Categories
Options
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The day after: Betting and other by-election round up
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The day after: Betting and other by-election round up
Some comfort for the Tories. UKIP lost two of the three council elections it was defending last night.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
FPT I can't believe that nobody has roundly abused TSE for this marvellously subtle musical reference. Bravo, Sir!
Can we please cease giving any credence to Ashcroft polls as they massively overstated Labour's share of the vote?
Hopefully that won't be removed, or are we running scared of Lord A's bullying tactics?
'Perhaps it's time for all of us to ask the question of whether we really understand this party and its support'
Hopefully it will occur to him to rethink his book!
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/liberaldemocrats/11153401/How-Clacton-spells-yet-more-by-election-doom-for-Lib-Dems.html
Can't believe there's no mention of Clegg's conference bounce in the thread header....
Douglas Carswell fails to endorse plan by Farage for ban on migrants with HIV
Party’s first elected MP, whose father helped identify Aids, says he will never seek to topple Ukip leader
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/oct/10/douglas-carswell-ukip-plans-migrants-hiv
Douglas Carswell backs Nigel Farage’s calls to ban HIV positive migrants from entering UK
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/douglas-carswell-backs-nigel-farages-calls-to-ban-hiv-positive-migrants-from-entering-uk-9788204.html
I'm not suggesting a Cleggasm for Mr Farage's party - but I wouldn't be surprised by a healthy uptick.
Take only the Labour 10 out of 10 voters.
Take the Tory 9 and 10 out of 10 voters
Take UKIP 6 to 10/10 voters.
I'm not touching it !
So to repeat the question:
If, hypothetically, someone lawfully in the UK on a short term basis contracted HIV here from someone of impeccable Anglo Saxon but HIV positive stock, should such a person be barred from treatment by the NHS?
You're answering this: No. In which case, there's a coach and horses driven through what one might if one were being charitable describe as UKIP's policy on this. It's just way too easy to circumvent by lying, and you're giving would-be migrants every incentive to circumvent it by lying.
Back to the drawing board for Mr Farage.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pgap_CzceBM
If, hypothetically, someone lawfully in the UK on a short term basis contracted HIV here from someone of impeccable Anglo Saxon but HIV positive stock, should such a person be barred from treatment by the NHS?
You're answering this: No. In which case, there's a coach and horses driven through what one might if one were being charitable describe as UKIP's policy on this. It's just way too easy to circumvent by lying, and you're giving would-be migrants every incentive to circumvent it by lying.
Back to the drawing board for Mr Farage.
It's a bit hard to make the case that this sort of ban is politically impossible when a dozen or so other Western nations do it.
Both polls were done weeks before the election so the figures changing is of little surprise.
Clacton was wet and miserable yesterday therefore Labour who ran no campaign and knew they would lose may have stayed at home a little moreso than the Tories who had much to lose and UKIP who had much to gain
Ashcroft was 6 points too high on Labour in Heywood. Survation was 9 points too high
Ashcroft was 11 points shy on the UKIP figure in Heywood. Survation was 8 points too low.
Survation was much less accurate on heywood than Ashcroft
Clearly there was something else going on in Heywood. The weather was again miserable. People may have stayed at home, their could have been a Shy Kipper syndrome, their could have been a late tactical vote.
I suggest if you think there is something wrong with the Ashcroft polling you need to come up with more evidence which demonstrates that specifically the Ashcroft polling looks questionable.
I'm not saying it's politically impossible. I'm saying it's bloody stupid.
Numerous examples, including the Ebola screening, show that the bloody stupid is politically possible.
If, hypothetically, someone lawfully in the UK on a short term basis contracted HIV here from someone of impeccable Anglo Saxon but HIV positive stock, should such a person be barred from treatment by the NHS?
You're answering this: No. In which case, there's a coach and horses driven through what one might if one were being charitable describe as UKIP's policy on this. It's just way too easy to circumvent by lying, and you're giving would-be migrants every incentive to circumvent it by lying.
Back to the drawing board for Mr Farage.
As I am not a ukip supporter I don't know why you think the farage part is relevant to our discussion and the same still applies if you are here legally and contract it while here you get treatment while you remain resident legally. For short term visitors that will be until they are stabilised and return home same as any other long term illness. The NHS is however only responsible for your treatment for the time you are resident here exactly as they would be for any other long term illness that manifested itself while you are here.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29565766
"Tory defector and UKIP candidate for the parliamentary seat of Rochester and Strood, Mark Reckless, said he did not believe there should be a blanket ban on people with HIV entering the country."
What's touching is that the Kippers can't see it, or attribute it to conspiracy, or can't see that having The Leader, the elected MP and the prospective MP saying three different things could possibly lead to any problems.
The structural weakness in UKIP is the lack of policy and 'what Nigel says goes'
You are as deluded as when you were wetting yourself over the loss of the Union and panicking like a cross between Corporal Jones and Private Fraser - some of us with greater intestinal fortitude (unlike the Westminster leaders) held our nerve and were proved right.
I understand your continuing embarrassment at that episode........
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29565766
Happy now?
"Really tories are making arses of themselves on this, just give it up, you're simply boosting UKIPs vote."
How does a Manchester University alumni the home of the greatest left wing comedians the country has seen.....who used to watch the Woodentops manage to turn into a Farage apologist.....Maybe this'll bring you back from the dark side
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9OdtkPs-fl8
Farage probably agrees too
Otherwise you are going to have to come to terms with the fact that a "free at the point of use" health system will be used/abused (depending on your point of view) by people from outside the country who have not contributed to its costs.
Much as with other parts of our welfare system, in an era of cheap travel, we have to accept that either it will be used by all - regardless of nationality/contribution and thus may seem unfair to those who have contributed and are British nationals - or some groups will be excluded, which may seem unfair to those who think need should trump all other considerations.
A choice will have to be made. Currently our political class are busy pretending that no choice is needed while simultaneously promising to spend ever more on the NHS. Those who do pay and will have to pay are, frankly, entitled to ask: "For who's benefit?"
That said I can't see any UKIP candidates winning if Farage fails in Thanet South. Carswell perhaps but that's about it.
Then when an election comes around they send a ballot paper out to you. You sign it, send it back. They check the signatures match and count it as a vote.
They usually get sent out a week before an election, so if you sent them to the home address rather than where the person is you run into time scale problems.
If the Conservatives were smart they would come out in support of a policy both sensible and moral, pointing out they proposed it. They won't.
However, the UKIP modelling is going to be far more difficult and subject to a noticeable amount of guesswork - which explains the wide variance in reported UKIP polling scores between the various companies. Will previous non-voters (a significant chunk of their support) revert to type and not vote again? Or will it turn out that the perceived similarity between the Big 3 was the main discouragement for them and a realistic alternative will galvanise them into actually voting? (for example of just one element of the guessy aspect of the modelling)
And, given that the numbers always have to add up to 100 (or so, less rounding errors), this will have a bit of a knock-on effect on the other numbers.
In short - whilst polls have always required a bit of reserve on behalf of the reader, right now, they're more uncertain than ever.
What do the 6% LD voters look like? How many DNVers are there that are going Kipper which Labour could bring home? Is having EdM in charge a fatal flaw in any such plan as he's just too metropolitan?
No entry to the UK without a visa unless the country concerned provided reciprocal medical cover from their "NHS" to UK citizens visiting the country (as EU and Australia among others do)
For other states. No visa issued unless one of the following is provided:
* proof of medical insurance covering any pre existing medical condition that they suffer from covering the whole validity of the visa
or
* paying of a £10,000 deposit lodged with the NHS which will be returned (without interest - the interest covers the admin), minus any medical charges for NHS treatment while here upon their departure.
Why should UK taxpayers pay for the medical costs of people from states where UK taxpayers visiting their country would have to pay for medical costs?
Similarly, ALL foreign aid from the UK should be stopped until such time as the national debt is paid off and we have a sovereign wealth fund like Norway do. Get our own house in order first.
The more the progressive media foam about this, the more they give UKIP publicity and demonstrate how out of touch they are. What part of "A country with £1.4 Billion debt increasing by £100Billion a year can't afford any more compassion funded by other peoples money" dont they get?
Didn´t Blair come out with the crass "24 Hours to save the NHS".
Time and time again.
"Mr. Roger, elegance? He was a slippery bastard. "
He was indeed. An elegant slippery bastard
Heard from my sister who visited Glasgow, that a couple of Scots voted Yes by post (aim - screw more cash from London) - who had second thoughts when that poll put Yes ahead...can we have the envelope back stuff.
source
http://www.internationalstudentinsurance.com/schengen-visa-insurance/
Nothing gets me crosser than politicians accusing their opponents of presenting their case as if they were "selling washing powder".
Washing powder is held to a much higher standard than politicians....Persil cannot claim it intends to wash whiter......
I'm assuming that means YouGov will be changing their methodology before the election, to either include UKIP in their prompting, or not to prompt at all.
http://yougov.co.uk/news/2014/09/29/ukip-snp-and-risks-parliamentary-paralysis/
That was one of the crassest comments he ever made, implying that those who want to preserve the best of the past are somehow to be swept away in order to create a New Britain. Still, only an Oxford law graduate could come up with such bilge.
There might well be a cost to the tourist trade but there would also, presumably, be a saving on the NHS budget and since we're always being told how important that is........
BTW travelling to the US without health insurance is pretty daft IMO.
This means most are received and returned before the campaign is complete, which means the voters will not be influenced by the campaign. This gives a massive and in my opinion unfair advantage to the incumbent party.
When postal voting was restricted to a tiny number it wasn't much of a problem but now it is a problem.
I think they should be moved on line in the same way as you can vote for building society elections online after receiving the code through the post, with online voting only allowed between 7AM and 10PM on election day.
As I pointed out earlier it can hardly be classed as an imposition to require insurance for a visa when even the eu requires it for a schengen visa
Many third world citizens have to provide a health check certificate from a British Embasst doctor in their visa application. This has been going on for yonks.
Also, you are a fool travelling without insurance. Anything goes wrong and you are in say the US, you could easily bankrupt yourself.
Dear @Ed_Miliband: Just go. Please just go.
Dan Hannan you can go by car, go by cow....
Currently, all such applicants have to provide a health insurance policy with their applications.
Even hippies have to grow up.. you sound more and more like Malcolm from the Modern parents with every post
The DUP are savage X's who threw stones at peace-keeping British squaddies.
Just saying!
Having spent the day thinking about it, I think Clacton was worse for the Conservatives than H&M was for Labour. Labour supporters largely sat on their hands in H&M, and Labour can reasonably hope that they will turn out in much greater numbers in 2015 - though Labour should be worried that yet again they have been unable to motivate their core vote to come out and vote for them. Erstwhile Conservative supporters defected to UKIP. They won't be coming back.
Because they're not fascist, and the default treatment of them as such now looks daft to all but the dedicated tribalists (who are fewer and farther between than ever). Continuing with that (especially with some of the very real issues that are pushing people to them in the fields of immigration concern, negative campaigning on each other and failure to communicate) is like responding to an utterly failed advertising campaign by trying to double down on what didn't work last time.