Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Osbo’s Autumn statement – Ladbrokes first in with their buz
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Osbo’s Autumn statement – Ladbrokes first in with their buzz word bingo
The Ladbrokes betting http://t.co/ZlibygoyoN autumn statement bingo. Will Osbo use any of these? pic.twitter.com/4eHNuohx43
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
"Yes, he has. They STILL don't seem to have realised they can't simultaneously attack the government for their failures AND promise to continue with almost all of their policies at the same time."
But that's what they are doing - on the basis they're cuddlier.
"No longer. Uniform swing is now worse than useless. It is positively misleading. In particular, Labour can no longer hope to emerge as the largest party next May, even if it trails Conservatives significantly in votes."
https://yougov.co.uk/news/2014/12/01/uniform-swing-rip/
Coming soon - If Labour win with a ridiculously low % of the vote it will impact on the politics of the situation after the election.
Exhibit A - the incredible shrinking man PPB.
As I posted on the previous thread, I think 'Stonehenge' might well be value, and regretfully 'hard-working families'.
The incumbency point is also true, but it also applied in previous elections where UNS has been reasonably good. Maybe incumbency tends to cancel out some other effect that would serve to understate the gains of the advancing party.
BBC - Miliband: Government's economic failures cost us all
Halle-fucking luujah
- Big party + Lib Dems + SNP
- Grand coalition
I can't see either working.
Just asking after the Spanish inquisition I got from OGH and Bandit1 yesterday re Thurrock
First I was accused of after timing, then told it was an "incredible" claim to have had that much on, then I was asked to prove I had placed the bet, then when I did I was told I must be a massive mug to be able to get it on
No pleasing some people, I did tell everyone a long time ago that this 4/5 shot was a good bet at 16s
The Lib Dem vote will collapse completely in the central belt, assume 0.5% for all current SLAB held seats in the belt.
It will hold up better than UNS suggests in highlands and islands.
The SNP surge will be greatest, and correlate to deprivation in the central belt (Especially Glasgow and surroundings) - which means the biggest swings should be in the safest Labour seats (GLasgow North East e.g.) but those are also the hardest Labour seats to take.
It's bloody tricky to call.
"New research from a group of economists -- Luigi Guiso, Paola Sapienza and Luigi Zingales -- paints a grim picture of the European project from the perspective of its participants. Analyzing four decades of data from the Eurobarometer opinion survey, they find that three events -- the 1992 Maastricht treaty, the 2004 enlargement to Eastern Europe, and the 2010 Eurozone crisis -- had the most negative effect on voters' perceptions of the European Union. In each case, the survey results suggest that Europeans perceived the events as driving further integration and didn't like what they saw.
Meanwhile, European leaders kept preparing for more integration despite the growing dissatisfaction. Amazingly, their obliviousness to public sentiment appears to be precisely what the early architects of European integration desired.
"Europe will be forged in crises,” Monnet wrote in 1976, “and will be the sum of the solutions adopted for those crises.”
Supporters of European integration talked about creating an unstoppable “chain reaction.” Turning back, even temporarily, would never be an option. The great strength of the euro, as German Chancellor Helmut Schmidt saw it, was that “nobody can leave it without damaging his own country and his own economy in a severe way.”
http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2014-11-28/is-europe-too-rigid-to-survive
How anyone with a functioning memory can take Labour seriously is beyond me.
If you take the final chart of Kellner's chart as the outcome then the ONLY gov't that is realistically possible in that scenario is Labour with SNP confidence and supply. And Labour are only not becoming the largest party because of direct losses to the SNP - which also means to my mind that the Cons getting most seats doesn't necessarily mean they will form the Gov't.
Anthony Wells @anthonyjwells now50 seconds ago
New post: Update on the Lord Ashcroft Doncaster poll http://bit.ly/1HRvgaj
But I don't think it would work for anyone else.
Certainly, why would Cameron (or Milliband) like to play second fiddle to the other? (And electorates rarely thank the smaller parts of coalitions - see Germany for example.)
Given the headline-grabbing nature of the result, you'd have thought they'd have double-checked it. I seem to recall someone here (Pulpstar, if memory serves me correctly) picking up that oddity immediately.
Has any Tory here criticised that bear for taking the English name 'Paddington' yet?
Is it because he wishes to hide his South American ursine roots, blah blah blah, BNP-lite, blah blah blah, de-toxifies Tories, blah blah blah....
Could Rochester go: Conservative -> UKIP -> Conservative -> UKIP all in the space of a year? It's by no means impossible.
What would Labour actually do instead? *dead silence*
Everybody has the right to be believed until they are demonstrated to be dishonest. If anybody here doubted my honesty I would just tell them not to bother addressing posts to me, and I would obviously stop dealing with them. Why would you want to correspond with somebody who thinks you are a liar? By posting the evidence, you kind of acknowledged their supposed right to call your integrity in question.
Bandit appears to be a new poster and unaware of the usual courtesies. He would also be unaware that you are one of the more serious punters posting regularly here. For that reason you might want to cut him a bit of slack, although personally I'd be more inclined to cut him dead.
It would be a disaster for the UK and democracy.
We saw a similar thing under Callaghan.
Don't get cross, get smug!
Historically, electorates punish those who are seen to act in their narrow, sectional interests. So, if the Libs are seen as preventing a government from being formed, they would be punished. (I don't know if that would be true for the SNP too.)
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/sep/10/francois-hollande-cut-public-spending
The French experience certainly is a cautionary tale, in that it shows exactly why slashing spending and hysteria about how "we have to cut the deficit!!!!!11" is NOT a good idea. (Well, to be fair to the PBTories, it admittedly does also show it's a bloody good job we stayedout of the Euro.)
"“I also did panto in Stockport and asked a little boy, who would only have been seven or eight, what his name was.
“He looked up at me, and replied: ‘If you touch my nuts, you’re dead’. What can you say? I wanted to scream."
https://uk.tv.yahoo.com/lionel-blair-won-t-work-with-children-anymore-because-of-potential--false-claims--–-daily-tv-round-up-114226593.html
Btw, I noticed your reference to Labour supporters' reticence regarding their alternative suggestions to Osborne's economic strategy. I think I qualify as one of the Labour Herd, so may I place it on record that I think Ossie has done a pretty good job as Chancellor in all the (difficult) circumstances.
If I have a criticisms, it would be of unfunded tax cuts but obviously I understand that it's politics and he has to satisfy a broad spectrum of public and Party opinion, so it's all part of the game, regrettable though that may sometimes be.
But no, I wouldn't expect a Labour Government, if it wins a majority next May, to behave a whole lot differently - although it would obviously dress it up differently!
When you look at where the spending goes, really the only scope for further significant savings is working-age welfare payments.
When a child is in pain or grief stricken, the teacher dare not offer so much as a comforting squeeze around the shoulders for fear it may be misrepresented. In this respect, you really do feel for them, and begin to despise the sanctimonious humbugs who have reduced us this.
See chart http://tinyurl.com/lagsgsf
Says one thing: 2013 spending was more than 2012..
We could cut our overseas aid contributions in half.
We could tell the EU we are paying them 4 billion next year, not ten.
Of course he has one huge advantage over a putative PM Miliband - he actually has the power. If, God forbid, we do end up with Ed in No 10, he'll either have a tiny majority, or even worse be dependent on pork-barrelling support from minor parties. In either scenario it's going to be near-impossible to make difficult decisions, until forced to by some major crisis as Callaghan was.
Incidentally I heard from a source senior in the Labour Party (a minister in the last government) that senior figures in the party are indeed terrified at the prospect of a Miliband government, as I have long suggested must be the case. One of the specific criticisms was that Ed M doesn't listen to anyone. Admittedly this was from a 'Blairite', but presumably the concern is widely shared in the party. If it's not they are prize idiots.
I think Danny Alexander has just scuppered the LibDems' chances of recovering any of the support they lost to the Greens. I can't believe it'll do much to attract back those who went to Labour, either.
Rightwing blogger opinion now represented by the demented Breitbart London and, er, Guido.
Not really tempted by those.
I hope readers will appreciate that I always aim to conduct my research to the highest standards, that data is always checked, and that instances like this are very rare. As ever, I welcome questions and observations on my research, and will always seek to correct errors that inevitably crop up from time to time.
Meanwhile, my apologies to all readers and especially to Ed Miliband.
http://lordashcroftpolls.com/2014/12/ed-miliband-doncaster-north-correction/
No reason to regard it as anything other than an honest error. His polls remain outstandingly reliable guides as to possible future election outcomes.
I'm grateful to Lord Ashcroft for the duff poll, it altered the Lab price in Doncaster North for a while.
Ideally I would like a Chancellor who said something along the lines of 'We're really in the shite, so I've got to raise taxes and/or cut public spending (but not by so much as to shove us back into recession). Grin and bear it, and in the end we'll survive what threatened to be a really catastrophic economic meltdown and may even finish up better off at the end of it.'
In a way, that's what he's been trying to do but without putting it quite that way. I guess it's too much to expect a politician to be frank about these things though, and I have no doubt at all that in the event that Ed Balls takes over from Osborne idc, he will be just as economical with the truth.
And yes I know they've paid into the system their whole lives.
So what is your point, exactly?