Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » As the Rochester campaign moves into its final frenetic day

2»

Comments

  • Itajai said:


    Amazingly I thought it was illegal for the US to export oil and gas. Except to Canada.
    It is.
  • RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737
    RodCrosby said:

    "Let me be clear. We will NEVER put the Tories in government."

    Seems clear to me...
    "...except by snaffling so many Labour seats in Scotland that the Tories remain the only viable contender."

    (^_-)
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    chestnut said:

    I wonder if the employees share that view.

    "More than 2,000 shop floor staff at Sports Direct are set for a life-changing windfall after record profits at the fast-growing, cheap-and-cheerful chain triggered a bonus payout that will see workers who earn £20,000 a year banking payouts of £100,000 each."

    Evil capitalist bastards, paying their large bonuses to the fat cats at er...the shop floor... (some mistake surely?)
  • ItajaiItajai Posts: 721

    I'm almost surprised they haven't made rude comments about Reckless being a [apparently practicing] Roman Catholic and therefore not to be trusted.

    He is also, if Archbishop Cramner is to be believed, Vice Chairman of All Party Parliamentary Pro-Life Group and "as a member of the Home Affairs Select Committee, he interrogated the DPP Keir Starmer QC, demanding to know why, despite all the manifest evidence of crime and illegality, no doctors have been prosecuted either for authorising abortions without medical examination or terminating pregnancies because the foetus happens to be female."

    Good for him. Lets hope he increases his majority on Thursday. Rather puts to bed the idea in some quarters that he is unprincipled, and the idea that there are too few people of religion in the UK to make a difference politically.

    http://archbishopcranmer.com/rochester-strood-the-christian-case-for-supporting-mark-reckless/

    The British Vishinsky so politicised the CPS that it only prosecuted politically convenient crimes. "Racist" tweets - tick. Protestors with behead those who oppose Islam - no tick. Pointing out sex crimes among the Pakistani community - tick. Prosecuting sex crimes committed by the Pakistani community - no tick. FGM - no tick.

    No wonder he will become a Labourite MP next May.
  • Sturgeon suggests the SNP might prop up a Labour government but wouldn't prop up a Tory government. But my main incentive for voting SNP was to screw Labour. I'm really struggling to find someone to vote for this time....

    With SNP MPs not voting on England only issues how could they prop Labour up anyway? It seems to me the SNP have much more to gain from a Tory government and EV4EL.
  • FlightpathFlightpath Posts: 4,012

    Sturgeon suggests the SNP might prop up a Labour government but wouldn't prop up a Tory government. But my main incentive for voting SNP was to screw Labour. I'm really struggling to find someone to vote for this time....

    With SNP MPs not voting on England only issues how could they prop Labour up anyway? It seems to me the SNP have much more to gain from a Tory government and EV4EL.

    The SNP are a socialist party. Voters have to decide what they want.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,587

    Both sound pretty repellent to me. I would vote for neither.
    But it's fun seeing the Tories trying for the class war vote, innit?

    Nominations closed in our borough council by-election (Dec 11) on Friday. No LibDem candidate, even though they got 20% there last time. It's the safest Tory ward (Toton) but UKIP (who initiated the by-election) and Labour are having a go. Lots of local issues - HS2 was going to be sited here, but now probably isn't and 500 houses are being built on the Green Belt.

  • chestnutchestnut Posts: 7,341

    It seems to me the SNP have much more to gain from a Tory government and EV4EL.

    Agreed. The end game that dare not speak it's name.

    It doesn't involve propping up a Tory government; it involves Scotland being freer of England than before. No one who supports them will punish them for doing that deal, surely?
  • FlightpathFlightpath Posts: 4,012
    rcs1000 said:

    @FalseFlag

    re US shale oil (really, tight oil)

    If the oil price is $60, large parts of the US cease to be economic and lots of small (over-indebted) operators will go bust.
    ...

    The shale is not going to go away is it?

  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,793

    Did you read the article?
    Yes.

    And it still seems like a ridiculous sum. Bank Mellat is not that big a bank.

    It's total assets are only $62bn. Let's assume it makes a 0.5% return on assets, that would mean it's annual profits are $300m. (As a comparison, Royal Bank of Scotland has almost $2 trillion of assets).

    And how much of that profit would be associated with the UK? 5%? 10%?

    They might win the case, but they are simply not a big enough bank that the UK's actions can have caused them that degree of loss.
  • I want a more libertarian approach. It seems no one is offering it at present. At one point UKIP did to some extent, but now they've gone for the key freedom which arises from EU membership (to pander to former Labour voters) I'm disinclined to support them as anything other than a Euro election protest vote.

    And I want a coherent answer to the WLQ. A party which won't vote on English matters seems a prime candidate for my vote, but not if it helps Labour at Westminster.

    Not that it really matters: my vote will swing nothing in our daft system. Maybe the nutter from the Scottish Jacobite Party will run again and I can vote for him with my conscience intact!
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,793

    The shale is not going to go away is it?

    No. If prices are high, it will be produced, and if prices are low it will be left in the ground. Tight oil in the US (and Canada, and other places) is going to act as a very effective floor and ceiling on the oil price.
  • But it's fun seeing the Tories trying for the class war vote, innit?

    Nominations closed in our borough council by-election (Dec 11) on Friday. No LibDem candidate, even though they got 20% there last time. It's the safest Tory ward (Toton) but UKIP (who initiated the by-election) and Labour are having a go. Lots of local issues - HS2 was going to be sited here, but now probably isn't and 500 houses are being built on the Green Belt.

    Which party's fault is it we need so much new housing?

    Let me guess, is it the party that let tens of millions of immigrants into the country?
  • FlightpathFlightpath Posts: 4,012
    edited November 2014
    "Indigo" -- Potentially very expensive eurofiasco in the Speccie

    http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2014/11/how-brussels-sanctions-could-bleed-britain-dry/

    Falsflag -- ''Actually sanctions were imposed at the behest of the US not the EU. Still we are a nation of laws so encouraging news.''

    Yes
    It looks the usual excuse for an anti EU rant from someone most of us will never have heard of. You are correct they are world wide sanctions many UN as well as USA inspired. If this bank is innocent then it should not have had sanctions applied. Seems that this is the point. It was us that did it not the EU. But is it innocent?
  • MarkSeniorMarkSenior Posts: 4,699
    Swiss_Bob said:

    Which party's fault is it we need so much new housing?

    Let me guess, is it the party that let tens of millions of immigrants into the country?
    Tens Of Millions ? - Now come on . Exaggeration to such a degree just makes you look an idiot .
  • Been actually out and about on estates in R area today.
    Suprising number of undeciding moving towatds Blue and even more UKIP saying will revert to Con at GE
  • Sports Direct's contemptuous dismissal of Ed's comments really is telling. Clearly they don't think it's even worth responding to the substance of his comments. Has the leader of one of our major parties even been held in such low esteem?
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,641
    chestnut said:

    I wonder if the employees share that view.

    "More than 2,000 shop floor staff at Sports Direct are set for a life-changing windfall after record profits at the fast-growing, cheap-and-cheerful chain triggered a bonus payout that will see workers who earn £20,000 a year banking payouts of £100,000 each."

    That sounds terrible.

  • ItajaiItajai Posts: 721
    Millions is more like it.

    So, we need x000000 new houses to house Labour's imported voters. Not building new housing means continued pressure on current housing. Building new houses means pressure on the green belt. Where does our hopeful next MP for Broxtowe stand?

    Yes - we need new housing for the millions of new immigrants Labour imported for electoral reasons
    No - no new housing, and so refreshingly at odds with his leader. Protect the green belt, etc

    We already know he is happy for foreigners to access any new social housing ahead of locals if their "needs" are higher. The only question is if he will favour fast tracking these foreigners to access existing or new housing.
  • Tens Of Millions ? - Now come on . Exaggeration to such a degree just makes you look an idiot .
    Shall we do some basic maths.

    You tell me what you think the current UK population is bearing in mind there's no census anymore and people were not required to complete the last one and didn't in large numbers.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,677
    Swiss_Bob said:

    Shall we do some basic maths.

    You tell me what you think the current UK population is bearing in mind there's no census anymore and people were not required to complete the last one and didn't in large numbers.
    Tens of millions 'large numbers'? That's not credible.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548

    But it's fun seeing the Tories trying for the class war vote, innit?

    Nominations closed in our borough council by-election (Dec 11) on Friday. No LibDem candidate, even though they got 20% there last time. It's the safest Tory ward (Toton) but UKIP (who initiated the by-election) and Labour are having a go. Lots of local issues - HS2 was going to be sited here, but now probably isn't and 500 houses are being built on the Green Belt.

    There are some Tories that I would vote for, but these two both make my heart sink.

    Though I see no one so far has staked for Labour on the seat.

    With a cold wet November and the Tories better organised at postal votes, I have gone for a 1.26% Tory win.





  • kle4 said:

    Tens of millions 'large numbers'? That's not credible.
    Feel free to answer the question I asked Mr Senior, then the maths lesson can begin.
  • MarkSeniorMarkSenior Posts: 4,699
    edited November 2014
    Swiss_Bob said:

    Shall we do some basic maths.

    You tell me what you think the current UK population is bearing in mind there's no census anymore and people were not required to complete the last one and didn't in large numbers.
    Simple Maths

    UK Population 1997 year Labour took office 58.2 million , UK Population 2010 year Labour left office 62.3 million . Increase ( not all down to immigration ) around 4 million .
    So clearly not tens of millions .
    You yourself destroyed any case you had or point to make by gross exaggeration .
  • Simple Maths

    UK Population 1997 year Labour took office 58.2 million , UK Population 2010 year Labour left office 62.3 million . Increase ( not all down to immigration ) around 4 million .
    So clearly not tens of millions .
    You yourself destroyed any case you had or point to make by gross exaggeration .
    Lets round the numbers. I'll take your 58 million.

    Do you accept the figure of 300,000 a year for emigration from the UK?
  • MarkSeniorMarkSenior Posts: 4,699
    Swiss_Bob said:

    Feel free to answer the question I asked Mr Senior, then the maths lesson can begin.
    Come on , be a man , own up to gross exaggeration or give us some detailed data to back up your ludicrous assertion .
  • New Thread
  • MarkSeniorMarkSenior Posts: 4,699
    Swiss_Bob said:

    Lets round the numbers. I'll take your 58 million.

    Do you accept the figure of 300,000 a year for emigration from the UK?
    Yes and how many of those are foreign nationals who migrated here in recent years ?
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322


    Come on , be a man , own up to gross exaggeration or give us some detailed data to back up your ludicrous assertion .

    You're correct here: total gross migration from 1997 to 2010 was 7.3 million.
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322

    I want a more libertarian approach. It seems no one is offering it at present. At one point UKIP did to some extent, but now they've gone for the key freedom which arises from EU membership (to pander to former Labour voters) I'm disinclined to support them as anything other than a Euro election protest vote.

    And I want a coherent answer to the WLQ. A party which won't vote on English matters seems a prime candidate for my vote, but not if it helps Labour at Westminster.

    Not that it really matters: my vote will swing nothing in our daft system. Maybe the nutter from the Scottish Jacobite Party will run again and I can vote for him with my conscience intact!

    The only parties that have a fully coherent answer to the WLQ are the SNP (by removing Scotland from the union) and UKIP (by granting an English parliament).
  • Socrates said:


    The only parties that have a fully coherent answer to the WLQ are the SNP (by removing Scotland from the union) and UKIP (by granting an English parliament).

    Agreed. I'm also disinclined to vote for ukip since their attitude to scottish indepdence is curiously incongruent with their attitude towards uk independence (not an issue in council or euro elections).
This discussion has been closed.