politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Nighthawks is now open

System

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Nighthawks is now open

Why not relax, and converse into the night on the day’s events in PB NightHawks.

Read the full story here

dr_spyn

first.

Germany 0-2 down to Argentina.

Stuart_Dickson

Panelbase out soon. Has YES in the lead. Allegedly.

Scrapheap_as_was

Lamela-time

Casino_Royale

Stuart_Dickson said:

Panelbase out soon. Has YES in the lead. Allegedly.

Source?

AndyJS

FPT:

George Monbiot taking lefty self-loathing of England to new heights (or depths):

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/sep/02/scots-independence-england-scotland

A really stupid comment under the article:

"At least people in Scotland have a choice.
I live in the north east of England and there is none for us. Nor will there ever be."

There was of course a referendum a few years ago at which a NE assembly was overwhelmingly rejected.

Stuart_Dickson

Casino_Royale said:

Stuart_Dickson said:

Panelbase out soon. Has YES in the lead. Allegedly.

Source?

Alex Orr: one of the SNP's European Parliament candidates.

kle4

FPT:
Roger said:
Watcher

"Labour supporters must read these threads, and laugh and laugh and laugh."

I find Cameron's unpopularity amongst the right on here very strange. I'm not a fan of Tory leaders of any sort but Cameron is more palatable than most. What's more I can't for the life of me see him losing the next election. Quite simply the middle ground has nowhere else to go and neither has the (sane) right.

It's not really that strange. Cameron pitched himself as being more to the centre, or able to appeal to the centre, than the hard Tory right. Therefore, when his popularity starts to wane and the electoral math looks difficult, that part of the party, wherein is to be found the most vocal and passionate ideological Tories, will feel that appeal to the centre is not working and they should be true to themselves, and that Cameron is not one of them.

And the middle ground will go to Labour. Why wouldn't they? Most people will not believe Tory claims that Miliband will be some radical hard left demon or some such, and with someone as weak as Cameron, even an uninspiring Miliband will not frighten many. Even if people like Cameron, he is not able to lead his party convincingly on many issues, and people know it.

Morris_Dancer

Cheers for link 19, Mr. Eagles. By chance I was checking dates (just to make sure it was indeed over 12 centuries the Western Empire lasted) of the Roman Empire this very day.

Writing a blog about longevity of states. Just a ramble, really, partly because of the Scottish referendum and partly because I've nearly finished the Byzantium history. Also tied into fantasy, which often has countries lasting for enormous lengths of time (which tends not to happen very much).

Morris_Dancer

Mr. Dickson, any ETA?

Casino_Royale

Stuart_Dickson said:

Casino_Royale said:

Stuart_Dickson said:

Panelbase out soon. Has YES in the lead. Allegedly.

Source?

Alex Orr: one of the SNP's European Parliament candidates.

Ah, ok. Will treat with a pinch of salt until I see some numbers.

It could be a "good poll" for YES with another small, or smaller gap, with NO and someone might be getting excitable.

kle4

1) Didn't the Guardian endorse the LDs in 2010 for the same reason, that the Big Two were so unappealing? There is something in saying the Tories are rudderless, although I would say that is because the idiots in the boat destroyed it while fighting over the last of the fresh water. It's also right that Miliband may be becalmed, though the current is taking him in to No10 regardless, so that's fine as far as he's concerned.

Morris_Dancer

Mr. kle4, there'll be a storm if Yes wins, though.

JosiasJessop

FPT:

Itajai said:

taffys said:

''Visas for marriage/partnership by country:''

What's your plan? Deny Marriage/Partnership VISAs to certain countries and not others?

That is what it would take, given your figures.

And religions.

The British polity is not there yet. But it might yet get there.

Okay, here's a question. How do you test someone's religion? Do you get them to sign a form saying (I am muslim, Jewish, Christian etc)? What is to stop them lying? Will you have police checking people who go into mosques, synagogues, churches etc?

It is fairly straightforward if the applicant claims they have got a job: it can be checked.
It is fairly straightforward if the applicant claims they are married: it can be checked.

But how do you check an applicant for religion?

Stuart_Dickson

Casino_Royale said:

Stuart_Dickson said:

Casino_Royale said:

Stuart_Dickson said:

Panelbase out soon. Has YES in the lead. Allegedly.

Source?

Alex Orr: one of the SNP's European Parliament candidates.

Ah, ok. Will treat with a pinch of salt until I see some numbers.

It could be a "good poll" for YES with another small, or smaller gap, with NO and someone might be getting excitable.

Salt dose highly advisable until actual publication. I just thought that punters may appreciate an early heads up.

matt

JosiasJessop said:

FPT:

Itajai said:

taffys said:

''Visas for marriage/partnership by country:''

What's your plan? Deny Marriage/Partnership VISAs to certain countries and not others?

That is what it would take, given your figures.

And religions.

The British polity is not there yet. But it might yet get there.

Okay, here's a question. How do you test someone's religion? Do you get them to sign a form saying (I am muslim, Jewish, Christian etc)? What is to stop them lying? Will you have police checking people who go into mosques, synagogues, churches etc?

It is fairly straightforward if the applicant claims they have got a job: it can be checked.
It is fairly straightforward if the applicant claims they are married: it can be checked.

But how do you check an applicant for religion?

Yellow star on shirt?

Morris_Dancer

Mr. Jessop, circumcision?

Tim_B

According to Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel, speaking on CNN just now, ISIS controls half of Syria and half of Iraq.

He also said that there are 100 plus Americans fighting with ISIS.

surbiton

http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/top-stories/scottish-independence-panelbase-poll-puts-yes-ahead-1-3071008

EDITED - Not a new poll, a poll from 2013.

Socrates

These are interesting numbers. Expected earnings (employment rate x average wage) by ethnicity.

Men:

Indian: £16,700
White Other: £15,600
White British: £15,200
Black African: £12,300
Black Caribbean: £12,200
Chinese: £11,400
Pakistani: £9,800
Bangladeshi: £8,400

Women:

Black Caribbean: £10,800
Indian: £10,200
Chinese: £10,100
White Other: £9,000
Black African: £7,900
White British: £7,800
Bangladeshi: £3,000
Pakistani: £2,600

FrankBooth

Stuart_Dickson said:

Panelbase out soon. Has YES in the lead. Allegedly.

You'd better be right Stuart.

Casino_Royale

If NO wants to win, all the mainstream parties need to have a conference this weekend and make a universal in blood, within the next 7 days, to give Scotland Devomax asap after GE2015 next year.

It needs to spell out all the powers they would devolve to Scotland - and to do so immediately. Possibly to also give the Scottish parliament a much bigger role in deciding foreign/defence policy for the UK as well. Perhaps a veto over deployment of Scottish troops, for example.

Nothing else will swing it now.

TheScreamingEagles

surbiton said:

http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/top-stories/scottish-independence-panelbase-poll-puts-yes-ahead-1-3071008

THAT IS LAST YEAR'S POLL

surbiton

Socrates said:

These are interesting numbers. Expected earnings (employment rate x average wage) by ethnicity.

Men:

Indian: £16,700
White Other: £15,600
White British: £15,200
Black African: £12,300
Black Caribbean: £12,200
Chinese: £11,400
Pakistani: £9,800
Bangladeshi: £8,400

Women:

Black Caribbean: £10,800
Indian: £10,200
Chinese: £10,100
White Other: £9,000
Black African: £7,900
White British: £7,800
Bangladeshi: £3,000
Pakistani: £2,600

And the national average is £30000 ? Huh ?

matt

Casino_Royale said:

If NO wants to win, all the mainstream parties need to have a conference this weekend and make a universal in blood, within the next 7 days, to give Scotland Devomax asap after GE2015 next year.

It needs to spell out all the powers they would devolve to Scotland - and to do so immediately. Possibly to also give the Scottish parliament a much bigger role in deciding foreign/defence policy for the UK as well. Perhaps a veto over deployment of Scottish troops, for example.

Nothing else will swing it now.

At which point one says, why bother.

Casino_Royale

Stuart_Dickson said:

Casino_Royale said:

Stuart_Dickson said:

Casino_Royale said:

Stuart_Dickson said:

Panelbase out soon. Has YES in the lead. Allegedly.

Source?

Alex Orr: one of the SNP's European Parliament candidates.

Ah, ok. Will treat with a pinch of salt until I see some numbers.

It could be a "good poll" for YES with another small, or smaller gap, with NO and someone might be getting excitable.

Salt dose highly advisable until actual publication. I just thought that punters may appreciate an early heads up.

Sure, but that works both ways. If it's just an enthusiastic YES camp rumour (and it's wrong) a lot of our fellow punters could take you at your word and lose money.

That's why the source is important, which you kindly provided, and you're also cautious yourself, which is wise.

MarkHopkins

JosiasJessop said:

FPT:

Itajai said:

taffys said:

''Visas for marriage/partnership by country:''

What's your plan? Deny Marriage/Partnership VISAs to certain countries and not others?

That is what it would take, given your figures.

And religions.

The British polity is not there yet. But it might yet get there.

Okay, here's a question. How do you test someone's religion? Do you get them to sign a form saying (I am muslim, Jewish, Christian etc)? What is to stop them lying? Will you have police checking people who go into mosques, synagogues, churches etc?

It is fairly straightforward if the applicant claims they have got a job: it can be checked.
It is fairly straightforward if the applicant claims they are married: it can be checked.

But how do you check an applicant for religion?

But how do you check an applicant for religion?

You tell them that you believe God is dead.

If they say that Jesus loves you anyway, then they are Christian.

If they threaten beheading, then they are Muslim.

If they shrug in an understanding way, then they are Jewish.

Oh, and if they ask for a poll on it, they are OGH.

Hugh

kle4 said:

1) Didn't the Guardian endorse the LDs in 2010 for the same reason, that the Big Two were so unappealing? There is something in saying the Tories are rudderless, although I would say that is because the idiots in the boat destroyed it while fighting over the last of the fresh water. It's also right that Miliband may be becalmed, though the current is taking him in to No10 regardless, so that's fine as far as he's concerned.

Miliband's strategic nous is beautiful.

The right tone on the right issues at the right time, similarly knowing when his enemies are making mistakes so keeping quiet.

You can tell he learned from the best political strategists the UK has ever seen, Gordon Brown and Tony Blair.

surbiton

TheScreamingEagles said:

surbiton said:

http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/top-stories/scottish-independence-panelbase-poll-puts-yes-ahead-1-3071008

THAT IS LAST YEAR'S POLL

Oops !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Socrates

surbiton said:

Socrates said:

These are interesting numbers. Expected earnings (employment rate x average wage) by ethnicity.

Men:

Indian: £16,700
White Other: £15,600
White British: £15,200
Black African: £12,300
Black Caribbean: £12,200
Chinese: £11,400
Pakistani: £9,800
Bangladeshi: £8,400

Women:

Black Caribbean: £10,800
Indian: £10,200
Chinese: £10,100
White Other: £9,000
Black African: £7,900
White British: £7,800
Bangladeshi: £3,000
Pakistani: £2,600

And the national average is £30000 ? Huh ?

The £30,000 number is just the average wage. Expected earnings are average wage x employment rate. My data is also from July 2011.

ManchesterKurt

Very strong argument can be made that the assembley was rejected for just being a talking shop with zero actual powers.

Holding another referendum across many parts of the north, but with real develotion of powers as a result of a yes vote would see very different results I would imagine.

AndyJS said:

FPT:

George Monbiot taking lefty self-loathing of England to new heights (or depths):

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/sep/02/scots-independence-england-scotland

A really stupid comment under the article:

"At least people in Scotland have a choice.
I live in the north east of England and there is none for us. Nor will there ever be."

There was of course a referendum a few years ago at which a NE assembly was overwhelmingly rejected.

Stereotomy

surbiton said:

Socrates said:

These are interesting numbers. Expected earnings (employment rate x average wage) by ethnicity.

Men:

Indian: £16,700
White Other: £15,600
White British: £15,200
Black African: £12,300
Black Caribbean: £12,200
Chinese: £11,400
Pakistani: £9,800
Bangladeshi: £8,400

Women:

Black Caribbean: £10,800
Indian: £10,200
Chinese: £10,100
White Other: £9,000
Black African: £7,900
White British: £7,800
Bangladeshi: £3,000
Pakistani: £2,600

And the national average is £30000 ? Huh ?

Employment rate x average wage

Casino_Royale

matt said:

Casino_Royale said:

If NO wants to win, all the mainstream parties need to have a conference this weekend and make a universal in blood, within the next 7 days, to give Scotland Devomax asap after GE2015 next year.

It needs to spell out all the powers they would devolve to Scotland - and to do so immediately. Possibly to also give the Scottish parliament a much bigger role in deciding foreign/defence policy for the UK as well. Perhaps a veto over deployment of Scottish troops, for example.

Nothing else will swing it now.

At which point one says, why bother.

Because it keeps our family of nations together in the UK, maintains our economic and monetary union, common travel area, mutual defence and global influence whilst also giving Scotland full control over its own affairs.

That's pretty much what (most) Scots want and would have voted for, had Cameron offered it as an option on the ballot paper.

ManchesterKurt

The mean wage in in the mid-£20,000's isn't it? About £26k from memory.

However, those numbers clearly account for unemployment, part time working etc. and give a much better view of the wages that real people live on.

surbiton said:

Socrates said:

These are interesting numbers. Expected earnings (employment rate x average wage) by ethnicity.

Men:

Indian: £16,700
White Other: £15,600
White British: £15,200
Black African: £12,300
Black Caribbean: £12,200
Chinese: £11,400
Pakistani: £9,800
Bangladeshi: £8,400

Women:

Black Caribbean: £10,800
Indian: £10,200
Chinese: £10,100
White Other: £9,000
Black African: £7,900
White British: £7,800
Bangladeshi: £3,000
Pakistani: £2,600

And the national average is £30000 ? Huh ?

HurstLlama

@Morris_Dancer

" has countries lasting for enormous lengths of time (which tends not to happen very much"

That's an interesting point that I has never even crossed my mind. In Europe how many countries can claim continuous existence as a unified state with more or less the same borders for a thousand years. England certainly, but after that I am struggling. Denmark, perhaps. Maybe you could make a case for Sweden? None of the big ones certainly; France, Germany, Italy, and Spain were all much later inventions. In fact going world wide its very hard to think of more than just Japan and China (and I am not too sure about the latter).

FrankBooth

Casino - I have relatives up there now but I could never endorse such a Union with Scotland. If things did get bad my brother could always move back down south.

Hugh

Socrates said:

These are interesting numbers. Expected earnings (employment rate x average wage) by ethnicity.

Men:

Indian: £16,700
White Other: £15,600
White British: £15,200
Black African: £12,300
Black Caribbean: £12,200
Chinese: £11,400
Pakistani: £9,800
Bangladeshi: £8,400

Women:

Black Caribbean: £10,800
Indian: £10,200
Chinese: £10,100
White Other: £9,000
Black African: £7,900
White British: £7,800
Bangladeshi: £3,000
Pakistani: £2,600

"by ethnicity"

Always the most important thing for you Socrates, eh

matt

Casino_Royale said:

matt said:

Casino_Royale said:

If NO wants to win, all the mainstream parties need to have a conference this weekend and make a universal in blood, within the next 7 days, to give Scotland Devomax asap after GE2015 next year.

It needs to spell out all the powers they would devolve to Scotland - and to do so immediately. Possibly to also give the Scottish parliament a much bigger role in deciding foreign/defence policy for the UK as well. Perhaps a veto over deployment of Scottish troops, for example.

Nothing else will swing it now.

At which point one says, why bother.

Because it keeps our family of nations together in the UK, maintains our economic and monetary union, common travel area, mutual defence and global influence whilst also giving Scotland full control over its own affairs.

That's pretty much what (most) Scots want and would have voted for, had Cameron offered it as an option on the ballot paper.

A federal country plus then. Some way beyond what the US states have. The history of federal states is not a happy one.

Scott_P

@milnemedia: STV through night referendum show, live at all 32 declarations & more

Read: http://t.co/1hxU88H8DQ

kle4

2) Even ConHome know that merely 'waving the Miliband spectre will not be enough'? The Tories really are doomed.

3) I'm not sure that will work, especially at this point - surely most people must at the least think it is possible Labour will win in 2015, if not likely. And yet support for Independence among Labour supporters is increasing even as the Tories destroy themselves.

4)Well they're not fools at least. Also, smart politics for her.

5) I hope they get the chance.

6) This still baffles me. After being kneecapped so publicly, why do people still want Cameron to remain in such a situation, especially as 'Do you want X to resign' questions usually have a majority for resignation anyway.

7) I'm sure everyone is agreement on this one. Yep.

8) That's one pessimistic view of England.

9)Maybe. They won't care.

10) Amusing, although why exactly did they decide to include these new figures?

11) Indeed. What a coup for UKIP this could end up being, and so well timed too.

12)Future Coalition? Their optimism knows no bounds. Going for a more modest goal this time though, makes sense, Is that because there is no need, legal or political, to change the voting system for locals?

13) Raising a point which just goes around and around, over and over.

14) Encouraging for Tories, if the voters were not already drifting that way.

15) No comment.

16) Tough for a human to pull off.

17) I thought it supposedly had something to do with homosexuality as well (Homosexuality for men,[81][93] but this is disputed,[88][94] and subject to geographic variations), according to the always reliable wikipedia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digit_ratio

19) I like the dates for the last Emperor/Usurper Romulus Augustulus. "born perhaps around 460 – died after 476, possibly alive around 500"

Casino_Royale

FrankBooth said:

Casino - I have relatives up there now but I could never endorse such a Union with Scotland. If things did get bad my brother could always move back down south.

Why?

JosiasJessop

MarkHopkins said:

JosiasJessop said:

FPT:

Itajai said:

taffys said:

''Visas for marriage/partnership by country:''

What's your plan? Deny Marriage/Partnership VISAs to certain countries and not others?

That is what it would take, given your figures.

And religions.

The British polity is not there yet. But it might yet get there.

Okay, here's a question. How do you test someone's religion? Do you get them to sign a form saying (I am muslim, Jewish, Christian etc)? What is to stop them lying? Will you have police checking people who go into mosques, synagogues, churches etc?

It is fairly straightforward if the applicant claims they have got a job: it can be checked.
It is fairly straightforward if the applicant claims they are married: it can be checked.

But how do you check an applicant for religion?

But how do you check an applicant for religion?

You tell them that you believe God is dead.

If they say that Jesus loves you anyway, then they are Christian.

If they threaten beheading, then they are Muslim.

If they shrug in an understanding way, then they are Jewish.

Oh, and if they ask for a poll on it, they are OGH.

LOL. Genuinely funny.

I'll have to remember that one.

kle4

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. kle4, there'll be a storm if Yes wins, though.

A fair point. As much as I don't want that to happen, the response of Labour to that is the most crucial to future events, and I cannot even begin to predict it, and I throw out wild predictions all the time.

Casino_Royale

matt said:

Casino_Royale said:

matt said:

Casino_Royale said:

If NO wants to win, all the mainstream parties need to have a conference this weekend and make a universal in blood, within the next 7 days, to give Scotland Devomax asap after GE2015 next year.

It needs to spell out all the powers they would devolve to Scotland - and to do so immediately. Possibly to also give the Scottish parliament a much bigger role in deciding foreign/defence policy for the UK as well. Perhaps a veto over deployment of Scottish troops, for example.

Nothing else will swing it now.

At which point one says, why bother.

Because it keeps our family of nations together in the UK, maintains our economic and monetary union, common travel area, mutual defence and global influence whilst also giving Scotland full control over its own affairs.

That's pretty much what (most) Scots want and would have voted for, had Cameron offered it as an option on the ballot paper.

A federal country plus then. Some way beyond what the US states have. The history of federal states is not a happy one.

I think it has to be a federal/confederal solution, now. We need to show the Scots much greater respect if we're to maintain some sort of political union with them.

I believe it's in our interests to do so, as both our economies and international influence would suffer if we divided these islands up.

FrankBooth

Casino_Royale said:

FrankBooth said:

Casino - I have relatives up there now but I could never endorse such a Union with Scotland. If things did get bad my brother could always move back down south.

Why?

It would be totally one-sided. Why should Scotland run its own affairs and still interfere with the rest of the UK?

isam

Matthew Goodwin (@GoodwinMJ)
03/09/2014 20:56
@Michael_Heaver @IsabelHardman @DanHannanMEP I wonder when ppl will realise that the Ukip vote might be about more than an EU referendum

kle4

isam said:

Matthew Goodwin (@GoodwinMJ)
03/09/2014 20:56
@Michael_Heaver @IsabelHardman @DanHannanMEP I wonder when ppl will realise that the Ukip vote might be about more than an EU referendum

May 2015.

AndyJS

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Jessop, circumcision?

That wouldn't work, loads of Anglo-Saxon men have been circumcised as a sort of middle-class affectation. Nothing to do with religion.

Socrates

Hugh said:

Socrates said:

These are interesting numbers. Expected earnings (employment rate x average wage) by ethnicity.

Men:

Indian: £16,700
White Other: £15,600
White British: £15,200
Black African: £12,300
Black Caribbean: £12,200
Chinese: £11,400
Pakistani: £9,800
Bangladeshi: £8,400

Women:

Black Caribbean: £10,800
Indian: £10,200
Chinese: £10,100
White Other: £9,000
Black African: £7,900
White British: £7,800
Bangladeshi: £3,000
Pakistani: £2,600

"by ethnicity"

Always the most important thing for you Socrates, eh

"These are uncomfortable facts - better imply the person presenting them is racist."

You could work for Rotherham Council.

Stereotomy

On the subject of UKIP, a few times I've seen this idea that when asked about their preference between Labour and Tories, they tend to split pretty evenly. But at the same time, the Tories seem to be losing far more votes to them than Labour.

My reading of this has been that more of the Labour -> Kipper switchers were non-voters than the Tory -> Kipper switchers. Does this seem accurate, or is there some other possibility or information I'm missing?

RobD

Are the BBC doing an overnight program? Not sure if I want to watch STV, given their performance during the debate!

Hugh

Stuart_Dickson said:

Panelbase out soon. Has YES in the lead. Allegedly.

Getting a bit excitable there I think SD.

Should be careful, one or two posters on political betting still put things like bets on stuff like politics!

Casino_Royale

FrankBooth said:

Casino_Royale said:

FrankBooth said:

Casino - I have relatives up there now but I could never endorse such a Union with Scotland. If things did get bad my brother could always move back down south.

Why?

It would be totally one-sided. Why should Scotland run its own affairs and still interfere with the rest of the UK?

FrankBooth said:

Casino_Royale said:

FrankBooth said:

Casino - I have relatives up there now but I could never endorse such a Union with Scotland. If things did get bad my brother could always move back down south.

Why?

It would be totally one-sided. Why should Scotland run its own affairs and still interfere with the rest of the UK?

Um. I'm not saying it should. There needs to be major reform in rUK as well (the bit I suspect the UK parties really find hard) and EVFEL. Perhaps even an English parliament and a separate British chamber.

I would be happy to still take joint monetary policy, foreign affairs and defence decisions with our fellow Britons in Scotland, as would most Scots:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-26245611
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/10621649/Give-Scotland-devo-max.html

Carnyx

AndyJS said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Jessop, circumcision?

That wouldn't work, loads of Anglo-Saxon men have been circumcised as a sort of middle-class affectation. Nothing to do with religion.

Also for medical reasons.

TheScreamingEagles

RobD said:

Are the BBC doing an overnight program? Not sure if I want to watch STV, given their performance during the debate!

Well they plan too, but, bloody Unions.

BBC strike could disrupt Scottish independence referendum coverage

Management draws up contingency plans after unions vote for industrial action in protest at 400 jobs cut proposal

http://www.theguardian.com/media/2014/sep/03/bbc-strike-could-disrupt-scottish-independence-referendum-coverage

nigel4england

Hugh said:

kle4 said:

1) Didn't the Guardian endorse the LDs in 2010 for the same reason, that the Big Two were so unappealing? There is something in saying the Tories are rudderless, although I would say that is because the idiots in the boat destroyed it while fighting over the last of the fresh water. It's also right that Miliband may be becalmed, though the current is taking him in to No10 regardless, so that's fine as far as he's concerned.

Miliband's strategic nous is beautiful.

The right tone on the right issues at the right time, similarly knowing when his enemies are making mistakes so keeping quiet.

You can tell he learned from the best political strategists the UK has ever seen, Gordon Brown and Tony Blair.

Is that why he is keeping quiet about Rotherham?

TheScreamingEagles

UPDATE - I've just stuck in link 20

PM could face calls to postpone UK election if Scots vote for independence

Pressure on Cameron to take unprecedented step amid warnings that 'constitutional meltdown' would follow yes vote

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/sep/03/calls-to-postpone-uk-general-election-scots-independence

kle4

nigel4england said:

Hugh said:

kle4 said:

1) Didn't the Guardian endorse the LDs in 2010 for the same reason, that the Big Two were so unappealing? There is something in saying the Tories are rudderless, although I would say that is because the idiots in the boat destroyed it while fighting over the last of the fresh water. It's also right that Miliband may be becalmed, though the current is taking him in to No10 regardless, so that's fine as far as he's concerned.

Miliband's strategic nous is beautiful.

The right tone on the right issues at the right time, similarly knowing when his enemies are making mistakes so keeping quiet.

You can tell he learned from the best political strategists the UK has ever seen, Gordon Brown and Tony Blair.

Is that why he is keeping quiet about Rotherham?

Probably. I don't feel any enthusiasm for the man, but he has shown great political calculation and carefully avoided terrible gaffes. Were his opponents strong and united, or the electoral math not as favourable, it would not be enough. But they are, it is, and it will be. Probably.

manofkent2014

Stereotomy said:

On the subject of UKIP, a few times I've seen this idea that when asked about their preference between Labour and Tories, they tend to split pretty evenly. But at the same time, the Tories seem to be losing far more votes to them than Labour.

My reading of this has been that more of the Labour -> Kipper switchers were non-voters than the Tory -> Kipper switchers. Does this seem accurate, or is there some other possibility or information I'm missing?

Many of the seats where UKIP are strongest were under Labour control during the Blair years (or part of them anyway), switched to Tory and now seem to be switching in significant part to UKIP.

So possibly a lot of UKIP voters are swing voters (amongst the 5 million votes Labour lost over those years) who voted for Blair and then Cameron and have rejected both of them. Therefore it doesn't really matter which gets in but as the Coalition is the incumbent and they don't much like this government any change will do.

Carnyx

HurstLlama said:

@Morris_Dancer

" has countries lasting for enormous lengths of time (which tends not to happen very much"

That's an interesting point that I has never even crossed my mind. In Europe how many countries can claim continuous existence as a unified state with more or less the same borders for a thousand years. England certainly, but after that I am struggling. Denmark, perhaps. Maybe you could make a case for Sweden? None of the big ones certainly; France, Germany, Italy, and Spain were all much later inventions. In fact going world wide its very hard to think of more than just Japan and China (and I am not too sure about the latter).

Hmm, Scotland is a better candidate than England (and before you mention 1707 you do know what the Treaty said, and you do call England an "unified state ... thousand years"). Berwick affects both equally but Wales is a lot bigger than the Shetlands and both were absorbed in that timescale!

Sweden has been very variable - used to own much of the Baltic, lost Norway a century ago. Denmark also very variable on that timescale, was it not?

JosiasJessop

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Jessop, circumcision?

Not tonight, thanks. I've had a big meal.

kle4

20) There are some interesting reasons to at least consider it, particularly if Labour would not have a majority without Scottish MPs, but I cannot see Labour accepting that under any circumstances. And if people complained about Brown hanging on in 2010, even though he had to remain in place until it was clear who the new PM would be, what would they say about Cameron in such a situation.

Stereotomy

Socrates said:

Hugh said:

Socrates said:

These are interesting numbers. Expected earnings (employment rate x average wage) by ethnicity.

Men:

Indian: £16,700
White Other: £15,600
White British: £15,200
Black African: £12,300
Black Caribbean: £12,200
Chinese: £11,400
Pakistani: £9,800
Bangladeshi: £8,400

Women:

Black Caribbean: £10,800
Indian: £10,200
Chinese: £10,100
White Other: £9,000
Black African: £7,900
White British: £7,800
Bangladeshi: £3,000
Pakistani: £2,600

"by ethnicity"

Always the most important thing for you Socrates, eh

"These are uncomfortable facts - better imply the person presenting them is racist."

You could work for Rotherham Council.

Interesting that the gender ratio for White British is almost the same as the highest/lowest ethnicity ratio for Men.

Carnyx

Carnyx said:

AndyJS said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Jessop, circumcision?

That wouldn't work, loads of Anglo-Saxon men have been circumcised as a sort of middle-class affectation. Nothing to do with religion.

Also for medical reasons.

PS To emphasise that I was talking (as the context suggested, but to be quite clear) about male circ.

HurstLlama

Carnyx said:

HurstLlama said:

@Morris_Dancer

" has countries lasting for enormous lengths of time (which tends not to happen very much"

That's an interesting point that I has never even crossed my mind. In Europe how many countries can claim continuous existence as a unified state with more or less the same borders for a thousand years. England certainly, but after that I am struggling. Denmark, perhaps. Maybe you could make a case for Sweden? None of the big ones certainly; France, Germany, Italy, and Spain were all much later inventions. In fact going world wide its very hard to think of more than just Japan and China (and I am not too sure about the latter).

Hmm, Scotland is a better candidate than England (and before you mention 1707 you do know what the Treaty said, and you do call England an "unified state ... thousand years"). Berwick affects both equally but Wales is a lot bigger than the Shetlands and both were absorbed in that timescale!

Sweden has been very variable - used to own much of the Baltic, lost Norway a century ago. Denmark also very variable on that timescale, was it not?

Carnyx, the reason I didn't include Scotland was partially the fact that it has not functioned as an independent state for rather a long time (that is what all the present fuss is about after all) and partially that I was sure that it was such a state a thousand years ago. No disrespect, intended.

Sweden added territories and lost them again but its basic borders, ignoring the "colonies" have been very stable for a long time. Whether for the full thousand years I don't know. Ditto Denmark.

anotherDave

Stereotomy said:

On the subject of UKIP, a few times I've seen this idea that when asked about their preference between Labour and Tories, they tend to split pretty evenly. But at the same time, the Tories seem to be losing far more votes to them than Labour.

My reading of this has been that more of the Labour -> Kipper switchers were non-voters than the Tory -> Kipper switchers. Does this seem accurate, or is there some other possibility or information I'm missing?

If you look at just 2010 voters then UKIP has taken more Tories than Labour, but a lot of those 2010 Conservative voters were 2012 Labour voters before they became 2013 UKIP voters. UKIP supporters are swing voters rather than Con/Lab partisans.

Local election results (NEV)

2011: Con 38%, Lab 37%, LD 16%
2012: Con 33%, Lab 39%, LD 15%
2013: Con 26%, Lab 29%, LD 13%, UKIP 22%
2014: Con 30%, Lab 31%, LD 11%, UKIP 18%

http://www.parliament.uk/briefing-papers/RP14-33/local-elections-2014

Stereotomy

anotherDave said:

Stereotomy said:

On the subject of UKIP, a few times I've seen this idea that when asked about their preference between Labour and Tories, they tend to split pretty evenly. But at the same time, the Tories seem to be losing far more votes to them than Labour.

My reading of this has been that more of the Labour -> Kipper switchers were non-voters than the Tory -> Kipper switchers. Does this seem accurate, or is there some other possibility or information I'm missing?

If you look at just 2010 voters then UKIP has taken more Tories than Labour, but a lot of those 2010 Conservative voters were 2012 Labour voters before they became 2013 UKIP voters. UKIP supporters are swing voters rather than Con/Lab partisans.

Local election results (NEV)

2011: Con 38%, Lab 37%, LD 16%
2012: Con 33%, Lab 39%, LD 15%
2013: Con 26%, Lab 29%, LD 13%, UKIP 22%
2014: Con 30%, Lab 31%, LD 11%, UKIP 18%

http://www.parliament.uk/briefing-papers/RP14-33/local-elections-2014

Interesting! That doesn't seem to fit very well with this "battle over the heart of the Right" narriative we've been having since Carswell announced his defection, does it?

isam

Stereotomy said:

On the subject of UKIP, a few times I've seen this idea that when asked about their preference between Labour and Tories, they tend to split pretty evenly. But at the same time, the Tories seem to be losing far more votes to them than Labour.

My reading of this has been that more of the Labour -> Kipper switchers were non-voters than the Tory -> Kipper switchers. Does this seem accurate, or is there some other possibility or information I'm missing?

Some say the Tory to kipper vote is exaggerated because a lot of 2010 Tories were 2005 labour... But I'm no expert

anothernick

kle4 said:

20) There are some interesting reasons to at least consider it, particularly if Labour would not have a majority without Scottish MPs, but I cannot see Labour accepting that under any circumstances. And if people complained about Brown hanging on in 2010, even though he had to remain in place until it was clear who the new PM would be, what would they say about Cameron in such a situation.

A yes vote is more likely to bring forward a general election than postpone it. The political chaos would be such that a new election might be the only way forward. The Fixed term Parliament act could be repealed in a few hours if necessary.

RobD

TheScreamingEagles said:

RobD said:

Are the BBC doing an overnight program? Not sure if I want to watch STV, given their performance during the debate!

Well they plan too, but, bloody Unions.

BBC strike could disrupt Scottish independence referendum coverage

Management draws up contingency plans after unions vote for industrial action in protest at 400 jobs cut proposal

http://www.theguardian.com/media/2014/sep/03/bbc-strike-could-disrupt-scottish-independence-referendum-coverage

Dimbleby should be banned from striking given his importance during such events.

Socrates

isam said:

Stereotomy said:

On the subject of UKIP, a few times I've seen this idea that when asked about their preference between Labour and Tories, they tend to split pretty evenly. But at the same time, the Tories seem to be losing far more votes to them than Labour.

My reading of this has been that more of the Labour -> Kipper switchers were non-voters than the Tory -> Kipper switchers. Does this seem accurate, or is there some other possibility or information I'm missing?

Some say the Tory to kipper vote is exaggerated because a lot of 2010 Tories were 2005 labour... But I'm no expert

Given 2010 was a hung parliament, it's probably the best vote to use: shows the alignment as closest to neutral.

old_labour

McPlato!

HurstLlama

anothernick said:

kle4 said:

20) There are some interesting reasons to at least consider it, particularly if Labour would not have a majority without Scottish MPs, but I cannot see Labour accepting that under any circumstances. And if people complained about Brown hanging on in 2010, even though he had to remain in place until it was clear who the new PM would be, what would they say about Cameron in such a situation.

A yes vote is more likely to bring forward a general election than postpone it. The political chaos would be such that a new election might be the only way forward. The Fixed term Parliament act could be repealed in a few hours if necessary.

Any early election would be fun. The lack of preparedness in the major parties for such an event (as well as in Whitehall generally if my old chums are correct) would have everybody running in all directions. I can't see it, but there would be some interesting bets to be had.

Socrates

Stereotomy said:

Socrates said:

Hugh said:

Socrates said:

These are interesting numbers. Expected earnings (employment rate x average wage) by ethnicity.

Men:

Indian: £16,700
White Other: £15,600
White British: £15,200
Black African: £12,300
Black Caribbean: £12,200
Chinese: £11,400
Pakistani: £9,800
Bangladeshi: £8,400

Women:

Black Caribbean: £10,800
Indian: £10,200
Chinese: £10,100
White Other: £9,000
Black African: £7,900
White British: £7,800
Bangladeshi: £3,000
Pakistani: £2,600

"by ethnicity"

Always the most important thing for you Socrates, eh

"These are uncomfortable facts - better imply the person presenting them is racist."

You could work for Rotherham Council.

Interesting that the gender ratio for White British is almost the same as the highest/lowest ethnicity ratio for Men.

I was also surprised by Black Caribbean women topping the list. Possibly it's because they have the highest rates of single mothers, so a greater share need to work? Just a theory.

The numbers for Bangladeshi and Pakistani women are tremendously low, however. Dan Hodges asked this week why British Muslims hadn't integrated like other groups - well I think this is a big part of the answer. The vast majority of women from this background stay at home in traditional roles, get little exposure to wider British society, and bring up their kids in the culture of their country of origin. A large number of them are also first generation, given that 50% of the men marry women from the country of family origin.

Carnyx

HurstLlama said:

Carnyx said:

HurstLlama said:

@Morris_Dancer

" has countries lasting for enormous lengths of time (which tends not to happen very much"

That's an interesting point that I has never even crossed my mind. In Europe how many countries can claim continuous existence as a unified state with more or less the same borders for a thousand years. England certainly, but after that I am struggling. Denmark, perhaps. Maybe you could make a case for Sweden? None of the big ones certainly; France, Germany, Italy, and Spain were all much later inventions. In fact going world wide its very hard to think of more than just Japan and China (and I am not too sure about the latter).

Hmm, Scotland is a better candidate than England (and before you mention 1707 you do know what the Treaty said, and you do call England an "unified state ... thousand years"). Berwick affects both equally but Wales is a lot bigger than the Shetlands and both were absorbed in that timescale!

Sweden has been very variable - used to own much of the Baltic, lost Norway a century ago. Denmark also very variable on that timescale, was it not?

Carnyx, the reason I didn't include Scotland was partially the fact that it has not functioned as an independent state for rather a long time (that is what all the present fuss is about after all) and partially that I was sure that it was such a state a thousand years ago. No disrespect, intended.

Sweden added territories and lost them again but its basic borders, ignoring the "colonies" have been very stable for a long time. Whether for the full thousand years I don't know. Ditto Denmark.

Quite, and no disrespect assumed either. But then England has not either, on the same logic - it went west in 1707. However, both have had pretty stable borders and continuing legal systems so e.g. no serious doubt about where we are physically, Berwick locals' views perhaps excepted.

Socrates

It's also likely that the white British age profile skews older, so greater percentage of the women conform to more traditional gender profiles.

Omnium

Should the Scots vote Yes then it'll be interesting to see how many Scottish Politicians find themselves (through family circumstances) straying south. I think it'll be a very changed and rather hostile environment for them.

I personally will I think be quite resentful against an independent Scotland. My ancestry is in part Scottish, and I'm sure that my forefathers wouldn't want their contribution to GB to be somehow lost. Generally it seems an unnecessary fuss, and really clashes with my undoubtedly English sensibilities.

The fact that the Independence debates focussed on essentially posturing, rather than real issues about what such decisions may mean for the individuals concerned (all of us) as a mass illustrates how woeful the basis of any decision which may happen in two weeks will be.

The whole thing seems wrong to me - I wouldn't favour votes for my individual organs for independence. There's something of that.

I don't suppose that the SNP will suddenly announce that they've decided to pull out of the process, but overall I think that would be the right thing. Big flag-waving and decision making stuff, but not breaking something a little quitter, but surely much more important.

MonikerDiCanio

First I'd heard of a sinister nationalist grouping named Settler Watch;
http://www.thecourier.co.uk/news/politics/settler-watch-founder-was-among-hecklers-at-jim-murphy-s-montrose-rally-1.548179

FrankBooth

Both Labour and Tories need to think long term about how to act in the event of a Yes. For instance, the idea from some Tory backbenchers to delay the general election looks insane. I certainly can't see how Cameron could hang on in such a situation. For Labour, the idea of them forming a majority government reliant on the votes of Scottish MPs is similarly ridiculous. Both parties could do themselves massive long term damage if they tried either of those things.

A government of national unity might be the only option.

Eh_ehm_a_eh

MonikerDiCanio said:

First I'd heard of a sinister nationalist grouping named Settler Watch;
http://www.thecourier.co.uk/news/politics/settler-watch-founder-was-among-hecklers-at-jim-murphy-s-montrose-rally-1.548179

MonikerDiCanio said:

First I'd heard of a sinister nationalist grouping named Settler Watch;
http://www.thecourier.co.uk/news/politics/settler-watch-founder-was-among-hecklers-at-jim-murphy-s-montrose-rally-1.548179

Been around for years.

Jebediah_Beane1

There has been a lot of Twitter activity about this supposed new Panelbase Poll but then I saw this from Severin Carrell of the Guardian -

twitter.com/severincarrell/status/507168128175194112

Given the lack of movement on Betfair this evening I'm starting to doubt it

MonikerDiCanio

Eh_ehm_a_eh said:

MonikerDiCanio said:

First I'd heard of a sinister nationalist grouping named Settler Watch;
http://www.thecourier.co.uk/news/politics/settler-watch-founder-was-among-hecklers-at-jim-murphy-s-montrose-rally-1.548179

MonikerDiCanio said:

First I'd heard of a sinister nationalist grouping named Settler Watch;
http://www.thecourier.co.uk/news/politics/settler-watch-founder-was-among-hecklers-at-jim-murphy-s-montrose-rally-1.548179

Been around for years.

Are you a member?

Socrates

Among all these stories about leaks of celebrity photos, it's worth remembering this revelation from earlier on in the year:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2697301/Nude-photos-intercepted-NSA-shared-employees-says-whistleblower-Edward-Snowden.html

Eh_ehm_a_eh

MonikerDiCanio said:

Eh_ehm_a_eh said:

MonikerDiCanio said:

First I'd heard of a sinister nationalist grouping named Settler Watch;
http://www.thecourier.co.uk/news/politics/settler-watch-founder-was-among-hecklers-at-jim-murphy-s-montrose-rally-1.548179

MonikerDiCanio said:

First I'd heard of a sinister nationalist grouping named Settler Watch;
http://www.thecourier.co.uk/news/politics/settler-watch-founder-was-among-hecklers-at-jim-murphy-s-montrose-rally-1.548179

Been around for years.

Are you a member?

No I'm Scottish and follow the news in Scotland.

Carnyx

[deleted - finger trouble]

RodCrosby

TheScreamingEagles said:

UPDATE - I've just stuck in link 20

PM could face calls to postpone UK election if Scots vote for independence

Pressure on Cameron to take unprecedented step amid warnings that 'constitutional meltdown' would follow yes vote

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/sep/03/calls-to-postpone-uk-general-election-scots-independence

Finally they're waking up to the problem I've highlighted, most recently here yesterday.

"So which bits of your manifesto, Mr Miliband, are you going to push through before your Scots MPs are culled, and you lose your majority/plurality in the House?"

"Umm..."

foxinsoxuk

15) I do hope they close the disco with the seminal : I feel Liberal, Alright

https://www.google.co.uk/search?ie=UTF-8&client=ms-android-hms-tef-gb&source=android-browser&q=i+feel+liberal+alright&gfe_rd=cr&ei=AHkHVJHUHfTH8gf7qoD4Bw

Liberals do have a track record of musical success.

Track record, geddit? Tumbleweed....

MonikerDiCanio

Eh_ehm_a_eh said:

MonikerDiCanio said:

Eh_ehm_a_eh said:

MonikerDiCanio said:

First I'd heard of a sinister nationalist grouping named Settler Watch;
http://www.thecourier.co.uk/news/politics/settler-watch-founder-was-among-hecklers-at-jim-murphy-s-montrose-rally-1.548179

MonikerDiCanio said:

First I'd heard of a sinister nationalist grouping named Settler Watch;
http://www.thecourier.co.uk/news/politics/settler-watch-founder-was-among-hecklers-at-jim-murphy-s-montrose-rally-1.548179

Been around for years.

Are you a member?

No I'm Scottish and follow the news in Scotland.

From Australia.

FrankBooth

RodCrosby said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

UPDATE - I've just stuck in link 20

PM could face calls to postpone UK election if Scots vote for independence

Pressure on Cameron to take unprecedented step amid warnings that 'constitutional meltdown' would follow yes vote

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/sep/03/calls-to-postpone-uk-general-election-scots-independence

Finally they're waking up to the problem I've highlighted, most recently here yesterday.

"So which bits of your manifesto, Mr Miliband, are you going to push through before your Scots MPs are culled, and you lose your majority/plurality in the House?"

"Umm..."

I really doubt Miliband would be that stupid. And if there was a yes vote, how many MPs would Labour likely get in Scotland? How about 59 SNP?

Hugh

Socrates said:

Stereotomy said:

Socrates said:

Hugh said:

Socrates said:

These are interesting numbers. Expected earnings (employment rate x average wage) by ethnicity.

Men:

Indian: £16,700
White Other: £15,600
White British: £15,200
Black African: £12,300
Black Caribbean: £12,200
Chinese: £11,400
Pakistani: £9,800
Bangladeshi: £8,400

Women:

Black Caribbean: £10,800
Indian: £10,200
Chinese: £10,100
White Other: £9,000
Black African: £7,900
White British: £7,800
Bangladeshi: £3,000
Pakistani: £2,600

"by ethnicity"

Always the most important thing for you Socrates, eh

"These are uncomfortable facts - better imply the person presenting them is racist."

You could work for Rotherham Council.

Interesting that the gender ratio for White British is almost the same as the highest/lowest ethnicity ratio for Men.

I was also surprised by Black Caribbean women topping the list. Possibly it's because they have the highest rates of single mothers, so a greater share need to work? Just a theory.

The numbers for Bangladeshi and Pakistani women are tremendously low, however. Dan Hodges asked this week why British Muslims hadn't integrated like other groups - well I think this is a big part of the answer. The vast majority of women from this background stay at home in traditional roles, get little exposure to wider British society, and bring up their kids in the culture of their country of origin. A large number of them are also first generation, given that 50% of the men marry women from the country of family origin.

Fascinating.

Any more stats "by ethnicity" you've got at your fingertips, Socrates?

isam

JosiasJessop said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Jessop, circumcision?

Not tonight, thanks. I've had a big meal.

Ha good one

Charles

surbiton said:

Socrates said:

These are interesting numbers. Expected earnings (employment rate x average wage) by ethnicity.

Men:

Indian: £16,700
White Other: £15,600
White British: £15,200
Black African: £12,300
Black Caribbean: £12,200
Chinese: £11,400
Pakistani: £9,800
Bangladeshi: £8,400

Women:

Black Caribbean: £10,800
Indian: £10,200
Chinese: £10,100
White Other: £9,000
Black African: £7,900
White British: £7,800
Bangladeshi: £3,000
Pakistani: £2,600

And the national average is £30000 ? Huh ?

I think it's included all the non-workers as well.

National wage is c. £24K (btw - £30K is the London number). From memory around 60% of the population is involved in economic activity, so you'd expect the weighted average of the numbers above to be something like £14,400 which looks about right.

Garbage analysis though

JosiasJessop

Way off-topic:

A number of posters link to XKCD from time to time. XKCD is a cartoon/comic that combines insight, science and geekery to great effect.

The author, Randall, has a new book out tomorrow. It's called 'What If?', and looks quite good:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/What-If-Scientific-Hypothetical-Questions/dp/1848549571/

(Note, I have no connection with Randall or XKCD, aside from having used the following on our wedding invites: http://xkcd.com/55/ )

Danny565

This idea of a "Labour government dependent on Scottish MPs" is probably never going to arise, because the SNP are probably going to have a near-clean sweep of the Scottish seats in the event of a "Yes" vote. I'd imagine even most Scots who voted "No" would pretty quickly convert to the mindset of "well, if this is going to happen, we'd better atleast have the people who'll get the best deal for Scotland in the negotiations for us".

Casino_Royale

Hugh said:

Socrates said:

Stereotomy said:

Socrates said:

Hugh said:

Socrates said:

These are interesting numbers. Expected earnings (employment rate x average wage) by ethnicity.

Men:

Indian: £16,700
White Other: £15,600
White British: £15,200
Black African: £12,300
Black Caribbean: £12,200
Chinese: £11,400
Pakistani: £9,800
Bangladeshi: £8,400

Women:

Black Caribbean: £10,800
Indian: £10,200
Chinese: £10,100
White Other: £9,000
Black African: £7,900
White British: £7,800
Bangladeshi: £3,000
Pakistani: £2,600

"by ethnicity"

Always the most important thing for you Socrates, eh

"These are uncomfortable facts - better imply the person presenting them is racist."

You could work for Rotherham Council.

Interesting that the gender ratio for White British is almost the same as the highest/lowest ethnicity ratio for Men.

I was also surprised by Black Caribbean women topping the list. Possibly it's because they have the highest rates of single mothers, so a greater share need to work? Just a theory.

The numbers for Bangladeshi and Pakistani women are tremendously low, however. Dan Hodges asked this week why British Muslims hadn't integrated like other groups - well I think this is a big part of the answer. The vast majority of women from this background stay at home in traditional roles, get little exposure to wider British society, and bring up their kids in the culture of their country of origin. A large number of them are also first generation, given that 50% of the men marry women from the country of family origin.

Fascinating.

Any more stats "by ethnicity" you've got at your fingertips, Socrates?

Give over, Hugh.

Socrates can speak for himself but, if you disagree, try to engage with him rather than trying to non-so-subtly smear him.

Omnium

FrankBooth said:

Both Labour and Tories need to think long term about how to act in the event of a Yes. For instance, the idea from some Tory backbenchers to delay the general election looks insane. I certainly can't see how Cameron could hang on in such a situation. For Labour, the idea of them forming a majority government reliant on the votes of Scottish MPs is similarly ridiculous. Both parties could do themselves massive long term damage if they tried either of those things.

A government of national unity might be the only option.

Under no circumstances would it be acceptable to have MPs for a foreign state shaping our government.

Charles

HurstLlama said:

@Morris_Dancer

" has countries lasting for enormous lengths of time (which tends not to happen very much"

That's an interesting point that I has never even crossed my mind. In Europe how many countries can claim continuous existence as a unified state with more or less the same borders for a thousand years. England certainly, but after that I am struggling. Denmark, perhaps. Maybe you could make a case for Sweden? None of the big ones certainly; France, Germany, Italy, and Spain were all much later inventions. In fact going world wide its very hard to think of more than just Japan and China (and I am not too sure about the latter).

China is running at close to 1,000 years with its current boundaries (defined by Kubla Khan).

Obviously there was Han civilisation before that, but I'm not sure that anyone united the current landmass.

Carnyx

FrankBooth said:

RodCrosby said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

UPDATE - I've just stuck in link 20

PM could face calls to postpone UK election if Scots vote for independence

Pressure on Cameron to take unprecedented step amid warnings that 'constitutional meltdown' would follow yes vote

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/sep/03/calls-to-postpone-uk-general-election-scots-independence

Finally they're waking up to the problem I've highlighted, most recently here yesterday.

"So which bits of your manifesto, Mr Miliband, are you going to push through before your Scots MPs are culled, and you lose your majority/plurality in the House?"

"Umm..."

I really doubt Miliband would be that stupid. And if there was a yes vote, how many MPs would Labour likely get in Scotland? How about 59 SNP?

Quite. However, even if Labour were to get say 25 MPs for Scots constituencies, do the MPs actually have to resign when indy day comes? Can they be made to do so if they don't want?

I thought MPs were elected for the full term of a parliament irrespective of the constituency so unless a GE is called after indy day, there is no way of prising them out (even should the party leader wish them to). So if there is no GE then Labour MPs can stay on for the full term?

If that is a problem then extending the term for one year sorts that neatly.

Three must be a similar situation with peers.

What happened when Ireland left?

Socrates

Charles said:

HurstLlama said:

@Morris_Dancer

" has countries lasting for enormous lengths of time (which tends not to happen very much"

That's an interesting point that I has never even crossed my mind. In Europe how many countries can claim continuous existence as a unified state with more or less the same borders for a thousand years. England certainly, but after that I am struggling. Denmark, perhaps. Maybe you could make a case for Sweden? None of the big ones certainly; France, Germany, Italy, and Spain were all much later inventions. In fact going world wide its very hard to think of more than just Japan and China (and I am not too sure about the latter).

China is running at close to 1,000 years with its current boundaries (defined by Kubla Khan).

Obviously there was Han civilisation before that, but I'm not sure that anyone united the current landmass.

The Song Dynasty was much smaller:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Song_dynasty

Eh_ehm_a_eh

MonikerDiCanio said:

Eh_ehm_a_eh said:

MonikerDiCanio said:

Eh_ehm_a_eh said:

MonikerDiCanio said:

First I'd heard of a sinister nationalist grouping named Settler Watch;
http://www.thecourier.co.uk/news/politics/settler-watch-founder-was-among-hecklers-at-jim-murphy-s-montrose-rally-1.548179

MonikerDiCanio said:

First I'd heard of a sinister nationalist grouping named Settler Watch;
http://www.thecourier.co.uk/news/politics/settler-watch-founder-was-among-hecklers-at-jim-murphy-s-montrose-rally-1.548179

Been around for years.

Are you a member?

No I'm Scottish and follow the news in Scotland.

From Australia.

Dundee was in Scotland this morning. Have i missed a cataclysmic event?

MonikerDiCanio

Eh_ehm_a_eh said:

MonikerDiCanio said:

Eh_ehm_a_eh said:

MonikerDiCanio said:

Eh_ehm_a_eh said:

MonikerDiCanio said:

First I'd heard of a sinister nationalist grouping named Settler Watch;
http://www.thecourier.co.uk/news/politics/settler-watch-founder-was-among-hecklers-at-jim-murphy-s-montrose-rally-1.548179

MonikerDiCanio said:

First I'd heard of a sinister nationalist grouping named Settler Watch;
http://www.thecourier.co.uk/news/politics/settler-watch-founder-was-among-hecklers-at-jim-murphy-s-montrose-rally-1.548179

Been around for years.

Are you a member?

No I'm Scottish and follow the news in Scotland.

From Australia.

Dundee was in Scotland this morning. Have i missed a cataclysmic event?

Crocodile Dundee.