Categories
Options
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » New IndyRef poll for Scottish Daily Mail from Survation has
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » New IndyRef poll for Scottish Daily Mail from Survation has NO lead back to what it was before the first debate
It should be noted that Survation,along with Panelbase and ICM, have tended to show the best figures for YES. Ipsos-MORI, TNS and YouGov have the worst ones.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Throughly depressing for this Unionist. I realise that it is merely reversion to the norm for Survation, but still... meh
Stay part of something that's run by something else. Unionism is as dated as Empire.
Sick Umar Razaq – released from jail after appealing the length of his sentence – posted a picture of himself in sunglasses on Facebook as he flew off to Pakistan.
It is believed only two are still behind bars
The final gang member Hussain, was recalled to prison last year. It is believed he breached his licence agreement by going to a children’s play area.
It also emerged Ramzan had links with a bogus bride network. His dad Mohammed Ramzan, 59, was jailed over a wedding plot in which women were preyed on before they were given £300 to pose as brides in fake ceremonies abroad.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/rotherham-sex-abuse-monster-flies-4126300
Its ok, because all the community leaders knew and they were taking steps to stop it without involving the police.
The authorities knew, but its ok, they have improved and lessons have been learned.
The PCC (and former of head of child services) DIDN'T know, despite evidence to the contrary. And if he didn't know, why not, it was his job to know. Seems everybody else in a position of power (other than the local MP who was hiding in his garage fiddling his expenses) knew.
1400 children sexually exploited in Rotherham by gangs of ahem, (Labour target voters?)
'Silence in the air and tumbleweed clogging up the streets around Primrose Hill.'
Vote Labour, get cnuts. Hypocritical wealthy cnuts at that.
We were united for 100 years before that, it didn't need a dowry and a forced marriage.
Screw it, I want the Wuffingas back, Wessex and it's dirty money can sod off.
Cameron could order an inquiry without Ed having to tell him?
Or did I miss something in what passes for our constitution?
That's why the delay in the one into government "dodgyness"?
#backtotheseptarchy
Nahh, his last throw is to declare UDI, and make a last stand at the local curry house
Fair point, well made.
Your beloved leader is a really pathetic piece of work.
It's a load of bullocks though?
night woollie
And the numbers were too big to say you didn't know.
Bribery was at the heart of it though, that's the point.
We on PB all have our views and argue them vigorously... When someone on your side errs it is difficult to put previous arguments aside and agree they made a mistake... No on ever does it!!! I'm sure the labour posters that change the subject when rotherham us mentioned know they are wrong but would rather not agree with people they genuinely think are racist
So imagine how ihard it must be for Miliband to criticise political correctness, and admit nick griffin was right about Asian gangs.. It might be the right thing to do but it would mean labour would lose the next election
If PB people don't do it under the cloak of anonymity with nothing to lose, why would an mp let alone a party leader?
Goodnight Smarmeron
Kind of, maybe, but also possibly not.
Out of curiosity, what specifically are you referring to by bribery.
'So imagine how ihard it must be for Miliband to criticise political correctness, and admit nick griffin was right about Asian gangs.'
Because Ed never ceases to lecture us that he always does the right thing and is not afraid of taking on vested interests?
This is not just about political correctness but a massive cover up of child abuse on an industrial scale for many years.
If he even contemplates that accepting Nick Griffin was correct, just this once, is a reason to change his response to what has happened, then he is even more scum than I can even imagine.
Rotherham is obviously just the tip of a very large iceberg. This stuff has been, and is still, going on across large swathes of the UK. Multiculturalism has failed miserably. One particular extreme strand of Islam, the same strand that preaches hatred of western values and leads to 100's of young Muslims to go and fight like medieval barbarians in Iraq and Syria, is infesting British culture like a disease.
There's no discussions to be had, or negotiations to be held with extreme Islamists. They don't fit into liberal western civilization. And Miliband just keeps quiet because he doesn't want to offend them! Worse still, Labour courts them as potential voters. Sickening.
In that case tear all the laws of that era down. Bribery was normal parliamentary procedure in Scotland and England, saying people were bribed is like saying parliament wasn't democratic and there was some social inequality about, it's how things were done.
Thought parliament returns on Monday?
Equally it's highly questionable if it made any difference at all, since iirc most of the recipients were heavily pro-union anyway (the ostensible reason for the money was due to the loss of salaried posts from the dissolution of the Scottish parliament).
Unsurprisingly the modern politics hangs over the historical assessments.
The video, entitled a Message in Blood, shows several men in orange jumpsuits said to be captured Kurdish fighters.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-28975638
Not unusual, but it's not like the past never bites you on the arse.
Night all
http://survation.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Scottish-DM-2nd-Debate-Tables.pdf
A few snippets:
Definitely will vote:
Yes: 85
No: 88
No lead:
Men: +2 (DK: 8)
Women: +10 (DK: 13)
While Salmond is seen as the clear winner of the debate, the shift in "more likely to vote Yes" largely driven by SNP voters (36%) , while Labour voters pretty evenly split, 20% yes, 18% no. For the majority (63%) it's made no difference.
http://blog.whatscotlandthinks.org/2014/08/poll-of-polls-28-august/
No lead (excl DK)
Employed
Full time: -4
Part time: -2
Unemployed: -26
Students: +36
Retired: +28
So, who will go out and vote? Students, pensioners or the unemployed?
Really? Why on earth would you expect the unemployed to vote for the status quo? Do you think life on benefits in Glasgow is a wonderful thing that must be protected at all costs ?
The less stake people have in society the more likely they are to vote for change.
That said, both the under 24s and over 55s are the least keen on independence.
Whether Independence will serve them any better is another matter entirely.
If they do go out and vote I hope they keep voting in subsequent elections...
Yes/no/no difference:
Lab: 20/18/61
Lib: 13/12/75
Of course they have an equal stake in society in the sense of civic duties and rights.
But in an economic sense, as the relative losers in the status quo, they have a greater incentive to seek radical change
1) many are probably not Scottish anyway
2) (assuming students includes pre-university) independence puts a big question mark over the sustainability of free university tuition considering the obvious illegality of continued charging of the English
3) as Salmond himself stated - 30k young Scots leave Scotland every year (usually to other areas in the UK - these people are not going to see rUK as a 'foreign country')
4) linked to 3) - the young are least likely to see Scotland as their permanent home (at least in the short term). Older people are more likely to have made a choice to have based themselves in Scotland for the long term.
My initial knee jerk reaction was to consider backing the Tories to retain this seat at Paddy Power's seemingly generous odds of 10/3, yet I managed to contain myself, realising on reflection that overwhelmingly the market gets it right on such issues (just as it probably will three weeks hence as regards the Scottish Indy referendum).
What this proves, to me at least, is just how weak are people's political convictions. Indeed they must be virtually non-existent to produce a result such as this.
Nothing like a bit of broad sweeping generalisation at 6.30am.
Welcome back.
Clearly there will be an insurgency angle to UKIP but surely a lot of it has to be down to whether they can get the Tory organisation to shift over with Carswell.
I've got to say that I am very very sceptical about his ability to use the canvassing data. Even if he was legally collecting it separately, which I struggle to understand (firstly did he collect it all himself, vs. representatives of the Conservative Party) arguably he could have been collecting under false pretences [turn up with a blue rosette, say I'm your local Tory MP, give me your data - and btw I own it not the party]. In any event it strikes me as a serious breach of good faith on his part - even if legal - and makes me think a lot less highly of him.
The Tories can win this - if they keep their nerve, select a good local candidate (I like the idea of an open primary - try to appeal to LD/Lab/Independents that way) and flood the seat.
As for value, I don't have a view - not a serious gambler. But an 80% probability instinctively feels high.
Only recently noticed the comments registration process was less onerous. Probably only a fleeting visit though hopefully - commenting on pb.com is disastrous for regular good night's sleep.
Many of the taxi drivers were paid from the council's account as they drove the girls to school, and were groomed on those journeys. One taxi driver was banned from council business as a potential paedophile, but none of the Asian drivers were.
Girls would escape at night via the fire escape, or even using knotted sheets out of first-floor windows.
Another point mentioned: many of these girls had been sexually abused before they went into care by their families, and the one thing that the care system could give them was familial love.
If true, it leads to some interesting questions about how we can protect children in care?
I heard Farage on R5 yesterday. His suggestion was that if Carswell held his seat there would be other Carswells. Doesn't say a lot for the moral fibre of the potential recruits but he is probably right. What I think people are not focussing enough on is that the reverse is also probably true. This is high stakes.
With the loyalty usually shown by Conservative supporters, especially in proximity to an election, I think the Tories are the value bet here. UKIP favourite but the Tories are value.
Further the current UKIP PPC was on the local TV last night being distinctly unimpressed about being hi-jacxked by Carswell.
My questions would be:
1) How much of Carswell's vote was personal (on the assumption he will carry it across)?
2) How many constituents will be annoyed with him for defecting and see it as grandstanding for personal gain, and how many will see it as a principled decision that deserves rewarding (I'm not saying either is necessarily true, just that that's how most people will see it)
3) How much money/other resources will UKIP be able to muster at short notice, bearing in mind they don't seem to have had much advanced warning?
4) Will the Conservatives choose a candidate from the local party to go with local knowledge, or given the short notice will they parachute in a candidate from the centre who is already on the approved list?
5) How many people will bother to vote?
Because until we have some idea of the answers to those questions, making judgements on the odds or even the value seems to me to be at best pointless and at worst blind guesswork. I think I'm right in saying it's 80 years since a defecting MP resigned their seat to fight a by-election for a new party (the Ulster Unionists over Sunningdale excepted) so there isn't much data to go on.
Or they could lose, lose 6 or 7 more MPs and fall into civil war shortly before an election. It won't be dull, that is for sure.
On (3) Farage said that they had been having "serious" discussions with Carswell since the summer so, at least at national level, they had a lot more notice than anyone else. No one seems to have told anyone on the local party though.
(4) would be a mistake if there is a credible local available. Ideally someone female, worked in the public sector for a long time and with a smidgeon of experience. A Sarah Wolloston (sp?) type candidate would be ideal and the selection of such a candidate will change the odds.
On your general comment are we not again forgetting the tory who joined the SDP, stood in a by election and lost?
In this case when Mike first announced Carswell's defection, he referred to Paddy Power's opening price for the ensuing by-election as being 4/6. Within half an hour the sheer weight of money placed with this and other bookies had reduced this price to 1/3, before it soon shortened further to 1/4.
As usual, Betfair was behind the game in offering this market but thus far out of a total value of £2404 matched bets, £2264 (94% has been wagered on UKIP, £101 on the Tories and a la-la land £39 on Labour.
http://bettertogether.net/
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/11062758/Scandal-hit-Rotherham-deleted-abuse-files.html
No wonder so many tried to spin that the press was out of control and needed more regulation.