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    edited June 2014

    JackW said:

    Oliver_PB said:

    The Cantor thing is hilarious. The American right continues to be completely insane. #Benghazi

    Quite posibly, Oliver, but those of us that bet on US Elections have been busy recalibrating this morning.

    The implications for 2016 are far reaching.
    In what way Conchita ?

    It's a massive Tea Party win.

    Immigration reform is now off the agenda. Right wing economic policies are on. Ted Cruz is a live candidate again. It's a blow to a number of others; I should think Bush, Rubio, and Christie will be badly hampered.

    Beyond that, it won't help the GOP in 'must-win' States like Florida, Virginia and N Carolina when the 2016 Presidentials roll round.

    Apparently Nancy Pelosi could hardly contain her mirth when the result came in.



    Thanks Peter.

    All said the essential dynamic of the 2016 race remains - Hillary Runs Hillary Wins.

  • ToryJimToryJim Posts: 4,189

    Mr. Jim, some of those ancient chariots were amazing. I've heard rumours some had as much as 8 horsepower!

    Oh quite Mr Dancer I think most were just 4 though. Diocles was quite impressive racing into his 40s most unusual for the time and driving for three different teams. I'm sure that chariot teams would construct their chariots to maximum advantage, lighter woods, sleeker designs, more slippery axle grease etc
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    I would have hoped that in reaction to an extremist Islamic school preaching sexism and sectarianism in lessons, the left would join in the condemnation and support the need to teach the values of this society instead. But no, they instead prefer to bash on British values:

    Michael Gove argues that school children should be taught British values. From now on history lessons will teach kids how to invade countries, sell locals into slavery and nick anything that isn’t nailed down.

    http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/quiz/2014/jun/10/how-british-are-you-values-quiz-michael-gove

    That's what they think of this country. When they hear "British" they think of slavery and imperialism first and foremost. They really do hate Britain don't they? No wonder they were so happy to import millions of foreigners. As Neather said, they don't want "mainstream British" culture, they want "true multiculturalism". They'd rather have a go at Britishness than Islamic bigots hating on "white prostitutes".

    I used to think that the more right wing posters on here calling the Left traitors who hated this country were being hyperbolic, but I'm starting to think they have a point.
  • ToryJimToryJim Posts: 4,189
    TGOHF said:

    JK Rowling donates £1M to the "No Thanks" campaign on Indy ref.

    I thought cultural Scotland was all for Indy. Have I been misinformed?
  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143
    Millsy said:

    On the unemployment figures, unless the statistics work in a strange way isn't it possible that within the next few months we will get below the important thresholds of 2m unemployed and 1m on JSA?

    This looks very likely. Excepting the possibility that the economy suddenly stalls the two things that could prevent this are a rapid drop in economic inactivity, or an acceleration in immigration.

    Neither are likely to increase fast enough to prevent the thresholds you mention being breached before the end of the year.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    DavidL said:

    The tax/bonus distortion is quite considerable and will have the somewhat unfortunate effect of keeping real pay below inflation for a good chunk of this year.

    Pay without bonus is also surprisingly low and that is harder to explain. If I was the government I would have tables showing how peoples' net pay has got on reflecting the fairly substantial increase in PA, especially for the low paid. Using the gross figures is not doing the government any favours at the moment and will not for much of this year, even if the underlying position is better.

    Did I read that the financial sector is dragging down those pay figures ?
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    JackW said:

    JackW said:

    Oliver_PB said:

    The Cantor thing is hilarious. The American right continues to be completely insane. #Benghazi

    Quite posibly, Oliver, but those of us that bet on US Elections have been busy recalibrating this morning.

    The implications for 2016 are far reaching.
    In what way Conchita ?

    It's a massive Tea Party win.

    Immigration reform is now off the agenda. Right wing economic policies are on. Ted Cruz is a live candidate again. It's a blow to a number of others; I should think Bush, Rubio, and Christie will be badly hampered.

    Beyond that, it won't help the GOP in 'must-win' States like Florida, Virginia and N Carolina when the 2016 Presidentials roll round.

    Apparently Nancy Pelosi could hardly contain her mirth when the result came in.



    Thanks Peter.

    All said the essential dynamic of the 2016 race remains - Hillary Runs Hillary Wins.

    Hillary is definitely running. Her book gave that away.
  • currystar said:

    Re Employment figures has anyone asked David Blanchflower when the the 5,000,000 unemployment figure will be reached. As this rate unemployment will be down to 1,500,000 by the election, look forward to Ed Balls telling everyone how right he is all the time.

    Ah Mr Blanchflower a fine example of a leftie economic forecaster in action. Reminds some of a leftie member of this website with their "no recession" forecast. Blanchflower is of course wheeled out on the BBC as an expert and never challenged on his past performance.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,959
    ToryJim said:

    TGOHF said:

    JK Rowling donates £1M to the "No Thanks" campaign on Indy ref.

    I thought cultural Scotland was all for Indy. Have I been misinformed?
    Well technically she's English, born in Gloucester. She's merely a resident of Scotland.

  • SlackbladderSlackbladder Posts: 9,779
    ToryJim said:

    Mr. Jim, some of those ancient chariots were amazing. I've heard rumours some had as much as 8 horsepower!

    Oh quite Mr Dancer I think most were just 4 though. Diocles was quite impressive racing into his 40s most unusual for the time and driving for three different teams. I'm sure that chariot teams would construct their chariots to maximum advantage, lighter woods, sleeker designs, more slippery axle grease etc
    That Adrianus Newimus could really design them well....
  • ToryJimToryJim Posts: 4,189
    I get the impression this World Cup could be somewhat chaotic, I've seen better looking turf on my local recreation ground....

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/world-cup/10891473/Manaus-pitch-raises-fears-ahead-of-Englands-World-Cup-2014-opener-against-Italy.html
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787

    AveryLP said:

    Lots of Harry Potter books being burnt in Nothern Britain today!

    I'm sure the cybernats will be shouting Expelliarmus at her.
    Harry Potter and the Deathly Pallor of YES

  • TGOHF said:

    JK Rowling donates £1M to the "No Thanks" campaign on Indy ref.

    SLAB in action. I hope it drives people to a YES vote. Could she be regarded as "English" by Scots?
  • SlackbladderSlackbladder Posts: 9,779
    JackW said:

    AveryLP said:

    Lots of Harry Potter books being burnt in Nothern Britain today!

    I'm sure the cybernats will be shouting Expelliarmus at her.
    Harry Potter and the Deathly Pallor of YES

    With Evil Lord Voldemond and Bellatrix Lesturgeon
  • AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    It will be the figures for May-July released in mid August which will be the first to exclude the distorting effect of the Apr 2014 on Apr 2013 fall.

    I see Sky are leading on the fall in average wages and we only get to the real reason at the end of Ed Conway's commentary. This is not balanced reporting!

    Goodness knows how the the BBC spin the Labour stats. I dread changing channels.
    DavidL said:

    The tax/bonus distortion is quite considerable and will have the somewhat unfortunate effect of keeping real pay below inflation for a good chunk of this year.

    Pay without bonus is also surprisingly low and that is harder to explain. If I was the government I would have tables showing how peoples' net pay has got on reflecting the fairly substantial increase in PA, especially for the low paid. Using the gross figures is not doing the government any favours at the moment and will not for much of this year, even if the underlying position is better.

  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,406

    JackW said:

    Oliver_PB said:

    The Cantor thing is hilarious. The American right continues to be completely insane. #Benghazi

    Quite posibly, Oliver, but those of us that bet on US Elections have been busy recalibrating this morning.

    The implications for 2016 are far reaching.
    In what way Conchita ?

    It's a massive Tea Party win.

    Immigration reform is now off the agenda. Right wing economic policies are on. Ted Cruz is a live candidate again. It's a blow to a number of others; I should think Bush, Rubio, and Christie will be badly hampered.

    Beyond that, it won't help the GOP in 'must-win' States like Florida, Virginia and N Carolina when the 2016 Presidentials roll round.

    Apparently Nancy Pelosi could hardly contain her mirth when the result came in.



    I've taken £3 of Cruz @ 17.0 on Betfair to add to my positions...

    Should I add Scott Walker @ 15.5 ?
  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143
    TGOHF said:

    DavidL said:

    The tax/bonus distortion is quite considerable and will have the somewhat unfortunate effect of keeping real pay below inflation for a good chunk of this year.

    Pay without bonus is also surprisingly low and that is harder to explain. If I was the government I would have tables showing how peoples' net pay has got on reflecting the fairly substantial increase in PA, especially for the low paid. Using the gross figures is not doing the government any favours at the moment and will not for much of this year, even if the underlying position is better.

    Did I read that the financial sector is dragging down those pay figures ?
    No, it appears to be the other way around, for Lloyds anyway:
    Lloyds Banking Group plc is reclassified to the private sector from April 2014 following the sale of some government owned shares to private sector investors. It is classified to the public sector between July 2009 and March 2014. ONS estimates that, if the reclassification had not occurred, the public sector single month growth rate from April 2014 would have been around 0.3 percentage points higher and the corresponding private sector growth rate would have been around 0.1 percentage points lower.
    The implication being that wage growth within Lloyds was higher than in the public sector and higher than in the private sector.
  • Mike OGH, an interesting article on polling "bias".

    NickexMP has a point about the LDs that past weight voting (e.g. ICM) maybe overstating their numbers because of the seismic change in how they are perceived. No longer home for the protest votes.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,959
    On topic excellent piece.

    Though when I read the phrase House effect my mind thought Dr Gregory House
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    Pulpstar said:

    JackW said:

    Oliver_PB said:

    The Cantor thing is hilarious. The American right continues to be completely insane. #Benghazi

    Quite posibly, Oliver, but those of us that bet on US Elections have been busy recalibrating this morning.

    The implications for 2016 are far reaching.
    In what way Conchita ?

    It's a massive Tea Party win.

    Immigration reform is now off the agenda. Right wing economic policies are on. Ted Cruz is a live candidate again. It's a blow to a number of others; I should think Bush, Rubio, and Christie will be badly hampered.

    Beyond that, it won't help the GOP in 'must-win' States like Florida, Virginia and N Carolina when the 2016 Presidentials roll round.

    Apparently Nancy Pelosi could hardly contain her mirth when the result came in.



    I've taken £3 of Cruz @ 17.0 on Betfair to add to my positions...

    Should I add Scott Walker @ 15.5 ?
    Cruz won't get much support outside the South. Walker is good on paper, but we need to see more of him in practice.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,950
    Mr. LP, are you suggesting Second Class Conway might not have the soundest judgement?
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787

    TGOHF said:

    JK Rowling donates £1M to the "No Thanks" campaign on Indy ref.

    SLAB in action. I hope it drives people to a YES vote. Could she be regarded as "English" by Scots?
    No.

    Presently YES is a dead campaign floundering. Essentially they have to find something, anything that will change the narrative of their badly losing hand. Quite what it might be is as much a mystery to commentators as it certainly is to YES.

  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,406

    Mike OGH, an interesting article on polling "bias".

    NickexMP has a point about the LDs that past weight voting (e.g. ICM) maybe overstating their numbers because of the seismic change in how they are perceived. No longer home for the protest votes.

    Yes, despite the vast ideological differences when the sum effect of UKIP is examined I think it will be shown that the Lib Dems have suffered the most.
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    Interestingly Cantor's Tea Party victor opposes mass surveillance and used it to bash the more authoritarian Cantor:

    http://thehill.com/policy/technology/208934-cantor-victor-strikes-different-tone-on-nsa

  • JonathanDJonathanD Posts: 2,400
    Public Sector total pay including the state banks was 0.6% y-o-y for April
    Public Sector total pay excluding the state banks was 1.2% y-o-y for April

    Looking at the private sectors you get

    Services: -1.8%
    Finance: -6.1%
    Manufacturing: +0.5%
    Construction: -4.6%
    Retail, hotels, restaurants: +0.7%


  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,736
    Very interesting So icm give tory to lab a 2.2% in house boost. Biggest Lab to tory boost is 0.3% by survation
  • AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    edited June 2014
    The Lloyds reclassification must be recent as it didn't impact on PSND in the last PSF bulletin.

    If the next PSF bulletin implements the reclassification we should see a very substantial reduction in Public Sector Net Debt, although the change will not affect the headline figure which excludes the effects of financial interventions.

    TGOHF said:

    DavidL said:

    The tax/bonus distortion is quite considerable and will have the somewhat unfortunate effect of keeping real pay below inflation for a good chunk of this year.

    Pay without bonus is also surprisingly low and that is harder to explain. If I was the government I would have tables showing how peoples' net pay has got on reflecting the fairly substantial increase in PA, especially for the low paid. Using the gross figures is not doing the government any favours at the moment and will not for much of this year, even if the underlying position is better.

    Did I read that the financial sector is dragging down those pay figures ?
    No, it appears to be the other way around, for Lloyds anyway:
    Lloyds Banking Group plc is reclassified to the private sector from April 2014 following the sale of some government owned shares to private sector investors. It is classified to the public sector between July 2009 and March 2014. ONS estimates that, if the reclassification had not occurred, the public sector single month growth rate from April 2014 would have been around 0.3 percentage points higher and the corresponding private sector growth rate would have been around 0.1 percentage points lower.
    The implication being that wage growth within Lloyds was higher than in the public sector and higher than in the private sector.

  • ToryJimToryJim Posts: 4,189
    Having read this blog with some of it's examples, I'm sure seanT could have lots of fun with the €70k spent on a replacement penis for a statue, I may need to buy and read the book.

    http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/alanjohnson/100275615/you-thought-you-already-knew-about-eu-corruption-read-this/
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    ToryJim said:

    Having read this blog with some of it's examples, I'm sure seanT could have lots of fun with the €70k spent on a replacement penis for a statue, I may need to buy and read the book.

    http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/alanjohnson/100275615/you-thought-you-already-knew-about-eu-corruption-read-this/

    It's alright - David Cameron's going to renegotiate the EU and all this waste and corruption will stop.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,693
    Interesting how JK Rowling intimates that the aggressiveness of a number of those in the YES campaign (some of whom may have either subtly, or unsubtly, questioned her patriotism) was a significant factor in her decision to support NO.

    This should be a warning - for those in the YES camp looking to win over floating voters - to take heed of.

    They won't.
  • JackW said:

    TGOHF said:

    JK Rowling donates £1M to the "No Thanks" campaign on Indy ref.

    SLAB in action. I hope it drives people to a YES vote. Could she be regarded as "English" by Scots?
    No.
    Presently YES is a dead campaign floundering. Essentially they have to find something, anything that will change the narrative of their badly losing hand. Quite what it might be is as much a mystery to commentators as it certainly is to YES.
    The little guy against the big pockets of the JK Rowling's?
  • AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    edited June 2014

    Mr. LP, are you suggesting Second Class Conway might not have the soundest judgement?

    I am ambivalent on Conway. He was duped by Olivier Blanchard at the IMF last year and made a bit of a fool of himself, but he did have the good grace to change his tune when the growth figures came in and proved Osborne was right in that battle.

    His blog is also sound and gives much better commentary than he is allowed by Sky News on camera.

    He is not an election or general presenter though as demonstrated by Sky's use of him on the 'SkyWall' during the Euros/Council results.

    I suspect the news editors more than Conway are at fault. He gave the real answer today on why growth in average wages had fallen but you had to wait and look for it. He should be given more time and editorial control on economic comment and he might come good.

  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    JonathanD said:

    Public Sector total pay including the state banks was 0.6% y-o-y for April
    Public Sector total pay excluding the state banks was 1.2% y-o-y for April

    Looking at the private sectors you get

    Services: -1.8%
    Finance: -6.1%
    Manufacturing: +0.5%
    Construction: -4.6%
    Retail, hotels, restaurants: +0.7%


    There must be some sectors not included above that are above the 0.7% average then ?

  • Peter_the_PunterPeter_the_Punter Posts: 14,466
    edited June 2014
    @JackW/Socrates/ToryJim

    Yes, I think Hillary will run and win.

    Obviously things get easier for her if the GOP run an implausible candidate. They have a number of perfectly plausible options but Ted Cruz ain't one of them. Yes, I would buy him now and sell later when he gets down to a silly price. Walker would be an eminently plausible candidate but in view of last nite's result I wouldn't back him now.

    Many PBers made a shedload on the 2012 Carnival of the Loonies that was the GOP Presidential Candidate selection process. Looks like we may get lucky again.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,693

    ToryJim said:

    TGOHF said:

    JK Rowling donates £1M to the "No Thanks" campaign on Indy ref.

    I thought cultural Scotland was all for Indy. Have I been misinformed?
    Well technically she's English, born in Gloucester. She's merely a resident of Scotland.

    But, of course, Scottishness and Scottish Nationalism is not predicated on the purity of one's Scottish ethnicity.

    Or so we are told.
  • TheWatcherTheWatcher Posts: 5,262

    JackW said:

    TGOHF said:

    JK Rowling donates £1M to the "No Thanks" campaign on Indy ref.

    SLAB in action. I hope it drives people to a YES vote. Could she be regarded as "English" by Scots?
    No.
    Presently YES is a dead campaign floundering. Essentially they have to find something, anything that will change the narrative of their badly losing hand. Quite what it might be is as much a mystery to commentators as it certainly is to YES.
    The little guy against the big pockets of the JK Rowling's?
    JK Rowling battling for the little guy against the £3.5 million donation of the Weirs to Yes?
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340

    @JackW/Socrates/ToryJim

    Yes, I think Hillary will run and win.

    Obviously things get easier for her if the GOP run an implausible candidate. They have a number of perfectly plausible options but Ted Cruz ain't one of them. Yes, I would buy him now and sell later when he gets down to a silly price. Walker would be an eminently plausible candidate but in view of last nite's result I wouldn't back him now.

    Many PBers made a shedload on the 2012 Carnival of the Loonies that was the GOP Presidential Candidate selection process. Looks like we may get lucky again.

    If I can blow my own trumpet, I think I expressed that theory last year when Chris Christie was still flavor of the month.

    I'm looking forward to another Baskin Robbins election.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,736
    Wonder why Tory variation from average is plus 3.6% and Lab is minus 0.8. Am i being thick or shouldnt a positve boost with one firm be cancelled out to come back to average.

    In my head if 35% was average labour score if icm has 33 and yg 37 then -2+2 =0 bingo average 35.

    i have a degree in applied statistics as well must be my age and the fact i am still hungover after celebrating the Owls takeover by mr mammadov(£750m wealth)
  • Peter_the_PunterPeter_the_Punter Posts: 14,466
    @ToryJIm

    "I've seen better looking turf on my local recreation ground...."

    You think that worries FIFA? They played the last World Cup with a beach ball.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,693

    JackW said:

    TGOHF said:

    JK Rowling donates £1M to the "No Thanks" campaign on Indy ref.

    SLAB in action. I hope it drives people to a YES vote. Could she be regarded as "English" by Scots?
    No.
    Presently YES is a dead campaign floundering. Essentially they have to find something, anything that will change the narrative of their badly losing hand. Quite what it might be is as much a mystery to commentators as it certainly is to YES.
    The little guy against the big pockets of the JK Rowling's?
    The big pockets of JK Rowling against the even bigger pockets of the Weirs. However, the latter's wealth is finite, whereas JK Rowling has no cap to her earning potential.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633

    JackW said:

    TGOHF said:

    JK Rowling donates £1M to the "No Thanks" campaign on Indy ref.

    SLAB in action. I hope it drives people to a YES vote. Could she be regarded as "English" by Scots?
    No.
    Presently YES is a dead campaign floundering. Essentially they have to find something, anything that will change the narrative of their badly losing hand. Quite what it might be is as much a mystery to commentators as it certainly is to YES.
    The little guy against the big pockets of the JK Rowling's?
    JK Rowling battling for the little guy against the £3.5 million donation of the Weirs to Yes?
    "No thanks" : has earned income behind it
    "Yes" : has unearned income behind it

    Unsurprisingly.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,406
    edited June 2014
    So far as I can tell the implied price for Hilary should she get the nomination against a standard Republican candidate for the presidency is 1.57.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,736
    JonathanD said:

    Public Sector total pay including the state banks was 0.6% y-o-y for April
    Public Sector total pay excluding the state banks was 1.2% y-o-y for April

    Looking at the private sectors you get

    Services: -1.8%
    Finance: -6.1%
    Manufacturing: +0.5%
    Construction: -4.6%
    Retail, hotels, restaurants: +0.7%


    Cost of Living Crisis April CPI 1.8%.
  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    TGOHF said:

    JackW said:

    TGOHF said:

    JK Rowling donates £1M to the "No Thanks" campaign on Indy ref.

    SLAB in action. I hope it drives people to a YES vote. Could she be regarded as "English" by Scots?
    No.
    Presently YES is a dead campaign floundering. Essentially they have to find something, anything that will change the narrative of their badly losing hand. Quite what it might be is as much a mystery to commentators as it certainly is to YES.
    The little guy against the big pockets of the JK Rowling's?
    JK Rowling battling for the little guy against the £3.5 million donation of the Weirs to Yes?
    "No thanks" : has earned income behind it
    "Yes" : has unearned income behind it

    Unsurprisingly.
    Did noone think of capping the donations to these campaigns? It's the innocent Scottish people about to be subjected to a barrage of literature and other advertising that I feel sorry for.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    I seem to recall that J K Rowling is a close friend of Gordon Brown. Perhaps the prompting for the donation came from that quarter, given that he has become much more engaged in the independence debate recently.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,959
    edited June 2014

    @JackW/Socrates/ToryJim

    Yes, I think Hillary will run and win.

    Obviously things get easier for her if the GOP run an implausible candidate. They have a number of perfectly plausible options but Ted Cruz ain't one of them. Yes, I would buy him now and sell later when he gets down to a silly price. Walker would be an eminently plausible candidate but in view of last nite's result I wouldn't back him now.

    Many PBers made a shedload on the 2012 Carnival of the Loonies that was the GOP Presidential Candidate selection process. Looks like we may get lucky again.

    We did. The thing to remember in both 2008 and 2012 the GOP chose the sensible, pragmatic and moderate candidate.

  • ToryJimToryJim Posts: 4,189

    @JackW/Socrates/ToryJim

    Yes, I think Hillary will run and win.

    Obviously things get easier for her if the GOP run an implausible candidate. They have a number of perfectly plausible options but Ted Cruz ain't one of them. Yes, I would buy him now and sell later when he gets down to a silly price. Walker would be an eminently plausible candidate but in view of last nite's result I wouldn't back him now.

    Many PBers made a shedload on the 2012 Carnival of the Loonies that was the GOP Presidential Candidate selection process. Looks like we may get lucky again.

    One thing I think is the GOP nomination process could be another example of asymmetric warfare. Romney ultimately won last time because of superior moderate Republican depth and resourcing, but the guerrilla raids the Tea Party could effect at various times, but not all, meant that gaining the nomination was far more costly and Romney had been pulled all over the field, a gift for Obama. The Tea Party don't win all their fights but do seem to win enough high profile battles to destabilise the bigger scene.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    TGOHF said:


    "No thanks" : has earned income behind it
    "Yes" : has unearned income behind it

    Unsurprisingly.

    Who will be first to publish the analysis on whether Scots (those eligible to vote in the referendum) spend more on Lottery tickets or Harry Potter?
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    antifrank said:

    @JackW/Socrates/ToryJim

    Yes, I think Hillary will run and win.

    Obviously things get easier for her if the GOP run an implausible candidate. They have a number of perfectly plausible options but Ted Cruz ain't one of them. Yes, I would buy him now and sell later when he gets down to a silly price. Walker would be an eminently plausible candidate but in view of last nite's result I wouldn't back him now.

    Many PBers made a shedload on the 2012 Carnival of the Loonies that was the GOP Presidential Candidate selection process. Looks like we may get lucky again.

    If I can blow my own trumpet, I think I expressed that theory last year when Chris Christie was still flavor of the month.

    I'm looking forward to another Baskin Robbins election.
    I've been backing both Clinton and the Democrats increasing electoral strength in presidential elections for a long time. Obama won 270 electoral votes with a five point margin, despite a poor economy, and demographics are in their favour.

    The biggest concern for the GOP has to be Florida. If we imagine two terms of Clinton, the state will have a strong Democratic lean in ten years time. It's impossible for the Republicans to win without it.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,693

    @JackW/Socrates/ToryJim

    Yes, I think Hillary will run and win.

    Obviously things get easier for her if the GOP run an implausible candidate. They have a number of perfectly plausible options but Ted Cruz ain't one of them. Yes, I would buy him now and sell later when he gets down to a silly price. Walker would be an eminently plausible candidate but in view of last nite's result I wouldn't back him now.

    Many PBers made a shedload on the 2012 Carnival of the Loonies that was the GOP Presidential Candidate selection process. Looks like we may get lucky again.

    I don't know if it's just me, or if this view is widely shared amongst floating voters in the USA, but I am uniquely repelled by Hillary. It's not a sexist thing: it's the dynastic nepotism, and the sense of entitlement that I can't stand. She appears to think the presidency is hers by right. There's also something about her style and tone (in her speeches and rallies) that grates on me.

    I recall everyone saying the same thing about Hillary in 2007. Then Obama turned up, and we all know what happened next. I don't think her election is by any means a foregone conclusion, although perhaps the challenge would need to come from within the Democrats rather than within the strangely confused Republican party.

    Either way, I wonder if we are underestimating the number of people that think she's yesterday's news.

    I admit, I know very little about US politics. But I'm not tempted to back her at current prices.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 39,668
    Socrates said:

    I would have hoped that in reaction to an extremist Islamic school preaching sexism and sectarianism in lessons, the left would join in the condemnation and support the need to teach the values of this society instead. But no, they instead prefer to bash on British values:

    Michael Gove argues that school children should be taught British values. From now on history lessons will teach kids how to invade countries, sell locals into slavery and nick anything that isn’t nailed down.

    http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/quiz/2014/jun/10/how-british-are-you-values-quiz-michael-gove

    That's what they think of this country. When they hear "British" they think of slavery and imperialism first and foremost. They really do hate Britain don't they? No wonder they were so happy to import millions of foreigners. As Neather said, they don't want "mainstream British" culture, they want "true multiculturalism". They'd rather have a go at Britishness than Islamic bigots hating on "white prostitutes".

    I used to think that the more right wing posters on here calling the Left traitors who hated this country were being hyperbolic, but I'm starting to think they have a point.

    Indeed Socrates. How dare people not agree with your views on what Britishness entails. They are clearly traitors. And it is certainly entirely representative of British values to read a column in the Guardian, take it literally and then decide that it represents the views of the "left". This certainly illustrates why politicians should decree lessons in British values.

  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983

    @JackW/Socrates/ToryJim

    Yes, I think Hillary will run and win.

    Obviously things get easier for her if the GOP run an implausible candidate. They have a number of perfectly plausible options but Ted Cruz ain't one of them. Yes, I would buy him now and sell later when he gets down to a silly price. Walker would be an eminently plausible candidate but in view of last nite's result I wouldn't back him now.

    Many PBers made a shedload on the 2012 Carnival of the Loonies that was the GOP Presidential Candidate selection process. Looks like we may get lucky again.

    We did. The thing to remember in both 2008 and 2012 the GOP chose the sensible, pragmatic and moderate candidate.

    Indeed. And fun and all as this shock for Cantor has been it should be remembered that the Tea Party has had very few successes in primaries so far this year.
  • ToryJimToryJim Posts: 4,189

    @JackW/Socrates/ToryJim

    Yes, I think Hillary will run and win.

    Obviously things get easier for her if the GOP run an implausible candidate. They have a number of perfectly plausible options but Ted Cruz ain't one of them. Yes, I would buy him now and sell later when he gets down to a silly price. Walker would be an eminently plausible candidate but in view of last nite's result I wouldn't back him now.

    Many PBers made a shedload on the 2012 Carnival of the Loonies that was the GOP Presidential Candidate selection process. Looks like we may get lucky again.

    We did. The thing to remember in both 2008 and 2012 the GOP chose the sensible, pragmatic and moderate candidate.

    Eventually . Although they both had to unbalance the ticket with a whack job.
  • MarkSeniorMarkSenior Posts: 4,699
    edited June 2014

    Mike OGH, an interesting article on polling "bias".

    NickexMP has a point about the LDs that past weight voting (e.g. ICM) maybe overstating their numbers because of the seismic change in how they are perceived. No longer home for the protest votes.

    The same comments/criticisms of ICM overstating the Lib Dems were made in the last Parliament and in the end at GE 2010 , ICM remained the gold standard . I expect the same will be proved true next year and the same people to be arguing in 2018 that ICM are overstating the Lib Dems because things are different .
    The one clear thing we can say from the figures given is that there is a clear difference between Online and Telephone polls which no variance in methodology can mask . Comres have yet to grasp the nettle and explain the vast difference between its online and telephone polls and tell us which set they believe are correct or indeed whether they think all their polls are wrong .
  • SlackbladderSlackbladder Posts: 9,779
    Oh dear, Ms Rowling coming under some nasty fire from the cybernats on twitter...
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,959
    Neil said:

    @JackW/Socrates/ToryJim

    Yes, I think Hillary will run and win.

    Obviously things get easier for her if the GOP run an implausible candidate. They have a number of perfectly plausible options but Ted Cruz ain't one of them. Yes, I would buy him now and sell later when he gets down to a silly price. Walker would be an eminently plausible candidate but in view of last nite's result I wouldn't back him now.

    Many PBers made a shedload on the 2012 Carnival of the Loonies that was the GOP Presidential Candidate selection process. Looks like we may get lucky again.

    We did. The thing to remember in both 2008 and 2012 the GOP chose the sensible, pragmatic and moderate candidate.

    Indeed. And fun and all as this shock for Cantor has been it should be remembered that the Tea Party has had very few successes in primaries so far this year.
    I'll never forget one of the debates that you and I stayed up for and reading far too much into Rick Santorum's jumper.

  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983

    Neil said:

    @JackW/Socrates/ToryJim

    Yes, I think Hillary will run and win.

    Obviously things get easier for her if the GOP run an implausible candidate. They have a number of perfectly plausible options but Ted Cruz ain't one of them. Yes, I would buy him now and sell later when he gets down to a silly price. Walker would be an eminently plausible candidate but in view of last nite's result I wouldn't back him now.

    Many PBers made a shedload on the 2012 Carnival of the Loonies that was the GOP Presidential Candidate selection process. Looks like we may get lucky again.

    We did. The thing to remember in both 2008 and 2012 the GOP chose the sensible, pragmatic and moderate candidate.

    Indeed. And fun and all as this shock for Cantor has been it should be remembered that the Tea Party has had very few successes in primaries so far this year.
    I'll never forget one of the debates that you and I stayed up for and reading far too much into Rick Santorum's jumper.

    I'll never forget the time Rick got Santorum all over his jumper.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,821
    On topic: the high figures produced for UKIP by some of the on-line pollsters are almost certainly due to the self-select bias which on-line polls are notoriously subject to. YouGov is very experienced in dealing with this problem, and Populus explicitly adjusted their weightings to match their telephone polls, so I think it's a pretty safe assumption that Comres Online, Survation and Opinium are systematically over-stating UKIP. Note that the differences for UKIP are much greater than those for other parties - it would perhaps be clearer if the charts didn't rescale when you switch between them.

    I also agree with Nick P's point that there is a possibility that ICM's adjustment of Don't Knows by past vote is having the effect of systematically over-stating the LibDem figure given the current political landscape. Of course there's no way to be sure of this at the moment, but the fact that ICM are the only pollsters showing such a big deviation from the average for the LibDems does at least suggest that this might be so.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,693

    Socrates said:

    I would have hoped that in reaction to an extremist Islamic school preaching sexism and sectarianism in lessons, the left would join in the condemnation and support the need to teach the values of this society instead. But no, they instead prefer to bash on British values:

    Michael Gove argues that school children should be taught British values. From now on history lessons will teach kids how to invade countries, sell locals into slavery and nick anything that isn’t nailed down.

    http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/quiz/2014/jun/10/how-british-are-you-values-quiz-michael-gove

    That's what they think of this country. When they hear "British" they think of slavery and imperialism first and foremost. They really do hate Britain don't they? No wonder they were so happy to import millions of foreigners. As Neather said, they don't want "mainstream British" culture, they want "true multiculturalism". They'd rather have a go at Britishness than Islamic bigots hating on "white prostitutes".

    I used to think that the more right wing posters on here calling the Left traitors who hated this country were being hyperbolic, but I'm starting to think they have a point.

    Indeed Socrates. How dare people not agree with your views on what Britishness entails. They are clearly traitors. And it is certainly entirely representative of British values to read a column in the Guardian, take it literally and then decide that it represents the views of the "left". This certainly illustrates why politicians should decree lessons in British values.

    I think it's an attempt by the Guardian to be funny (almost always cringeworthy) but many a true word is said in jest.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,959
    Neil said:

    Neil said:

    @JackW/Socrates/ToryJim

    Yes, I think Hillary will run and win.

    Obviously things get easier for her if the GOP run an implausible candidate. They have a number of perfectly plausible options but Ted Cruz ain't one of them. Yes, I would buy him now and sell later when he gets down to a silly price. Walker would be an eminently plausible candidate but in view of last nite's result I wouldn't back him now.

    Many PBers made a shedload on the 2012 Carnival of the Loonies that was the GOP Presidential Candidate selection process. Looks like we may get lucky again.

    We did. The thing to remember in both 2008 and 2012 the GOP chose the sensible, pragmatic and moderate candidate.

    Indeed. And fun and all as this shock for Cantor has been it should be remembered that the Tea Party has had very few successes in primaries so far this year.
    I'll never forget one of the debates that you and I stayed up for and reading far too much into Rick Santorum's jumper.

    I'll never forget the time Rick got Santorum all over his jumper.
    Ewwww you sicko

  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983

    Socrates said:

    I would have hoped that in reaction to an extremist Islamic school preaching sexism and sectarianism in lessons, the left would join in the condemnation and support the need to teach the values of this society instead. But no, they instead prefer to bash on British values:

    Michael Gove argues that school children should be taught British values. From now on history lessons will teach kids how to invade countries, sell locals into slavery and nick anything that isn’t nailed down.

    http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/quiz/2014/jun/10/how-british-are-you-values-quiz-michael-gove

    That's what they think of this country. When they hear "British" they think of slavery and imperialism first and foremost. They really do hate Britain don't they? No wonder they were so happy to import millions of foreigners. As Neather said, they don't want "mainstream British" culture, they want "true multiculturalism". They'd rather have a go at Britishness than Islamic bigots hating on "white prostitutes".

    I used to think that the more right wing posters on here calling the Left traitors who hated this country were being hyperbolic, but I'm starting to think they have a point.

    Indeed Socrates. How dare people not agree with your views on what Britishness entails. They are clearly traitors. And it is certainly entirely representative of British values to read a column in the Guardian, take it literally and then decide that it represents the views of the "left". This certainly illustrates why politicians should decree lessons in British values.

    I think it's an attempt by the Guardian to be funny (almost always cringeworthy) but many a true word is said in jest.
    I'm starting to think that people who deny that lefties are traitors should themselves be considered traitors.
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322

    Socrates said:

    I would have hoped that in reaction to an extremist Islamic school preaching sexism and sectarianism in lessons, the left would join in the condemnation and support the need to teach the values of this society instead. But no, they instead prefer to bash on British values:

    Michael Gove argues that school children should be taught British values. From now on history lessons will teach kids how to invade countries, sell locals into slavery and nick anything that isn’t nailed down.

    http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/quiz/2014/jun/10/how-british-are-you-values-quiz-michael-gove

    That's what they think of this country. When they hear "British" they think of slavery and imperialism first and foremost. They really do hate Britain don't they? No wonder they were so happy to import millions of foreigners. As Neather said, they don't want "mainstream British" culture, they want "true multiculturalism". They'd rather have a go at Britishness than Islamic bigots hating on "white prostitutes".

    I used to think that the more right wing posters on here calling the Left traitors who hated this country were being hyperbolic, but I'm starting to think they have a point.

    Indeed Socrates. How dare people not agree with your views on what Britishness entails. They are clearly traitors. And it is certainly entirely representative of British values to read a column in the Guardian, take it literally and then decide that it represents the views of the "left". This certainly illustrates why politicians should decree lessons in British values.

    It's not disagreeing with my views on what it entails. It's seeing Britishness entirely in terms of negative things. The Guardian article was just one example. I also pointed to the revelations from Neather about the Labour government feeling "mainstream" British culture was stale and wanting to make it "truly multicultural".

    Seriously, just step back and try to imagine the Washington Post or the New York Times mocking American values in that way. Or Le Monde mocking French values. It wouldn't happen. The mainstream British left are particularly unique in disliking their own country's traditional culture. If they could have their way, British culture would be increasingly replaced by foreigners, the phrase "British values" wouldn't be mentioned, and Britain would just become a group of regions in an integrated European superstate, governed from Brussels and Berlin.

    There are of course left wing exceptions, like yourself, or MPs like Frank Field, but the heart of left-wing thinking is the way I've described.
  • TheWatcherTheWatcher Posts: 5,262
    edited June 2014

    Oh dear, Ms Rowling coming under some nasty fire from the cybernats on twitter...

    Somewhat proving her point.

    'However, I also know that there is a fringe of nationalists who like to demonise anyone who is not blindly and unquestionably pro-independence and I suspect, notwithstanding the fact that I’ve lived in Scotland for twenty-one years and plan to remain here for the rest of my life, that they might judge me ‘insufficiently Scottish’ to have a valid view. '

    Not very clever are they.
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    ToryJim said:

    @JackW/Socrates/ToryJim

    Yes, I think Hillary will run and win.

    Obviously things get easier for her if the GOP run an implausible candidate. They have a number of perfectly plausible options but Ted Cruz ain't one of them. Yes, I would buy him now and sell later when he gets down to a silly price. Walker would be an eminently plausible candidate but in view of last nite's result I wouldn't back him now.

    Many PBers made a shedload on the 2012 Carnival of the Loonies that was the GOP Presidential Candidate selection process. Looks like we may get lucky again.

    We did. The thing to remember in both 2008 and 2012 the GOP chose the sensible, pragmatic and moderate candidate.

    Eventually . Although they both had to unbalance the ticket with a whack job.
    Romney the "sensible, pragmatic and moderate" candidate is only a relative thing. He believes 47% of Americans that didn't pay income tax were hardcore Democrats that didn't have personal responsibility in their lives and wanted to increase US military spending by $2 trillion. He also gave in to just about every other extreme bit of the House GOP agenda.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,534
    Socrates said:

    antifrank said:

    @JackW/Socrates/ToryJim

    Yes, I think Hillary will run and win.

    Obviously things get easier for her if the GOP run an implausible candidate. They have a number of perfectly plausible options but Ted Cruz ain't one of them. Yes, I would buy him now and sell later when he gets down to a silly price. Walker would be an eminently plausible candidate but in view of last nite's result I wouldn't back him now.

    Many PBers made a shedload on the 2012 Carnival of the Loonies that was the GOP Presidential Candidate selection process. Looks like we may get lucky again.

    If I can blow my own trumpet, I think I expressed that theory last year when Chris Christie was still flavor of the month.

    I'm looking forward to another Baskin Robbins election.
    I've been backing both Clinton and the Democrats increasing electoral strength in presidential elections for a long time. Obama won 270 electoral votes with a five point margin, despite a poor economy, and demographics are in their favour.

    The biggest concern for the GOP has to be Florida. If we imagine two terms of Clinton, the state will have a strong Democratic lean in ten years time. It's impossible for the Republicans to win without it.
    The crucial issue will surely be how the voters rate Obama's Presidency in two years' time?
  • Bond_James_BondBond_James_Bond Posts: 1,939
    JackW said:

    Scott_P said:

    @RuthDavidsonMSP: New TNS BMRB poll out - No maintains its double-digit lead. Analysis from @WhatScotsThink here http://t.co/2dXrpq11U9

    59/41 No/YES when DK's excluded.

    YES remain dead in the water, completely becalmed.

    Tick tock ....

    Is there any known correlation between don't knows and turnout?

    Do people who Don't Know not vote; do they make a late decision and vote; or does the answer vary according to what the vote's about?

    Eg, Didn't Vote outnumbered Don't Know in the euros - has anyone looked at other elections?
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,534

    Socrates said:

    I would have hoped that in reaction to an extremist Islamic school preaching sexism and sectarianism in lessons, the left would join in the condemnation and support the need to teach the values of this society instead. But no, they instead prefer to bash on British values:

    Michael Gove argues that school children should be taught British values. From now on history lessons will teach kids how to invade countries, sell locals into slavery and nick anything that isn’t nailed down.

    http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/quiz/2014/jun/10/how-british-are-you-values-quiz-michael-gove

    That's what they think of this country. When they hear "British" they think of slavery and imperialism first and foremost. They really do hate Britain don't they? No wonder they were so happy to import millions of foreigners. As Neather said, they don't want "mainstream British" culture, they want "true multiculturalism". They'd rather have a go at Britishness than Islamic bigots hating on "white prostitutes".

    I used to think that the more right wing posters on here calling the Left traitors who hated this country were being hyperbolic, but I'm starting to think they have a point.

    Indeed Socrates. How dare people not agree with your views on what Britishness entails. They are clearly traitors. And it is certainly entirely representative of British values to read a column in the Guardian, take it literally and then decide that it represents the views of the "left". This certainly illustrates why politicians should decree lessons in British values.

    I think it's an attempt by the Guardian to be funny (almost always cringeworthy) but many a true word is said in jest.
    The Guardian does, after all, think that Steve Bell is funny.

  • ToryJimToryJim Posts: 4,189
    Socrates said:

    ToryJim said:

    @JackW/Socrates/ToryJim

    Yes, I think Hillary will run and win.

    Obviously things get easier for her if the GOP run an implausible candidate. They have a number of perfectly plausible options but Ted Cruz ain't one of them. Yes, I would buy him now and sell later when he gets down to a silly price. Walker would be an eminently plausible candidate but in view of last nite's result I wouldn't back him now.

    Many PBers made a shedload on the 2012 Carnival of the Loonies that was the GOP Presidential Candidate selection process. Looks like we may get lucky again.

    We did. The thing to remember in both 2008 and 2012 the GOP chose the sensible, pragmatic and moderate candidate.

    Eventually . Although they both had to unbalance the ticket with a whack job.
    Romney the "sensible, pragmatic and moderate" candidate is only a relative thing. He believes 47% of Americans that didn't pay income tax were hardcore Democrats that didn't have personal responsibility in their lives and wanted to increase US military spending by $2 trillion. He also gave in to just about every other extreme bit of the House GOP agenda.
    We will never know if he did so willingly or under political duress.
  • SlackbladderSlackbladder Posts: 9,779
    BBC Breaking News ‏@BBCBreaking · 7 mins
    European Commission to probe Apple, Starbucks & Fiat tax rulings in Ireland, Netherlands & Luxembourg http://bbc.in/1l7Neq4

    Hmmm Interesting..
  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143

    Wonder why Tory variation from average is plus 3.6% and Lab is minus 0.8. Am i being thick or shouldnt a positve boost with one firm be cancelled out to come back to average.

    In my head if 35% was average labour score if icm has 33 and yg 37 then -2+2 =0 bingo average 35.

    I'm embarrassed that I didn't notice that. If they didn't give equal weight to each pollster then the next most obvious thing would have been to give greater weight to YouGov as they produce most polls - but that doesn't appear to have happened either.
  • ToryJimToryJim Posts: 4,189
    antifrank said:
    That is more cogently argued than I expected
  • anotherDaveanotherDave Posts: 6,746
    Neil said:

    Socrates said:

    I would have hoped that in reaction to an extremist Islamic school preaching sexism and sectarianism in lessons, the left would join in the condemnation and support the need to teach the values of this society instead. But no, they instead prefer to bash on British values:

    Michael Gove argues that school children should be taught British values. From now on history lessons will teach kids how to invade countries, sell locals into slavery and nick anything that isn’t nailed down.

    http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/quiz/2014/jun/10/how-british-are-you-values-quiz-michael-gove

    That's what they think of this country. When they hear "British" they think of slavery and imperialism first and foremost. They really do hate Britain don't they? No wonder they were so happy to import millions of foreigners. As Neather said, they don't want "mainstream British" culture, they want "true multiculturalism". They'd rather have a go at Britishness than Islamic bigots hating on "white prostitutes".

    I used to think that the more right wing posters on here calling the Left traitors who hated this country were being hyperbolic, but I'm starting to think they have a point.

    Indeed Socrates. How dare people not agree with your views on what Britishness entails. They are clearly traitors. And it is certainly entirely representative of British values to read a column in the Guardian, take it literally and then decide that it represents the views of the "left". This certainly illustrates why politicians should decree lessons in British values.

    I think it's an attempt by the Guardian to be funny (almost always cringeworthy) but many a true word is said in jest.
    I'm starting to think that people who deny that lefties are traitors should themselves be considered traitors.
    Would you like a blindfold?

  • Bond_James_BondBond_James_Bond Posts: 1,939
    edited June 2014

    On topic: the high figures produced for UKIP by some of the on-line pollsters are almost certainly due to the self-select bias which on-line polls are notoriously subject to. YouGov is very experienced in dealing with this problem, and Populus explicitly adjusted their weightings to match their telephone polls, so I think it's a pretty safe assumption that Comres Online, Survation and Opinium are systematically over-stating UKIP. Note that the differences for UKIP are much greater than those for other parties - it would perhaps be clearer if the charts didn't rescale when you switch between them.

    I also agree with Nick P's point that there is a possibility that ICM's adjustment of Don't Knows by past vote is having the effect of systematically over-stating the LibDem figure given the current political landscape. Of course there's no way to be sure of this at the moment, but the fact that ICM are the only pollsters showing such a big deviation from the average for the LibDems does at least suggest that this might be so.

    I suspect also that a lot of UKIPpers are apt to be more rather than less forthcoming about this allegiance than supporters of other parties.

    Basing this generalisation on the deranged UKIPpers of the DT comments section, it's clear that they see themselves as a huge and popular grassroots crusade with which most people agree. They do not see themselves as a fringe movement that got 3% of the last GE vote and is the most disliked of all major parties.

  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 6,621
    edited June 2014
    Sean_F said:

    Socrates said:

    I would have hoped that in reaction to an extremist Islamic school preaching sexism and sectarianism in lessons, the left would join in the condemnation and support the need to teach the values of this society instead. But no, they instead prefer to bash on British values:

    Michael Gove argues that school children should be taught British values. From now on history lessons will teach kids how to invade countries, sell locals into slavery and nick anything that isn’t nailed down.

    http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/quiz/2014/jun/10/how-british-are-you-values-quiz-michael-gove

    That's what they think of this country. When they hear "British" they think of slavery and imperialism first and foremost. They really do hate Britain don't they? No wonder they were so happy to import millions of foreigners. As Neather said, they don't want "mainstream British" culture, they want "true multiculturalism". They'd rather have a go at Britishness than Islamic bigots hating on "white prostitutes".

    I used to think that the more right wing posters on here calling the Left traitors who hated this country were being hyperbolic, but I'm starting to think they have a point.

    Indeed Socrates. How dare people not agree with your views on what Britishness entails. They are clearly traitors. And it is certainly entirely representative of British values to read a column in the Guardian, take it literally and then decide that it represents the views of the "left". This certainly illustrates why politicians should decree lessons in British values.

    I think it's an attempt by the Guardian to be funny (almost always cringeworthy) but many a true word is said in jest.
    The Guardian does, after all, think that Steve Bell is funny.

    Good point. Why is that? My guess is that no-one thinks it's actually funny, but the fear of breaking ranks and inviting ridicule and condescension from their colleagues is just too strong.
  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 7,382

    On topic: the high figures produced for UKIP by some of the on-line pollsters are almost certainly due to the self-select bias which on-line polls are notoriously subject to. YouGov is very experienced in dealing with this problem, and Populus explicitly adjusted their weightings to match their telephone polls, so I think it's a pretty safe assumption that Comres Online, Survation and Opinium are systematically over-stating UKIP. Note that the differences for UKIP are much greater than those for other parties - it would perhaps be clearer if the charts didn't rescale when you switch between them.

    I also agree with Nick P's point that there is a possibility that ICM's adjustment of Don't Knows by past vote is having the effect of systematically over-stating the LibDem figure given the current political landscape. Of course there's no way to be sure of this at the moment, but the fact that ICM are the only pollsters showing such a big deviation from the average for the LibDems does at least suggest that this might be so.

    Survation reallocate DKs in their national polling as do ComRes and Lord Ashcroft.

  • anotherDaveanotherDave Posts: 6,746

    On topic: the high figures produced for UKIP by some of the on-line pollsters are almost certainly due to the self-select bias which on-line polls are notoriously subject to. YouGov is very experienced in dealing with this problem, and Populus explicitly adjusted their weightings to match their telephone polls, so I think it's a pretty safe assumption that Comres Online, Survation and Opinium are systematically over-stating UKIP. Note that the differences for UKIP are much greater than those for other parties - it would perhaps be clearer if the charts didn't rescale when you switch between them.

    I also agree with Nick P's point that there is a possibility that ICM's adjustment of Don't Knows by past vote is having the effect of systematically over-stating the LibDem figure given the current political landscape. Of course there's no way to be sure of this at the moment, but the fact that ICM are the only pollsters showing such a big deviation from the average for the LibDems does at least suggest that this might be so.

    I suspect also that a lot of UKIPpers are apt to be more rather than less forthcoming about this allegiance than supporters of other parties.

    Basing this generalisation on the deranged UKIPpers of the DT comments section, it's clear that they see themselves as a huge and popular grassroots crusade with which most people agree. They do not see themselves as a fringe movement that got 3% of the last GE vote and is the most disliked of all major parties.

    So is UKIP a 'fringe movement', or a 'major party'?

  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,564

    Socrates said:



    I used to think that the more right wing posters on here calling the Left traitors who hated this country were being hyperbolic, but I'm starting to think they have a point.

    Indeed Socrates. How dare people not agree with your views on what Britishness entails. They are clearly traitors. And it is certainly entirely representative of British values to read a column in the Guardian, take it literally and then decide that it represents the views of the "left". This certainly illustrates why politicians should decree lessons in British values.

    Lol. Socrates has had a rough time here in the past and anyway I try not to comment much on other posters, but whatever he discusses - Muslims (quiz their loyalty!), the EU (they're scoundrels!), Russia (blockade the Black Sea fleet!), Tea Party supporters (denounce them!) - he feels explosively impassioned. It must be exhausting, and what I think of as, um, typically Greek.

  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983

    Neil said:

    Socrates said:

    I would have hoped that in reaction to an extremist Islamic school preaching sexism and sectarianism in lessons, the left would join in the condemnation and support the need to teach the values of this society instead. But no, they instead prefer to bash on British values:

    Michael Gove argues that school children should be taught British values. From now on history lessons will teach kids how to invade countries, sell locals into slavery and nick anything that isn’t nailed down.

    http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/quiz/2014/jun/10/how-british-are-you-values-quiz-michael-gove

    That's what they think of this country. When they hear "British" they think of slavery and imperialism first and foremost. They really do hate Britain don't they? No wonder they were so happy to import millions of foreigners. As Neather said, they don't want "mainstream British" culture, they want "true multiculturalism". They'd rather have a go at Britishness than Islamic bigots hating on "white prostitutes".

    I used to think that the more right wing posters on here calling the Left traitors who hated this country were being hyperbolic, but I'm starting to think they have a point.

    Indeed Socrates. How dare people not agree with your views on what Britishness entails. They are clearly traitors. And it is certainly entirely representative of British values to read a column in the Guardian, take it literally and then decide that it represents the views of the "left". This certainly illustrates why politicians should decree lessons in British values.

    I think it's an attempt by the Guardian to be funny (almost always cringeworthy) but many a true word is said in jest.
    I'm starting to think that people who deny that lefties are traitors should themselves be considered traitors.
    Would you like a blindfold?

    Before I am convicted of being a leftie and appropriately punished I exercise my right to be tried by BobbaFett.

  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 39,668
    @Socrates - Can you tell me what my traditional culture is please?

    The Neather "revelations" were denied and withdrawn.

    I fear that in these posts on values you just reveal your prejudices. And that is why I find the idea of school lessons on British values so worrying. People see Britishness in very different ways.

  • SmarmeronSmarmeron Posts: 5,099
    @Sean_F

    Cartoons don't have to be funny, funny is usually for kids comics.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    Of course if we object to sectarian religious indoctrination in schools, sex segregation and archaic dress we are rather hoist by our own petard. Close down Eton and Cheltenham Ladies College! My presbyterian ancestors could give anyone a run for their money in terms of sectarianism.

    But British values are not always easy to define. More important are lessons in British civic society. I would like to see civics as part of the national curriculum (as it is in many American states) so that all students are taught equality of sexes, religions, races and sexuality. Similarly the rights to dress and express views on political and religious issues without coercion. Freedom of speech, assembly and press along with the laws that define and limit these rights.

    In short the lessons should be based on legal rights, obligations and duties not nebulous universal values.
    Socrates said:

    Socrates said:

    I would have hoped that in reaction to an extremist Islamic school preaching sexism and sectarianism in lessons, the left would join in the condemnation and support the need to teach the values of this society instead. But no, they instead prefer to bash on British values:

    Michael Gove argues that school children should be taught British values. From now on history lessons will teach kids how to invade countries, sell locals into slavery and nick anything that isn’t nailed down.

    http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/quiz/2014/jun/10/how-british-are-you-values-quiz-michael-gove



    Indeed Socrates.

    It's not disagreeing with my views on what it entails. It's seeing Britishness entirely in terms of negative things. The Guardian article was just one example. I also pointed to the revelations from Neather about the Labour government feeling "mainstream" British culture was stale and wanting to make it "truly multicultural".

    Seriously, just step back and try to imagine the Washington Post or the New York Times mocking American values in that way. Or Le Monde mocking French values. It wouldn't happen. The mainstream British left are particularly unique in disliking their own country's traditional culture. If they could have their way, British culture would be increasingly replaced by foreigners, the phrase "British values" wouldn't be mentioned, and Britain would just become a group of regions in an integrated European superstate, governed from Brussels and Berlin.

    There are of course left wing exceptions, like yourself, or MPs like Frank Field, but the heart of left-wing thinking is the way I've described.
  • anotherDaveanotherDave Posts: 6,746
    Neil said:

    Neil said:

    Socrates said:

    I would have hoped that in reaction to an extremist Islamic school preaching sexism and sectarianism in lessons, the left would join in the condemnation and support the need to teach the values of this society instead. But no, they instead prefer to bash on British values:

    Michael Gove argues that school children should be taught British values. From now on history lessons will teach kids how to invade countries, sell locals into slavery and nick anything that isn’t nailed down.

    http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/quiz/2014/jun/10/how-british-are-you-values-quiz-michael-gove

    That's what they think of this country. When they hear "British" they think of slavery and imperialism first and foremost. They really do hate Britain don't they? No wonder they were so happy to import millions of foreigners. As Neather said, they don't want "mainstream British" culture, they want "true multiculturalism". They'd rather have a go at Britishness than Islamic bigots hating on "white prostitutes".

    I used to think that the more right wing posters on here calling the Left traitors who hated this country were being hyperbolic, but I'm starting to think they have a point.

    Indeed Socrates. How dare people not agree with your views on what Britishness entails. They are clearly traitors. And it is certainly entirely representative of British values to read a column in the Guardian, take it literally and then decide that it represents the views of the "left". This certainly illustrates why politicians should decree lessons in British values.

    I think it's an attempt by the Guardian to be funny (almost always cringeworthy) but many a true word is said in jest.
    I'm starting to think that people who deny that lefties are traitors should themselves be considered traitors.
    Would you like a blindfold?

    Before I am convicted of being a leftie and appropriately punished I exercise my right to be tried by BobbaFett.

    Request denied. Stand against the wall please. Face front.

  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 6,621
    edited June 2014
    Salmond replied: “It is the spell of ‘reasonablacorum’. And did you notice that when she said it, she sounded a bit like a snake?”

    http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/international/salmond-accuses-jk-rowling-of-sorcery-2014061187484

    Pro-independence campaigners backed Salmond, claiming that in her past evil lives Rowling was a slave who collaborated with the Confederacy and a Nazi spy who reported directly to Joseph Goebbels.
  • SlackbladderSlackbladder Posts: 9,779
    Neil said:

    Neil said:

    Socrates said:

    I would have hoped that in reaction to an extremist Islamic school preaching sexism and sectarianism in lessons, the left would join in the condemnation and support the need to teach the values of this society instead. But no, they instead prefer to bash on British values:

    Michael Gove argues that school children should be taught British values. From now on history lessons will teach kids how to invade countries, sell locals into slavery and nick anything that isn’t nailed down.

    http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/quiz/2014/jun/10/how-british-are-you-values-quiz-michael-gove

    That's what they think of this country. When they hear "British" they think of slavery and imperialism first and foremost. They really do hate Britain don't they? No wonder they were so happy to import millions of foreigners. As Neather said, they don't want "mainstream British" culture, they want "true multiculturalism". They'd rather have a go at Britishness than Islamic bigots hating on "white prostitutes".

    I used to think that the more right wing posters on here calling the Left traitors who hated this country were being hyperbolic, but I'm starting to think they have a point.

    Indeed Socrates. How dare people not agree with your views on what Britishness entails. They are clearly traitors. And it is certainly entirely representative of British values to read a column in the Guardian, take it literally and then decide that it represents the views of the "left". This certainly illustrates why politicians should decree lessons in British values.

    I think it's an attempt by the Guardian to be funny (almost always cringeworthy) but many a true word is said in jest.
    I'm starting to think that people who deny that lefties are traitors should themselves be considered traitors.
    Would you like a blindfold?

    Before I am convicted of being a leftie and appropriately punished I exercise my right to be tried by BobbaFett.

    No Disintergrations....
  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 6,621
    edited June 2014
    Smarmeron said:

    @Sean_F

    Cartoons don't have to be funny, funny is usually for kids comics.

    No but political cartoons are meant to be witty. Here's a recent 'masterpiece':

    http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/cartoon/2014/jun/04/steve-bell-cartoon-queens-speech-plastic-bags-levy-supermarkets

    Oh...my...sides.
  • Bond_James_BondBond_James_Bond Posts: 1,939

    On topic: the high figures produced for UKIP by some of the on-line pollsters are almost certainly due to the self-select bias which on-line polls are notoriously subject to. YouGov is very experienced in dealing with this problem, and Populus explicitly adjusted their weightings to match their telephone polls, so I think it's a pretty safe assumption that Comres Online, Survation and Opinium are systematically over-stating UKIP. Note that the differences for UKIP are much greater than those for other parties - it would perhaps be clearer if the charts didn't rescale when you switch between them.

    I also agree with Nick P's point that there is a possibility that ICM's adjustment of Don't Knows by past vote is having the effect of systematically over-stating the LibDem figure given the current political landscape. Of course there's no way to be sure of this at the moment, but the fact that ICM are the only pollsters showing such a big deviation from the average for the LibDems does at least suggest that this might be so.

    I suspect also that a lot of UKIPpers are apt to be more rather than less forthcoming about this allegiance than supporters of other parties.

    Basing this generalisation on the deranged UKIPpers of the DT comments section, it's clear that they see themselves as a huge and popular grassroots crusade with which most people agree. They do not see themselves as a fringe movement that got 3% of the last GE vote and is the most disliked of all major parties.

    So is UKIP a 'fringe movement', or a 'major party'?

    It's both. From a recognition POV, if voters are sufficiently aware of you to have a view on you either way, you probably qualify as major; so the BNP would be 'major', whereas We Demand A Referendum would not be.

    On actual cast vote share, however, UKIP would be minor; as would they on councils controlled; or on meaningful representation (nobody would seriously argue MEP seats to be meaningful).

    UKIP are a sort of Schrodinger's Party. They exist in a kind of quantum state in which they both are and are not significant. In the same way, David Steel's Liberals existed in a quantum party in which their terms for entering coalition were of deep interest right up until the moment where a majority was declared.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,534
    Smarmeron said:

    @Sean_F

    Cartoons don't have to be funny, funny is usually for kids comics.

    I think that wit is important.
  • FalseFlagFalseFlag Posts: 1,801

    @JackW/Socrates/ToryJim

    Yes, I think Hillary will run and win.

    Obviously things get easier for her if the GOP run an implausible candidate. They have a number of perfectly plausible options but Ted Cruz ain't one of them. Yes, I would buy him now and sell later when he gets down to a silly price. Walker would be an eminently plausible candidate but in view of last nite's result I wouldn't back him now.

    Many PBers made a shedload on the 2012 Carnival of the Loonies that was the GOP Presidential Candidate selection process. Looks like we may get lucky again.

    We did. The thing to remember in both 2008 and 2012 the GOP chose the sensible, pragmatic and moderate candidate.

    True although history seems to have rewritten that. Amnesty and aggressive foreign policy might be establishment mainstream but are an anethma to the American people.

    Still tipping Paul, just needs to tighten his immigration policies. What this result shows is you don't have to sell out to the Sheldon Adelsons of this world. Oh and Paul will bury Hillary on Benghazi and rightly so.
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322

    Of course if we object to sectarian religious indoctrination in schools, sex segregation and archaic dress we are rather hoist by our own petard. Close down Eton and Cheltenham Ladies College! My presbyterian ancestors could give anyone a run for their money in terms of sectarianism.

    Again, it's jaw-dropping to me that left-wingers react to this thing by having a go at traditionally British things. Clearly a school that leads an assembly with anti-Christian chants is in no way comparable to Eton College. This is a completely false equivalence. It's done because left-wingers have intellectually wired themselves to attack British culture and not to ever criticise immigrant groups. Seriously, how hard is it to say "yes, there was something seriously abhorrent about this school"?

  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,534
    Anorak said:

    Salmond replied: “It is the spell of ‘reasonablacorum’. And did you notice that when she said it, she sounded a bit like a snake?”

    http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/international/salmond-accuses-jk-rowling-of-sorcery-2014061187484

    Pro-independence campaigners backed Salmond, claiming that in her past evil lives Rowling was a slave who collaborated with the Confederacy and a Nazi spy who reported directly to Joseph Goebbels.

    Well, she did write the Harry Potter books in order to introduce children to Satanism, according to an interview she gave The Onion.

  • SmarmeronSmarmeron Posts: 5,099
    @Anorak

    The latest one portraying Gove as a British Ayatolla demanding obedience to his vision, hardly splits my sides either.
    On the other hand, it is a political cartoon.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 43,337
    antifrank said:

    I seem to recall that J K Rowling is a close friend of Gordon Brown. Perhaps the prompting for the donation came from that quarter, given that he has become much more engaged in the independence debate recently.

    They are indeed friends - though perhaps more through Sarah Brown. She is also a donor to the Labour Party.
    Neil said:

    TGOHF said:

    JackW said:

    TGOHF said:

    JK Rowling donates £1M to the "No Thanks" campaign on Indy ref.

    SLAB in action. I hope it drives people to a YES vote. Could she be regarded as "English" by Scots?
    No.
    Presently YES is a dead campaign floundering. Essentially they have to find something, anything that will change the narrative of their badly losing hand. Quite what it might be is as much a mystery to commentators as it certainly is to YES.
    The little guy against the big pockets of the JK Rowling's?
    JK Rowling battling for the little guy against the £3.5 million donation of the Weirs to Yes?
    "No thanks" : has earned income behind it
    "Yes" : has unearned income behind it

    Unsurprisingly.
    Did noone think of capping the donations to these campaigns? It's the innocent Scottish people about to be subjected to a barrage of literature and other advertising that I feel sorry for.
    The donations are indeed capped, with different maxima for the lead campaigners (Yes Scotland and the No Campaign) and for what one might call auxiliaries, and much more severe restrictions for anyone who has not already booked (or has done a reverse ferret like the CBI). The link below suggests that the distinction between campaigners is perhaps not as well defined as it might be.

    I'm a little puzzled by Ms Rowling's announcement because the No Campaign - 'Better Tgether' it used to be called - is only allowed to spend £1.5M anyway during the campaign period (which began a few days ago), so possibly the donation was ages ago and the money has been spent already.

    However, on checking, and as LPW (one of the more interesting commentators on the indyref) noted recently, this rather bizarrely only applies to certain kinds of expenditure - not, rather oddly, including salaries, for instance.

    http://lallandspeatworrier.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05/money-money-money.html

  • BobaFettBobaFett Posts: 2,789
    @Neil @Slackbladder

    Misspelling my name results in an automatic disintegration, as a rule.

    In Neil's case, I'll make an exception.

    I'll give him the benefit of the doubt on his leftie credentials.

    But I would encourage him to be far more vocal about them on here. It's not as if this site is overwhelmed by leftism...
This discussion has been closed.