Temporary staffing data. As an investor, I've found it to be incredibly good as a 'canary in the coalmine' about changing underlying economic conditions.
Yes but Isam may I suggest that unlike you I try not to let it cloud my betting judgement. I've said on this thread and previously that, like Mike, I still make Reckless favourite. Just not 78% favourite.
Most of my best winning bets have occurred when I have bet against my personal tastes. They have proved to be my real winners. I'll tantalise you with one example: I've twice won well on Arsenal as title winners which for a Spurs supporter takes some doing.
Unlike me you don't let it cloud your betting judgement? I have backed and laid Ukip in many occasions depending on whether I think the odds are wrong or not... And also against my football team.
In fact I have laid Ukip at 1.3 here after the survation poll to even up the book, but I just can't bet on the conservatives as an opening bet without more than Tory/anti Ukip wishful thinking
Nothing easier in betting than laying the favourite, gives everyone a very easy line after. Sometimes favs are too big though
People on here were saying Ukip were too short in Clacton at 1/3 and both Tories and labour were cited as the value... When I said the euro results made Ukip worthy favs I was laughed to scorn
That as now was based on no more than wishful thinking. Read the threads the day Carswell defected it's all there
Temporary staffing data. As an investor, I've found it to be incredibly good as a 'canary in the coalmine' about changing underlying economic conditions.
By the way, talking of Arsenal you can still get 500/1 on Southampton for the title with Ladbrokes. OK so they probably won't overhaul Chelsea and they may not keep it going. The odds are long for very good reasons. But they're not 500/1 reasons.
Temporary staffing data. As an investor, I've found it to be incredibly good as a 'canary in the coalmine' about changing underlying economic conditions.
Growth rates are hard to interpret without knowing the base.
You're right that many of the Eurozone countries are off very small bases. And it's also worth remembering that late in an economy cycle, temporary staffing data (like in the US) can be weak as temporary staff are converted to permanent ones.
However, the fact is that in Japan and a number of Eurozone economies, there are considerably more people being brought into the temporary workforce than a year or two years ago.
By the way, have you withdrawn your inaccurate claim that the ECB has been buying peripheral bonds to prop up their prices yet?
"But why is it still 3/1 if it's such massive value? Whys no one smashing it? "
It's propably the absence of polls.
You'd feel pretty daft if you smashed into the 3/1 a few hours before a poll put Reckless put 15 points ahead.
But obviously if a poll comes out that shows it a lot closer, it won't be 3/1 anymore will it?! Blimey it'd be an easy game if you got to bet after things had happened!
On topic, I don't really understand what's going on here but incumbents have an advantage, you get big swings against the government in by-elections, and what you'd expect from that totally matches what limited information we have for the polling. UKIP would seem like strong favourites on the face of it.
"But why is it still 3/1 if it's such massive value? Whys no one smashing it? "
It's propably the absence of polls.
You'd feel pretty daft if you smashed into the 3/1 a few hours before a poll put Reckless put 15 points ahead.
But obviously if a poll comes out that shows it a lot closer, it won't be 3/1 anymore will it?! Blimey it'd be an easy game if you got to bet after things had happened!
That's not true of Portugal. Last quarter (2Q), Portugal was one of the stars in the Eurozone, with 0.6% GDP growth (equivalent to 2.6% annual), second only behind Ireland. In fact, it's worth remembering that the top three Eurzone countries in 2Q GDP growth were all PIIGS - Ireland, Portugal and Spain. Which are - not uncoincidentally - the three countries which took the deficit reduction and reform medicine. Portugal is now second in the whole of Europe for FDI, having leapfrogged the UK and much of Eastern Europe. Spain, by the way, is now third (also ahead of the UK).
...
I think you are putting too much stock in the quarterly figures, the 0.6% for Portugal was revised down to 0.3% and that was after a contraction of -0.5% the quarter before. I agree that some of the fundamentals are improving in Portugal but it is no Ireland.
Spain is another where I think the headline GDP figure masks an underlying weakness (just like the UK incidentally), the construction sector is dead, manufacturing is moving back towards the post-war unskilled type and unemployment is stubbornly high and unlike Ireland, Spain has not exported its unemployment problems to other EU countries.
As for the ECB commitment to QE, I will believe it when I see it. The ABS purchases are laughable in volume and the TLTRO is a busted flush. Worse still monetising government debt seems like a loser in Europe already since investors, without QE, are willing to accept pitiful returns offered by Bunds and Oats already. Lowering those yields further is not going to drive private money into other markets as it did in the UK and US, it will be more like Japan where institutions and investors will take the lower yield and sit on their hands waiting for the ECB to give up. It took a radical PM in Japan to get the monetary stimulus to work and to almost beat deflation, Europe has no one like that and the Bundesbank is always going to be a handbrake on any kind of massive QE programme.
As for Italy, there seems to be no appetite for privatisation, no appetite to reform the labour market and given Italy's huge competitive disadvantage to Germany in terms of productivity adjusted unit labour costs there is no will strong enough to reform such a market. In a country with endemic corruption, creaking infrastructure and an absolutely huge (and rising) interest bill, coupled with an ageing population one doesn't envy Renzi.
I think this weeks polls will be revealing as a Lab supporter I am hoping for an average poll lead of 3%. minimum.
Anything less and with some swing-back bound to occur IMO I think a Lab maj would be less likely.
I fear Ed is Crap could be heading for biggest party only which is fine from a betting point of view but rubbish with the right wing vote likely to be so split.
We will see starting with todays Populus and concluding with Sunday Times YG et al can Ed is crap achieve a 3% average lead?
I agree that Italy could go either way: it's a very hard call. Remzi talks the talk but the country has a dysfunctional political system that makes it very hard to implement change.
Good spot re Portugal, I missed that. (Although I would point out that, even after revising the previous Q, was still up 0.9% yoy)
I fundamentally disagree re Spain. I think people miss the extent of the underlying change there. The labour market is now much freer than it was in 2006 (and on OECD measures of labour market flexibility isn't that far behind the UK). Underlying government spending is much lower. The country runs a current account surplus. House prices have stopped dropping. It's attracting FDI in much the same way the UK did in the 1980s. Labour productivity has risen 15% in five years, as wage rates have fallen the same amount - making it an incredibly attractive place to invest. The combination of a liberalised labour market, good infrastructure, rising productivity and falling wages is a potent one for those looking to build factories in Europe. Exports are up - in absolute terms - about 40 50% in the last five years. It's also worth remembering that the Spanish have - unlike the Italians - sorted out their banking system.
I disagree re QE. While the BoE, the BoJ and the Fed have massively increased the size of their balance sheets in the last three years, the ECB as shrunk theirs. The TLTROs and ABS purchases - while not supported by Jens Weidmann - will go ahead. You might argue that €1trn is not enough, but you would be hard pressed to argue that the reversal of the shrinkage of the ECB's balance sheet is not enough.
Political insight du jour: political parties try very, very hard to win elections. It's what they do. Almost all talk of throwing kitchen sinks/not really trying is spin and expectations management. I am sure the tories are trying really hard. I am equally sure they are not trying harder than UKIP. It's about differentials (which were also going to ensure the Yes victory in the indyref) and there ain't one. There also isn't a "better at the ground game" argument in this particular case, with a lot of pre existing tory machinery on the Reckless side.
Secondly if you are a right-leaning tory there is actually a strong temptation to vote Ukip as this is only a by-election. It gives Cameron a kicking (allegedly they don't like him) and giving Ukip a win is your best chance of nudging the tory GE manifesto to the right.
And they might also just vote Ukip to see what it feels like. Do you come out of the booth with an insatiable desire to set fire to a Romanian?
Our celebrity member Mike Read, the former Radio 1 DJ, has written a brand new single especially for UKIP and we need your help to get it to the top of the pop charts.
First performed to great acclaim at our Party Conference in Doncaster, UKIP Calypso by The Independents needs to sell just 22,000 downloads to make it into the Top 30, or 28,000 to get into the Top 10.
Wouldn’t it be great if we could get this song into the charts and played on radio stations around Britain?
With more than 40,000 members and thousands more supporters we’re sure we can do this! It costs just 79p to download, 20p of which will go to UKIP.
Please click here to get listening and help take us to the top!"
Our celebrity member Mike Read, the former Radio 1 DJ, has written a brand new single especially for UKIP and we need your help to get it to the top of the pop charts.
First performed to great acclaim at our Party Conference in Doncaster, UKIP Calypso by The Independents needs to sell just 22,000 downloads to make it into the Top 30, or 28,000 to get into the Top 10.
Wouldn’t it be great if we could get this song into the charts and played on radio stations around Britain?
With more than 40,000 members and thousands more supporters we’re sure we can do this! It costs just 79p to download, 20p of which will go to UKIP.
Please click here to get listening and help take us to the top!"
He really can be embarrassing at times.
I think if that gets to number 1 it will be bad for Ukip... Maybe the Tories should spend their election dough on making sure it does!
BTW, your comment regarding Spanish manufacturing moving back to unskilled is wildly inaccurate.
The largest component of Spanish exports is now automotive, and this has been increasing. There are new factories and expansions from VW, GM, Renault, Ford and Nissan. You are seeing plants being closed in places like Belgium, and production being moved to Northern Spain. The technical complexity of Spanish exports - as measured by the 'Economic Complexity Index' - increased from 0.93 in 2008 to 0.95 in 2011 and to 0.98 in 2013.
"....Political parties try very, very hard to win elections. "
Sometimes HQ makes a decision to soft-pedal in an area, especially where by-elections are concerned.
Labour definitely did that in Eastleigh, and you could say it worked in the sense that it helped prevent a Tory win. (It also preserved funds, which is not an immaterial consideration!) It's a risky strategy though and I'm not sure it's right in Rochester.
On topic, this by-election, like Newark is fascinating, for the fact Labour aren't even attempting to win this.
The swing needed here for them to win is 10.4%, which should be pretty easy given that 16% voted Lib Dem in R&S in 2010.
In Newark they needed a 15.8% swing to win the seat, which should have been easy given than 20% voted Lib Dem in Newark in 2010.
Historically speaking, those sorts of swings are possible for an opposition in the last year of the parliament.
The Tories achieved a 16.5% swing in Norwich North in 2009.
Labour in 1996 achieved a 22% swing South East Staffordshire by-election
Like a French sailor led by Villeneuve at Trafalgar, Labour know they are doomed under the duffer that is Ed Miliband.
Is quite incredible... They hang on by the skin of their teeth in heartlands and don't try in possible gains... Have to say their strategy looks very strange
Friday's Populus North Britain Sub-sample had the SNP ahead by 14%, of Labour who were in third place.
Today's Populus North British sub-sample had Labour ahead.
But surely a poll is only an aggregate of several sub-samples when you break it down?
No, the poll as a whole is properly weighted, individual sub-samples are not, so can be misleading.
Put it this way, look at it a football season, a sub-sample is one result, whereas the final league table is the definitive barometer. Say Sunderland beat Chelsea last season, you could use that to say Sunderland are awesome.
(and before scrapheap mentions it, pee off about Liverpool and Crystal Palace result last season)
First performed to great acclaim at our Party Conference in Doncaster, UKIP Calypso by The Independents.
"Calypso" - sounds like a foreign immigrant tune favoured by brown people !?
Were Chas n Dave not available for a good old British singalong ?
Chas and Dave are already committed to the fight for creating a Homeland For Cockneys, and the movement to set up a separate free State on The Isle of Dogs.
On topic, this by-election, like Newark is fascinating, for the fact Labour aren't even attempting to win this.
The swing needed here for them to win is 10.4%, which should be pretty easy given that 16% voted Lib Dem in R&S in 2010.
In Newark they needed a 15.8% swing to win the seat, which should have been easy given than 20% voted Lib Dem in Newark in 2010.
Historically speaking, those sorts of swings are possible for an opposition in the last year of the parliament.
The Tories achieved a 16.5% swing in Norwich North in 2009.
Labour in 1996 achieved a 22% swing South East Staffordshire by-election
Like a French sailor led by Villeneuve at Trafalgar, Labour know they are doomed under the duffer that is Ed Miliband.
Is quite incredible... They hang on by the skin of their teeth in heartlands and don't try in possible gains... Have to say their strategy looks very strange
Is it the 'Too clever by half' strategy, one that abounds in those with copious amounts of intellectual self confidence?
On topic, this by-election, like Newark is fascinating, for the fact Labour aren't even attempting to win this.
The swing needed here for them to win is 10.4%, which should be pretty easy given that 16% voted Lib Dem in R&S in 2010.
In Newark they needed a 15.8% swing to win the seat, which should have been easy given than 20% voted Lib Dem in Newark in 2010.
Historically speaking, those sorts of swings are possible for an opposition in the last year of the parliament.
The Tories achieved a 16.5% swing in Norwich North in 2009.
Labour in 1996 achieved a 22% swing South East Staffordshire by-election
Like a French sailor led by Villeneuve at Trafalgar, Labour know they are doomed under the duffer that is Ed Miliband.
Is quite incredible... They hang on by the skin of their teeth in heartlands and don't try in possible gains... Have to say their strategy looks very strange
I can only assume that Labour high command thinks that UKIP winning R&S (or Newark prior to tha) does more damage to Dave than Labour winning the seat, and increases the chances of Dave being defenestrated.
On Topic: Very disappointed that Labour are soft-pedalling in R&S. This is a seat that's very winnable and even if Labour don't win it, a credible vote share will boost morale. A distant trailing third will be a poor result. Whoever is in charge of by-election strategy at party HQ needs firing.
Off Topic: Searching for a new PC (general use, part time gamer) - any recommendations? Intel or AMD?
There can be little confidence in the Lynton Crosby strategy of out-Ukipping Ukip.It hasn't worked since Dave called the euroref and it didn't work in Eastleigh.Yet,the Tories continue to fish in this dry river whichever of the 2 candidates gets selected and however many troops on the ground.
I had a dream that the Lib Dems were ahead of the SNP in a Scotland specific constituency poll !
No one seems to have picked up on your oblique reference to an opinion poll today putting Tories ahead of Labour in Scotland for the first time since 50s...
Meanwhile the Mail are going in hard on NHS Wales. The implication being if you are ill and infirm and Labour win be afraid, be very afraid. Perhaps a taster of the Tory election strategy.
On Topic: Very disappointed that Labour are soft-pedalling in R&S. This is a seat that's very winnable and even if Labour don't win it, a credible vote share will boost morale. A distant trailing third will be a poor result. Whoever is in charge of by-election strategy at party HQ needs firing.
Off Topic: Searching for a new PC (general use, part time gamer) - any recommendations? Intel or AMD?
The truth is though while obviously not as ideal as a Tory win a narrow Labour win at R& S is pretty good for Dave as it proves his mantra about going to bed with Nigel and waking up with Ed. A case for Lab of losing a battle in order to win the war.
On Topic: Very disappointed that Labour are soft-pedalling in R&S. This is a seat that's very winnable and even if Labour don't win it, a credible vote share will boost morale. A distant trailing third will be a poor result. Whoever is in charge of by-election strategy at party HQ needs firing.
Off Topic: Searching for a new PC (general use, part time gamer) - any recommendations? Intel or AMD?
Well I'd recommend an Apple.
But if you're going for used for gaming, I'd recommend Intel everytime, and lots of RAM
On Topic: Very disappointed that Labour are soft-pedalling in R&S. This is a seat that's very winnable and even if Labour don't win it, a credible vote share will boost morale. A distant trailing third will be a poor result. Whoever is in charge of by-election strategy at party HQ needs firing.
When the main opposition party cannot be bothered to campaign in a seat it was 2nd in and had previously held, it shows that they are a party focusing on tactics and not the wider strategy of being the main opposition. But they do not like WWC voters so why surprised?
This'll dilute election coverage a bit. The second offspring of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge is due in April: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-29688969
I think this weeks polls will be revealing as a Lab supporter I am hoping for an average poll lead of 3%. minimum.
Anything less and with some swing-back bound to occur IMO I think a Lab maj would be less likely.
I fear Ed is Crap could be heading for biggest party only which is fine from a betting point of view but rubbish with the right wing vote likely to be so split.
We will see starting with todays Populus and concluding with Sunday Times YG et al can Ed is crap achieve a 3% average lead?
Populus lead is in fact 3 points on the YG basis - Populus are weighting for turnout, which is currently very high for Con/UKIP (75%), not so high for Lab (65%) and lower still for LD. At the moment, Cameron is making more of the news than the other parties so I'd expect that to continue this week, failing surprises. But doorstep feeling remains very entrenched and I expect voter certainty to even out when it matters.The by-election is probably the next major event that could shift votes, especially if it triggers other events, but that's a month off so we'll have a thin gruel of drifting polls for a bit.
On Topic: Very disappointed that Labour are soft-pedalling in R&S. This is a seat that's very winnable and even if Labour don't win it, a credible vote share will boost morale. A distant trailing third will be a poor result. Whoever is in charge of by-election strategy at party HQ needs firing.
Off Topic: Searching for a new PC (general use, part time gamer) - any recommendations? Intel or AMD?
The truth is though while obviously not as ideal as a Tory win a narrow Labour win at R& S is pretty good for Dave as it proves his mantra about going to bed with Nigel and waking up with Ed. A case for Lab of losing a battle in order to win the war.
But it will kill off the enthusiasm of activists in that constituency and neighbouring ones. It will create a feeling that Labour does not want them.
On topic, this by-election, like Newark is fascinating, for the fact Labour aren't even attempting to win this.
The swing needed here for them to win is 10.4%, which should be pretty easy given that 16% voted Lib Dem in R&S in 2010.
In Newark they needed a 15.8% swing to win the seat, which should have been easy given than 20% voted Lib Dem in Newark in 2010.
Historically speaking, those sorts of swings are possible for an opposition in the last year of the parliament.
The Tories achieved a 16.5% swing in Norwich North in 2009.
Labour in 1996 achieved a 22% swing South East Staffordshire by-election
Like a French sailor led by Villeneuve at Trafalgar, Labour know they are doomed under the duffer that is Ed Miliband.
It is rather tiring to keep having to point this out to you TSE but Newark Labour have been in disarray for a decade or more. The by election there tells you absolutely nothing about Labour nationally.
By the way, have you withdrawn your inaccurate claim that the ECB has been buying peripheral bonds to prop up their prices yet?
No, because you never responded to my last post about it. You mentioned that the SMP program had winded up, which was accurate, but entirely ignored the OMT program.
By the way, have you withdrawn your inaccurate claim that the ECB has been buying peripheral bonds to prop up their prices yet?
No, because you never responded to my last post about it. You mentioned that the SMP program had winded up, which was accurate, but entirely ignored the OMT program.
Given that I've explained to you on a couple of occasions exactly what the United & Cecil Club is, and the sort of people that join it, why did you feel the need to describe it as "mysterious and sinister" (or whatever the exact phrase was).
Now, I know you were cute about it in "only quoting" the guardian, but isn't it a wee bit, you know, unethical to lie and smear your opponents?
On topic, this by-election, like Newark is fascinating, for the fact Labour aren't even attempting to win this.
The swing needed here for them to win is 10.4%, which should be pretty easy given that 16% voted Lib Dem in R&S in 2010.
In Newark they needed a 15.8% swing to win the seat, which should have been easy given than 20% voted Lib Dem in Newark in 2010.
Historically speaking, those sorts of swings are possible for an opposition in the last year of the parliament.
The Tories achieved a 16.5% swing in Norwich North in 2009.
Labour in 1996 achieved a 22% swing South East Staffordshire by-election
Like a French sailor led by Villeneuve at Trafalgar, Labour know they are doomed under the duffer that is Ed Miliband.
It is rather tiring to keep having to point this out to you TSE but Newark Labour have been in disarray for a decade or more. The by election there tells you absolutely nothing about Labour nationally.
Yet as you never tire of telling us, there was no tactical voting so, I'm trying to work out, given the collapse of the Lib Dems, Labour's share of the vote still dropped, where exactly did the Labour vote go and what we can read into it.
Friday's Populus North Britain Sub-sample had the SNP ahead by 14%, of Labour who were in third place.
Today's Populus North British sub-sample had Labour ahead.
But surely a poll is only an aggregate of several sub-samples when you break it down?
No. Or more accurately Yes, but not in a useful way.
Subsamples are an artificial breakdown of a poll. As the results are weighted across the whole poll this can weigh or lighten any particular subsampl disproportionallye. Furthermore, look at the population of the subsample, in the Populus poll it was 128 people, that's a margin of error of more than 8.5% - would you take a poll seriously that had a margin of error that large?
By the way, have you withdrawn your inaccurate claim that the ECB has been buying peripheral bonds to prop up their prices yet?
No, because you never responded to my last post about it. You mentioned that the SMP program had winded up, which was accurate, but entirely ignored the OMT program.
The OMT programme has not bought a single bond.
As in, the OMT programme is currently inactive, and has never been used by the ECB to buy bonds issued by Italy, Spain, Greece or anyone else. Because the legal status of the OMT remains unknown (it is being challenged) it is not clear whether the ECB would utilise it. Although I would guess in extremis it probably would.
New market up for Green Seat Bands at Ladbrokes, plus a bit of analysis here: http://t.co/kEnJttJvJD
Two or more seats would be tempting at 6/1 but for the fact Hills are 8/1 !
You are basically betting Brighton and Norwich, with a possible surprise in Bristol West helping out. It's an OK bet, but not fantastic. I do however expect to see Greens pick up a bit from now to May, so maybe there's a bit more value in the bet than first seems apparent.
By the way, have you withdrawn your inaccurate claim that the ECB has been buying peripheral bonds to prop up their prices yet?
No, because you never responded to my last post about it. You mentioned that the SMP program had winded up, which was accurate, but entirely ignored the OMT program.
The OMT programme has not bought a single bond.
Yes, but the promise of the ECB under the OMT program that it will step in has had a notable effect on bond prices. As with bank guarantees, there's a notional liability there.
By the way, have you withdrawn your inaccurate claim that the ECB has been buying peripheral bonds to prop up their prices yet?
No, because you never responded to my last post about it. You mentioned that the SMP program had winded up, which was accurate, but entirely ignored the OMT program.
The OMT programme has not bought a single bond.
Yes, but the promise of the ECB under the OMT program that it will step in has had a notable effect on bond prices. As with bank guarantees, there's a notional liability there.
Socrates: that's not what you said.
You specifically said that the ECB had been selling German bonds to buy peripheral bonds and made a number of other claims, unbacked up by any links or evidence about the ECB balance sheet containing more peripheral debt.
I pointed out that was not true, and you continue to repeat it.
If you want to claim that the OMT changed the environment for funding, then sure, I agree. But that's not what you wrote and repeated.
On Topic: Very disappointed that Labour are soft-pedalling in R&S. This is a seat that's very winnable and even if Labour don't win it, a credible vote share will boost morale. A distant trailing third will be a poor result. Whoever is in charge of by-election strategy at party HQ needs firing.
Off Topic: Searching for a new PC (general use, part time gamer) - any recommendations? Intel or AMD?
The truth is though while obviously not as ideal as a Tory win a narrow Labour win at R& S is pretty good for Dave as it proves his mantra about going to bed with Nigel and waking up with Ed. A case for Lab of losing a battle in order to win the war.
But it will kill off the enthusiasm of activists in that constituency and neighbouring ones. It will create a feeling that Labour does not want them.
I agree and in fairness they have a lively candidate in R & S, a female kickboxer of Pakistani ethnic origin and today I see Ms Harperson is visiting the constituency. I don't for a second think Lab want a poor result - a narrow loss to Ukip would suit them best tactically and for the reasons you state. The 16% LD vote will be the squeezable one - another lost deposit is beckoning.
On topic, this by-election, like Newark is fascinating, for the fact Labour aren't even attempting to win this.
The swing needed here for them to win is 10.4%, which should be pretty easy given that 16% voted Lib Dem in R&S in 2010.
In Newark they needed a 15.8% swing to win the seat, which should have been easy given than 20% voted Lib Dem in Newark in 2010.
Historically speaking, those sorts of swings are possible for an opposition in the last year of the parliament.
The Tories achieved a 16.5% swing in Norwich North in 2009.
Labour in 1996 achieved a 22% swing South East Staffordshire by-election
Like a French sailor led by Villeneuve at Trafalgar, Labour know they are doomed under the duffer that is Ed Miliband.
It is rather tiring to keep having to point this out to you TSE but Newark Labour have been in disarray for a decade or more. The by election there tells you absolutely nothing about Labour nationally.
Yet as you never tire of telling us, there was no tactical voting so, I'm trying to work out, given the collapse of the Lib Dems, Labour's share of the vote still dropped, where exactly did the Labour vote go and what we can read into it.
It didn't drop much actually did it?
Paul Baggaley (Independent) runs a Save Newark Hospital campaign.. he got the same amount that Labour went down.. seems like a Labour type cause
Obv there is a churn which is impossible to know, and we can all present it the way we want
Conservative Robert Jenrick 17,431 45.0 -8.9
UKIP Roger Helmer 10,028 25.9 +22.1
Labour Michael Payne 6,842 17.7 -4.6
Independent Paul Baggaley 1,891 4.9 N/A
Green David Kirwan 1,057 2.7 N/A
Liberal Democrat David Watts 1,004 2.6 -17.4
Monster Raving Loony Nick The Flying Brick 168 0.4 N/A
COMPLETELY OT!. I was in a bar in Soho some years ago when someone jokingly said to Derek Coutts 'Imagine having on your tombstone 'Here lies Derek Coutts. He shot the OXO commercials'.
As a put down it was quite funny but having just listened to Linda Bellingham's co star in the ad paying tribute to her I thought the real irony is that that Derek who cast and directed them in their most famous work in all likelihood wont be remembered at all.
On topic, this by-election, like Newark is fascinating, for the fact Labour aren't even attempting to win this.
The swing needed here for them to win is 10.4%, which should be pretty easy given that 16% voted Lib Dem in R&S in 2010.
In Newark they needed a 15.8% swing to win the seat, which should have been easy given than 20% voted Lib Dem in Newark in 2010.
Historically speaking, those sorts of swings are possible for an opposition in the last year of the parliament.
The Tories achieved a 16.5% swing in Norwich North in 2009.
Labour in 1996 achieved a 22% swing South East Staffordshire by-election
Like a French sailor led by Villeneuve at Trafalgar, Labour know they are doomed under the duffer that is Ed Miliband.
It is rather tiring to keep having to point this out to you TSE but Newark Labour have been in disarray for a decade or more. The by election there tells you absolutely nothing about Labour nationally.
Yet as you never tire of telling us, there was no tactical voting so, I'm trying to work out, given the collapse of the Lib Dems, Labour's share of the vote still dropped, where exactly did the Labour vote go and what we can read into it.
It didn't drop much actually did it?
Paul Baggaley (Independent) runs a Save Newark Hospital campaign.. he got the same amount that Labour went down.. seems like a Labour type cause
Obv there is a churn which is impossible to know, and we can all present it the way we want
Conservative Robert Jenrick 17,431 45.0 -8.9
UKIP Roger Helmer 10,028 25.9 +22.1
Labour Michael Payne 6,842 17.7 -4.6
Independent Paul Baggaley 1,891 4.9 N/A
Green David Kirwan 1,057 2.7 N/A
Liberal Democrat David Watts 1,004 2.6 -17.4
Monster Raving Loony Nick The Flying Brick 168 0.4 N/A
Independent Andy Hayes 117 0.3 N/A
Bus-Pass Elvis Party David Bishop 87 0.2 N/A
Common Good Dick Rodgers 64 0.2 N/A
Patriotic Socialist Party Lee Woods 18 0.1 N/
All the polls show a huge shift from LD to Lab.
Despite this in Newark and in Heywood it didn't do much for Labour's share of the vote.
The betting's going to be a bit dull until we see a Rochester poll, and that won't happen until the Tories name a candidate.
Why is it taking so long?
Democracy takes time.
Unlike the Kippers we're not foisting a candidate on the good people of Rochester and Strood, Vox Populi, Vox Dei and all that jazz
Vicious regress. Why has the binary choice between the candidates in the open primary been arbitrarily foisted on the electorate by backroom tory machinations? Why were they not fairly, openly and democratically selected in an open primary?
By the way, have you withdrawn your inaccurate claim that the ECB has been buying peripheral bonds to prop up their prices yet?
No, because you never responded to my last post about it. You mentioned that the SMP program had winded up, which was accurate, but entirely ignored the OMT program.
The OMT programme has not bought a single bond.
Yes, but the promise of the ECB under the OMT program that it will step in has had a notable effect on bond prices. As with bank guarantees, there's a notional liability there.
Socrates: that's not what you said.
You specifically said that the ECB had been selling German bonds to buy peripheral bonds and made a number of other claims, unbacked up by any links or evidence about the ECB balance sheet containing more peripheral debt.
I pointed out that was not true, and you continue to repeat it.
If you want to claim that the OMT changed the environment for funding, then sure, I agree. But that's not what you wrote and repeated.
Fair enough. I'll take back that claim, which was out of date.
Surprisingly, there had been rumours he might not and instead end up going to compete for Porsche in sports car racing. Glad he's still got his seat, he's one of the best drivers outside a top team.
Voters do care about the personal qualities of the candidate. Since the Newark by-election we have found out a bit more about the somewhat sleazy private life of Helmer who always was a bit of a nut job and weirdo. Ukip's poor polling there might also have reflected the public's ability to sniff out a wrong 'un.
Surprisingly, there had been rumours he might not and instead end up going to compete for Porsche in sports car racing. Glad he's still got his seat, he's one of the best drivers outside a top team.
I've got laptop problems - can you tell me if Lewis is still 4/6 for US, Morris?
On topic, this by-election, like Newark is fascinating, for the fact Labour aren't even attempting to win this.
The swing needed here for them to win is 10.4%, which should be pretty easy given that 16% voted Lib Dem in R&S in 2010.
In Newark they needed a 15.8% swing to win the seat, which should have been easy given than 20% voted Lib Dem in Newark in 2010.
Historically speaking, those sorts of swings are possible for an opposition in the last year of the parliament.
The Tories achieved a 16.5% swing in Norwich North in 2009.
Labour in 1996 achieved a 22% swing South East Staffordshire by-election
Like a French sailor led by Villeneuve at Trafalgar, Labour know they are doomed under the duffer that is Ed Miliband.
It is rather tiring to keep having to point this out to you TSE but Newark Labour have been in disarray for a decade or more. The by election there tells you absolutely nothing about Labour nationally.
Yet as you never tire of telling us, there was no tactical voting so, I'm trying to work out, given the collapse of the Lib Dems, Labour's share of the vote still dropped, where exactly did the Labour vote go and what we can read into it.
It didn't drop much actually did it?
Paul Baggaley (Independent) runs a Save Newark Hospital campaign.. he got the same amount that Labour went down.. seems like a Labour type cause
Obv there is a churn which is impossible to know, and we can all present it the way we want
Conservative Robert Jenrick 17,431 45.0 -8.9
UKIP Roger Helmer 10,028 25.9 +22.1
Labour Michael Payne 6,842 17.7 -4.6
Independent Paul Baggaley 1,891 4.9 N/A
Green David Kirwan 1,057 2.7 N/A
Liberal Democrat David Watts 1,004 2.6 -17.4
Monster Raving Loony Nick The Flying Brick 168 0.4 N/A
Independent Andy Hayes 117 0.3 N/A
Bus-Pass Elvis Party David Bishop 87 0.2 N/A
Common Good Dick Rodgers 64 0.2 N/A
Patriotic Socialist Party Lee Woods 18 0.1 N/
All the polls show a huge shift from LD to Lab.
Despite this in Newark and in Heywood it didn't do much for Labour's share of the vote.
Voters do care about the personal qualities of the candidate. Since the Newark by-election we have found out a bit more about the somewhat sleazy private life of Helmer who always was a bit of a nut job and weirdo. Ukip's poor polling there might also have reflected the public's ability to sniff out a wrong 'un.
It doesn't say much for the fabled vetting procedures that UKIP are always going on about.
One wonders how many other wrong uns the Nigel Party have let in?
On topic, this by-election, like Newark is fascinating, for the fact Labour aren't even attempting to win this.
The swing needed here for them to win is 10.4%, which should be pretty easy given that 16% voted .
It is rather tiring to keep having to point this out to you TSE but Newark Labour have been in disarray for a decade or more. The by election there tells you absolutely nothing about Labour nationally.
Yet as you never tire of telling us, there was no tactical voting so, I'm trying to work out, given the collapse of the Lib Dems, Labour's share of the vote still dropped, where exactly did the Labour vote go and what we can read into it.
It didn't drop much actually did it?
Paul Baggaley (Independent) runs a Save Newark Hospital campaign.. he got the same amount that Labour went down.. seems like a Labour type cause
Obv there is a churn which is impossible to know, and we can all present it the way we want
Conservative Robert Jenrick 17,431 45.0 -8.9
UKIP Roger Helmer 10,028 25.9 +22.1
Labour Michael Payne 6,842 17.7 -4.6
Independent Paul Baggaley 1,891 4.9 N/A
Green David Kirwan 1,057 2.7 N/A
Liberal Democrat David Watts 1,004 2.6 -17.4
Monster Raving Loony Nick The Flying Brick 168 0.4 N/A
Independent Andy Hayes 117 0.3 N/A
Bus-Pass Elvis Party David Bishop 87 0.2 N/A
Common Good Dick Rodgers 64 0.2 N/A
Patriotic Socialist Party Lee Woods 18 0.1 N/
All the polls show a huge shift from LD to Lab.
Despite this in Newark and in Heywood it didn't do much for Labour's share of the vote.
Newark polls?
I'm talking about GB wide polls and The Lord A marginals polls.
All things being equal in Newark and Heywood Labour's share of the vote should have been up a lot, but in reality they went down and barely went up on their poor performance in 2010 respectively.
Several of us, including myself, have betting strategies that Labour will be the largest party in 2015 because of the 2010 Lib Dems.
If that crutch is happening only in the VI polls and not the ballot box, then I'm going to have to review my betting portfolio.
On topic, this by-election, like Newark is fascinating, for the fact Labour aren't even attempting to win this.
The swing needed here for them to win is 10.4%, which should be pretty easy given that 16% voted Lib Dem in R&S in 2010.
In Newark they needed a 15.8% swing to win the seat, which should have been easy given than 20% voted Lib Dem in Newark in 2010.
Historically speaking, those sorts of swings are possible for an opposition in the last year of the parliament.
The Tories achieved a 16.5% swing in Norwich North in 2009.
Labour in 1996 achieved a 22% swing South East Staffordshire by-election
Like a French sailor led by Villeneuve at Trafalgar, Labour know they are doomed under the duffer that is Ed Miliband.
It is rather tiring to keep having to point this out to you TSE but Newark Labour have been in disarray for a decade or more. The by election there tells you absolutely nothing about Labour nationally.
Yet as you never tire of telling us, there was no tactical voting so, I'm trying to work out, given the collapse of the Lib Dems, Labour's share of the vote still dropped, where exactly did the Labour vote go and what we can read into it.
It didn't drop much actually did it?
Paul Baggaley (Independent) runs a Save Newark Hospital campaign.. he got the same amount that Labour went down.. seems like a Labour type cause
All the polls show a huge shift from LD to Lab.
Despite this in Newark and in Heywood it didn't do much for Labour's share of the vote.
Newark polls?
Sorry you meant National polls
The Newark "who voted for who" saga is a bit silly I think
Everyone paints the picture that suits them and no one can prove anything, so its a bot pointless
If there was a big anti UKIP vote, then Clacton wouldn't have been a cakewalk, and Heywood wouldn't have been a photo finish
Friday's Populus North Britain Sub-sample had the SNP ahead by 14%, of Labour who were in third place.
Today's Populus North British sub-sample had Labour ahead.
But surely a poll is only an aggregate of several sub-samples when you break it down?
No. Or more accurately Yes, but not in a useful way.
Subsamples are an artificial breakdown of a poll. As the results are weighted across the whole poll this can weigh or lighten any particular subsampl disproportionallye. Furthermore, look at the population of the subsample, in the Populus poll it was 128 people, that's a margin of error of more than 8.5% - would you take a poll seriously that had a margin of error that large?
Labour 21% and 32%, SNP 31% and 35%.
I know which "subsamples" I'd rather have.
Which polling company is doing the upcoming Scottish VI poll ?
I'm going to have a look back through their "subsamples" and may well formulate a small bet on the basis of them.
Most people won't know who Mr Barroso is. Just some fat-cat from Brussels trying to tell us what to do, and that may be the impression he leaves. I suspect you're right about Cameron's negotiations, though.
Mr Dancer,
While you’re here ... I’ve read the e-tomes you recommended (yours included) and I thought they were rattling good stories which just happened to be in an SF setting.
However, the story wot I wrote is aimed at being proper SF geekery. Despite this, Wild Wolf Publishing have released it on Amazon . If anyone is interested –
To go into paperback if the ratings are good enough. They are a specialist publisher in “dark, edgy” stuff and I thought mine was light and thoughtful. Still, what do I know?
As it is proper scientific stuff, it’s obviously unsuitable for Arts graduates but as the subtitle is “History reborn”, and the hero is a historian, it’s probably OK for an historian to read, even an ancient one, like you.
It does involve stuff like genetic manipulation and skin colour, and global warming, politics and sex, not to mention the world being governed by Nigel Farage.
OK, I’m lying about that last one, but it is the sort of stuff that some on PB fret about.
But it’s no use anyone who graduated from Oxford with a PPE degree trying to understand it, so I won’t even tell them about it.
Here endeth the plug.
The plug worked :-)
I have also been meaning to sample the works of MD - if he is around could he post a link to Amazon for me.
On topic, this by-election, like Newark is fascinating, for the fact Labour aren't even attempting to win this.
The swing needed here for them to win is 10.4%, which should be pretty easy given that 16% voted Lib Dem in R&S in 2010.
In Newark they needed a 15.8% swing to win the seat, which should have been easy given than 20% voted Lib Dem in Newark in 2010.
Historically speaking, those sorts of swings are possible for an opposition in the last year of the parliament.
The Tories achieved a 16.5% swing in Norwich North in 2009.
Labour in 1996 achieved a 22% swing South East Staffordshire by-election
Like a French sailor led by Villeneuve at Trafalgar, Labour know they are doomed under the duffer that is Ed Miliband.
It is rather tiring to keep having to point this out to you TSE but Newark Labour have been in disarray for a decade or more. The by election there tells you absolutely nothing about Labour nationally.
Yet as you never tire of telling us, there was no tactical voting so, I'm trying to work out, given the collapse of the Lib Dems, Labour's share of the vote still dropped, where exactly did the Labour vote go and what we can read into it.
It didn't drop much actually did it?
Paul Baggaley (Independent) runs a Save Newark Hospital campaign.. he got the same amount that Labour went down.. seems like a Labour type cause
All the polls show a huge shift from LD to Lab.
Despite this in Newark and in Heywood it didn't do much for Labour's share of the vote.
Newark polls?
Sorry you meant National polls
The Newark "who voted for who" saga is a bit silly I think
Everyone paints the picture that suits them and no one can prove anything, so its a bot pointless
If there was a big anti UKIP vote, then Clacton wouldn't have been a cakewalk, and Heywood wouldn't have been a photo finish
anti Helmer, maybe
Anti-Helmer Labour vote switching to the Tories is my reckoning. There is also the local Labour disarray Tyndall was pointing to - so I'm not sure Newark can be considered so constructive.
I think UKIP win Rochester and Strood, that Swale by-election result (Is Swale in the constituency ?) has convinced me - and they could even outperform that 40% poll.
Comments
"But why is it still 3/1 if it's such massive value? Whys no one smashing it? "
It's propably the absence of polls.
You'd feel pretty daft if you smashed into the 3/1 a few hours before a poll put Reckless put 15 points ahead.
Temporary staffing data. As an investor, I've found it to be incredibly good as a 'canary in the coalmine' about changing underlying economic conditions.
In fact I have laid Ukip at 1.3 here after the survation poll to even up the book, but I just can't bet on the conservatives as an opening bet without more than Tory/anti Ukip wishful thinking
Nothing easier in betting than laying the favourite, gives everyone a very easy line after. Sometimes favs are too big though
People on here were saying Ukip were too short in Clacton at 1/3 and both Tories and labour were cited as the value... When I said the euro results made Ukip worthy favs I was laughed to scorn
That as now was based on no more than wishful thinking. Read the threads the day Carswell defected it's all there
Edit: bugger it's down to 400/1.
However, the fact is that in Japan and a number of Eurozone economies, there are considerably more people being brought into the temporary workforce than a year or two years ago.
By the way, have you withdrawn your inaccurate claim that the ECB has been buying peripheral bonds to prop up their prices yet?
But obviously if a poll comes out that shows it a lot closer, it won't be 3/1 anymore will it?! Blimey it'd be an easy game if you got to bet after things had happened!
Never thought of that. ;-)
Spain is another where I think the headline GDP figure masks an underlying weakness (just like the UK incidentally), the construction sector is dead, manufacturing is moving back towards the post-war unskilled type and unemployment is stubbornly high and unlike Ireland, Spain has not exported its unemployment problems to other EU countries.
As for the ECB commitment to QE, I will believe it when I see it. The ABS purchases are laughable in volume and the TLTRO is a busted flush. Worse still monetising government debt seems like a loser in Europe already since investors, without QE, are willing to accept pitiful returns offered by Bunds and Oats already. Lowering those yields further is not going to drive private money into other markets as it did in the UK and US, it will be more like Japan where institutions and investors will take the lower yield and sit on their hands waiting for the ECB to give up. It took a radical PM in Japan to get the monetary stimulus to work and to almost beat deflation, Europe has no one like that and the Bundesbank is always going to be a handbrake on any kind of massive QE programme.
As for Italy, there seems to be no appetite for privatisation, no appetite to reform the labour market and given Italy's huge competitive disadvantage to Germany in terms of productivity adjusted unit labour costs there is no will strong enough to reform such a market. In a country with endemic corruption, creaking infrastructure and an absolutely huge (and rising) interest bill, coupled with an ageing population one doesn't envy Renzi.
Price vs time tracker graph is informative - seems to have been influenced purely by Carswells win - which was thought to be on a large personal vote.
Anything less and with some swing-back bound to occur IMO I think a Lab maj would be less likely.
I fear Ed is Crap could be heading for biggest party only which is fine from a betting point of view but rubbish with the right wing vote likely to be so split.
We will see starting with todays Populus and concluding with Sunday Times YG et al can Ed is crap achieve a 3% average lead?
The Tories will certainly be trying hard this time, and although Labour are apparently giving it a pass, they will at least have to show their faces.
Con 34 (+1) Lab 36 (+1) LD 9 (-1) UKIP 13 (-1)
http://www.populus.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/OmOnline_Vote_20-10-2014_BPC.pdf
I agree that Italy could go either way: it's a very hard call. Remzi talks the talk but the country has a dysfunctional political system that makes it very hard to implement change.
Good spot re Portugal, I missed that. (Although I would point out that, even after revising the previous Q, was still up 0.9% yoy)
I fundamentally disagree re Spain. I think people miss the extent of the underlying change there. The labour market is now much freer than it was in 2006 (and on OECD measures of labour market flexibility isn't that far behind the UK). Underlying government spending is much lower. The country runs a current account surplus. House prices have stopped dropping. It's attracting FDI in much the same way the UK did in the 1980s. Labour productivity has risen 15% in five years, as wage rates have fallen the same amount - making it an incredibly attractive place to invest. The combination of a liberalised labour market, good infrastructure, rising productivity and falling wages is a potent one for those looking to build factories in Europe. Exports are up - in absolute terms - about 40 50% in the last five years. It's also worth remembering that the Spanish have - unlike the Italians - sorted out their banking system.
I disagree re QE. While the BoE, the BoJ and the Fed have massively increased the size of their balance sheets in the last three years, the ECB as shrunk theirs. The TLTROs and ABS purchases - while not supported by Jens Weidmann - will go ahead. You might argue that €1trn is not enough, but you would be hard pressed to argue that the reversal of the shrinkage of the ECB's balance sheet is not enough.
Secondly if you are a right-leaning tory there is actually a strong temptation to vote Ukip as this is only a by-election. It gives Cameron a kicking (allegedly they don't like him) and giving Ukip a win is your best chance of nudging the tory GE manifesto to the right.
And they might also just vote Ukip to see what it feels like. Do you come out of the booth with an insatiable desire to set fire to a Romanian?
Friday's Populus North Britain Sub-sample had the SNP ahead by 14%, of Labour who were in third place.
Today's Populus North British sub-sample had Labour ahead.
That said there is money for the conservatives on Betfair now... So maybe one thing is happening or about to happen...
"Help UKIP Get To Number One!
Our celebrity member Mike Read, the former Radio 1 DJ, has written a brand new single especially for UKIP and we need your help to get it to the top of the pop charts.
First performed to great acclaim at our Party Conference in Doncaster, UKIP Calypso by The Independents needs to sell just 22,000 downloads to make it into the Top 30, or 28,000 to get into the Top 10.
Wouldn’t it be great if we could get this song into the charts and played on radio stations around Britain?
With more than 40,000 members and thousands more supporters we’re sure we can do this! It costs just 79p to download, 20p of which will go to UKIP.
Please click here to get listening and help take us to the top!"
He really can be embarrassing at times.
Ps haven't heard it, don't want to!
BTW, your comment regarding Spanish manufacturing moving back to unskilled is wildly inaccurate.
The largest component of Spanish exports is now automotive, and this has been increasing. There are new factories and expansions from VW, GM, Renault, Ford and Nissan. You are seeing plants being closed in places like Belgium, and production being moved to Northern Spain. The technical complexity of Spanish exports - as measured by the 'Economic Complexity Index' - increased from 0.93 in 2008 to 0.95 in 2011 and to 0.98 in 2013.
The swing needed here for them to win is 10.4%, which should be pretty easy given that 16% voted Lib Dem in R&S in 2010.
In Newark they needed a 15.8% swing to win the seat, which should have been easy given than 20% voted Lib Dem in Newark in 2010.
Historically speaking, those sorts of swings are possible for an opposition in the last year of the parliament.
The Tories achieved a 16.5% swing in Norwich North in 2009.
Labour in 1996 achieved a 22% swing South East Staffordshire by-election
Like a French sailor led by Villeneuve at Trafalgar, Labour know they are doomed under the duffer that is Ed Miliband.
Were Chas n Dave not available for a good old British singalong ?
"....Political parties try very, very hard to win elections. "
Sometimes HQ makes a decision to soft-pedal in an area, especially where by-elections are concerned.
Labour definitely did that in Eastleigh, and you could say it worked in the sense that it helped prevent a Tory win. (It also preserved funds, which is not an immaterial consideration!) It's a risky strategy though and I'm not sure it's right in Rochester.
Put it this way, look at it a football season, a sub-sample is one result, whereas the final league table is the definitive barometer. Say Sunderland beat Chelsea last season, you could use that to say Sunderland are awesome.
(and before scrapheap mentions it, pee off about Liverpool and Crystal Palace result last season)
Ed is Crap is PM
Average Lead this week only 2% (1 poll)
Off Topic: Searching for a new PC (general use, part time gamer) - any recommendations? Intel or AMD?
Meanwhile the Mail are going in hard on NHS Wales. The implication being if you are ill and infirm and Labour win be afraid, be very afraid. Perhaps a taster of the Tory election strategy.
Ed could be on course to outfoot Michael Foot.
Me and my GF (aka Briskin & co) are thinking about buying shares (at the lower end of the limit) in a Ftse company. (Guess the one in question!)
If we rang the stockbroker the next working day (i.e. today) - being aware of the various limits - Could we get in through in either name?
Populus 70 versus yougov low 60s
kurds kurds kurds
- Why does the whole world have so much F-ing faith in the kurds.
"“If you have a three bedroom house you can’t have five or six guests because it’s too crowded – it is the same with the country."
http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/news/coventry-news/ukip-switch-former-labour-councillor-7962582#.VETJlEDze5k.twitter
But if you're going for used for gaming, I'd recommend Intel everytime, and lots of RAM
http://youtu.be/up7pvPqNkuU
drat
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-29688969
http://t.co/kEnJttJvJD
I'd also consider a Quiet PC pre-built system.
Been reading footrot flats which gave me the idea
Although under Ed, Labour are more Flatline Foots.
Monday: hangover
Your bank probably has a sharedealing service which might be the quickest way of doing things.
Remember that the v of your i cgdawau. dyor. wibble.
Must be a really pressing issue for him
Given that I've explained to you on a couple of occasions exactly what the United & Cecil Club is, and the sort of people that join it, why did you feel the need to describe it as "mysterious and sinister" (or whatever the exact phrase was).
Now, I know you were cute about it in "only quoting" the guardian, but isn't it a wee bit, you know, unethical to lie and smear your opponents?
Subsamples are an artificial breakdown of a poll. As the results are weighted across the whole poll this can weigh or lighten any particular subsampl disproportionallye. Furthermore, look at the population of the subsample, in the Populus poll it was 128 people, that's a margin of error of more than 8.5% - would you take a poll seriously that had a margin of error that large?
You are basically betting Brighton and Norwich, with a possible surprise in Bristol West helping out. It's an OK bet, but not fantastic. I do however expect to see Greens pick up a bit from now to May, so maybe there's a bit more value in the bet than first seems apparent.
Perhaps BJO is overcome with concern following the shocking revelations in the Mail regarding the NHS under labour in Wales.
Then again, maybe he isn't.
You specifically said that the ECB had been selling German bonds to buy peripheral bonds and made a number of other claims, unbacked up by any links or evidence about the ECB balance sheet containing more peripheral debt.
I pointed out that was not true, and you continue to repeat it.
If you want to claim that the OMT changed the environment for funding, then sure, I agree. But that's not what you wrote and repeated.
Why is it taking so long?
Heartily concur with the spirit of your post.
When your in the top 100,000 website's globally you really have hit the big time!
Well done to Mike and Robert on this fantastic website you've created.
Personally, I attribute the site's success to the important posts about differential front end grip.
Paul Baggaley (Independent) runs a Save Newark Hospital campaign.. he got the same amount that Labour went down.. seems like a Labour type cause
Obv there is a churn which is impossible to know, and we can all present it the way we want
Conservative Robert Jenrick 17,431 45.0 -8.9
UKIP Roger Helmer 10,028 25.9 +22.1
Labour Michael Payne 6,842 17.7 -4.6
Independent Paul Baggaley 1,891 4.9 N/A
Green David Kirwan 1,057 2.7 N/A
Liberal Democrat David Watts 1,004 2.6 -17.4
Monster Raving Loony Nick The Flying Brick 168 0.4 N/A
Independent Andy Hayes 117 0.3 N/A
Bus-Pass Elvis Party David Bishop 87 0.2 N/A
Common Good Dick Rodgers 64 0.2 N/A
Patriotic Socialist Party Lee Woods 18 0.1 N/
Unlike the Kippers we're not foisting a candidate on the good people of Rochester and Strood, Vox Populi, Vox Dei and all that jazz
As a put down it was quite funny but having just listened to Linda Bellingham's co star in the ad paying tribute to her I thought the real irony is that that Derek who cast and directed them in their most famous work in all likelihood wont be remembered at all.
Despite this in Newark and in Heywood it didn't do much for Labour's share of the vote.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/29688104
Surprisingly, there had been rumours he might not and instead end up going to compete for Porsche in sports car racing. Glad he's still got his seat, he's one of the best drivers outside a top team.
David Cameron could walk on water and you'd be criticising him for not being able to swim.
One wonders how many other wrong uns the Nigel Party have let in?
Will it go Green, Yellow, Red or some other shade. From BBC.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p029027h
Greens have only reached 500 members in the City for the first time.
All things being equal in Newark and Heywood Labour's share of the vote should have been up a lot, but in reality they went down and barely went up on their poor performance in 2010 respectively.
Several of us, including myself, have betting strategies that Labour will be the largest party in 2015 because of the 2010 Lib Dems.
If that crutch is happening only in the VI polls and not the ballot box, then I'm going to have to review my betting portfolio.
The Newark "who voted for who" saga is a bit silly I think
Everyone paints the picture that suits them and no one can prove anything, so its a bot pointless
If there was a big anti UKIP vote, then Clacton wouldn't have been a cakewalk, and Heywood wouldn't have been a photo finish
anti Helmer, maybe
I know which "subsamples" I'd rather have.
Which polling company is doing the upcoming Scottish VI poll ?
I'm going to have a look back through their "subsamples" and may well formulate a small bet on the basis of them.
I have also been meaning to sample the works of MD - if he is around could he post a link to Amazon for me.
There is also the local Labour disarray Tyndall was pointing to - so I'm not sure Newark can be considered so constructive.
I think UKIP win Rochester and Strood, that Swale by-election result (Is Swale in the constituency ?) has convinced me - and they could even outperform that 40% poll.
UKIP has the big "mo"