Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The SNP’s been issuing lots of data from its latest Panelba

2»

Comments

  • FlightpathFlightpath Posts: 4,012

    There's a fascinating article in the Times by Peter Kellner

    The headline is

    Politicians should ignore our opinion polls - MPs are too easily swayed by what the public thinks. They must stand up for their beliefs

    http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/opinion/columnists/article4309202.ece

    I stand up for my beliefs, which I have posted on here, and would never consider voting tactically. Yet you still deride us Kippers for doing exactly as that article suggests.
    If your belief is to leave the EU then you would be mad to not vote tactically, ie mad to vote in a way to let in EU friendly Labour.
    If your belief is to howl at the moon then feel free.
    I want a referendum. How I vote in it is up for grabs.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,470

    Mr. Jessop, there was no mention of the cable when I read the story.

    Ah, okay. I wondered if it might have been an uncommanded attack by the enormo-haddock, or a lack of differential front-end grip ...
  • O/t, an interesting BBC piece on Otto Skorzeny and his Irish sojourn, plus several good photos. The look of fear in Mussolini's eyes is particularly striking.

    'How did Hitler's scar-faced henchman become an Irish farmer?'

    http://tinyurl.com/pqbtdo6
  • FlightpathFlightpath Posts: 4,012

    Indigo said:

    Mr. Indigo, I wonder what the German view is. If Greece gets let off a huge quantity of debt, other nations may try the same approach.

    They may come to regret QMV, the majority debtor nations with no money will "discovers it can vote itself largess out of the public treasury"

    The elites of the EU have basically managed to manufacture a "Heads you win, Tails I Lose" scenario. Either they have to forgive huge amounts of Greek debt, at which point everyone else is going to want equitable treatment, and Germany loses a truck load of money, or, Greece calls a hard default of its outstanding debt, and crashes out of the EU as the ECB withdraws support, contagion causes havoc through the EU and risks Portugal going under as well, and Germany loses a truck load of money as the main backer of the ECB. If you were aiming to screw things up it would be hard to do a better job.
    Isn't there another option here, "Greece sucks it up"? It's not obvious a hard default and crash out of the EU would be a huge short-term economic success that made a hypothetical incoming Tsipras administration wildly popular, and his whole sell is that Greece can stay in the Euro and the EU (but still get a pony).
    Is the issue 'EU' or is it 'Eurozone'? Is it not the requirement of the Eurozone (ever closer fiscal and so political union) that drives the Tory renegotiation proposals?
    Does the IMF have a say in this?
  • Toms said:

    @ antifrank
    " that Bulgarian and Romanian migrants to the UK are harder working than the English..."

    To which I'd add Albanians if the guy who did my plastering is typical. The man's a talented human dynamo. And liberal with his splendid home-made raki (or should that be rakia ?).

    I sense a 'plastered' joke eager to make its escape.
  • IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966

    We need to ask ourselves why we cannot get our own people educated and motivated for work and life. We also need to ask where, assuming we want people to be in higher education doing higher educated things after it, where we get our lower educated workers from doing the lower educated jobs that we require to service our higher educated needs.

    Actually none of those is the key question. The real question going forward is how we are going to continue to pay the vast majority of our workforce the sort of rates they have become accustom to when they are 30% less productive than our Asian competitors. A related but equally important question is how are we going to pay the vast majority of our citizens who do not have the intellectual gifts to compete at the cutting edge of modern high tech industries and whose employers are rapidly finding that they can get the work done more efficiently and for less money offshore.

    As a simple example of the latter, it is economically advantageous (ie. it happens) to ship containers of pig skins from UK slaughterhouses around the world to China, where they are made into gloves which are then shipped back around the world to the UK and sold, compared to making the same gloves in England.

  • saddenedsaddened Posts: 2,245
    For @isam, having real issues replying on my phone, excess characters. Will confirm when back home on larger screen. In the interim if I'm wrong I apologise.

    I
  • TomsToms Posts: 2,478
    edited December 2014

    Toms said:

    @ antifrank
    " that Bulgarian and Romanian migrants to the UK are harder working than the English..."

    To which I'd add Albanians if the guy who did my plastering is typical. The man's a talented human dynamo. And liberal with his splendid home-made raki (or should that be rakia ?).

    I sense a 'plastered' joke eager to make its escape.
    I think we can both hold enjoy our booze well.
    I'd not like to see him plastering plastered.
  • Mr. Song, forming an opinion of an electoral system based on partisan advantage is not an attractive approach to such things.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,326
    Well, well....


    ‘I do not know whether you are having the same experience but I am finding, among people who work outside the City of London but whose activities bring them into touch in some degree with the City, that there is increasing disquiet about the things that people think are going on in the City,’ he wrote.

    ‘I do not just mean the levels of remuneration; a lot of people, including some from inside the City, think that is a bubble that will be pricked in a year or two.

    ‘They think more about the way in which corners are being cut and money is being made in ways that are at least bordering on the unscrupulous.

    ‘It tends to be summed up by the people saying that they doubt whether it really is good enough any more to leaving the policing of the City to self-regulation.

    ‘I’m afraid that all this is pretty vague and unspecific; but I find it sufficiently prevalent to be concerned.’

    From a note sent to the then PM in March 1986.
  • philiphphiliph Posts: 4,704
    edited December 2014
    As it is a private poll are the SNP (or any other private commissioner of a poll) obliged to disclose the exact question asked our can they present a precis of the question phrased as they like, thus disguising a leading question?

    In other words, is private polling of any interest when released by an interested party.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,711
    Indigo said:

    We need to ask ourselves why we cannot get our own people educated and motivated for work and life. We also need to ask where, assuming we want people to be in higher education doing higher educated things after it, where we get our lower educated workers from doing the lower educated jobs that we require to service our higher educated needs.

    Actually none of those is the key question. The real question going forward is how we are going to continue to pay the vast majority of our workforce the sort of rates they have become accustom to when they are 30% less productive than our Asian competitors. A related but equally important question is how are we going to pay the vast majority of our citizens who do not have the intellectual gifts to compete at the cutting edge of modern high tech industries and whose employers are rapidly finding that they can get the work done more efficiently and for less money offshore.

    As a simple example of the latter, it is economically advantageous (ie. it happens) to ship containers of pig skins from UK slaughterhouses around the world to China, where they are made into gloves which are then shipped back around the world to the UK and sold, compared to making the same gloves in England.

    Don't similar economic madnesses apply to Scottish prawns and Thailand?
  • IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966
    I am dubious that AV would have passed even with the Tories full support. The received wisdom is that Cameron threw away the chance by opposing it, but I dont think the public were convinced in any case.
  • IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966
    edited December 2014

    Indigo said:

    We need to ask ourselves why we cannot get our own people educated and motivated for work and life. We also need to ask where, assuming we want people to be in higher education doing higher educated things after it, where we get our lower educated workers from doing the lower educated jobs that we require to service our higher educated needs.

    Actually none of those is the key question. The real question going forward is how we are going to continue to pay the vast majority of our workforce the sort of rates they have become accustom to when they are 30% less productive than our Asian competitors. A related but equally important question is how are we going to pay the vast majority of our citizens who do not have the intellectual gifts to compete at the cutting edge of modern high tech industries and whose employers are rapidly finding that they can get the work done more efficiently and for less money offshore.

    As a simple example of the latter, it is economically advantageous (ie. it happens) to ship containers of pig skins from UK slaughterhouses around the world to China, where they are made into gloves which are then shipped back around the world to the UK and sold, compared to making the same gloves in England.

    Don't similar economic madnesses apply to Scottish prawns and Thailand?
    I believe so, and they are flown which just shows the difference in labour productivity if they can pay refrigerated air freight 8000 miles and still make it profitable compared to local labour..
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,708
    edited December 2014

    Indigo said:

    Mr. Indigo, I wonder what the German view is. If Greece gets let off a huge quantity of debt, other nations may try the same approach.

    They may come to regret QMV, the majority debtor nations with no money will "discovers it can vote itself largess out of the public treasury"

    The elites of the EU have basically managed to manufacture a "Heads you win, Tails I Lose" scenario. Either they have to forgive huge amounts of Greek debt, at which point everyone else is going to want equitable treatment, and Germany loses a truck load of money, or, Greece calls a hard default of its outstanding debt, and crashes out of the EU as the ECB withdraws support, contagion causes havoc through the EU and risks Portugal going under as well, and Germany loses a truck load of money as the main backer of the ECB. If you were aiming to screw things up it would be hard to do a better job.
    Isn't there another option here, "Greece sucks it up"? It's not obvious a hard default and crash out of the EU would be a huge short-term economic success that made a hypothetical incoming Tsipras administration wildly popular, and his whole sell is that Greece can stay in the Euro and the EU (but still get a pony).
    Is the issue 'EU' or is it 'Eurozone'? Is it not the requirement of the Eurozone (ever closer fiscal and so political union) that drives the Tory renegotiation proposals?
    Does the IMF have a say in this?
    Yeah, not sure they'd necessarily crash out of the EU even if they left the Eurozone - that was just the premise of the discussion up-thread. It would certainly be possible to leave the Euro and stay in the EU, but the reason to leave the Eurozone is to go the full Argentina - I'm not sure if there's anything there incompatible with EU membership. I guess Cyprus did capital controls without anybody being bothered, so maybe it's OK.

    As far as the Tory renegotiation proposals go, there aren't any, there are just proposals for proposals, and very vague ones, too. What's there is isn't driven by requirements of the Eurozone, it's driven by requirements of internal Conservative party management.
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    saddened said:

    For @isam, having real issues replying on my phone, excess characters. Will confirm when back home on larger screen. In the interim if I'm wrong I apologise.

    I

    Ok.. well you can take my word for it that you were wrong to say I had censored anything, and as all the insults that followed were based on an error, I accept your apology
  • MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053
    http://rt.com/uk/218319-muslim-brotherhood-delayed-report/

    UK Muslim Brotherhood report muzzled 'to keep good relations with Qatar'

    Why am I not surprised?
  • IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966
    edited December 2014

    Is the issue 'EU' or is it 'Eurozone'? Is it not the requirement of the Eurozone (ever closer fiscal and so political union) that drives the Tory renegotiation proposals?
    Does the IMF have a say in this?

    Yeah, not sure they'd necessarily crash out of the EU even if they left the Eurozone - that was just the premise of the discussion up-thread. It would certainly be possible to leave the Euro and stay in the EU, but the reason to leave the Eurozone is to go the full Argentina - I'm not sure if there's anything there incompatible with EU membership. I guess Cyprus did capital controls without anybody being bothered, so maybe it's OK.

    As far as the Tory renegotiation proposals go, there aren't any, there are just proposals for proposals, and very vague ones, too. What there is isn't driven by requirements of the Eurozone, it's driven by requirements of internal Conservative party management.
    "Ever closer union" is in the preamble of the Treaty of Rome, its a fundamental tenant of the EU, and nothing specifically to do with the currency. It's the primary reason that the renegotiation isn't going to amount to much more than a few bits of tinsel, that and several national leaders (Hollande, Komorowski) have already said in effect they dont care want the UK wants, its not going to get it.

    Regarding Greece the key point was that if they resiled from the requirements imposed by the Troika (which SYRIZA are currently committed to one the first day in office) the ECB would withdraw support for their economy, and they would be unable to fund their economy leading them with no choice but to drop out the Euro and bring in the New Drachma. See http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/greece/11316567/This-Greek-tragedy-could-end-in-utter-ruin.html
    In any case, the immediate consequence of a non-negotiated Greek default would be the withdrawal by the European Central Bank of its support for the Greek banking system. To fill the gap, the central bank in Athens would have to provide its own liquidity, at which point Greece would effectively be out of the euro.
  • The Tories are down a further single notch today at 278-284 seats on Sporting's GE spread market, just five seats behind Labour's 283-289.
    There could be some fun next week when the polling firms recommence their operations.
  • calumcalum Posts: 3,046
    scotslass said:

    As a relatively new kid on this normally excellent site let me see if I can get this right.

    Mike makes a post suggesting that the SNP did not publish voting intentions, without checking with either the SNP, or Panelbase and assumes this is a conspiracy to suppress information.

    This sets running excitable contributions from posters who hope beyond hope that the information from THREE Scottish polls in the last TWO weeks might somehow be wrong.

    Now when Mike has his original suspicions confounded by the SNP, and more importantly Panelbase, normally sensible people like antifrank suggesting this is "odd"

    In fact it is perfectly rational behaviour. The SNP do not need information on voting intentions - they have that already. What they have been very successfully feeding the Scottish press over the least three days is rather an explanation for their current success. All of the results from their poll - on popular support for the SNP as "good" for Scotland, on support for the SNP role in a hung parliament etc -are interesting and very favourable indeed to the SNP narrative.

    If we want to know how the SNP is doing then all we have to do is look at their soaring prices on Sporting Index - mid point now 28 seats from 21 a couple of weeks ago.

    If we want information on why that is happening then it would have been better Mike to publish some of these poll findings rather than float a conspiracy theory which has been so quickly and comprehensively shot down.

    I think it is looking like many on this site's refusal to accept that SLAB is facing extinction in Scotland could end up being a missed betting opportunity.
  • Cyclefree said:

    You might want to take care about what you are saying there. There was never any allegation - or any evidence - that Vodafone sought to bribe anyone at HMRC. Such an allegation would be highly libellous if made without supporting evidence. (And the Private Eye story never really stacked up anyway.)

    Was not OKC a Pharamacist before he retired? Glasshouses and such....

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-30622544

    As ever: Correlation =/= causation....
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,410
    calum said:

    scotslass said:

    As a relatively new kid on this normally excellent site let me see if I can get this right.

    Mike makes a post suggesting that the SNP did not publish voting intentions, without checking with either the SNP, or Panelbase and assumes this is a conspiracy to suppress information.

    This sets running excitable contributions from posters who hope beyond hope that the information from THREE Scottish polls in the last TWO weeks might somehow be wrong.

    Now when Mike has his original suspicions confounded by the SNP, and more importantly Panelbase, normally sensible people like antifrank suggesting this is "odd"

    In fact it is perfectly rational behaviour. The SNP do not need information on voting intentions - they have that already. What they have been very successfully feeding the Scottish press over the least three days is rather an explanation for their current success. All of the results from their poll - on popular support for the SNP as "good" for Scotland, on support for the SNP role in a hung parliament etc -are interesting and very favourable indeed to the SNP narrative.

    If we want to know how the SNP is doing then all we have to do is look at their soaring prices on Sporting Index - mid point now 28 seats from 21 a couple of weeks ago.

    If we want information on why that is happening then it would have been better Mike to publish some of these poll findings rather than float a conspiracy theory which has been so quickly and comprehensively shot down.

    I think it is looking like many on this site's refusal to accept that SLAB is facing extinction in Scotland could end up being a missed betting opportunity.
    No no we've got a few bets on the SNP...
  • Pulpstar said:

    calum said:

    scotslass said:

    As a relatively new kid on this normally excellent site let me see if I can get this right.

    Mike makes a post suggesting that the SNP did not publish voting intentions, without checking with either the SNP, or Panelbase and assumes this is a conspiracy to suppress information.

    This sets running excitable contributions from posters who hope beyond hope that the information from THREE Scottish polls in the last TWO weeks might somehow be wrong.

    Now when Mike has his original suspicions confounded by the SNP, and more importantly Panelbase, normally sensible people like antifrank suggesting this is "odd"

    In fact it is perfectly rational behaviour. The SNP do not need information on voting intentions - they have that already. What they have been very successfully feeding the Scottish press over the least three days is rather an explanation for their current success. All of the results from their poll - on popular support for the SNP as "good" for Scotland, on support for the SNP role in a hung parliament etc -are interesting and very favourable indeed to the SNP narrative.

    If we want to know how the SNP is doing then all we have to do is look at their soaring prices on Sporting Index - mid point now 28 seats from 21 a couple of weeks ago.

    If we want information on why that is happening then it would have been better Mike to publish some of these poll findings rather than float a conspiracy theory which has been so quickly and comprehensively shot down.

    I think it is looking like many on this site's refusal to accept that SLAB is facing extinction in Scotland could end up being a missed betting opportunity.
    No no we've got a few bets on the SNP...
    I've bet just shy of £1000 on the SNP in various Scottish constituencies in the last week alone.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    Indigo said:

    Indigo said:

    We need to ask ourselves why we cannot get our own people educated and motivated for work and life. We also need to ask where, assuming we want people to be in higher education doing higher educated things after it, where we get our lower educated workers from doing the lower educated jobs that we require to service our higher educated needs.

    Actually none of those is the key question. The real question going forward is how we are going to continue to pay the vast majority of our workforce the sort of rates they have become accustom to when they are 30% less productive than our Asian competitors. A related but equally important question is how are we going to pay the vast majority of our citizens who do not have the intellectual gifts to compete at the cutting edge of modern high tech industries and whose employers are rapidly finding that they can get the work done more efficiently and for less money offshore.

    As a simple example of the latter, it is economically advantageous (ie. it happens) to ship containers of pig skins from UK slaughterhouses around the world to China, where they are made into gloves which are then shipped back around the world to the UK and sold, compared to making the same gloves in England.

    Don't similar economic madnesses apply to Scottish prawns and Thailand?
    I believe so, and they are flown which just shows the difference in labour productivity if they can pay refrigerated air freight 8000 miles and still make it profitable compared to local labour..
    I thought they were shipped by boat.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    Indigo said:

    I am dubious that AV would have passed even with the Tories full support. The received wisdom is that Cameron threw away the chance by opposing it, but I dont think the public were convinced in any case.
    Without the ludicrous "You are Too Stupid to Understand It"/"If you vote for AV you hate babies and soldiers" anti-AV campaign I think AV would have had a far better chance of passing.
  • antifrank said:

    I've bet just shy of £1000 on the SNP in various Scottish constituencies in the last week alone.

    To be fair:

    On an average median UK salary - as against yours - that would be about £50. Just because you can is nothing to shout about...! :neutral_face:
  • Mr. Alistair, to be fair, one of the most damaging parts of the campaign for AV was the explanatory booklet from the Electoral Commission, which had 1 side explaining how FPTP worked and 6 sides dedicated to espousing the wonder that was AV.
  • IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966
    edited December 2014
    Alistair said:

    Indigo said:

    Indigo said:

    We need to ask ourselves why we cannot get our own people educated and motivated for work and life. We also need to ask where, assuming we want people to be in higher education doing higher educated things after it, where we get our lower educated workers from doing the lower educated jobs that we require to service our higher educated needs.

    Actually none of those is the key question. The real question going forward is how we are going to continue to pay the vast majority of our workforce the sort of rates they have become accustom to when they are 30% less productive than our Asian competitors. A related but equally important question is how are we going to pay the vast majority of our citizens who do not have the intellectual gifts to compete at the cutting edge of modern high tech industries and whose employers are rapidly finding that they can get the work done more efficiently and for less money offshore.

    As a simple example of the latter, it is economically advantageous (ie. it happens) to ship containers of pig skins from UK slaughterhouses around the world to China, where they are made into gloves which are then shipped back around the world to the UK and sold, compared to making the same gloves in England.

    Don't similar economic madnesses apply to Scottish prawns and Thailand?
    I believe so, and they are flown which just shows the difference in labour productivity if they can pay refrigerated air freight 8000 miles and still make it profitable compared to local labour..
    I thought they were shipped by boat.
    You are correct http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/northern_ireland/6189870.stm

    I have certainly read of another UK fish product, possibly oysters, being handled by air.

    Seems the cheap end of the Whiskey trade is using Australia for bottling as well

    http://www.heraldscotland.com/scotland-to-china-and-back-again-cod-s-10-000-mile-trip-to-your-table-1.826905
  • Alistair said:

    Indigo said:

    I am dubious that AV would have passed even with the Tories full support. The received wisdom is that Cameron threw away the chance by opposing it, but I dont think the public were convinced in any case.
    Without the ludicrous "You are Too Stupid to Understand It"/"If you vote for AV you hate babies and soldiers" anti-AV campaign I think AV would have had a far better chance of passing.
    For it to have a real chance of passing you'd have had to have got rid of the pro-AV campaign as well.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,038
    It's a recurring theme on here that the Tories should have supported AV because it would have given them an advantage at the election (Especially with the rise of UKIP). I'd rather decisions were made for greater reasons than that!
  • antifrank said:

    UPDATE: The SNP has assured me that no GE15 voting questions were asked

    How peculiar. You'd have thought that was much the most important question they'd want to ask right now.
    Otoh the SNP may be building a position as the party who will fight for authentic Devo Max, which seems much more realistic than flying 'new referendum' kites for the moment.
    If the Tories offer the SNP Devo Lot More (in exchange for EV4EL) where Labour offer Devo Bit More, which way would the SNP jump?

  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,038

    antifrank said:

    UPDATE: The SNP has assured me that no GE15 voting questions were asked

    How peculiar. You'd have thought that was much the most important question they'd want to ask right now.
    Otoh the SNP may be building a position as the party who will fight for authentic Devo Max, which seems much more realistic than flying 'new referendum' kites for the moment.
    If the Tories offer the SNP Devo Lot More (in exchange for EV4EL) where Labour offer Devo Bit More, which way would the SNP jump?

    Well they've already ruled out any agreement with the Tories, despite the Tories voting with them during their minority government in Scotland (perhaps the SNP view Tories north of the border differently!).
  • RobD said:

    It's a recurring theme on here that the Tories should have supported AV because it would have given them an advantage at the election (Especially with the rise of UKIP). I'd rather decisions were made for greater reasons than that!
    One of the useful things about this site is that the discussion is based on what would be the best strategy for politicians to follow to promote their own interests, rather than what would be the best way to promote truth, prosperity and justice. This is important because notwithstanding the fact that the relevant people failed to see UKIP rising the way they did, the former is a much better predictor of what they'll actually do than the latter.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    RobD said:

    antifrank said:

    UPDATE: The SNP has assured me that no GE15 voting questions were asked

    How peculiar. You'd have thought that was much the most important question they'd want to ask right now.
    Otoh the SNP may be building a position as the party who will fight for authentic Devo Max, which seems much more realistic than flying 'new referendum' kites for the moment.
    If the Tories offer the SNP Devo Lot More (in exchange for EV4EL) where Labour offer Devo Bit More, which way would the SNP jump?

    Well they've already ruled out any agreement with the Tories, despite the Tories voting with them during their minority government in Scotland (perhaps the SNP view Tories north of the border differently!).
    They've ruled out supporting a Tory government in general, they haven't rules out bill-by-bill support.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,038
    Alistair said:

    RobD said:

    antifrank said:

    UPDATE: The SNP has assured me that no GE15 voting questions were asked

    How peculiar. You'd have thought that was much the most important question they'd want to ask right now.
    Otoh the SNP may be building a position as the party who will fight for authentic Devo Max, which seems much more realistic than flying 'new referendum' kites for the moment.
    If the Tories offer the SNP Devo Lot More (in exchange for EV4EL) where Labour offer Devo Bit More, which way would the SNP jump?

    Well they've already ruled out any agreement with the Tories, despite the Tories voting with them during their minority government in Scotland (perhaps the SNP view Tories north of the border differently!).
    They've ruled out supporting a Tory government in general, they haven't rules out bill-by-bill support.
    It sounds pretty clear cut to me:

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/nicola-sturgeon-assures-scottish-voters-well-never-ever-put-the-tories-into-government-9863300.html
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,038

    RobD said:

    It's a recurring theme on here that the Tories should have supported AV because it would have given them an advantage at the election (Especially with the rise of UKIP). I'd rather decisions were made for greater reasons than that!
    One of the useful things about this site is that the discussion is based on what would be the best strategy for politicians to follow to promote their own interests, rather than what would be the best way to promote truth, prosperity and justice. This is important because notwithstanding the fact that the relevant people failed to see UKIP rising the way they did, the former is a much better predictor of what they'll actually do than the latter.
    Hm, even if UKIP were higher in the polls, I don't think Cameron's position would have been different. Mine wouldn't have been, at least.
  • IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966
    Alistair said:

    RobD said:

    antifrank said:

    UPDATE: The SNP has assured me that no GE15 voting questions were asked

    How peculiar. You'd have thought that was much the most important question they'd want to ask right now.
    Otoh the SNP may be building a position as the party who will fight for authentic Devo Max, which seems much more realistic than flying 'new referendum' kites for the moment.
    If the Tories offer the SNP Devo Lot More (in exchange for EV4EL) where Labour offer Devo Bit More, which way would the SNP jump?

    Well they've already ruled out any agreement with the Tories, despite the Tories voting with them during their minority government in Scotland (perhaps the SNP view Tories north of the border differently!).
    They've ruled out supporting a Tory government in general, they haven't rules out bill-by-bill support.
    Even that appears to make Labour supporters feel they can take at least tacit SNP support more or less for granted. Not a day goes past without me reading something here to the effect that the SNP wouldnt dare bring down a Miliband government because it would be electoral suicide. If that is the case (which I doubt) then the SNP is in a weaker negotiating position than Cameron is with the EU.
  • antifrank said:

    UPDATE: The SNP has assured me that no GE15 voting questions were asked

    How peculiar. You'd have thought that was much the most important question they'd want to ask right now.
    Otoh the SNP may be building a position as the party who will fight for authentic Devo Max, which seems much more realistic than flying 'new referendum' kites for the moment.
    If the Tories offer the SNP Devo Lot More (in exchange for EV4EL) where Labour offer Devo Bit More, which way would the SNP jump?

    An interesting dilemma. I suspect there would be a huge amount of horsetrading (even more than 2010) before we had a rose garden moment.
  • IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966
    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    It's a recurring theme on here that the Tories should have supported AV because it would have given them an advantage at the election (Especially with the rise of UKIP). I'd rather decisions were made for greater reasons than that!
    One of the useful things about this site is that the discussion is based on what would be the best strategy for politicians to follow to promote their own interests, rather than what would be the best way to promote truth, prosperity and justice. This is important because notwithstanding the fact that the relevant people failed to see UKIP rising the way they did, the former is a much better predictor of what they'll actually do than the latter.
    Hm, even if UKIP were higher in the polls, I don't think Cameron's position would have been different. Mine wouldn't have been, at least.
    Its not so much the polls, if the UKIP raise had started a year earlier and they now have 4 MPs not 2 from ByElections, what would Cameron do. In effect the question is how many seats does Cameron lose before he starts to worry, and how many before he feels he has to come to terms with UKIP rather than face certain defeat. If UKIP was currently sitting on 20 seats would Cameron be looking to cut a deal.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,711
    edited December 2014

    Cyclefree said:

    You might want to take care about what you are saying there. There was never any allegation - or any evidence - that Vodafone sought to bribe anyone at HMRC. Such an allegation would be highly libellous if made without supporting evidence. (And the Private Eye story never really stacked up anyway.)

    Was not OKC a Pharamacist before he retired? Glasshouses and such....

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-30622544

    As ever: Correlation =/= causation....
    Indeed. And case as stated, if I were still involved with pharmaceutical politics I would be concerned about this scheme.
    It’s unquestionably going to add time to the the dispensing process and could cause embarrassment and consequent alienation to patients.
    It’s also, it would appear going to require more computer hardware, especially in pharmacies dispensing large numbers of prescriptions.
  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143
    edited December 2014
    In the only real national elections which do not use FPTP the Tories ended up polling below UKIP.

    The Tories are now engaged in a struggle for hegemony over the right-wing vote. FPTP and incumbency are two powerful weapons in their favour.

    Under AV, a right-wing voter would have been able to vote purely by their preference, safe in the knowledge that if a majority of right-wing voters did not share their preference, then their vote would be transferred the other way and they would not gift the seat to Labour, or the Liberals.

    This raises a terrifying prospect for Tories - that a majority of their supporters would give their first preference to UKIP. Arguably* this is what occurred at the 2014 European elections conducted under PR.

    Undoubtedly, by fighting to retain FPTP, the Tories are working in their best long-term interests - even if it may come at the expense of a short-term hit at the 2015 general election.

    * Except: turnout, leant votes to a Frog parliament, yadda, yadda...
  • Indeed. And case as stated, if I were still involved with pharmaceutical politics I would be concerned about this scheme.
    It’s unquestionably going to add time to the the dispensing process and could cause embarrassment and consequent alienation to patients.
    It’s also, it would appear going to require more computer hardware, especially in pharmacies dispensing large numbers of prescriptions.

    I take it you used a Dickensian Ledger for your potions. No new things like mechanical-till; Japanese cash-boxes; and - God-forbid - credit/debit-cards....
  • HurstLlamaHurstLlama Posts: 9,098

    Cyclefree said:

    You might want to take care about what you are saying there. There was never any allegation - or any evidence - that Vodafone sought to bribe anyone at HMRC. Such an allegation would be highly libellous if made without supporting evidence. (And the Private Eye story never really stacked up anyway.)

    Was not OKC a Pharamacist before he retired? Glasshouses and such....

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-30622544

    As ever: Correlation =/= causation....
    Indeed. And case as stated, if I were still involved with pharmaceutical politics I would be concerned about this scheme.
    It’s unquestionably going to add time to the the dispensing process and could cause embarrassment and consequent alienation to patients.
    It’s also, it would appear going to require more computer hardware, especially in pharmacies dispensing large numbers of prescriptions.
    Not sure why you say that, Mr. Cole, isn't the proposal only bringing other payment exemptions into line with those used for patients who buy an annual season ticket? When I first bought an annual ticket I had to show it when collecting a prescription, then the pharmacist ran a local register, now it is all handled centrally using some database.
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    If you hate Russell Brand as much as I do - you'll love this - hilariously good piss take.

    https://youtube.com/watch?v=TDDzlgMrkGM
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    RobD said:

    Well they've already ruled out any agreement with the Tories, despite the Tories voting with them during their minority government in Scotland (perhaps the SNP view Tories north of the border differently!).

    Is this the same SNP that "ruled out" supporting the Edinburgh Trams, right up until they *cough* voted for the Trams *cough* and the extra funding?

    And can I just check that the first thing the SNP "We could do anything if it wasn't for those bastards in Westminster" administration did on finding Ebola was ship it to London?
  • IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966
    edited December 2014
    .
  • FlightpathFlightpath Posts: 4,012

    In the only real national elections which do not use FPTP the Tories ended up polling below UKIP.

    The Tories are now engaged in a struggle for hegemony over the right-wing vote. FPTP and incumbency are two powerful weapons in their favour.

    Under AV, a right-wing voter would have been able to vote purely by their preference, safe in the knowledge that if a majority of right-wing voters did not share their preference, then their vote would be transferred the other way and they would not gift the seat to Labour, or the Liberals.

    This raises a terrifying prospect for Tories - that a majority of their supporters would give their first preference to UKIP. Arguably* this is what occurred at the 2014 European elections conducted under PR.

    Undoubtedly, by fighting to retain FPTP, the Tories are working in their best long-term interests - even if it may come at the expense of a short-term hit at the 2015 general election.

    * Except: turnout, leant votes to a Frog parliament, yadda, yadda...
    You are quoting an election which was of no relevance 'nationally' and with a low turnout. Also one where there was no constituency link which would have exposed the fruit cakes and loonies like our friend Mr Smith. In other words your comparison is bogus.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,498
    Scott_P said:

    RobD said:

    Well they've already ruled out any agreement with the Tories, despite the Tories voting with them during their minority government in Scotland (perhaps the SNP view Tories north of the border differently!).

    Is this the same SNP that "ruled out" supporting the Edinburgh Trams, right up until they *cough* voted for the Trams *cough* and the extra funding?

    And can I just check that the first thing the SNP "We could do anything if it wasn't for those bastards in Westminster" administration did on finding Ebola was ship it to London?
    You really are a sad tube
This discussion has been closed.