Howdy, Stranger!

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

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The winner of the PB Indyref competition is….

SystemSystem Posts: 11,705
edited September 2014 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The winner of the PB Indyref competition is….

Many thanks once again to Shadsy of Ladbrokes politics for donating the prize, and Mark Hopkins for developing the software for us to submit our entries.

Read the full story here


«1345

Comments

  • Options
    First ..... again!
  • Options
    Congratulations, Mr. Evershed.

    Hope to get the pre-race piece up sometime before 8pm.
  • Options
    MTimTMTimT Posts: 7,034
    Looks like Conor Ryan should have a special shout out for being just .02% out on the result and .06% out on turnout. Spectacular, sir!
  • Options
    Danny565Danny565 Posts: 8,091
    Interested to see the polls. I feel the Tories may have got a bounce, but mainly because of just the referendum result itself rather than this guff about EV4EL (which I still maintain will seem of little relevance to anything to most people outside the Westminster bubble).
  • Options
    FPT -
    AllyM said:

    Howard said:

    I am very impressed by Gordon Brown's intellectual depth. He is interesting to listen to, and I enjoyed his speech today. I think he does deserve respect, I think he stepped forward to save the Union when the time came.

    Best I've seen of Brown. Made the quiet Darling look like a real wimp in terms of fighting to keep the Union.

    I'm giving a piece of credit to Brown and I've never voted Labour and probably never will.

    Yes. Brown very much among the winners of the referendum. Darling very much not, likewise Lamont. Murphy for me the star of Labour's show - given that he's for some reason fallen from Miliband's good books, can Scottish Labour co-opt him for 2016?
  • Options
    You have to feel sorry for Conor Ryan who was only out by a COMBINED difference of 0.08% on the Yes vote (0.02%) and the turnout level (0.06%). Quite remarkable!
    Do you have any betting tips Ryan?
  • Options
    Betting Post

    Backed Ricciardo for the win at 10.5, hedged at 4:
    http://enormo-haddock.blogspot.co.uk/2014/09/singapore-pre-race.html
  • Options
    RobCRobC Posts: 398
    Congrats to the winner - I certainly didn't expect Yes to fall below 45%. I'm more annoyed though that I didn't place something on Ecks's early departure. Does anyone recall the pre referendum day odds on this?
  • Options
    CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,941
    edited September 2014
    FPT

    Carnyx said:

    Brown is deluded. He is up there in Scotland saying all this stuff will be delivered but he has absolutely no power to make it so. He said today that if the promises are not kept then the parties will pay at the ballot box. Given that the Tories and Lib Dems are in power and will be far more concerned about keeping England happy than Scotland.

    So how exactly is a failed politician languishing on the back benches going to force the rest of Parliament and the Government to do his bidding. (And thats before we even get to the Lords)

    The man is a complete fool.

    Perhaps tomorrow the Sunday papers will have more details of what Brown agreed with Cameron and Clegg. Pb commenters would have us believe the first the government knew of any commitment to new powers was when they saw Brown's speech on Youtube. It probably wasn't really like that.
    It doesn't matter. Brown's own party is going to make sure he can't keep his promises because they will not budge on EV4EL and will try to kick everything into the long grass.

    I don't doubt Brown's commitment but he is just mad to think that he can push this throughh by force of will.

    It is also worth pointing out that no one even knows what is going to be offered as 'Devomax'. Certainly what the SNP and Yes are claiming it means (basically everything except Defence and Foreign affairs) is a very long way from what most people on here seem to think.
    That was certainly the meaning of devomax being used in the early stages of the debate, so it's not a new thing at all. Any more and we Scots'd be independent.
    I agree. I am just not sure that that has sunk in with a lot of other people yet.
    Thanks. My memory is quite clear on that point but I am very pleased to have it confirmed, and agree with your own comment too.

    The trouble will really come if the Scots rightly suspect that the devomax on offer is nothing of the sort - but the rest of the UK will get fired up about all this 'devomax' being given to us Scots.

    It may have been deliberate obfuscation to get through to 19 September, but the confusion isn't going to help reach a rational result. This is am absolutely crucial terminological issue, IMO.

    [edit} and congrats to the winner too.
  • Options

    You have to feel sorry for Conor Ryan who was only out by a COMBINED difference of 0.08% on the Yes vote (0.02%) and the turnout level (0.06%). Quite remarkable!
    Do you have any betting tips Ryan?

    Yes I noticed that. Being a dimwit I thought that was actually the aim of the competition to minimise the combined score.
  • Options
    Congrats to the winner - and enjoying seeing the ranks of 'out of touch Unionists who know nothing about Scotland' comprehensively trounce the self appointed 'finger on the pulse' Nats.....
  • Options
    RobC said:

    Congrats to the winner - I certainly didn't expect Yes to fall below 45%. I'm more annoyed though that I didn't place something on Ecks's early departure. Does anyone recall the pre referendum day odds on this?

    3/1 - I think.

    I'm fairly certain back in 2012, there was a market on which leader would go first, Salmond, Clegg, Miliband and Cameron, and you could have got around 8/1 on Salmond.
  • Options
    JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    PBers may wish to avail themselves of the generous odds of the LibDems winning Watford now that Dorothy Thornhill has been selected as their PPC.

    It'll not last long ....
  • Options
    AllyMAllyM Posts: 260
    Well done to the winner. Excellent.

    4.13 out overall for me (both Yes and Turnout combined) - not a shameful effort.
  • Options
    JackW said:

    PBers may wish to avail themselves of the generous odds of the LibDems winning Watford now that Dorothy Thornhill has been selected as their PPC.

    It'll not last long ....

    Remind me of your prediction in Watford last time?

    *Innocent face*

    I do agree with your assessment this time though.
  • Options
    EasterrossEasterross Posts: 1,915

    FPT -

    AllyM said:

    Howard said:

    I am very impressed by Gordon Brown's intellectual depth. He is interesting to listen to, and I enjoyed his speech today. I think he does deserve respect, I think he stepped forward to save the Union when the time came.

    Best I've seen of Brown. Made the quiet Darling look like a real wimp in terms of fighting to keep the Union.

    I'm giving a piece of credit to Brown and I've never voted Labour and probably never will.

    Yes. Brown very much among the winners of the referendum. Darling very much not, likewise Lamont. Murphy for me the star of Labour's show - given that he's for some reason fallen from Miliband's good books, can Scottish Labour co-opt him for 2016?
    Sorry but what precisely did Brown achieve? 37% of Scottish Labour voters voted YES. Labour's 2 worst rotten burghs in Scotland, Glasgow and North Lanarkshire voted YES. That looks like a resounding failure to me.

    However Brown may have just driven the first spike into the coffin of the Scottish Labour Party. The YESNP and chums seem to have created a new movement called The 45. Since Thursday 5,000 people have joined the SNP and members of the Labour Party have been putting pictures on Twitter of them burning their Labour card memberships.

    EV4EL will be a major issue if the Tories make it one. It is ludicrous that Scottish Labour MPs can vote on Health, Education etc issues for England but they cannot vote on them as regards their own constituents, never mind whether English MPs can. That is the really offensive thing about the current arrangements. To be fair the SNP and Scots Tory MPs do not vote on English matters.

    Darling's success was in getting moderate Labour people to campaign side by side with Tories and LibDems. Brown was his usual divisive self, being instrumental in Labour creating its own separate organisation which proved to be an unmitigated failure. Very noticeable that SLAB's leader Johann Lamont saw her own constituents vote YES. Nicola Sturgeon will make mincemeat of her at First Ministers Questions.

    Which polls are we expecting tonight?
  • Options

    Congrats to the winner - and enjoying seeing the ranks of 'out of touch Unionists who know nothing about Scotland' comprehensively trounce the self appointed 'finger on the pulse' Nats.....

    My favourite tweets of recent times.

    David Aaronovitch ‏@DAaronovitch 22h

    50.001% Yes would have meant Scottish separation in perpetuity. Apparently a No win by 10.6% lasts only until the Yes campaign wants it to.

    Aric Gilinsky @AGilinsky · 9h

    45% of Scotland votes Yes, "So close!" while 46.5% of Glasgow votes No and "Yes by a country mile."
  • Options
    RobC said:

    Congrats to the winner - I certainly didn't expect Yes to fall below 45%. I'm more annoyed though that I didn't place something on Ecks's early departure. Does anyone recall the pre referendum day odds on this?

    Rob - Here are Ladorokes' odds on 27 July on which Party Leader would leave office first :

    Clegg ........... 7/4
    Salmond ....... 9/4
    Farage .......... 4/1
    Cameron ...... 5/1
    Miliband ....... 6/1
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    RobC said:

    Congrats to the winner - I certainly didn't expect Yes to fall below 45%. I'm more annoyed though that I didn't place something on Ecks's early departure. Does anyone recall the pre referendum day odds on this?

    Shadsy had 5/1 as I recall.

    I thought he would go; but not within 48 hours
  • Options
    AllyMAllyM Posts: 260

    FPT -

    AllyM said:

    Howard said:

    I am very impressed by Gordon Brown's intellectual depth. He is interesting to listen to, and I enjoyed his speech today. I think he does deserve respect, I think he stepped forward to save the Union when the time came.

    Best I've seen of Brown. Made the quiet Darling look like a real wimp in terms of fighting to keep the Union.

    I'm giving a piece of credit to Brown and I've never voted Labour and probably never will.

    Yes. Brown very much among the winners of the referendum. Darling very much not, likewise Lamont. Murphy for me the star of Labour's show - given that he's for some reason fallen from Miliband's good books, can Scottish Labour co-opt him for 2016?
    Sorry but what precisely did Brown achieve? 37% of Scottish Labour voters voted YES. Labour's 2 worst rotten burghs in Scotland, Glasgow and North Lanarkshire voted YES. That looks like a resounding failure to me.

    However Brown may have just driven the first spike into the coffin of the Scottish Labour Party. The YESNP and chums seem to have created a new movement called The 45. Since Thursday 5,000 people have joined the SNP and members of the Labour Party have been putting pictures on Twitter of them burning their Labour card memberships.

    EV4EL will be a major issue if the Tories make it one. It is ludicrous that Scottish Labour MPs can vote on Health, Education etc issues for England but they cannot vote on them as regards their own constituents, never mind whether English MPs can. That is the really offensive thing about the current arrangements. To be fair the SNP and Scots Tory MPs do not vote on English matters.

    Darling's success was in getting moderate Labour people to campaign side by side with Tories and LibDems. Brown was his usual divisive self, being instrumental in Labour creating its own separate organisation which proved to be an unmitigated failure. Very noticeable that SLAB's leader Johann Lamont saw her own constituents vote YES. Nicola Sturgeon will make mincemeat of her at First Ministers Questions.

    Which polls are we expecting tonight?
    This new 45 'craze' and people joining the SNP, SSP and SGreens; I have to ask how long this will last?

    I also have to ask, will it last, in large numbers, for at least 2 years?

    Feels like a hard left group, a la SSP, in the making.
  • Options
    JackWJackW Posts: 14,787

    JackW said:

    PBers may wish to avail themselves of the generous odds of the LibDems winning Watford now that Dorothy Thornhill has been selected as their PPC.

    It'll not last long ....

    Remind me of your prediction in Watford last time?

    *Innocent face*

    I do agree with your assessment this time though.
    Indeed.

    I still don't logically understand that result and I've put it down to a combination of the cussedness of the Watford electorate, a highly effective ballot stuffing operation by the lizard people and Sean Fear and his then Conservative prayer mat.



  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,602
    edited September 2014
    JackW said:

    JackW said:

    PBers may wish to avail themselves of the generous odds of the LibDems winning Watford now that Dorothy Thornhill has been selected as their PPC.

    It'll not last long ....

    Remind me of your prediction in Watford last time?

    *Innocent face*

    I do agree with your assessment this time though.
    Indeed.

    I still don't logically understand that result and I've put it down to a combination of the cussedness of the Watford electorate, a highly effective ballot stuffing operation by the lizard people and Sean Fear and his then Conservative prayer mat.

    There were a few weird results in the Lib/Con fights last time, my most unexpected winners were Con gain Winchester and LD gain Wells.

    I'm not sure how the Tories gained Winchester, and I backed the LDs in Wells for all the wrong reasons, but it was all down to the Kippers that one.
  • Options
    manofkent2014manofkent2014 Posts: 1,543
    edited September 2014
    Danny565 said:

    Interested to see the polls. I feel the Tories may have got a bounce, but mainly because of just the referendum result itself rather than this guff about EV4EL (which I still maintain will seem of little relevance to anything to most people outside the Westminster bubble).

    EVfEL recognises the English democratic deficit just sufficiently to use it (by highlighting the rest of the deficit and particularly Barnett aka International Aid for the Home Nations) to beat Westminster and the Tories over the head with it
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    JackW said:

    JackW said:

    PBers may wish to avail themselves of the generous odds of the LibDems winning Watford now that Dorothy Thornhill has been selected as their PPC.

    It'll not last long ....

    Remind me of your prediction in Watford last time?

    *Innocent face*

    I do agree with your assessment this time though.
    Indeed.

    I still don't logically understand that result and I've put it down to a combination of the cussedness of the Watford electorate, a highly effective ballot stuffing operation by the lizard people and Sean Fear and his then Conservative prayer mat.



    May I thank you for your advice. I made a net profit of 127.40, having backed your McARSE on the band 40-45% and turnout 80-85% as my main bets.

    Shadsy needn't cry too much, he will get it back! He always does in the end.

    I hope your recovery is both swift and complete and your ARSE in form next year!
  • Options
    By the end of the week people will be claiming it was Boris who shored up the No vote.
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,602
    edited September 2014

    By the end of the week people will be claiming it was Boris who shored up the No vote.

    Don't misunderestime the power of this intervention of Boris.

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BxRdVuoIQAAKtpt.jpg:large

    (For the great unwashed that aren't fluent in Latin, It says London loves Scotland, don't leave us )

    The great reality of it is, it was George Osborne what won it, the polling shows that.

    I have a thread for next week, entitled

    George Osborne: The man who saved the Union.
  • Options
    Yes, thanks from me too Jack. Despite all the doubters, SeanT et al, I was heavily into the 40% - 45% Yes band, largely on account of your unwavering conviction as regards the final outcome.
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,602
    edited September 2014

    Yes, thanks from me too Jack. Despite all the doubters, SeanT et al, I was heavily into the 40% - 45% Yes band, largely on account of your unwavering conviction as regards the final outcome.

    Indeed, you yourself made a very profitable tip, back in July, which I followed you in.

    40% - 45% Yes Vote ....... Stake 58% at 9/4 (3.25 decimal)
    35% - 40% Tes Vote ....... Stake 42% at 7/2 (4.50 decimal)

    So thank you.

    Do you know the very funny thing about that tip, someone, who shall remain nameless, in reply to your post said this

    "That post confirms something that has been obvious for a long time: non-Scots, even poilitically knowledgable ones, are in for a shock on 19 September."
  • Options
    JackWJackW Posts: 14,787

    JackW said:

    JackW said:

    PBers may wish to avail themselves of the generous odds of the LibDems winning Watford now that Dorothy Thornhill has been selected as their PPC.

    It'll not last long ....

    Remind me of your prediction in Watford last time?

    *Innocent face*

    I do agree with your assessment this time though.
    Indeed.

    I still don't logically understand that result and I've put it down to a combination of the cussedness of the Watford electorate, a highly effective ballot stuffing operation by the lizard people and Sean Fear and his then Conservative prayer mat.

    There were a few weird results in the Lib/Con fights last time, my most unexpected winners were Con gain Winchester and LD gain Wells.

    I'm not sure how the Tories gained Winchester, and I backed the LDs in Wells for all the wrong reasons, but it was all down to the Kippers that one.
    Winchester was a Tory gain because of a local LibDem sh*t storm.

  • Options
    RobCRobC Posts: 398
    edited September 2014
    One unlikely Con/LD battleground in 2015 might be Maidstone. In 2010 the Tory majority fell sharply and since then first time MP and junior minister Helen Grant has not proved to be particularly popular, the LDs are are putting resources in and have an excellent PPC. Also there was a good recent local election in a formerly Tory ward. Obviously still a bit of a long shot but might be worth an outside punt.
  • Options

    Yes, thanks from me too Jack. Despite all the doubters, SeanT et al, I was heavily into the 40% - 45% Yes band, largely on account of your unwavering conviction as regards the final outcome.

    Indeed, you yourself made a very profitable tip, back in July, which I followed you in.

    40% - 45% Yes Vote ....... Stake 58% at 9/4 (3.25 decimal)
    35% - 40% Tes Vote ....... Stake 42% at 7/2 (4.50 decimal)

    So thank you.

    Do you know the very funny thing about that tip, someone, who shall remain nameless, in reply to your post said this

    "That post confirms something that has been obvious for a long time: non-Scots, even poilitically knowledgable ones, are in for a shock on 19 September."
    TSE - Yes, I do indeed remember that comment as well as its author. Still at least he paid me a back-handed compliment.
  • Options
    manofkent2014manofkent2014 Posts: 1,543
    edited September 2014
    A little ditty I've put together (to the tune of ten green bottles):

    66 Labour MPs sitting on a bench,
    66 Labour MPs sitting on a bench,
    And If the Tories wangle EVfEL,
    The Labour Party's Spent,
    There'll Be Zero Labour MP's sitting on that bench.
  • Options

    By the end of the week people will be claiming it was Boris who shored up the No vote.

    Don't misunderestime the power of this intervention of Boris.

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BxRdVuoIQAAKtpt.jpg:large

    (For the great unwashed that aren't fluent in Latin, It says London loves Scotland, don't leave us )

    The great reality of it is, it was George Osborne what won it, the polling shows that.

    I have a thread for next week, entitled

    George Osborne: The man who saved the Union.
    I'm not sure about that. It would not surprise me if the current furore over EV4EL is not an Osborne wheeze.
  • Options
    TheWatcherTheWatcher Posts: 5,262
    edited September 2014

    Yes, thanks from me too Jack. Despite all the doubters, SeanT et al, I was heavily into the 40% - 45% Yes band, largely on account of your unwavering conviction as regards the final outcome.

    Indeed, you yourself made a very profitable tip, back in July, which I followed you in.

    40% - 45% Yes Vote ....... Stake 58% at 9/4 (3.25 decimal)
    35% - 40% Tes Vote ....... Stake 42% at 7/2 (4.50 decimal)

    So thank you.

    Do you know the very funny thing about that tip, someone, who shall remain nameless, in reply to your post said this

    "That post confirms something that has been obvious for a long time: non-Scots, even poilitically knowledgable ones, are in for a shock on 19 September."
    Has Stuart 'Clueless wonders are in for a shock' Dickson been seen since Thursday?
  • Options



    Has Stuart 'Clueless wonders are in for a shock' Dickson been seen since Thursday?

    Tipping point
  • Options
    TheWatcherTheWatcher Posts: 5,262
    edited September 2014



    Has Stuart 'Clueless wonders are in for a shock' Dickson been seen since Thursday?

    Tipping point
    Repeated 30 times as the day progressed.

    Hubris.
  • Options
    SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322

    Yes, thanks from me too Jack. Despite all the doubters, SeanT et al, I was heavily into the 40% - 45% Yes band, largely on account of your unwavering conviction as regards the final outcome.

    Indeed, you yourself made a very profitable tip, back in July, which I followed you in.

    40% - 45% Yes Vote ....... Stake 58% at 9/4 (3.25 decimal)
    35% - 40% Tes Vote ....... Stake 42% at 7/2 (4.50 decimal)

    So thank you.

    Do you know the very funny thing about that tip, someone, who shall remain nameless, in reply to your post said this

    "That post confirms something that has been obvious for a long time: non-Scots, even poilitically knowledgable ones, are in for a shock on 19 September."
    Has Stuart 'Clueless wonders are in for a shock' Dickson been seen since Thursday?
    No. And this is despite the fact that during one goading I asked him to promise he would be here after the results came in, and he guaranteed he would. malcolmg, for all his failings, was man enough to show his face afterwards. Stuart has been completely feart. And we all know he would be all over here if he had won. What a loser.
  • Options
    JackWJackW Posts: 14,787

    JackW said:

    JackW said:

    PBers may wish to avail themselves of the generous odds of the LibDems winning Watford now that Dorothy Thornhill has been selected as their PPC.

    It'll not last long ....

    Remind me of your prediction in Watford last time?

    *Innocent face*

    I do agree with your assessment this time though.
    Indeed.

    I still don't logically understand that result and I've put it down to a combination of the cussedness of the Watford electorate, a highly effective ballot stuffing operation by the lizard people and Sean Fear and his then Conservative prayer mat.



    May I thank you for your advice. I made a net profit of 127.40, having backed your McARSE on the band 40-45% and turnout 80-85% as my main bets.

    Shadsy needn't cry too much, he will get it back! He always does in the end.

    I hope your recovery is both swift and complete and your ARSE in form next year!
    Thank you.

    In fairness I was disappointed with the final projected YES number albeit from 5 weeks out. McARSE was trending to YES but back in mid August I had to make a judgement on how far this would go and also the reaction of NO inclined voters in differential turnout.

    Having dialled in these factors I underestimated the scope of the trend and also the differential turnout. Glasgow and Dundee refers. That said a final McARSE would have put YES at around 43.5% so still out by a few points, which isn't good enough really even allowing for the individual nature of a hugely important binary referendum.

    The turnout markets were pretty easy from day one, so almost free money there.

    Glad you and so many others made a few shillings and I'll do my best to ensure my ARSE does likewise for the general election when it returns at the back end of October.



  • Options

    Yes, thanks from me too Jack. Despite all the doubters, SeanT et al, I was heavily into the 40% - 45% Yes band, largely on account of your unwavering conviction as regards the final outcome.

    Indeed, you yourself made a very profitable tip, back in July, which I followed you in.

    40% - 45% Yes Vote ....... Stake 58% at 9/4 (3.25 decimal)
    35% - 40% Tes Vote ....... Stake 42% at 7/2 (4.50 decimal)

    So thank you.

    Do you know the very funny thing about that tip, someone, who shall remain nameless, in reply to your post said this

    "That post confirms something that has been obvious for a long time: non-Scots, even poilitically knowledgable ones, are in for a shock on 19 September."
    TSE - Yes, I do indeed remember that comment as well as its author. Still at least he paid me a back-handed compliment.
    Well following you has always been fun and profitable.

    I also do owe you an apology, for not hat tipping you in my Hammond bet thread a few weeks ago, it was an oversight, not deliberate, and shouldn't have happened. Has been hectic times for those who have been writing PB threads this last month. But again apologies.

    I assure you, it won't happen in the future.
  • Options

    By the end of the week people will be claiming it was Boris who shored up the No vote.

    Don't misunderestime the power of this intervention of Boris.

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BxRdVuoIQAAKtpt.jpg:large

    (For the great unwashed that aren't fluent in Latin, It says London loves Scotland, don't leave us )

    The great reality of it is, it was George Osborne what won it, the polling shows that.

    I have a thread for next week, entitled

    George Osborne: The man who saved the Union.
    I'm not sure about that. It would not surprise me if the current furore over EV4EL is not an Osborne wheeze.
    Here's the polling,

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Bx4qVWJIYAAbJ6V.jpg:large
  • Options
    TheWatcherTheWatcher Posts: 5,262
    edited September 2014
    Socrates said:

    Yes, thanks from me too Jack. Despite all the doubters, SeanT et al, I was heavily into the 40% - 45% Yes band, largely on account of your unwavering conviction as regards the final outcome.

    Indeed, you yourself made a very profitable tip, back in July, which I followed you in.

    40% - 45% Yes Vote ....... Stake 58% at 9/4 (3.25 decimal)
    35% - 40% Tes Vote ....... Stake 42% at 7/2 (4.50 decimal)

    So thank you.

    Do you know the very funny thing about that tip, someone, who shall remain nameless, in reply to your post said this

    "That post confirms something that has been obvious for a long time: non-Scots, even poilitically knowledgable ones, are in for a shock on 19 September."
    Has Stuart 'Clueless wonders are in for a shock' Dickson been seen since Thursday?
    No. And this is despite the fact that during one goading I asked him to promise he would be here after the results came in, and he guaranteed he would. malcolmg, for all his failings, was man enough to show his face afterwards. Stuart has been completely feart. And we all know he would be all over here if he had won. What a loser.
    Malcolm's a wind up merchant, but Dickson took it to another level, and crashed and burned in a quite spectacular fashion. I'd be surprised if he posted here again, having fallen flat on his erchie.
  • Options
    FenmanFenman Posts: 1,047
    My top tip for solving the West Lothian question. We all register online as West Lothian voters....
  • Options
    SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    Given the recent goings-on at Calais, isn't it about time we give up the amnesty for immigrants that manage to avoid the UKBA for twenty years? Given the UKBA's incompetence it's clearly a huge incentive increasing the number of illegal immigrants coming here.

    ‘Everyone in Eritrea knows you have to get to Britain, not Italy or France. I have friends there sleeping on the streets, and they have nothing to eat. In Calais, people are sleeping in the street. I know in the UK I will get something to eat and a bed to sleep in.’

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2761600/The-madness-hotel-asylum-600-migrants-crammed-98-rooms-London-hotel-500-000-bill-paid-YOU.html
  • Options
    Danny565Danny565 Posts: 8,091

    JackW said:

    PBers may wish to avail themselves of the generous odds of the LibDems winning Watford now that Dorothy Thornhill has been selected as their PPC.

    It'll not last long ....

    Remind me of your prediction in Watford last time?

    *Innocent face*

    I do agree with your assessment this time though.
    It would be amusing to see the Lib Dems gain Watford, at the same time as losing Sheffield Hallam.
  • Options
    Danny565 said:

    JackW said:

    PBers may wish to avail themselves of the generous odds of the LibDems winning Watford now that Dorothy Thornhill has been selected as their PPC.

    It'll not last long ....

    Remind me of your prediction in Watford last time?

    *Innocent face*

    I do agree with your assessment this time though.
    It would be amusing to see the Lib Dems gain Watford, at the same time as losing Sheffield Hallam.
    I've backed LD gains in Oxford West and somewhere else I've forgotten.
  • Options
    JackWJackW Posts: 14,787

    Yes, thanks from me too Jack. Despite all the doubters, SeanT et al, I was heavily into the 40% - 45% Yes band, largely on account of your unwavering conviction as regards the final outcome.

    You and all others are most welcome .....

    ...............................................................

    I'm getting the evil eye ....

    Off to bed early .... almost like the old days ....

    Titter .....

  • Options
    SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322

    Socrates said:

    Yes, thanks from me too Jack. Despite all the doubters, SeanT et al, I was heavily into the 40% - 45% Yes band, largely on account of your unwavering conviction as regards the final outcome.

    Indeed, you yourself made a very profitable tip, back in July, which I followed you in.

    40% - 45% Yes Vote ....... Stake 58% at 9/4 (3.25 decimal)
    35% - 40% Tes Vote ....... Stake 42% at 7/2 (4.50 decimal)

    So thank you.

    Do you know the very funny thing about that tip, someone, who shall remain nameless, in reply to your post said this

    "That post confirms something that has been obvious for a long time: non-Scots, even poilitically knowledgable ones, are in for a shock on 19 September."
    Has Stuart 'Clueless wonders are in for a shock' Dickson been seen since Thursday?
    No. And this is despite the fact that during one goading I asked him to promise he would be here after the results came in, and he guaranteed he would. malcolmg, for all his failings, was man enough to show his face afterwards. Stuart has been completely feart. And we all know he would be all over here if he had won. What a loser.
    Malcolm's a wind up merchant, but Dickson took it to another level, and crashed and burned in a quite spectacular fashion. I'd be surprised if he posted here again, having fallen flat on his erchie.
    It would have been bad enough normally, but he specifically promised he'd turn up whatever the result. He's clearly as much a bare faced liar as Alex Salmond is.
  • Options
    RogerRoger Posts: 18,904

    Five things we learned during the independence referendum



    '1. When a notoriously unpleasant Hollywood producer died thousands of people turned out for his funeral. Quizzed by a fellow mourner as to why someone so unpopular should attract such a crowd, one wit quipped: ‘Give the public what they want …’

    http://www.progressonline.org.uk/2014/09/19/what-we-have-learned-during-the-referendum/
  • Options
    SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    SeanT said:



    Has Stuart 'Clueless wonders are in for a shock' Dickson been seen since Thursday?

    Tipping point
    I also loved The Union Divvie's single word - "boom" - as a poll came up, coupla days before the vote, showing another YES lead.

    Turned out it was a typo, and NO was in the lead.

    "Boom.

    Oh."

    Credit to Carnyx for coming on here and being a man, the rest of the Nats have turned out to be the most pathetic bunch of girl scouts, running away from the Unionist spider. All kilt and no sporran. A spineless mob of fanny-featured jessies. Hilarious.
    No wonder they lost. Scottish nationalists have no backbone. I wouldn't have trusted them to run my country either.
  • Options
    Y0kelY0kel Posts: 2,307
    Stories have it Alan Henning has been killed by IS outside Raqqa.
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    JackW said:

    JackW said:

    JackW said:

    PBers may wish to avail themselves of the generous odds of the LibDems winning Watford now that Dorothy Thornhill has been selected as their PPC.

    It'll not last long ....

    Remind me of your prediction in Watford last time?

    *Innocent face*

    I do agree with your assessment this time though.
    Indeed.

    I still don't logically understand that result and I've put it down to a combination of the cussedness of the Watford electorate, a highly effective ballot stuffing operation by the lizard people and Sean Fear and his then Conservative prayer mat.



    May I thank you for your advice. I made a net profit of 127.40, having backed your McARSE on the band 40-45% and turnout 80-85% as my main bets.

    Shadsy needn't cry too much, he will get it back! He always does in the end.

    I hope your recovery is both swift and complete and your ARSE in form next year!
    Thank you.

    In fairness I was disappointed with the final projected YES number albeit from 5 weeks out. McARSE was trending to YES but back in mid August I had to make a judgement on how far this would go and also the reaction of NO inclined voters in differential turnout.

    Having dialled in these factors I underestimated the scope of the trend and also the differential turnout. Glasgow and Dundee refers. That said a final McARSE would have put YES at around 43.5% so still out by a few points, which isn't good enough really even allowing for the individual nature of a hugely important binary referendum.

    The turnout markets were pretty easy from day one, so almost free money there.

    Glad you and so many others made a few shillings and I'll do my best to ensure my ARSE does likewise for the general election when it returns at the back end of October.



    I noticed the MCARSE had been drifting towards the low 40's for a while. Hence my own forecast of 44.33%, placing me 36/361. Not bad, but I was at the bottom of 3rd page on turnout.

    Best wishes.
  • Options
    SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    I see the suspect in the possible murder of Alice Gross was previously arrested for the indecent assault of a 14 year old girl in London.

    http://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/missing-alice-gross-arnis-zalkalns-now-a-suspect-as-met-release-cctv-of-latvian-builder-cycling-near-canal-path-9740096.html

    It is utterly stunning that we allow convicted murderers into the UK. Will Cameron commit to removing free movement from serious criminals as part of his negotiations? It's one of the few things he could probably actually achieve.
  • Options
    HurstLlamaHurstLlama Posts: 9,098
    RobC said:

    One unlikely Con/LD battleground in 2015 might be Maidstone. In 2010 the Tory majority fell sharply and since then first time MP and junior minister Helen Grant has not proved to be particularly popular, the LDs are are putting resources in and have an excellent PPC. Also there was a good recent local election in a formerly Tory ward. Obviously still a bit of a long shot but might be worth an outside punt.

    Mr. C., thanks for pointing out Maidstone as a possible earner. I see that the majority was about 6k compared to 14k in 2005 so something is going on even discounting the Ann Widdecombe personal vote. Do you have any idea how active UKIP is in the area?
  • Options
    Y0kel said:

    Stories have it Alan Henning has been killed by IS outside Raqqa.

    According to the brief look I had at Tapestry's blog, it was Henning in the second part of the Haines video anyway. And according to Sean T, all the videos were filmed together.

    Either way, what we're seeing is an idiotic pantomime we should pay no heed to whatever.
  • Options
    manofkent2014manofkent2014 Posts: 1,543
    edited September 2014
    Socrates said:

    Given the recent goings-on at Calais, isn't it about time we give up the amnesty for immigrants that manage to avoid the UKBA for twenty years? Given the UKBA's incompetence it's clearly a huge incentive increasing the number of illegal immigrants coming here.

    ‘Everyone in Eritrea knows you have to get to Britain, not Italy or France. I have friends there sleeping on the streets, and they have nothing to eat. In Calais, people are sleeping in the street. I know in the UK I will get something to eat and a bed to sleep in.’

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2761600/The-madness-hotel-asylum-600-migrants-crammed-98-rooms-London-hotel-500-000-bill-paid-YOU.html

    Its not the UKBA;s fault really. They are risibly underfunded to actually have the necessary resources to do the levels of searches necessary at Dover. Blame Osborne, Alexander, May and the Home Office.

    Locating them in Gatwick when they arrived in Dover is just insane. Its about time May forced the Immigration bureaucrats out of Looney (Lunar) House and put them where they are needed (Ports, Train stations and Airports)

    PS I thought May had announced she was scrapping the Border force's Agency status and bringing it in house?
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    SeanT said:

    Socrates said:

    SeanT said:



    Has Stuart 'Clueless wonders are in for a shock' Dickson been seen since Thursday?

    Tipping point
    I also loved The Union Divvie's single word - "boom" - as a poll came up, coupla days before the vote, showing another YES lead.

    Turned out it was a typo, and NO was in the lead.

    "Boom.

    Oh."

    Credit to Carnyx for coming on here and being a man, the rest of the Nats have turned out to be the most pathetic bunch of girl scouts, running away from the Unionist spider. All kilt and no sporran. A spineless mob of fanny-featured jessies. Hilarious.
    No wonder they lost. Scottish nationalists have no backbone. I wouldn't have trusted them to run my country either.
    I see some Nats got the crap beaten out of them by Rangers hooligans in George Sq.

    Inevitable. After all the Nat goading and sneering and bullying, the BritNat monster rears up and gives them a shoeing.

    This is what happens when you stir dark nationalist forces: you risk the possibility your equally nationalist opponents might just be bigger and nastier.
    The Loyalist trouble looked like fairly standard football banter. A bit of singing, chanting and flag waving at the losers.

    Last night on here posters were claiming multiple stabbings and implying Loyalists were nazis.
  • Options
    SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322

    Socrates said:

    Given the recent goings-on at Calais, isn't it about time we give up the amnesty for immigrants that manage to avoid the UKBA for twenty years? Given the UKBA's incompetence it's clearly a huge incentive increasing the number of illegal immigrants coming here.

    ‘Everyone in Eritrea knows you have to get to Britain, not Italy or France. I have friends there sleeping on the streets, and they have nothing to eat. In Calais, people are sleeping in the street. I know in the UK I will get something to eat and a bed to sleep in.’

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2761600/The-madness-hotel-asylum-600-migrants-crammed-98-rooms-London-hotel-500-000-bill-paid-YOU.html

    Its not the UKBA;s fault really. They are risibly underfunded to actually have the necessary resources to do the levels of searches necessary at Dover. Blame Osborne, Alexander, May and the Home Office.

    Locating them in Gatwick when they arrived in Dover is just insane. Its about time May forced the Immigration bureaucrats out of Looney (Lunar) House and put them where they are needed (Ports, Train stations and Airports)

    PS I thought May had announced she was scrapping the Border force's Agency status and bringing it in house?
    It's not just that: it's also the huge numbers of over-staying immigrants that the UKBA has lost within the UK.
  • Options
    Socrates said:

    I see the suspect in the possible murder of Alice Gross was previously arrested for the indecent assault of a 14 year old girl in London.

    http://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/missing-alice-gross-arnis-zalkalns-now-a-suspect-as-met-release-cctv-of-latvian-builder-cycling-near-canal-path-9740096.html

    It is utterly stunning that we allow convicted murderers into the UK. Will Cameron commit to removing free movement from serious criminals as part of his negotiations? It's one of the few things he could probably actually achieve.

    To be fair I don't think that even has to be negotiated. My understanding is that anyone can be excluded from any member state on the grounds of public safety. The problem is more one of having systems in place to identify such people.


  • Options
    SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    With regards to illegal immigrants, can't we do what Australia does? Have a processing centre offshore so they don't disappear into society when human rights law means they have to be let out?
  • Options
    manofkent2014manofkent2014 Posts: 1,543
    edited September 2014

    RobC said:

    One unlikely Con/LD battleground in 2015 might be Maidstone. In 2010 the Tory majority fell sharply and since then first time MP and junior minister Helen Grant has not proved to be particularly popular, the LDs are are putting resources in and have an excellent PPC. Also there was a good recent local election in a formerly Tory ward. Obviously still a bit of a long shot but might be worth an outside punt.

    Mr. C., thanks for pointing out Maidstone as a possible earner. I see that the majority was about 6k compared to 14k in 2005 so something is going on even discounting the Ann Widdecombe personal vote. Do you have any idea how active UKIP is in the area?
    UKIP won the Euros in Maidstone but not by anywhere near the same margins as they won the coastal areas (10th out of 13 areas with a 8% lead over the Tories). It was one of UKIP's less successful areas in Kent in the County Council elections but that in part was due to a lack of candidates IIRC in half of the wards in Maidstone. Even so I have a feeling that without all those candidates it still turned it into a Tory LD marginal with the LDs winning 4 of the 8 county council seats.
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    Socrates said:

    Socrates said:

    Given the recent goings-on at Calais, isn't it about time we give up the amnesty for immigrants that manage to avoid the UKBA for twenty years? Given the UKBA's incompetence it's clearly a huge incentive increasing the number of illegal immigrants coming here.

    ‘Everyone in Eritrea knows you have to get to Britain, not Italy or France. I have friends there sleeping on the streets, and they have nothing to eat. In Calais, people are sleeping in the street. I know in the UK I will get something to eat and a bed to sleep in.’

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2761600/The-madness-hotel-asylum-600-migrants-crammed-98-rooms-London-hotel-500-000-bill-paid-YOU.html

    Its not the UKBA;s fault really. They are risibly underfunded to actually have the necessary resources to do the levels of searches necessary at Dover. Blame Osborne, Alexander, May and the Home Office.

    Locating them in Gatwick when they arrived in Dover is just insane. Its about time May forced the Immigration bureaucrats out of Looney (Lunar) House and put them where they are needed (Ports, Train stations and Airports)

    PS I thought May had announced she was scrapping the Border force's Agency status and bringing it in house?
    It's not just that: it's also the huge numbers of over-staying immigrants that the UKBA has lost within the UK.
    Go for the offshore solution like the Australians.

    A camp in a friendly African country would be a good start.

    http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jun/25/morrison-asylum-seekers-should-go-home-or-face-very-very-long-detention
  • Options

    By the end of the week people will be claiming it was Boris who shored up the No vote.

    Don't misunderestime the power of this intervention of Boris.

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BxRdVuoIQAAKtpt.jpg:large

    (For the great unwashed that aren't fluent in Latin, It says London loves Scotland, don't leave us )

    The great reality of it is, it was George Osborne what won it, the polling shows that.

    I have a thread for next week, entitled

    George Osborne: The man who saved the Union.
    I'm not sure about that. It would not surprise me if the current furore over EV4EL is not an Osborne wheeze.
    Here's the polling,

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Bx4qVWJIYAAbJ6V.jpg:large
    If you mean the pound, then that could as easily make a case for Darling in the first debate. If you take a timeline of polls and prices, and especially the decline in DKs, it looks as if the change happened last week, so before *that* speech and "the vow"; possibly the second debate even though the conventional wisdom was that Salmond won.
  • Options
    HurstLlamaHurstLlama Posts: 9,098

    Socrates said:

    Given the recent goings-on at Calais, isn't it about time we give up the amnesty for immigrants that manage to avoid the UKBA for twenty years? Given the UKBA's incompetence it's clearly a huge incentive increasing the number of illegal immigrants coming here.

    ‘Everyone in Eritrea knows you have to get to Britain, not Italy or France. I have friends there sleeping on the streets, and they have nothing to eat. In Calais, people are sleeping in the street. I know in the UK I will get something to eat and a bed to sleep in.’

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2761600/The-madness-hotel-asylum-600-migrants-crammed-98-rooms-London-hotel-500-000-bill-paid-YOU.html

    Its not the UKBA;s fault really. They are risibly underfunded to actually have the necessary resources to do the levels of searches necessary at Dover. Blame Osborne, Alexander, May and the Home Office.

    Locating them in Gatwick when they arrived in Dover is just insane. Its about time May forced the Immigration bureaucrats out of Looney (Lunar) House and put them where they are needed (Ports, Train stations and Airports)

    PS I thought May had announced she was scrapping the Border force's Agency status and bringing it in house?
    I had some dealings with the Immigration and Nationality Service as it was then about twenty years ago. They had some really good people on the front desks and a lot of complete wankers. Unfortunately it seemed they only recruited the management from the latter group. The senior management were universally in my experience the sort of people one used to describe at school as utter spastics. The were also bereft of firm strategic leadership from the political level.

    The UKBA will have inherited a lot of that corporate culture and sticking them in uniform and putting some retired copper, topping up his pension, in charge was not going to change that, at least not without an awful lot of good leadership starting at the very top.

    Turning the UKBA around is not just, or even primarily, a matter of money. It is matter of leadership. Sack the top three or four tiers (yes including ministers) and get some good people in there and you might have a chance.
  • Options

    RobC said:

    One unlikely Con/LD battleground in 2015 might be Maidstone. In 2010 the Tory majority fell sharply and since then first time MP and junior minister Helen Grant has not proved to be particularly popular, the LDs are are putting resources in and have an excellent PPC. Also there was a good recent local election in a formerly Tory ward. Obviously still a bit of a long shot but might be worth an outside punt.

    Mr. C., thanks for pointing out Maidstone as a possible earner. I see that the majority was about 6k compared to 14k in 2005 so something is going on even discounting the Ann Widdecombe personal vote. Do you have any idea how active UKIP is in the area?
    UKIP won the Euros in Maidstone but not by anywhere near the same margins as they won the coastal areas (10th out of 13 areas with a 8% lead over the Tories). It was one of UKIP's less successful areas in Kent in the County Council elections but that in part was due to a lack of candidates IIRC in half of the wards in Maidstone. Even so I have a feeling that without all those candidates it still turned it into a Tory LD marginal with the LDs winning 4 of the 8 county council seats.
    Maidstone Area Euro 2014 Vote Shares

    UKIP 37%
    Conservative Party 29%
    Liberal Democrats 11%
    Labour Party 11%
    Green Party 6%
    Other 6%
  • Options
    There were some people on the YES side who said here on PB:
    *the bookies are totally wrong, based on English punters
    *there is something going on for YES, on the ground, that the media is not picking up.
    *number of YES posters in windows greatly outnumbers NO
    *it will be 60% YES

    The actual result shows that we were right not to be swayed too much by how many people are putting up YES posters
  • Options
    manofkent2014manofkent2014 Posts: 1,543
    edited September 2014

    Socrates said:

    Given the recent goings-on at Calais, isn't it about time we give up the amnesty for immigrants that manage to avoid the UKBA for twenty years? Given the UKBA's incompetence it's clearly a huge incentive increasing the number of illegal immigrants coming here.

    ‘Everyone in Eritrea knows you have to get to Britain, not Italy or France. I have friends there sleeping on the streets, and they have nothing to eat. In Calais, people are sleeping in the street. I know in the UK I will get something to eat and a bed to sleep in.’

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2761600/The-madness-hotel-asylum-600-migrants-crammed-98-rooms-London-hotel-500-000-bill-paid-YOU.html

    Its not the UKBA;s fault really. They are risibly underfunded to actually have the necessary resources to do the levels of searches necessary at Dover. Blame Osborne, Alexander, May and the Home Office.

    Locating them in Gatwick when they arrived in Dover is just insane. Its about time May forced the Immigration bureaucrats out of Looney (Lunar) House and put them where they are needed (Ports, Train stations and Airports)

    PS I thought May had announced she was scrapping the Border force's Agency status and bringing it in house?
    I had some dealings with the Immigration and Nationality Service as it was then about twenty years ago. They had some really good people on the front desks and a lot of complete wankers. Unfortunately it seemed they only recruited the management from the latter group. The senior management were universally in my experience the sort of people one used to describe at school as utter spastics. The were also bereft of firm strategic leadership from the political level.

    The UKBA will have inherited a lot of that corporate culture and sticking them in uniform and putting some retired copper, topping up his pension, in charge was not going to change that, at least not without an awful lot of good leadership starting at the very top.

    Turning the UKBA around is not just, or even primarily, a matter of money. It is matter of leadership. Sack the top three or four tiers (yes including ministers) and get some good people in there and you might have a chance.
    Indeed the problem with the Immigration was always the last place to go if you were ambitious. The seniority dates for promotions above standard Immigration Officer when I worked for the Home Office in the 1980's/ 90's was the early 1960's/70's (i.e. you had to wait 20 years for promotion). Nobody ambitious is going to wait 20 years for promotion. Hence it was a backwater with a lot of 'stale' personnel. Of course the more personnel you have the more opportunities
  • Options
    BenMBenM Posts: 1,795
    Socrates said:

    With regards to illegal immigrants, can't we do what Australia does? Have a processing centre offshore so they don't disappear into society when human rights law means they have to be let out?

    Asylum Seekers aren't "illegal" immigrants.
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    BenM said:

    Socrates said:

    With regards to illegal immigrants, can't we do what Australia does? Have a processing centre offshore so they don't disappear into society when human rights law means they have to be let out?

    Asylum Seekers aren't "illegal" immigrants.
    They can safely apply for asylum in any of the countries of the Shengen area. They are illegally entering our country, therefore they are illegal immigrants.

    Immediate deportation to an offshore camp would soon put a stop to the camp in Calais.
  • Options
    Summary of Maidstone Area County Council results 2013

    Libdem 5980 34%
    Con 5656 32%
    Lab** 2471 14.%
    Green 1740 10%
    UKIP* 1635 9%
    English Democrats 115 0.65%

    *UKIP only Contested 1 of 4 Wards
    ** Labour only contested 3 of 4 wards.

    I think the big question is how much of the Libdem vote in Maidstone is a general protest vote that could easily shift to UKIP as it seemed to do in the Euros
  • Options
    HurstLlamaHurstLlama Posts: 9,098

    RobC said:

    One unlikely Con/LD battleground in 2015 might be Maidstone. In 2010 the Tory majority fell sharply and since then first time MP and junior minister Helen Grant has not proved to be particularly popular, the LDs are are putting resources in and have an excellent PPC. Also there was a good recent local election in a formerly Tory ward. Obviously still a bit of a long shot but might be worth an outside punt.

    Mr. C., thanks for pointing out Maidstone as a possible earner. I see that the majority was about 6k compared to 14k in 2005 so something is going on even discounting the Ann Widdecombe personal vote. Do you have any idea how active UKIP is in the area?
    UKIP won the Euros in Maidstone but not by anywhere near the same margins as they won the coastal areas (10th out of 13 areas with a 8% lead over the Tories). It was one of UKIP's less successful areas in Kent in the County Council elections but that in part was due to a lack of candidates IIRC in half of the wards in Maidstone. Even so I have a feeling that without all those candidates it still turned it into a Tory LD marginal with the LDs winning 4 of the 8 county council seats.
    Thanks, that is very interesting. Two thoughts occur,

    1. I know Ann Widdecombe was very popular, but the drop in majority when she retired from 14k to 6k seems like an enormous personal vote. Are there any other changes that have taken place?

    2. If UKIP get their act together could they hack away at that Conservative vote still further? My bet is that they could and possibly will. Enough to see the Lib Dem over the line? Well that seems doubtful given their collapse in support since 2010, but certainly a constituency worth keeping an eye on and maybe risking a few bob, if one can get sensible odds.
  • Options
    BenMBenM Posts: 1,795

    BenM said:

    Socrates said:

    With regards to illegal immigrants, can't we do what Australia does? Have a processing centre offshore so they don't disappear into society when human rights law means they have to be let out?

    Asylum Seekers aren't "illegal" immigrants.
    They can safely apply for asylum in any of the countries of the Shengen area. They are illegally entering our country, therefore they are illegal immigrants.

    Immediate deportation to an offshore camp would soon put a stop to the camp in Calais.
    Try to understand some international law before spouting drivel.
  • Options

    By the end of the week people will be claiming it was Boris who shored up the No vote.

    Don't misunderestime the power of this intervention of Boris.

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BxRdVuoIQAAKtpt.jpg:large

    (For the great unwashed that aren't fluent in Latin, It says London loves Scotland, don't leave us )

    The great reality of it is, it was George Osborne what won it, the polling shows that.

    I have a thread for next week, entitled

    George Osborne: The man who saved the Union.
    I'm not sure about that. It would not surprise me if the current furore over EV4EL is not an Osborne wheeze.
    Here's the polling,

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Bx4qVWJIYAAbJ6V.jpg:large
    If you mean the pound, then that could as easily make a case for Darling in the first debate. If you take a timeline of polls and prices, and especially the decline in DKs, it looks as if the change happened last week, so before *that* speech and "the vow"; possibly the second debate even though the conventional wisdom was that Salmond won.
    I thought Darling 'won' the second debate but you would never have guessed so from the audience or media reaction.

    The audience appeared to be packed with Salmond supporters, who responded wildly to his rhetoric. Darling's more factual approach was treated with disdain.

    I agree that the tide turned in the last week or so but I suspect that was largely to do with an increasing realisation that a Yes vote was likely to force Scotland to face some fairly awkward realities. Darling, and subsequently Brown, played their part, but it was those realities that won the day.

  • Options
    RobCRobC Posts: 398
    edited September 2014

    RobC said:

    One unlikely Con/LD battleground in 2015 might be Maidstone. In 2010 the Tory majority fell sharply and since then first time MP and junior minister Helen Grant has not proved to be particularly popular, the LDs are are putting resources in and have an excellent PPC. Also there was a good recent local election in a formerly Tory ward. Obviously still a bit of a long shot but might be worth an outside punt.

    Mr. C., thanks for pointing out Maidstone as a possible earner. I see that the majority was about 6k compared to 14k in 2005 so something is going on even discounting the Ann Widdecombe personal vote. Do you have any idea how active UKIP is in the area?
    UKIP won the Euros in Maidstone but not by anywhere near the same margins as they won the coastal areas (10th out of 13 areas with a 8% lead over the Tories). It was one of UKIP's less successful areas in Kent in the County Council elections but that in part was due to a lack of candidates IIRC in half of the wards in Maidstone. Even so I have a feeling that without all those candidates it still turned it into a Tory LD marginal with the LDs winning 4 of the 8 county council seats.
    Maidstone Area Euro 2014 Vote Shares

    UKIP 37%
    Conservative Party 29%
    Liberal Democrats 11%
    Labour Party 11%
    Green Party 6%
    Other 6%
    I am not sure those Euro election figures will have much relevance come GE 2015. I suspect any movement to UKIP will be at the expense of Tories and Labour leaving a possible route in for the Lib Dems. The LD PPC is working full time in Maidstone so there must be a chance. Helen Grant having abandoned her constituency office has now reopened one again so she must be a little worried. Anyway I will keep an eye on events and report back to PBers.

    Edit I see Man of Kent has posted up the last local election results - I think these are more significant
  • Options
    SimonStClareSimonStClare Posts: 7,976
    edited September 2014
    Evening all - 3 points

    (1) Congratulations to David Evershed – a most worthy winner

    (2) Glad to see so many took part in the competition, with some actually de-lurking.

    (3) Gob smacked to be on the first page, let alone in the top 35.

    Many thanks to OGH and all those involved in the organisation & running of – cheers.
  • Options
    HurstLlamaHurstLlama Posts: 9,098
    BenM said:

    BenM said:

    Socrates said:

    With regards to illegal immigrants, can't we do what Australia does? Have a processing centre offshore so they don't disappear into society when human rights law means they have to be let out?

    Asylum Seekers aren't "illegal" immigrants.
    They can safely apply for asylum in any of the countries of the Shengen area. They are illegally entering our country, therefore they are illegal immigrants.

    Immediate deportation to an offshore camp would soon put a stop to the camp in Calais.
    Try to understand some international law before spouting drivel.
    Umm... in what way did the good doctor not get international law correct?
  • Options
    Roger said:


    Five things we learned during the independence referendum



    '1. When a notoriously unpleasant Hollywood producer died thousands of people turned out for his funeral. Quizzed by a fellow mourner as to why someone so unpopular should attract such a crowd, one wit quipped: ‘Give the public what they want …’

    http://www.progressonline.org.uk/2014/09/19/what-we-have-learned-during-the-referendum/

    Sam Goldwyn wasn't it?
  • Options
    BenMBenM Posts: 1,795

    BenM said:

    BenM said:

    Socrates said:

    With regards to illegal immigrants, can't we do what Australia does? Have a processing centre offshore so they don't disappear into society when human rights law means they have to be let out?

    Asylum Seekers aren't "illegal" immigrants.
    They can safely apply for asylum in any of the countries of the Shengen area. They are illegally entering our country, therefore they are illegal immigrants.

    Immediate deportation to an offshore camp would soon put a stop to the camp in Calais.
    Try to understand some international law before spouting drivel.
    Umm... in what way did the good doctor not get international law correct?
    Look up article 31 on UN convention on the Status of Refugees.
  • Options
    HurstLlamaHurstLlama Posts: 9,098
    RobC said:

    RobC said:

    One unlikely Con/LD battleground in 2015 might be Maidstone. In 2010 the Tory majority fell sharply and since then first time MP and junior minister Helen Grant has not proved to be particularly popular, the LDs are are putting resources in and have an excellent PPC. Also there was a good recent local election in a formerly Tory ward. Obviously still a bit of a long shot but might be worth an outside punt.

    Mr. C., thanks for pointing out Maidstone as a possible earner. I see that the majority was about 6k compared to 14k in 2005 so something is going on even discounting the Ann Widdecombe personal vote. Do you have any idea how active UKIP is in the area?
    UKIP won the Euros in Maidstone but not by anywhere near the same margins as they won the coastal areas (10th out of 13 areas with a 8% lead over the Tories). It was one of UKIP's less successful areas in Kent in the County Council elections but that in part was due to a lack of candidates IIRC in half of the wards in Maidstone. Even so I have a feeling that without all those candidates it still turned it into a Tory LD marginal with the LDs winning 4 of the 8 county council seats.
    Maidstone Area Euro 2014 Vote Shares

    UKIP 37%
    Conservative Party 29%
    Liberal Democrats 11%
    Labour Party 11%
    Green Party 6%
    Other 6%
    I am not sure those Euro election figures will have much relevance come GE 2015. I suspect any movement to UKIP will be at the expense of Tories and Labour leaving a possible route in for the Lib Dems. The LD PPC is working full time in Maidstone so there must be a chance. Helen Grant having abandoned her constituency office has now reopened one again so she must be a little worried. Anyway I will keep an eye on events and report back to PBers.
    Thanks, Mr. C. I'd be obliged if you did keep us in touch with events and trends on the ground. It sounds like Maidstone might be a profitable constituency come next May. It might perhaps even be a bellwether one, if the Conservatives lose there what chance have they?
  • Options
    HurstLlamaHurstLlama Posts: 9,098
    BenM said:

    BenM said:

    BenM said:

    Socrates said:

    With regards to illegal immigrants, can't we do what Australia does? Have a processing centre offshore so they don't disappear into society when human rights law means they have to be let out?

    Asylum Seekers aren't "illegal" immigrants.
    They can safely apply for asylum in any of the countries of the Shengen area. They are illegally entering our country, therefore they are illegal immigrants.

    Immediate deportation to an offshore camp would soon put a stop to the camp in Calais.
    Try to understand some international law before spouting drivel.
    Umm... in what way did the good doctor not get international law correct?
    Look up article 31 on UN convention on the Status of Refugees.
    Yup, done that. Now do you want to answer the question?
  • Options
    BenMBenM Posts: 1,795

    BenM said:

    BenM said:

    BenM said:

    Socrates said:

    With regards to illegal immigrants, can't we do what Australia does? Have a processing centre offshore so they don't disappear into society when human rights law means they have to be let out?

    Asylum Seekers aren't "illegal" immigrants.
    They can safely apply for asylum in any of the countries of the Shengen area. They are illegally entering our country, therefore they are illegal immigrants.

    Immediate deportation to an offshore camp would soon put a stop to the camp in Calais.
    Try to understand some international law before spouting drivel.
    Umm... in what way did the good doctor not get international law correct?
    Look up article 31 on UN convention on the Status of Refugees.
    Yup, done that. Now do you want to answer the question?
    Like I said, try to understand it.
  • Options

    RobC said:

    One unlikely Con/LD battleground in 2015 might be Maidstone. In 2010 the Tory majority fell sharply and since then first time MP and junior minister Helen Grant has not proved to be particularly popular, the LDs are are putting resources in and have an excellent PPC. Also there was a good recent local election in a formerly Tory ward. Obviously still a bit of a long shot but might be worth an outside punt.

    Mr. C., thanks for pointing out Maidstone as a possible earner. I see that the majority was about 6k compared to 14k in 2005 so something is going on even discounting the Ann Widdecombe personal vote. Do you have any idea how active UKIP is in the area?
    UKIP won the Euros in Maidstone but not by anywhere near the same margins as they won the coastal areas (10th out of 13 areas with a 8% lead over the Tories). It was one of UKIP's less successful areas in Kent in the County Council elections but that in part was due to a lack of candidates IIRC in half of the wards in Maidstone. Even so I have a feeling that without all those candidates it still turned it into a Tory LD marginal with the LDs winning 4 of the 8 county council seats.
    Thanks, that is very interesting. Two thoughts occur,

    1. I know Ann Widdecombe was very popular, but the drop in majority when she retired from 14k to 6k seems like an enormous personal vote. Are there any other changes that have taken place?

    2. If UKIP get their act together could they hack away at that Conservative vote still further? My bet is that they could and possibly will. Enough to see the Lib Dem over the line? Well that seems doubtful given their collapse in support since 2010, but certainly a constituency worth keeping an eye on and maybe risking a few bob, if one can get sensible odds.
    Here's the district council make up as well. As you can see the Libdems are well entrenched as the main opposition and obviously where they have numbers they campaign better.

    Conservative 24
    Lib Dem 20
    Independent 5
    UKIP 4
    Labour 2

    Whether or not they will try and target it whilst setting up seige defences around their own constituencies is another question?
  • Options

    By the end of the week people will be claiming it was Boris who shored up the No vote.

    Don't misunderestime the power of this intervention of Boris.

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BxRdVuoIQAAKtpt.jpg:large

    (For the great unwashed that aren't fluent in Latin, It says London loves Scotland, don't leave us )

    The great reality of it is, it was George Osborne what won it, the polling shows that.

    I have a thread for next week, entitled

    George Osborne: The man who saved the Union.
    I'm not sure about that. It would not surprise me if the current furore over EV4EL is not an Osborne wheeze.
    Here's the polling,

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Bx4qVWJIYAAbJ6V.jpg:large
    If you mean the pound, then that could as easily make a case for Darling in the first debate. If you take a timeline of polls and prices, and especially the decline in DKs, it looks as if the change happened last week, so before *that* speech and "the vow"; possibly the second debate even though the conventional wisdom was that Salmond won.
    I thought Darling 'won' the second debate but you would never have guessed so from the audience or media reaction.

    The audience appeared to be packed with Salmond supporters, who responded wildly to his rhetoric. Darling's more factual approach was treated with disdain.

    I agree that the tide turned in the last week or so but I suspect that was largely to do with an increasing realisation that a Yes vote was likely to force Scotland to face some fairly awkward realities. Darling, and subsequently Brown, played their part, but it was those realities that won the day.

    That debate was not conducted well, and some political journalists ought perhaps to reconsider their vocation. (Some Betfair punters too, considering overreactions to early results on the night.)

    The polls listed on Wikipedia suggest something changed 7 to 10 days before referendum day to move DKs to No, and Betfair's prices iirc showed an inflection point around then too (I thought there was a graph in a pb header but I cannot find it). Maybe shadsy has some Ladbrokes figures. It does not help that the polls all seem to spread field work over three days.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_Scottish_independence_referendum,_2014#2014
  • Options
    HurstLlamaHurstLlama Posts: 9,098
    BenM said:

    BenM said:

    BenM said:

    BenM said:

    Socrates said:

    With regards to illegal immigrants, can't we do what Australia does? Have a processing centre offshore so they don't disappear into society when human rights law means they have to be let out?

    Asylum Seekers aren't "illegal" immigrants.
    They can safely apply for asylum in any of the countries of the Shengen area. They are illegally entering our country, therefore they are illegal immigrants.

    Immediate deportation to an offshore camp would soon put a stop to the camp in Calais.
    Try to understand some international law before spouting drivel.
    Umm... in what way did the good doctor not get international law correct?
    Look up article 31 on UN convention on the Status of Refugees.
    Yup, done that. Now do you want to answer the question?
    Like I said, try to understand it.
    No, I have read it and have an understanding of it. You tell me why FoxinSox was "spouting drivel". You seem to claim you know what you are talking about so it shouldn't take you long or require much effort of your part.
  • Options

    RobC said:

    RobC said:

    One unlikely Con/LD battleground in 2015 might be Maidstone. In 2010 the Tory majority fell sharply and since then first time MP and junior minister Helen Grant has not proved to be particularly popular, the LDs are are putting resources in and have an excellent PPC. Also there was a good recent local election in a formerly Tory ward. Obviously still a bit of a long shot but might be worth an outside punt.

    Mr. C., thanks for pointing out Maidstone as a possible earner. I see that the majority was about 6k compared to 14k in 2005 so something is going on even discounting the Ann Widdecombe personal vote. Do you have any idea how active UKIP is in the area?
    UKIP won the Euros in Maidstone but not by anywhere near the same margins as they won the coastal areas (10th out of 13 areas with a 8% lead over the Tories). It was one of UKIP's less successful areas in Kent in the County Council elections but that in part was due to a lack of candidates IIRC in half of the wards in Maidstone. Even so I have a feeling that without all those candidates it still turned it into a Tory LD marginal with the LDs winning 4 of the 8 county council seats.
    Maidstone Area Euro 2014 Vote Shares

    UKIP 37%
    Conservative Party 29%
    Liberal Democrats 11%
    Labour Party 11%
    Green Party 6%
    Other 6%
    I am not sure those Euro election figures will have much relevance come GE 2015. I suspect any movement to UKIP will be at the expense of Tories and Labour leaving a possible route in for the Lib Dems. The LD PPC is working full time in Maidstone so there must be a chance. Helen Grant having abandoned her constituency office has now reopened one again so she must be a little worried. Anyway I will keep an eye on events and report back to PBers.
    Thanks, Mr. C. I'd be obliged if you did keep us in touch with events and trends on the ground. It sounds like Maidstone might be a profitable constituency come next May. It might perhaps even be a bellwether one, if the Conservatives lose there what chance have they?
    The other consideration is that UKIP have so many potential targets along the Kent Coast (2 Thanet seats, Sittingbourne & Sheppey, Folkestone, 3 Medway seats) that I think it unlikely there will be that much attention paid to Maidstone except from the local association
  • Options
    MTimTMTimT Posts: 7,034
    BenM said:

    BenM said:

    BenM said:

    Socrates said:

    With regards to illegal immigrants, can't we do what Australia does? Have a processing centre offshore so they don't disappear into society when human rights law means they have to be let out?

    Asylum Seekers aren't "illegal" immigrants.
    They can safely apply for asylum in any of the countries of the Shengen area. They are illegally entering our country, therefore they are illegal immigrants.

    Immediate deportation to an offshore camp would soon put a stop to the camp in Calais.
    Try to understand some international law before spouting drivel.
    Umm... in what way did the good doctor not get international law correct?
    Look up article 31 on UN convention on the Status of Refugees.
    BenM By practice, you are only an asylum seeker in the first country you step foot in upon leaving the country where you claim persecution. The UK could return all asylum seekers in the UK who have got there via France or England to those countries without being in breach of the UN

  • Options
    Congratulations to David.You are a PB soothsayer and you do not even have an ARSE or an ELBOW. let alone a SMERSH -wtf happened to that?
  • Options
    BenM said:

    BenM said:

    BenM said:

    BenM said:

    Socrates said:

    With regards to illegal immigrants, can't we do what Australia does? Have a processing centre offshore so they don't disappear into society when human rights law means they have to be let out?

    Asylum Seekers aren't "illegal" immigrants.
    They can safely apply for asylum in any of the countries of the Shengen area. They are illegally entering our country, therefore they are illegal immigrants.

    Immediate deportation to an offshore camp would soon put a stop to the camp in Calais.
    Try to understand some international law before spouting drivel.
    Umm... in what way did the good doctor not get international law correct?
    Look up article 31 on UN convention on the Status of Refugees.
    Yup, done that. Now do you want to answer the question?
    Like I said, try to understand it.
    Perhaps you should try and understand Article 26 and the concept of First Safe Country,
  • Options
    MTimTMTimT Posts: 7,034
    MTimT said:

    BenM said:

    BenM said:

    BenM said:

    Socrates said:

    With regards to illegal immigrants, can't we do what Australia does? Have a processing centre offshore so they don't disappear into society when human rights law means they have to be let out?

    Asylum Seekers aren't "illegal" immigrants.
    They can safely apply for asylum in any of the countries of the Shengen area. They are illegally entering our country, therefore they are illegal immigrants.

    Immediate deportation to an offshore camp would soon put a stop to the camp in Calais.
    Try to understand some international law before spouting drivel.
    Umm... in what way did the good doctor not get international law correct?
    Look up article 31 on UN convention on the Status of Refugees.
    BenM By practice, you are only an asylum seeker in the first country you step foot in upon leaving the country where you claim persecution. The UK could return all asylum seekers in the UK who have got there via France or England to those countries without being in breach of the UN

    'or England' should read 'or Italy'
  • Options
    SeanT said:



    Has Stuart 'Clueless wonders are in for a shock' Dickson been seen since Thursday?

    Tipping point
    I also loved The Union Divvie's single word - "boom" - as a poll came up, coupla days before the vote, showing another YES lead.

    Turned out it was a typo, and NO was in the lead.

    "Boom.

    Oh."

    Credit to Carnyx for coming on here and being a man, the rest of the Nats have turned out to be the most pathetic bunch of girl scouts, running away from the Unionist spider. All kilt and no sporran. A spineless mob of fanny-featured jessies. Hilarious.
    An all-too-predictable handbrake turn from pitiful blubbering to triumphalist blustering; to modify Churchill's aphorism, in the face of defeat unnerved, in victory unbearable. Much better to have spent the last few days with friends and fellow campaigners rather than unpleasant bystanders.

    If you pm me either details for a bank transfer or an e-mail address for a Paypal payment I'll forward £100.

    If Tim's looking in, I owe you £100 on the Indy winner, and you owe me £50 for the Salmond v. Darling Ipsos approval ratings (on my reading), so net I owe you £50. You can let me know via Peter the Punter how you'd like paid.

    Mark Senior, you owe me £25 for Yes being above 40%, let me know how you want to pay.

    Antifrank, you owe charity £50 for Yes being above 40%. I think I nominated the Erskine veterans charity - http://www.erskine.org.uk
  • Options
    I was in the top 50ish for Yes (0.5% out), and top 30ish Overall.

    I can live with that.

  • Options
    I'm maintaining progress from a very low base,spending some time in seclusion and then onto the forensic refractory ward.I think malcolmg was chained up against a wall for a time.Making the 2nd page is quite an achievement but it's still not as good as Bob Latchford painting my front wall.
  • Options
    Indyref poll alert

    Front page of the Scottish Mail on Sunday

    "Don't DARE ask us again" - Poll exclusive - Scots back SNP but not another referendum


    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ByAIcsoIgAArBUD.jpg
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,602
    edited September 2014
    Zooming on that front page it says support for the SNP has soared, but the voters don't want another referendum for a generation.

    Fieldwork was friday
  • Options
    CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,941
    edited September 2014
    FPT

    Carnyx said:


    [snip]

    It doesn't matter. Brown's own party is going to make sure he can't keep his promises because they will not budge on EV4EL and will try to kick everything into the long grass.

    I don't doubt Brown's commitment but he is just mad to think that he can push this throughh by force of will.

    It is also worth pointing out that no one even knows what is going to be offered as 'Devomax'. Certainly what the SNP and Yes are claiming it means (basically everything except Defence and Foreign affairs) is a very long way from what most people on here seem to think.

    That was certainly the meaning of devomax being used in the early stages of the debate, so it's not a new thing at all. Any more and we Scots'd be independent.
    That may well be what you thought was being discussed/offered but the problem with DevoMax, as opposed to outright independence, is that it needs the consent of the other party(ies) and nobody thought to ask them. So now we have another row.

    Cameron really is a fecking useless politician without a strategic bone in his body. Do sod all, plan sod all until the problem hits you smack in the face and then wing it is a viable modus operandi for an undergraduate or even a junior manager who never wants to be promoted but at the top level it really isn't good enough.
    I won't say [edit: one way or another, though he did at least not do a Rajoy] what I think of Mr C, but I can entirely agree with what else you say. As I well recall at the time, the devomax option was clearly understood amongst pro-indy sites, etc., to be dependent on the agreement of the rest of the UK - so the notion was certainly out there at the time of the Edinburgh Agreement (as were at least initial discussions about the problems of England's governance in the UK, sympathetic ones too). But hey, we were a bunch of nats, so who cared? And when Mr Cameron had 'defeated' Mr Salmond by saying no to indyref, how the media cheered.

    The other question is why Mr Cameron was more frightened of his backbenchers than the Scots, and risked the Union instead of talking them through what might be necessary. He did have two years, and could have made it clear at the start that "we will offer the third option with full details at the time, but if it's not a goer, it's a plain yes/no indyref".

    Instead, look what we ****** get! He's managed to upset, oh, everyone on PB? or am I missing anyone out?
  • Options
    HurstLlamaHurstLlama Posts: 9,098



    The other consideration is that UKIP have so many potential targets along the Kent Coast (2 Thanet seats, Sittingbourne & Sheppey, Folkestone, 3 Medway seats) that I think it unlikely there will be that much attention paid to Maidstone except from the local association

    Very good points, Mr. C.. Whilst UKIP is growing fast it is will still be very difficult to get enough people out on the streets for the "ground war" in a general election with all(?) constituencies contested. However, the answer to that must surely be not to fight the traditional ground war. Fighting on your enemy's terms has always been a losing idea.

    @ManofKent2014

    You make a very good point too. With the apparent collapse of the Lib Dem vote share will they have the dosh and, more importantly, the will to chase after potential gains like Maidstone. I dunno. I think they are stuffed as a political force if all they do is circle the wagons in May.
  • Options
    Just dawned on me, where unlikely to get maybe less than half a dozen polls on Scottish Independence between now and next May.
  • Options
    BenMBenM Posts: 1,795
    edited September 2014

    BenM said:

    BenM said:

    BenM said:

    BenM said:

    Socrates said:

    With regards to illegal immigrants, can't we do what Australia does? Have a processing centre offshore so they don't disappear into society when human rights law means they have to be let out?

    Asylum Seekers aren't "illegal" immigrants.
    They can safely apply for asylum in any of the countries of the Shengen area. They are illegally entering our country, therefore they are illegal immigrants.

    Immediate deportation to an offshore camp would soon put a stop to the camp in Calais.
    Try to understand some international law before spouting drivel.
    Umm... in what way did the good doctor not get international law correct?
    Look up article 31 on UN convention on the Status of Refugees.
    Yup, done that. Now do you want to answer the question?
    Like I said, try to understand it.
    Perhaps you should try and understand Article 26 and the concept of First Safe Country,
    Oh dear. Article 26 doesn't say that at all.

    http://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/StatusOfRefugees.aspx
  • Options
    CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,941

    Indyref poll alert

    Front page of the Scottish Mail on Sunday

    "Don't DARE ask us again" - Poll exclusive - Scots back SNP but not another referendum


    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ByAIcsoIgAArBUD.jpg

    Mm, interesting. And (I think) about 5K members for the SNP. And a new movement springing up (the 45% with percentage sign, not Charles Edward Stuart's little jaunt to Derby). Early days yet.

  • Options
    @Decrepit

    I was intrigued and to some extent gratified that the punters got it more right than the pollsters. I'm not sure why that was and as a regular punter on politics I wouldn't generally advocate dismissing the polls.

    My guess is that the punters felt all along that economic realities would prevail over rhetoric and emotion. Certainly that's the way I felt, but not so so strongly that I was prepared to risk much of my betting bank. As a result I had to make do with modest gains, but at least I never risked dropping out of the game!
  • Options
    Carnyx said:

    Indyref poll alert

    Front page of the Scottish Mail on Sunday

    "Don't DARE ask us again" - Poll exclusive - Scots back SNP but not another referendum


    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ByAIcsoIgAArBUD.jpg

    Mm, interesting. And (I think) about 5K members for the SNP. And a new movement springing up (the 45% with percentage sign, not Charles Edward Stuart's little jaunt to Derby). Early days yet.

    Are the Nats not aware than 45% is less than 55%?
This discussion has been closed.