Howdy, Stranger!

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

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » If you think that GE2015 is getting hard to understand chec

SystemSystem Posts: 11,705
edited December 2014 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » If you think that GE2015 is getting hard to understand check out Martin Baxter’s battle-ground map

Martin Baxter, the ex-Cambridge University mathematiciion who has been running Electoral Calculus for two decades, has produced the above map that sets out the various outcomes and links them, based on party shares, to what could happen.

Read the full story here


«13

Comments

  • Options
    That's a very interesting visual representation of potential outcomes.
  • Options
    Paul_Mid_BedsPaul_Mid_Beds Posts: 1,409
    edited December 2014
    Do you think the SNP would entertain a coalition with Labour or Tories? Wouldn't it be suicidal for them to do so?

    It would certainly benefit the Scottish tories if they went with Labour into coalition.
  • Options
    SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    If both Labour and the Tories are below 25 points, it'll be UKIP in the driving seat, not the Lib Dems.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,292
    edited December 2014
    It is an excellent addition, but really it just show basically it is "who the f##k knows". Very small changes in national vote share (and we also don't know how regional variations are going to unwind) could result in any of the options.

    The big if in all of it, If UKIP, SNP, Green and Lib Dem's do actually get in the region of the vote share they are currently polling at and how will that be distributed across the country.

    What we do know is Ed could sneak through the back door despite being incredibly badly as an opposition party when current government is having to make large cuts in public spending, and the flip side that there isn't really any love for the Tories.
  • Options
    HurstLlamaHurstLlama Posts: 9,098

    That's a very interesting visual representation of potential outcomes.

    "Interesting" in this case been Yorkshire dialect for incomprehensible but looks clever.
  • Options
    Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 25,568
    FPT
    Socrates said:



    The fact you have to scramble about for "suggestions" shows how bonkers it is. You basically start with a conclusion - that all American military interventions are part of a grand empire building scheme - and then have to find the logic to make it work. Any logic that suggests otherwise, such as it just happening to happen at the time of an imminent massacre, or the fact it was initially pushed by the French and British, is quickly ignored. Your readiness to ignore evidence is clear by your question, which is a flippant hand-wave of the fact you had a far superior military force on the outside of an opposing city, with that force's leader openly saying that no mercy would be shown.

    Meanwhile you use the thinnest scraps of evidence to claim the US is secretly behind events from Thailand and Hong Kong. It's frankly barmy. Like all conspiracy theorists, you have this black and white world view, and you have to wedge all events and facts into it.

    The word 'suggestion' was made flippantly. The suggestion itself was not, and I certainly did not have to 'scramble' for anything. I have provided significant evidence in support of the theory that Gadaffi's monetary policies were unacceptable to the US; you on the other hand have provided no evidence of an imminent massacre. With which topsy turvy logic is this grounds for criticism of my posts?

    I use no flimsy evidence to claim the US is behind these uprisings, the evidence is well documented. They are funded and organised by the National Endowment for Democracy, an arm of the State Department. Again, I stress, this has been proven time and again, and in the case of Hong Kong has been openly admitted.
    http://nsnbc.me/2014/09/30/us-openly-approves-hong-kong-chaos-created/

    Now, we might be in favour of the growth of democracy against the Communist regime of China, but we must see that these people's use by the State Department is nothing more or less than sedition against the PRC -a cynical and extremely dangerous strategy.

    I have consistently outlined the principles of indirect warfare, and shown you examples of it at work. You have consistently stuck your fingers in your ears -except when you accuse the Russians of doing it of course.

    You are very fond of documenting the calumnies of the British Empire. Imagine if during its decline, rather than accepting the process, the British had instead operated an 'encirclement' strategy against the growing power of the US? Fomented unrest within its borders, arranged its allies against it, fuelled international disputes with it, used its financial dominance to introduce sanctions against it, and aimed at subjugation and break up? What chaos and misery would have ensued in this futile attempt?
  • Options
    philiphphiliph Posts: 4,704
    edited December 2014
    Fascinating how small the NOM section is (assuming that is the same as No overall control) , which I have realised it isn't!!
  • Options
    philiphphiliph Posts: 4,704
    edited December 2014
    To clarify my stupidity below, massive area for potential coalitions, tiny area where non are viable.

  • Options
    AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited December 2014
    Interesting fact: Gordon is the only non-Labour seat in Scotland where the SNP are in second place.
  • Options
    MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053

    That's a very interesting visual representation of potential outcomes.

    Interesting and quite barmy. The fact that UKIP and the SNP and the Greens are missing from the jigsaw makes the whole contraption useless. So much for mad mathematicians anchored in the past.
  • Options
    MikeK said:

    That's a very interesting visual representation of potential outcomes.

    Interesting and quite barmy. The fact that UKIP and the SNP and the Greens are missing from the jigsaw makes the whole contraption useless. So much for mad mathematicians anchored in the past.
    So far the Lord A seat polling has UKIP holding Clacton and winning Thurrock. I can see a case for Boston & Skegness and maybe one or two others but it is hard to envisage much more than that.



  • Options
    AndyJS said:

    Interesting fact: Gordon is the only non-Labour seat in Scotland where the SNP are in second place.

    Interesting, too, that NO won there on September 18th by nearly two to one.

  • Options
    Socrates said:

    If both Labour and the Tories are below 25 points, it'll be UKIP in the driving seat, not the Lib Dems.

    Yes but that is very very unlikely. UKIP are forecast at under 10 seats. The only way UKIP influence this is in the level of seats that they lose for the Conservatives.

    If there was a realistic chance of 25% for both the big 2 we would be seeing one of them regularly polling at that level.
  • Options
    Insightful graph from Martin. He should remove the Nats from any coalition with the Conservatives as the SNP have ruled it out. That will help clarify things.
  • Options
    AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395

    AndyJS said:

    Interesting fact: Gordon is the only non-Labour seat in Scotland where the SNP are in second place.

    Interesting, too, that NO won there on September 18th by nearly two to one.

    Yes except that 35% will probably be enough for Salmond to win the seat.
  • Options
    Doesn't this go against what you were saying Mike about overall party polling being not much use and that we need individual seat polls, especially in Scotland?
  • Options
    Mr. Llama, I must confess to knowing very little Yorkshire dialect. [Most Yorkshiremen don't].
  • Options
    CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,941

    Do you think the SNP would entertain a coalition with Labour or Tories? Wouldn't it be suicidal for them to do so?

    It would certainly benefit the Scottish tories if they went with Labour into coalition.

    But would it benefit Labour in Scotland to join the Tories? They'd really, really lose. Even more. After spending decades going on about how evil the Tories are.

    And I thought the Tories hated the thought of Mr Miliband in charge? Mr Balls?

    On that basis, Labour and the Tories might just as well merge to become the Unionist Party - as that (at least in Scotland) is the implication of such a coalition. And they'd end up refighting indyref in more senses than one.


  • Options
    MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053

    MikeK said:

    That's a very interesting visual representation of potential outcomes.

    Interesting and quite barmy. The fact that UKIP and the SNP and the Greens are missing from the jigsaw makes the whole contraption useless. So much for mad mathematicians anchored in the past.
    So far the Lord A seat polling has UKIP holding Clacton and winning Thurrock. I can see a case for Boston & Skegness and maybe one or two others but it is hard to envisage much more than that.

    UKIP, the party, believe that 30+ seats are within reach with the polls staying as they are now. However, the likelyhood is that UKIP will gain a few more percentage points by May 7th '15, to do even better. Lab/Lib/Con PBers have their dreams: so do Kippers.

  • Options
    VerulamiusVerulamius Posts: 1,438
    You could do other similar graphs for other assumptions. You need two degrees of freedom, mathematically, so show on a 2D graph. So this graph is based on the equation L+C+LD=X where X is constant (ie Nats, Green and UKIP constant).

    You could do a another graph based on the equation L+C+UKIP=X, so that you vary UKIP but keep LD constant. Other graphs are available.

    Of course if you were able to show a 3D version of this you could have 3 degrees of freedom.

    Loads of ways to have fun on a Sunday afternoon.
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @kayaburgess: Wow @Nigel_Farage is starting to make David Icke look sensible by comparison. His excuse for missing a public Q&A: http://t.co/H3Ju7MMxKD
  • Options
    FlightpathFlightpath Posts: 4,012
    MikeK said:

    MikeK said:

    That's a very interesting visual representation of potential outcomes.

    Interesting and quite barmy. The fact that UKIP and the SNP and the Greens are missing from the jigsaw makes the whole contraption useless. So much for mad mathematicians anchored in the past.
    So far the Lord A seat polling has UKIP holding Clacton and winning Thurrock. I can see a case for Boston & Skegness and maybe one or two others but it is hard to envisage much more than that.

    UKIP, the party, believe that 30+ seats are within reach with the polls staying as they are now. However, the likelyhood is that UKIP will gain a few more percentage points by May 7th '15, to do even better. Lab/Lib/Con PBers have their dreams: so do Kippers.

    Its not the dreams it the ambition. The ambition to destroy the conservative party and thus give a generation of government to labour. Its absurd but thats where prejudice takes you.
  • Options
    Con/scotnat coalition is impossible, so Martin must be referring to a Con/Lab britnat grand coalition.
  • Options

    Do you think the SNP would entertain a coalition with Labour or Tories? Wouldn't it be suicidal for them to do so?

    It would certainly benefit the Scottish tories if they went with Labour into coalition.

    The SNP have explicitly ruled out any coalition with the Tories. And if Labour want a coalition they must abolish Trident.
  • Options
    It's an interesting map
    I may be being thick - I was trying to work out Lib Dem Support works - it seems to be 72% - (Con + Lab) ?

    And I must confess that I'm a bit sceptical about the labelling of the pale blue strip centre-right - labelled as "Con/Nat coalition" - That may be the mathematical outcome, but seems politically very unlikely. Perhaps it should be "All bets are off..." or "Who the hell knows"

    But it's a most interesting bit of work.
  • Options
    ZenPaganZenPagan Posts: 689

    Do you think the SNP would entertain a coalition with Labour or Tories? Wouldn't it be suicidal for them to do so?

    It would certainly benefit the Scottish tories if they went with Labour into coalition.

    The SNP have explicitly ruled out any coalition with the Tories. And if Labour want a coalition they must abolish Trident.
    Any party that went into coalition with the SNP after a list of demands seen as detrimental to the rest of the country would be in my view heavily punished at the next GE. If the SNP however keeps its bargaining reasonable then its a possibility. The question is of course will the SNP keep that list reasonable.

  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,292
    edited December 2014
    What a great message to send out...

    Mother 'betrayed' by her son's terror sentence

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30368103

    I went to the police to tell them my son has gone to Syria to fight with Al-Qaeda, now I'm betrayed because my terrorist son got locked up. What did she think they would do, give them a hero's welcome on their return. How about a parade?
  • Options

    AndyJS said:

    Interesting fact: Gordon is the only non-Labour seat in Scotland where the SNP are in second place.

    Interesting, too, that NO won there on September 18th by nearly two to one.

    In that case Mike you will be very interested to know that Shadsy has just lengthened his LIB DEM HOLD price in Gordon to 5/1. How much are you putting on Rennie's team?
  • Options
    surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    Fat_Steve said:

    It's an interesting map
    I may be being thick - I was trying to work out Lib Dem Support works - it seems to be 72% - (Con + Lab) ?

    And I must confess that I'm a bit sceptical about the labelling of the pale blue strip centre-right - labelled as "Con/Nat coalition" - That may be the mathematical outcome, but seems politically very unlikely. Perhaps it should be "All bets are off..." or "Who the hell knows"

    But it's a most interesting bit of work.

    Politically, very likely indeed. OK, the Nats will not form a coalition with the Tories, but who would they prefer to be the top dog ? Tories, surely.

    Tories would be more likely to give Scotland more powers thus demanding a greater degree of EV4EL as a quid pro quo.

    By the way, given the current support spread in Scotland, Labour might be just as happy. Though I doubt it. Labour will still remain the second biggest party in Scotland and any reduction in the current popularity of the SNP brings Labour lots of seats.
  • Options
    calumcalum Posts: 3,046
    The general consensus seems to be that Scottish Labour's support is down to 25% and that things surely can’t get much worse. Being a life-long labour supporter now supporting the SNP and living in Central Scotland, my sense is that things are about to get much worse for SLAB before they get better. I think the core 25% is going to be further reduced by the following factors:

    - SNP continuing to monopolise the centre left space.
    – Nicola Sturgeon will attract the proportion of the female vote, which had been previously turned off the SNP by a dislike of Alex Salmond.
    – UKIP and the Greens will make inroads, as in the rest of the UK.
    –The SSP will also take some support away.
    - A bit of the LibDem resurgence once they are free from the shackles of the coalition.
    – SLAB will struggle to get their vote out.

    Taking account all the above, we could be looking at SLAB falling into the 15-20% area which would be extinction point. The anointing of Jim Murphy as the potential saviour of SLAB, shows just how out of touch with Scottish politics the Labour party, political commentators and main stream media have become.

    In terms of tactical voting, I could envisage Conservatives voting SNP to add to SLAB’s woes and Greens voting SNP. I don’t envisage there being a “Unionist” alliance to try and combat the SNP, as the mainstream parties are all going to be at each other’s throats nationally.
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 41,005
    edited December 2014

    What a great message to send out...

    Mother 'betrayed' by her son's terror sentence

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30368103

    I went to the police to tell them my son has gone to Syria to fight with Al-Qaeda, now I'm betrayed because my terrorist son got locked up. What did she think they would do, give them a hero's welcome on their return. How about a parade?

    You couldn't make it up?
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,168
    Useful resource, on present polls looks like a Labour/LD coalition, or Nat support for a Labour minority government, but could soon switch to a Tory LD or Nat deal. Though I see today's yougov has the Nats on 38% in Scotland today so slightly lower than recent polls after the Smith Report
  • Options
    AndyJS said:

    Interesting fact: Gordon is the only non-Labour seat in Scotland where the SNP are in second place.

    The SNP are joint FAV in East Dunbartonshire where we came 4th in 2010 with just 10% of the vote.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,168
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,168
    edited December 2014
  • Options
    calum said:

    The general consensus seems to be that Scottish Labour's support is down to 25% and that things surely can’t get much worse. Being a life-long labour supporter now supporting the SNP and living in Central Scotland, my sense is that things are about to get much worse for SLAB before they get better. I think the core 25% is going to be further reduced by the following factors:

    - SNP continuing to monopolise the centre left space.
    – Nicola Sturgeon will attract the proportion of the female vote, which had been previously turned off the SNP by a dislike of Alex Salmond.
    – UKIP and the Greens will make inroads, as in the rest of the UK.
    –The SSP will also take some support away.
    - A bit of the LibDem resurgence once they are free from the shackles of the coalition.
    – SLAB will struggle to get their vote out.

    Taking account all the above, we could be looking at SLAB falling into the 15-20% area which would be extinction point. The anointing of Jim Murphy as the potential saviour of SLAB, shows just how out of touch with Scottish politics the Labour party, political commentators and main stream media have become.

    In terms of tactical voting, I could envisage Conservatives voting SNP to add to SLAB’s woes and Greens voting SNP. I don’t envisage there being a “Unionist” alliance to try and combat the SNP, as the mainstream parties are all going to be at each other’s throats nationally.

    The PB consensus is that there will be massive anti-SNP tactical voting. Yet another bit of evidence for the dossier. They haven't got the faintest clue about Scotland.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,990
    What happens in the white region??
  • Options
    Sorry to be late to this thread, got stuck behind a 4 ball of immigrants on the course... never would have happened in my day
  • Options
    FlightpathFlightpath Posts: 4,012
    edited December 2014

    What a great message to send out...

    Mother 'betrayed' by her son's terror sentence

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30368103

    I went to the police to tell them my son has gone to Syria to fight with Al-Qaeda, now I'm betrayed because my terrorist son got locked up. What did she think they would do, give them a hero's welcome on their return. How about a parade?

    Even my ancient mother in law thought it was silly giving them a big sentance since they had been 'shopped' by their parents. 13 years seems a propaganda defeat. Possibly an intellegence loss as well.
  • Options
    CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,941
    surbiton said:

    Fat_Steve said:

    It's an interesting map
    I may be being thick - I was trying to work out Lib Dem Support works - it seems to be 72% - (Con + Lab) ?

    And I must confess that I'm a bit sceptical about the labelling of the pale blue strip centre-right - labelled as "Con/Nat coalition" - That may be the mathematical outcome, but seems politically very unlikely. Perhaps it should be "All bets are off..." or "Who the hell knows"

    But it's a most interesting bit of work.

    Politically, very likely indeed. OK, the Nats will not form a coalition with the Tories, but who would they prefer to be the top dog ? Tories, surely.

    Tories would be more likely to give Scotland more powers thus demanding a greater degree of EV4EL as a quid pro quo.

    By the way, given the current support spread in Scotland, Labour might be just as happy. Though I doubt it. Labour will still remain the second biggest party in Scotland and any reduction in the current popularity of the SNP brings Labour lots of seats.
    Very unlikely. The Tories are more likely to concede independence than scrap Trident - and the SNP already give then EV4EL for free.

  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 41,005
    RobD said:

    What happens in the white region??

    It says that's the 28% that don't support either Lab or Con.. but that's not right is it? Shouldn't it be the % chance of a third party winning most seats, which is about 1% or less?
  • Options
    SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    It's a good effort but I would suggest 2 corrections for the map above: Replace the LD part of the chart with UKIP while fix the LD's at present levels and 28 seats.

    That should make the down left corner purple while maintaining the strip of orange and light blue for the Lab-Lib and Con-Lib coalitions.
    Apart from that it's ok.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,168
    SD Calum Scottish Tories would be far more likely to vote tactically for a Murphy-led Labour candidate if the alternative was an SNP MP, they will also likely vote for Alexander and LD in Gordon to keep out the SNP and Salmond
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 41,005
    isam said:

    RobD said:

    What happens in the white region??

    It says that's the 28% that don't support either Lab or Con.. but that's not right is it? Shouldn't it be the % chance of a third party winning most seats, which is about 1% or less?
    Then again I am not really sure!
  • Options
    SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    HYUFD said:

    SD Calum Scottish Tories would be far more likely to vote tactically for a Murphy-led Labour candidate if the alternative was an SNP MP, they will also likely vote for Alexander and LD in Gordon to keep out the SNP and Salmond

    Fantasies, more fantasies.
    The Tories and Labour voters will never vote tactically for one another, the SNP is the byproduct of that. You do not understand that the SNP is a coalition of nationalists, conservatives, socialists, greens and liberals that have one thing in common: they hate their ex-party.

    Conservatives have left the Tories since the 1980's for the SNP because they presume that the Tories hate Scotland.
    Liberals have left the LD since the coalition for the SNP because they hate the Tory party.
    Socialists have left Labour for the SNP this year because Labour can't promise them a socialist state.
    And the Greens are with the SNP because they are also left wing radicals and want a socialist-green paradise.

    Bottom line is, the dissatisfaction and sense of betrayal coupled with the SNP being populist has resulted in the SNP scoring 40-45% in the scottish polls.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,168
    edited December 2014
    Speedy Tories were the most staunch No backers, Tory voters are far closer to Jim Murphy than Nicola Sturgeon, now that many leftwing Labour supporters who voted Yes in the referendum are backing the SNP and the Greens it is safer for Scottish Tories to vote for a more centrist Labour Party that is committed to the union. In a straight Labour v SNP contest many will do so
    According to today's yougov Scotland figures the SNP are on 38% and the Greens on 7% ie 45%. Labour are on 29% and the Tories are on 17% ie 46% and 1% more than the SNP + Green total
  • Options
    CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,941
    HYUFD said:

    Speedy Tories were the most staunch No backers, Tory voters are far closer to Jim Murphy than Nicola Sturgeon, now that many leftwing Labour supporters who voted Yes in the referendum are backing the SNP and the Greens it is safer for Scottish Tories to vote for a more centrist Labour Party that is committed to the union. In a straight Labour v SNP contest many will do so
    According to today's yougov Scotland figures the SNP are on 38% and the Greens on 7% ie 45%. Labour are on 29% and the Tories are on 17% ie 46% and 1% more than the SNP + Green total

    But you're not allowing for the impact of Mr Murphy on the Labour vote itself. No point in gaining Tories if you lose Labour. (Which of course is the opposite dilemma of Mr Findlay.)
  • Options
    From the previous post:

    "Yet in spite of these huge developments there have been just three Scotland only three Westminster voting polls since the week of the IndyRef in mid-September"


    There's actually been six full polls.


    Survation for Mail on Sunday; fieldwork - 19 September 2014; sample of 871

    SNP - 35%
    Labour - 39%
    Con - 18%
    LD - 3%
    Other - 5%


    Panelbase for SNP; fieldwork - 29 September to 1 October 2014; sample of 1049

    SNP - 34%
    Labour - 32%
    Con - 18%
    LD - 5%
    Other - 11%


    IPSOS-Mori for STV; fieldwork - 22 to 29 October 2014; sample of 1,026

    SNP - 52%
    Labour - 23%
    Con - 10%
    LD - 6%
    Other - 9%


    YouGov for The Times; fieldwork - 27 to 30 October 2014; sample of 1,078

    SNP - 43%
    Labour - 27%
    Con - 15%
    LD - 4%
    Other - 11%


    Panelbase for the Wings Over Scotland website; fieldwork - 30 October to 4 November 2014; Sample of 1000

    SNP - 45%
    Labour - 28%
    Con - 15%
    LD - 3%
    Other - 8%


    Survation for the Daily Record; fieldwork - 6 to 13 November 2014; Sample of 1001

    SNP - 45.8%
    Labour - 23.9%
    Con - 16.7%
    LD - 6.1%
    Other - 7.5%
  • Options
    CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    HYUFD said:
    eeek.

    I got Gordon Brown ;-)
  • Options
    Danny565Danny565 Posts: 8,091
    "Only the hard left think there's no need for more cuts!", say the PBTories.

    YouGov begs to differ:

    Thinking about how the next government handles the deficit, which of the following best reflects your view?

    They should prioritise reducing deficit, mainly through cuts: 20%
    Should prioritise reducing deficit, mainly through taxes: 19%
    Should NOT prioritise reducing deficit, spend more on public services or cut taxes: 36%
    None of these: 10%
    Don't know: 15%

    http://cdn.yougov.com/cumulus_uploads/docu...ults-051214.pdf
  • Options
    Be funny if Fatface loses to the tories in Gordon.
  • Options
    Danny565Danny565 Posts: 8,091
    edited December 2014
    As much as people go on about how the mainstream parties have been ignoring the public's anti-immigration feelings until recently (a complaint that has some justification imo), it seems that wanting more cuts is an even MORE extreme position than being pro-immigration, according to that YouGov poll. Why isn't there the same outcry about the politicians ignoring the public's will on this?
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,072
    HYUFD said:
    You got: Margaret Thatcher
    Wicked!!! You are defined by your desire to see Britain lead in Europe and abroad. In 1975 you fought to keep Britain in Europe but towards the end of your career you became more sceptical. This didn’t stop you rounding up a famous speech in 1988 with: “Britain does not dream of some cosy, isolated existence on the fringes of the European Community. Our destiny is in Europe, as part of the Community.”
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,072
    Re Scotland:

    If the period 1979 to 2010 was defined by anti-Tory tactical voting, the period from 2020 to xxx will be defined by anti SNP tactical voting. A desire for the continuation the union - which is the view of more than 55% of Scottish electorate - will drive Conservatives to tactically vote Labour and the like.

    2015 will probably not mark the SNP's high vote share. It may well mark its high seat share.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,168
    edited December 2014
    rcs 1000 Good for you, Charles amusing, I got Tony Blair despite opposing the euro
  • Options

    From the previous post:

    "Yet in spite of these huge developments there have been just three Scotland only three Westminster voting polls since the week of the IndyRef in mid-September"


    There's actually been six full polls.


    Survation for Mail on Sunday; fieldwork - 19 September 2014; sample of 871

    SNP - 35%
    Labour - 39%
    Con - 18%
    LD - 3%
    Other - 5%


    Panelbase for SNP; fieldwork - 29 September to 1 October 2014; sample of 1049

    SNP - 34%
    Labour - 32%
    Con - 18%
    LD - 5%
    Other - 11%


    IPSOS-Mori for STV; fieldwork - 22 to 29 October 2014; sample of 1,026

    SNP - 52%
    Labour - 23%
    Con - 10%
    LD - 6%
    Other - 9%


    YouGov for The Times; fieldwork - 27 to 30 October 2014; sample of 1,078

    SNP - 43%
    Labour - 27%
    Con - 15%
    LD - 4%
    Other - 11%


    Panelbase for the Wings Over Scotland website; fieldwork - 30 October to 4 November 2014; Sample of 1000

    SNP - 45%
    Labour - 28%
    Con - 15%
    LD - 3%
    Other - 8%


    Survation for the Daily Record; fieldwork - 6 to 13 November 2014; Sample of 1001

    SNP - 45.8%
    Labour - 23.9%
    Con - 16.7%
    LD - 6.1%
    Other - 7.5%

    Thanks Andrew. I thought that that "only three" looked wrong when I read it this morning but I didn't have time to respond.
  • Options
    Danny565 said:

    As much as people go on about how the mainstream parties have been ignoring the public's anti-immigration feelings until recently (a complaint that has some justification imo), it seems that wanting more cuts is an even MORE extreme position than being pro-immigration, according to that YouGov poll. Why isn't there the same outcry about the politicians ignoring the public's will on this?

    Maybe because the country is £1.5 trillion in debt with interest payments approaching the Education budget even with the low interest we have at the moment.

    If Labour had kept to Kenneth Clarkes spending levels, we would only have a national debt of £300 billion and the money saved on interest would mean there was no need for further cuts.

    We are paying the price of socialist profligacy with other peoples money.
  • Options
    GeoffMGeoffM Posts: 6,071
    Charles said:

    HYUFD said:
    eeek.

    I got Gordon Brown ;-)
    I got John Major. Very strange quiz.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,168
    Carnyx Labour in Scotland is already down to 29%, those who may leave to the SNP or the Greens have virtually all gone anyway
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,072

    Danny565 said:

    As much as people go on about how the mainstream parties have been ignoring the public's anti-immigration feelings until recently (a complaint that has some justification imo), it seems that wanting more cuts is an even MORE extreme position than being pro-immigration, according to that YouGov poll. Why isn't there the same outcry about the politicians ignoring the public's will on this?

    Maybe because the country is £1.5 trillion in debt with interest payments approaching the Education budget even with the low interest we have at the moment.

    If Labour had kept to Kenneth Clarkes spending levels, we would only have a national debt of £300 billion and the money saved on interest would mean there was no need for further cuts.

    We are paying the price of socialist profligacy with other peoples money.
    Whatever you might think of Mr Clarke's views on Europe, he was easily one of the best three chancellors of the last half century.
  • Options
    MonikerDiCanioMonikerDiCanio Posts: 5,792
    edited December 2014

    calum said:

    The general consensus seems to be that Scottish Labour's support is down to 25% and that things surely can’t get much worse. Being a life-long labour supporter now supporting the SNP and living in Central Scotland, my sense is that things are about to get much worse for SLAB before they get better. I think the core 25% is going to be further reduced by the following factors:

    - SNP continuing to monopolise the centre left space.
    – Nicola Sturgeon will attract the proportion of the female vote, which had been previously turned off the SNP by a dislike of Alex Salmond.
    – UKIP and the Greens will make inroads, as in the rest of the UK.
    –The SSP will also take some support away.
    - A bit of the LibDem resurgence once they are free from the shackles of the coalition.
    – SLAB will struggle to get their vote out.

    Taking account all the above, we could be looking at SLAB falling into the 15-20% area which would be extinction point. The anointing of Jim Murphy as the potential saviour of SLAB, shows just how out of touch with Scottish politics the Labour party, political commentators and main stream media have become.

    In terms of tactical voting, I could envisage Conservatives voting SNP to add to SLAB’s woes and Greens voting SNP. I don’t envisage there being a “Unionist” alliance to try and combat the SNP, as the mainstream parties are all going to be at each other’s throats nationally.

    The PB consensus is that there will be massive anti-SNP tactical voting. Yet another bit of evidence for the dossier. They haven't got the faintest clue about Scotland.
    You claimed that a high turnout would inevitably lead to a Yes victory in the referendum. You have an atrocious record on forecasting Scottish political developments from your Swedish bungalow.
  • Options
    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx Labour in Scotland is already down to 29%, those who may leave to the SNP or the Greens have virtually all gone anyway

    Ho ho.

    That reminds me of the kind of thing Scottish Tories used to say circa 1994.
  • Options
    GeoffMGeoffM Posts: 6,071
    rcs1000 said:

    HYUFD said:
    You got: Margaret Thatcher
    Wicked!!! You are defined by your desire to see Britain lead in Europe and abroad. In 1975 you fought to keep Britain in Europe but towards the end of your career you became more sceptical. This didn’t stop you rounding up a famous speech in 1988 with: “Britain does not dream of some cosy, isolated existence on the fringes of the European Community. Our destiny is in Europe, as part of the Community.”
    Well done!
  • Options
    Danny565Danny565 Posts: 8,091
    edited December 2014

    Danny565 said:

    As much as people go on about how the mainstream parties have been ignoring the public's anti-immigration feelings until recently (a complaint that has some justification imo), it seems that wanting more cuts is an even MORE extreme position than being pro-immigration, according to that YouGov poll. Why isn't there the same outcry about the politicians ignoring the public's will on this?

    Maybe because the country is £1.5 trillion in debt with interest payments approaching the Education budget even with the low interest we have at the moment.
    Either you believe in democracy or you don't. If the public aren't allowed to choose any economic policies that aren't "credible", then why bother having elections at all? Why not just let the stock/bond markets choose our governments?

    Not to mention, even taking this debate on the PBTories' terms of the bond markets being all-important, it's far from obvious that they're demanding yet more spending cuts anyway. As even that arch-socialist Andrew Neil put it to Alan Johnson on This Week the other day: "we're still running a huge deficit as it is and yet the markets can't lend money to us quickly enough, so why the need to balance the books at all?"
  • Options
    MarkSeniorMarkSenior Posts: 4,699

    calum said:

    The general consensus seems to be that Scottish Labour's support is down to 25% and that things surely can’t get much worse. Being a life-long labour supporter now supporting the SNP and living in Central Scotland, my sense is that things are about to get much worse for SLAB before they get better. I think the core 25% is going to be further reduced by the following factors:

    - SNP continuing to monopolise the centre left space.
    – Nicola Sturgeon will attract the proportion of the female vote, which had been previously turned off the SNP by a dislike of Alex Salmond.
    – UKIP and the Greens will make inroads, as in the rest of the UK.
    –The SSP will also take some support away.
    - A bit of the LibDem resurgence once they are free from the shackles of the coalition.
    – SLAB will struggle to get their vote out.

    Taking account all the above, we could be looking at SLAB falling into the 15-20% area which would be extinction point. The anointing of Jim Murphy as the potential saviour of SLAB, shows just how out of touch with Scottish politics the Labour party, political commentators and main stream media have become.

    In terms of tactical voting, I could envisage Conservatives voting SNP to add to SLAB’s woes and Greens voting SNP. I don’t envisage there being a “Unionist” alliance to try and combat the SNP, as the mainstream parties are all going to be at each other’s throats nationally.

    The PB consensus is that there will be massive anti-SNP tactical voting. Yet another bit of evidence for the dossier. They haven't got the faintest clue about Scotland.
    You claimed that a high turnout in the referendum would inevitably lead to a Yes victory in the referendum. You have an atrocious record on forecasting Scottish political developments from your Swedish bungalow.
    To give Stuart his due , he is not as bad at forecasting Scottish political developments as is Easterross .
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 39,075
    GeoffM said:

    Charles said:

    HYUFD said:
    eeek.

    I got Gordon Brown ;-)
    I got John Major. Very strange quiz.
    Gordon Brown for me as well. I chose Gamekeeper as one answer, but I wouldn't have wanted Brown to exchange his Nokia for a shotgun or rifle ...
  • Options
    CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,941
    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx Labour in Scotland is already down to 29%, those who may leave to the SNP or the Greens have virtually all gone anyway

    Hmm, that's a thought. But (as I noted earlier and as @AndrewStuart 's helpful post confirms, the Tories have gone down steadily from 21 in the summer to their hard rock core of 16%. Not that many Tories to switch vote, specially if it means a Labour government in the UK (rather than the Tories under another name doing well in an indy Scotland).

  • Options
    Continuation to "Yet in spite of these huge developments there have been just three Scotland only three Westminster voting polls since the week of the IndyRef in mid-September"


    And whilst not singular Scotland only polls the regularity of the YouGov UK polls can give weekly composites with a healthy sample so that their uniformity can be compared week to week.

    Since the IndyRef the combined weekly Westminster voting intentions for Scotland have been:

    Fieldwork - 21 to 26 September 2014; 5 polls with combined sample of 1,302

    SNP - 41%
    Labour - 29%
    Con - 17%
    LD - 6%
    UKIP - 3%
    Green - 4%
    Other - 1%


    Fieldwork - 28 September to 3 October 2014; 5 polls with combined sample of 1,246

    SNP - 39%
    Labour - 29%
    Con - 17%
    LD - 6%
    UKIP - 4%
    Green - 3%
    Other - 2%


    Fieldwork - 5 to 10 October 2014; 5 polls with combined sample of 1,120

    SNP - 39%
    Labour - 29%
    Con - 18%
    LD - 7%
    UKIP - 4%
    Green - 3%
    Other - 1%


    Fieldwork - 12 to 17 October 2014; 5 polls with combined sample of 1,177

    SNP - 41%
    Labour - 25%
    Con - 19%
    LD - 7%
    UKIP - 5%
    Green - 3%
    Other - 1%


    Fieldwork - 19 to 24 October 2014; 5 polls with combined sample of 1,173

    SNP - 43%
    Labour - 26%
    Con - 16%
    LD - 5%
    UKIP - 3%
    Green - 5%
    Other - 2%


    Fieldwork - 26 to 31 October 2014; 5 polls with combined sample of 1,134

    SNP - 41%
    Labour - 27%
    Con - 19%
    LD - 6%
    UKIP - 4%
    Green - 3%
    Other - 1%


    Fieldwork - 2 to 7 November 2014; 5 polls with combined sample of 1,096

    SNP - 41%
    Labour - 26%
    Con - 18%
    LD - 6%
    UKIP - 5%
    Green - 4%
    Other - 0%


    Fieldwork - 9 to 14 November 2014; 5 polls with combined sample of 1,079

    SNP - 43%
    Labour - 25%
    Con - 16%
    LD - 6%
    UKIP - 5%
    Green - 4%
    Other - 1%


    Fieldwork - 16 to 21 November 2014; 6 polls with combined sample of 1,506

    SNP - 43%
    Labour - 25%
    Con - 17%
    LD - 7%
    UKIP - 4%
    Green - 4%
    Other - 1%


    Fieldwork - 23 to 28 November 2014; 5 polls with combined sample of 1,208

    SNP - 41%
    Labour - 27%
    Con - 19%
    LD - 3%
    UKIP - 4%
    Green - 4%
    Other - 1%


    Fieldwork - 30 November to 5 December 2014; 5 polls with combined sample of 1,074

    SNP - 45%
    Labour - 25%
    Con - 14%
    LD - 6%
    UKIP - 6%
    Green - 2%
    Other - 1%

  • Options
    NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    Danny565 said:


    Not to mention, even taking this debate on the PBTories' terms of the bond markets being all-important

    Surely it's you who views them bond markets as being all important. If you run 10%+ deficits in perpetuity then you need to get the money to pay for welfare and public services from somewhere. Like the bond markets. In your world the bond markets are King because as soon as they say no to funding your deficits you are, you know, f*cked.
  • Options
    rcs1000 said:

    Re Scotland:

    If the period 1979 to 2010 was defined by anti-Tory tactical voting, the period from 2020 to xxx will be defined by anti SNP tactical voting. A desire for the continuation the union - which is the view of more than 55% of Scottish electorate - will drive Conservatives to tactically vote Labour and the like.

    2015 will probably not mark the SNP's high vote share. It may well mark its high seat share.

    You have no idea how cheered I am by your post and others like it. You have completely failed to understand what happened in September. Long may that last!
  • Options
    rcs1000 said:

    Re Scotland:

    If the period 1979 to 2010 was defined by anti-Tory tactical voting, the period from 2020 to xxx will be defined by anti SNP tactical voting. A desire for the continuation the union - which is the view of more than 55% of Scottish electorate - will drive Conservatives to tactically vote Labour and the like.

    2015 will probably not mark the SNP's high vote share. It may well mark its high seat share.

    You were predicting Yes at 35% a week before the referendum, weren't you?
  • Options
    And here's what those weekly YouGov samples for Scotland look like as averages per week going back to May 2014

    http://i61.tinypic.com/243oolk.jpg
  • Options
    Rexel56Rexel56 Posts: 807
    isam said:

    What a great message to send out...

    Mother 'betrayed' by her son's terror sentence

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30368103

    I went to the police to tell them my son has gone to Syria to fight with Al-Qaeda, now I'm betrayed because my terrorist son got locked up. What did she think they would do, give them a hero's welcome on their return. How about a parade?

    You couldn't make it up?
    Well @FrancisUrquhart has made up the quote from the mother...
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,072

    rcs1000 said:

    Re Scotland:

    If the period 1979 to 2010 was defined by anti-Tory tactical voting, the period from 2020 to xxx will be defined by anti SNP tactical voting. A desire for the continuation the union - which is the view of more than 55% of Scottish electorate - will drive Conservatives to tactically vote Labour and the like.

    2015 will probably not mark the SNP's high vote share. It may well mark its high seat share.

    You were predicting Yes at 35% a week before the referendum, weren't you?
    I think I said "I very much doubt that Yes will exceed 40%, and it could be as low as 35%."

    So, I was quite comfortably wrong :-)
  • Options
    Danny565 said:

    Danny565 said:

    As much as people go on about how the mainstream parties have been ignoring the public's anti-immigration feelings until recently (a complaint that has some justification imo), it seems that wanting more cuts is an even MORE extreme position than being pro-immigration, according to that YouGov poll. Why isn't there the same outcry about the politicians ignoring the public's will on this?

    Maybe because the country is £1.5 trillion in debt with interest payments approaching the Education budget even with the low interest we have at the moment.
    Either you believe in democracy or you don't. If the public aren't allowed to choose any economic policies that aren't "credible", then why bother having elections at all? Why not just let the stock/bond markets choose our governments?

    Not to mention, even taking this debate on the PBTories' terms of the bond markets being all-important, it's far from obvious that they're demanding yet more spending cuts anyway. As even that arch-socialist Andrew Neil put it to Alan Johnson on This Week the other day: "we're still running a huge deficit as it is and yet the markets can't lend money to us quickly enough, so why the need to balance the books at all?"
    There is a reason that moneylenders are still keen to lend to the government, it is the same reason that payday loan companies like to lend to the low paid and unemployed. That reason is the welfare of the moneylenders not the welfare of their victims.

  • Options
    GeoffMGeoffM Posts: 6,071

    GeoffM said:

    Charles said:

    HYUFD said:
    eeek.

    I got Gordon Brown ;-)
    I got John Major. Very strange quiz.
    Gordon Brown for me as well. I chose Gamekeeper as one answer, but I wouldn't have wanted Brown to exchange his Nokia for a shotgun or rifle ...
    I chose Scientist for that one.
    Perhaps that would that have tilted my outcome towards being a certain PM who had been a research chemist?
    As opposed to Brown who not only wasn't a chemist but had to deny on television taking mood-altering pharmaceuticals.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,168
    SD Indeed, in 1994 they were polling about 29% they got 30% in 1997
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 41,005
    Rexel56 said:

    isam said:

    What a great message to send out...

    Mother 'betrayed' by her son's terror sentence

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30368103

    I went to the police to tell them my son has gone to Syria to fight with Al-Qaeda, now I'm betrayed because my terrorist son got locked up. What did she think they would do, give them a hero's welcome on their return. How about a parade?

    You couldn't make it up?
    Well @FrancisUrquhart has made up the quote from the mother...
    Fair point! Although those were her sentiments

    Every little helps when youre on the wrong side of the argument I spose
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,168
    edited December 2014
    Carnyx The Tories polled 16% in 2010 in Scotland, today's yougov had them on 17% so fractionally up. Over 90% of Scottish Tories voted No in indyref, they would far rather have a Labour government than live in an independent country and break away from rUK. If the choice in your seat is Labour or SNP it is basically either a Labour government or the SNP holding the balance of power, and many will hold their nose and vote for the first option
  • Options

    Be funny if Fatface loses to the tories in Gordon.

    You can get CON GAIN in Gordon at 50/1 with Ladbrokes. How much are you planning on contributing to Shadsy's pension fund?
  • Options
    Danny565Danny565 Posts: 8,091
    Neil said:

    Danny565 said:


    Not to mention, even taking this debate on the PBTories' terms of the bond markets being all-important

    Surely it's you who views them bond markets as being all important. If you run 10%+ deficits in perpetuity then you need to get the money to pay for welfare and public services from somewhere. Like the bond markets. In your world the bond markets are King because as soon as they say no to funding your deficits you are, you know, f*cked.
    But why would they say no to continuing to fund a deficit of the same size as now, when they're fine with funding it now?
  • Options
    NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    Danny565 said:

    Neil said:

    Danny565 said:


    Not to mention, even taking this debate on the PBTories' terms of the bond markets being all-important

    Surely it's you who views them bond markets as being all important. If you run 10%+ deficits in perpetuity then you need to get the money to pay for welfare and public services from somewhere. Like the bond markets. In your world the bond markets are King because as soon as they say no to funding your deficits you are, you know, f*cked.
    But why would they say no to continuing to fund a deficit of the same size as now, when they're fine with funding it now?
    Because they're B@STARDS, Danny. Just B@STARDS.

  • Options
    Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 25,568
    rcs1000 said:

    HYUFD said:
    You got: Margaret Thatcher
    Wicked!!! You are defined by your desire to see Britain lead in Europe and abroad. In 1975 you fought to keep Britain in Europe but towards the end of your career you became more sceptical. This didn’t stop you rounding up a famous speech in 1988 with: “Britain does not dream of some cosy, isolated existence on the fringes of the European Community. Our destiny is in Europe, as part of the Community.”
    Same for me. Put out by something called 'British Influence' which is run by Peter Mandelson, Ken Clarke and Danny Alexander: http://www.britishinfluence.org/info

    Reminds me of 'Political compass' and other such things -most of which provide a more left-wing result than anticipated unless you're channelling Herman Goering when answering.
  • Options
    HYUFD said:

    SD Indeed, in 1994 they were polling about 29% they got 30% in 1997

    Huh? Total nonsense. In 1997 the Scottish Tories got just 17.5% of the vote and zero MPs.
  • Options
    MonkeysMonkeys Posts: 755
    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx The Tories polled 16% in 2010 in Scotland, today's yougov had them on 17% so fractionally up. Over 90% of Scottish Tories voted No in indyref, they would far rather have a Labour government than live in an independent country and break away from rUK. If the choice in your seat is Labour or SNP it is basically either a Labour government or the SNP holding the balance of power, and many will hold their nose and vote for the first option

    SNP winning a Labour seat only hurts the Labour Party. It doesn't hurt the Tories at all. Remember that shark-eyed Jim's big idea right now is a 50p top rate of Income Tax. Given that Labour will form the opposition no matter what, why would a Tory hand them seats? They're not all masochists.
  • Options
    Danny565Danny565 Posts: 8,091
    edited December 2014

    HYUFD said:

    SD Indeed, in 1994 they were polling about 29% they got 30% in 1997

    Huh? Total nonsense. In 1997 the Scottish Tories got just 17.5% of the vote and zero MPs.
    It really puts it into perspective that the Scottish Tories did even WORSE in 2010 than they did in the 1997 landslide defeat.

    There was only a net Lab->Con swing of 1.4% between 1997 and 2010, compared to a UK-wide average of 9.8%. (Interestingly, although people often put Wales into the same bracket as Scotland in terms of "Tory woes", Wales actually saw the SECOND-BIGGEST swing to the Tories in this timeframe of 12.5%, behind only the East of England at 13.3%).
  • Options
    TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 40,281
    edited December 2014
    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx The Tories polled 16% in 2010 in Scotland, today's yougov had them on 17% so fractionally up. Over 90% of Scottish Tories voted No in indyref, they would far rather have a Labour government than live in an independent country and break away from rUK. If the choice in your seat is Labour or SNP it is basically either a Labour government or the SNP holding the balance of power, and many will hold their nose and vote for the first option

    Your building a lot on a single Yougov Scottish sub sample.

    There may very well be tactical Unionist voting, but no way will it approach the totals of the polling of Unionist parties. SLab & the LDs are already arguing over who should adopt the mantle of being 'the' Unionist party in Gordon.

    http://tinyurl.com/mws7ar8
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,168
    edited December 2014
    SD Yes, and in Scotland in 1994 they won no MEPS and 14.5% of the vote suggesting the writing was on the wall
    http://www.election.demon.co.uk/sum1994.html
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,168
    Monkeys Obviously Tories in Scotland would oppose the SNP having the balance of power under any circumstances, given the choice between one more MP for Miliband or one for Sturgeon and Salmond holding a gun to Cameron or Miliband's head demanding even more powers and pressing for another referendum they will take the former
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,072
    Danny565 said:

    Neil said:

    Danny565 said:


    Not to mention, even taking this debate on the PBTories' terms of the bond markets being all-important

    Surely it's you who views them bond markets as being all important. If you run 10%+ deficits in perpetuity then you need to get the money to pay for welfare and public services from somewhere. Like the bond markets. In your world the bond markets are King because as soon as they say no to funding your deficits you are, you know, f*cked.
    But why would they say no to continuing to fund a deficit of the same size as now, when they're fine with funding it now?
    How did you go bust? Very slowly at first, then all in a rush...

    High levels of government debt have been shown to lower economic growth. This paper (http://www.ecb.europa.eu/pub/pdf/scpwps/ecbwp1237.pdf) suggests that above 90-100%, debt levels cause slower growth.

    High levels of government spending do not stimulate economic growth in the longer term. (see: http://dash.harvard.edu/bitstream/handle/1/3451296/Barro_GovernmentSpending.pdf?.. or http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2005/03/the-impact-of-government-spending-on-economic-growth)

  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 39,075
    O/T: Since we've moved to discussing Scotland, an article on how SellotapeScotch Tape was invented, and how it got its name.

    http://www.gizmodo.co.uk/2014/12/how-scotch-tape-was-invented/
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,168
    TUD Maybe, but obviously the main challenger to the SNP or the main unionist incumbent will be the beneficiary of any tactical voting, so in Gordon that is the LDs
  • Options
    Danny565Danny565 Posts: 8,091
    rcs1000 said:

    Danny565 said:

    Neil said:

    Danny565 said:


    Not to mention, even taking this debate on the PBTories' terms of the bond markets being all-important

    Surely it's you who views them bond markets as being all important. If you run 10%+ deficits in perpetuity then you need to get the money to pay for welfare and public services from somewhere. Like the bond markets. In your world the bond markets are King because as soon as they say no to funding your deficits you are, you know, f*cked.
    But why would they say no to continuing to fund a deficit of the same size as now, when they're fine with funding it now?
    How did you go bust? Very slowly at first, then all in a rush...

    High levels of government debt have been shown to lower economic growth. This paper (http://www.ecb.europa.eu/pub/pdf/scpwps/ecbwp1237.pdf) suggests that above 90-100%, debt levels cause slower growth.

    High levels of government spending do not stimulate economic growth in the longer term. (see: http://dash.harvard.edu/bitstream/handle/1/3451296/Barro_GovernmentSpending.pdf?.. or http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2005/03/the-impact-of-government-spending-on-economic-growth)

    Then why are we growing so strongly now (apparently) when we still have a very high deficit / levels of debt?
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,072

    Danny565 said:

    Danny565 said:

    As much as people go on about how the mainstream parties have been ignoring the public's anti-immigration feelings until recently (a complaint that has some justification imo), it seems that wanting more cuts is an even MORE extreme position than being pro-immigration, according to that YouGov poll. Why isn't there the same outcry about the politicians ignoring the public's will on this?

    Maybe because the country is £1.5 trillion in debt with interest payments approaching the Education budget even with the low interest we have at the moment.
    Either you believe in democracy or you don't. If the public aren't allowed to choose any economic policies that aren't "credible", then why bother having elections at all? Why not just let the stock/bond markets choose our governments?

    Not to mention, even taking this debate on the PBTories' terms of the bond markets being all-important, it's far from obvious that they're demanding yet more spending cuts anyway. As even that arch-socialist Andrew Neil put it to Alan Johnson on This Week the other day: "we're still running a huge deficit as it is and yet the markets can't lend money to us quickly enough, so why the need to balance the books at all?"
    There is a reason that moneylenders are still keen to lend to the government, it is the same reason that payday loan companies like to lend to the low paid and unemployed. That reason is the welfare of the moneylenders not the welfare of their victims.

    As it should be.

    A loan is a voluntary agreement between two parties.
  • Options
    MonkeysMonkeys Posts: 755
    HYUFD said:

    Monkeys Obviously Tories in Scotland would oppose the SNP having the balance of power under any circumstances, given the choice between one more MP for Miliband or one for Sturgeon and Salmond holding a gun to Cameron or Miliband's head demanding even more powers and pressing for another referendum they will take the former

    Groundbreaking use of the word "Obviously."
  • Options
    GeoffMGeoffM Posts: 6,071

    rcs1000 said:

    HYUFD said:
    You got: Margaret Thatcher
    Wicked!!! You are defined by your desire to see Britain lead in Europe and abroad. In 1975 you fought to keep Britain in Europe but towards the end of your career you became more sceptical. This didn’t stop you rounding up a famous speech in 1988 with: “Britain does not dream of some cosy, isolated existence on the fringes of the European Community. Our destiny is in Europe, as part of the Community.”
    Same for me. Put out by something called 'British Influence' which is run by Peter Mandelson, Ken Clarke and Danny Alexander: http://www.britishinfluence.org/info

    Reminds me of 'Political compass' and other such things -most of which provide a more left-wing result than anticipated unless you're channelling Herman Goering when answering.
    Yes, I always seem to end up pretty monochrome when I do the Compass. I like the Goering comparison. In fact, I'm going to give it another go right now. See if I've mellowed in my old age.
  • Options
    As for the other polling companies who poll less frequently this is what their sample averages look like. (Though these are taken over a longer period and in many cases well below 1,000 samples.)

    For all the ComRes UK polls since IndyRef (24 September 2014 to 30th November 2014) the total Scottish samples of 6 polls gives a combined number of 622. Results are:

    SNP - 42%
    Labour - 27%
    Con - 15%
    LD - 5%
    UKIP - 5%
    Green - 4%
    Other - 2%


    For all the Survation UK polls since IndyRef (10 October to 7 November 2014) the total Scottish samples of 3 polls gives a combined number of 282. Results are:

    SNP - 48%
    Labour - 24%
    Con - 11%
    LD - 6%
    UKIP - 8%
    Green - 2%
    Other - 1%


    For all the ICM UK polls since IndyRef (10 October to 9 November 2014) the total Scottish samples of 2 polls gives a combined number of 102. Results are:

    SNP - 38%
    Labour - 28%
    Con - 16%
    LD - 5%
    UKIP - 8%
    Green - 4%
    Other - 1%


    For all the IPSOS-Mori UK polls since IndyRef (11 October to 10 November 2014) the total Scottish samples of 2 polls gives a combined number of 168. Results are:

    SNP - 51%
    Labour - 19%
    Con - 17%
    LD - 3%
    UKIP - 4%
    Green - 5%
    Other - 1%


    For all the Lord Ashcroft UK polls since IndyRef (19 September to 30 November 2014) the total Scottish samples of 12 polls gives a combined number of 952. Results are:

    SNP - 46%
    Labour - 25%
    Con - 14%
    LD - 6%
    UKIP - 4%
    Green - 4%
    Other - 2%


    For all the Populus UK polls since IndyRef (19 September to 30 November 2014) the total Scottish samples of 12 polls gives a combined number of 2,651. Results are:

    SNP - 36%
    Labour - 29%
    Con - 19%
    LD - 9%
    UKIP - 4%
    Green - 3%
    Other - >0%

  • Options
    FlightpathFlightpath Posts: 4,012
    edited December 2014

    rcs1000 said:

    Re Scotland:

    If the period 1979 to 2010 was defined by anti-Tory tactical voting, the period from 2020 to xxx will be defined by anti SNP tactical voting. A desire for the continuation the union - which is the view of more than 55% of Scottish electorate - will drive Conservatives to tactically vote Labour and the like.

    2015 will probably not mark the SNP's high vote share. It may well mark its high seat share.

    You have no idea how cheered I am by your post and others like it. You have completely failed to understand what happened in September. Long may that last!
    What happened in September was a significant NO vote. What happened to the Labour party is the question.
    Do you believe in the nuclear deterrent?
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,168
    Monkeys Scottish Tories were quite prepared to campaign with Labour in the BT campaign to beat the SNP, no reason some will not vote for them to keep out the SNP at other elections
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,168
    edited December 2014
    PoliticalSpectrum is a similar, but separate, political compass quiz
    http://www.gotoquiz.com/politics/political-spectrum-quiz.html
This discussion has been closed.