I do think (from doorstep conversations as much as from polls) that UKIP has faded slightly so in reply to stjohn on the last thread, I wouldn't think that buying UKIP on 2-3 spread is value, though I suppose there's a lottery-ticket type possibility of a maybe 1/10000 chance that a gigantic scandal means they thunder home with dozens of seats and you make thousands of quid. I'd think that any two of Carswell, Reckless and Farage should win.
That said, it's not that people have become alienated from UKIP, just that the "oh sod it, who cares who actually wins my seat, I want to protest" view is becoming rarer. UKIP may be doing better where they're clearly contenders. For example, Broxtowe UKIP's website doesn't mention the candidate, even though they selected him some months ago.
By the way, 100% agree with FrancisUrquhart on the last thread that online GP surgery booking should be pushed - it's bonkers how many surgeries still do the "telephone at 8am and if it's busy try again" routine. It's an area where a Government push with a standard recommended solution could help - GP surgeries often seem just too busy to innovate much.
Antifrank. I thought your Scottish article very interesting. I noticed you had moved Edinburgh South from SNP to Labour. A good move in my opinion and if I can get somewhere near even money it's going to be my largest bet of the election. I see you also moved Aberdeen South though with reservations. Another worth while wager in my opinion.
Ukip is more than likely to have a major correction downwards.The authoritarian/libertarian split,evidenced by Farage v Carswell,is pretty terminal and despite Ukip's call for communication silence,Communication Breakdown is likely to persist,and there is always the drip-drip of the BNP-EDL-Britain First Fascist groupings -support for Ukip undermining it. We will see what instructions Farage gets from Murdoch at their next secret meeting.He could pull the plug on the whole thing if he sees he can't win South Thanet. My guess is most of the current Ukip tribe will be DNVs like Russell Brand,angrily pessimistic,shouting at the telly-"they are all the same and that includes Ukip".
Ukip is more than likely to have a major correction downwards.The authoritarian/libertarian split,evidenced by Farage v Carswell,is pretty terminal and despite Ukip's call for communication silence,Communication Breakdown is likely to persist,and there is always the drip-drip of the BNP-EDL-Britain First Fascist groupings -support for Ukip undermining it. We will see what instructions Farage gets from Murdoch at their next secret meeting.He could pull the plug on the whole thing if he sees he can't win South Thanet. My guess is most of the current Ukip tribe will be DNVs like Russell Brand,angrily pessimistic,shouting at the telly-"they are all the same and that includes Ukip".
Even though I loather lots about the EU, we are better off in, leaving the EU would be an unmitigated disaster.. That's why you must not pander to little Englanders
Do you have any evidence that leaving the EU would be an 'unmitigated disaster' beyond asserting that it would be so?
It stands to reason dunnit. One country isolated, do you think the EU would be friendly towards uf if we left?
Here we see the Europhile reasoning in all it's glory. When the referendum comes, how are we eurosceptics going to cope with such compelling argument as "it stands to reason dunnit"?
Antifrank. I thought your Scottish article very interesting. I noticed you had moved Edinburgh South from SNP to Labour. A good move in my opinion and if I can get somewhere near even money it's going to be my largest bet of the election. I see you also moved Aberdeen South though with reservations. Another worth while wager in my opinion.
I'm not really sure about either seat (or many others, to be candid). It's just a model to try to work out how the referendum might have changed Scottish politics. There will be other models and I very much doubt that I have got even some of the fundamentals roughly right. It's simply an attempt to take the conversation beyond uniform national swing or something that looks at Scotland nationally rather than acknowledging that the Yes campaign is driving the SNP's rise in the polls and that the Yes campaign did much better in some areas than others.
Just heard the headline 8am news on R4 today. German sources say that Merkel is likely to cede very little ground to Cameron when she meets him for talks on the UK's EU renegotiation later. Apparently, there was talk of German backpeddling even on the very small reforms on EU migrant benefit claim rights in the UK that Cameron has already outlined.
There are just not serious about keeping the UK in the EU. Better off out.
Damian Green wrote an article the other day saying that while the Government didn't agree with all the reforms demanded by the FreshStart group, they will get a reformed EU with such mighty changes as "more liberalised trade in services" and "a focus on the TTIP". That was it.
Burnham's idea about the need to integrate social car and medicine makes sense. The old biddies have a habit of blocking beds (it's generally old biddies as men are gallant enough to snuff it earlier).
Incidentally, the Irish press have the same headlines - about the A&E crisis in the Republic. It's that time of year, you see.
Even though I loather lots about the EU, we are better off in, leaving the EU would be an unmitigated disaster.. That's why you must not pander to little Englanders
Do you have any evidence that leaving the EU would be an 'unmitigated disaster' beyond asserting that it would be so?
It stands to reason dunnit. One country isolated, do you think the EU would be friendly towards uf if we left?
Of course they would be friendly. They would have no choice given the £88bn balance of payments deficit we are currently running with them.
There are no upsides to our remaining members of the EU. The words 'unmitigated disaster' are a perfect summary of our membership over the last 40 years.
I remain to be convinced that the Germans would seek to punish us by refusing to sell their cars to us.
I've followed you in on that Cumbernauld seat, Mr Antifrank
I put a fair bit more money on constituencies in and around Glasgow last night. I deliberately didn't put any tips up yesterday, because I don't want to influence other people's money decisions on something so rough. But I'm willing to risk my own money because I know where the rough edges are - and it would be very galling if I turned out to be even remotely right not to have got some kind of return out of it!
Despite the large swings, I've not put any extra money on the SNP in the three Lib Dem held seats in the Highlands. I feel that I have probably not fully accounted for Lib Dem incumbency there.
Telegraphs Allister Heath has a very interesting and precise assessment of Labours Mansion Tax and the horrific damage it would do to all and this country despite it bending a class war based tax.
"This is a truly dreadful idea from a Labour Party that has lost touch with economic reality"
No doubt written in his London mansion, whinging deadbeat.
Obviously you did not read the entire piece and not only who it will effect but how mission creep in the future will sucker in a lot more people. It also is very likely ( as shown elsewhere) an exodus of the top % who pay the majority of the tax in this country. How this can be a good position to be in other than for those obsessed with class war really is failing to assess the overall implications.
What they need to concentrate on is making all who should do so pay their tax. Too many loopholes for their chums to avoid paying what they should. Simplify the system and make sure people with lots of money cannot employ accountants to make up schemes to let them avoid paying tax. HMRC should tax first and make them prove they do not need to pay, and all costs are on them if any issues. They have little interest in taxing those who should be paying , they prefer to nickel and dime the PAYE mugs who have no option. We need a fair tax system.
Just heard the headline 8am news on R4 today. German sources say that Merkel is likely to cede very little ground to Cameron when she meets him for talks on the UK's EU renegotiation later. Apparently, there was talk of German backpeddling even on the very small reforms on EU migrant benefit claim rights in the UK that Cameron has already outlined.
There are just not serious about keeping the UK in the EU. Better off out.
Damian Green wrote an article the other day saying that while the Government didn't agree with all the reforms demanded by the FreshStart group, they will get a reformed EU with such mighty changes as "more liberalised trade in services" and "a focus on the TTIP". That was it.
Its going to be quite a feat even with Cameron's presentations skills to dress that up to look like any more than a bit of tinsel. Infact that is so meagre it is likely to look like a little bit of tinsel after being talked up.
I see you avoid answering the question , typical Tory , throw another Billion on the BBQ, bu**er those nasty SNP people have balanced their budget again , how dare they..
I've followed you in on that Cumbernauld seat, Mr Antifrank
I put a fair bit more money on constituencies in and around Glasgow last night. I deliberately didn't put any tips up yesterday, because I don't want to influence other people's money decisions on something so rough. But I'm willing to risk my own money because I know where the rough edges are - and it would be very galling if I turned out to be even remotely right not to have got some kind of return out of it!
Despite the large swings, I've not put any extra money on the SNP in the three Lib Dem held seats in the Highlands. I feel that I have probably not fully accounted for Lib Dem incumbency there.
I think I've backed the SNP in every seat now.
As an aside, OGH thinks Danny Alexander's anticipated promotion, backing him at 2/1 to hold his seat is a good bet.
Why does anyone waste their time attempting to discuss anything with MG..
Ha Ha Ha , the odious cretin doddery appears from under his rock, bereft of anything to add to topic as usual. Limited to personal insults , what a ****
I've followed you in on that Cumbernauld seat, Mr Antifrank
I put a fair bit more money on constituencies in and around Glasgow last night. I deliberately didn't put any tips up yesterday, because I don't want to influence other people's money decisions on something so rough. But I'm willing to risk my own money because I know where the rough edges are - and it would be very galling if I turned out to be even remotely right not to have got some kind of return out of it!
Despite the large swings, I've not put any extra money on the SNP in the three Lib Dem held seats in the Highlands. I feel that I have probably not fully accounted for Lib Dem incumbency there.
I actually backed the Lib Dems in Caithness (Have a smidgen on the SNP at 6-1 too there) ... I think Viscount Thurso being away from the centre of the coalition will help him.
Charlie Kennedy also isn't safe on your model. But I think he will hold.
Probably - pity their record in Wales is even worse - and of course the SNP have cut Scottish NHS Spending......(and only publish records on A&E quarterly - last time they were worse than England's)......So the irony is, on this metric, England is doing best not that you'd know it from Burnham.....
just shows the Scottish NHS is more efficient than the lardy English one. All that cash and they are declaring daily emergencies.
I know you are allergic to 'facts':
However, the performance in England is still better than elsewhere in the UK. The data in the other nations lags a bit behind England.
Scotland has a slightly tougher waiting time target - 98% of patients should be seen in four hours - but in September 93.5% were.
Comparing the September figures for England and Scotland shows England was performing slightly better in that month.
Very much agree with RCS and Indigo regarding the economic quicksands that are not recognised (publicly) by our politicians but could well swallow up the UK and a lot of western Europe.
So anecdote alert. Went to two very different social functions over the Christmas/New Year period. At one, there were some Welsh AMs and MPs whose complaint was that it was 'not fair' that global companies were not majorly investing in Wales. When I asked them, "Why should they" they were dumbfounded as having never thought of that scenario of a small outpost on the western edge of Europe. Again lack of gap analysis and long term thinking.
The other function contained many Russians and French now living in London. The Russians were mainly those who would not miss losing the odd £billion. They were quite vocal about the freedom to think and express those thoughts in the UK and compared that with the growing situation in Russia under Putin where freedom of thought and speech was diminishing. (Some English present expressed their view how that was starting to occur in the UK). The Russians liked their security and also the quality of education provided (for their children) by our top Public Schools and Universities.
The French, whilst escaping the economic clutches of Hollande, sw much more opportunity for business in the UK than France which was restricted by employment and tax laws.
However, both nationalities are ready to leave the UK for fresh fields should both personal and business economic and social conditions change.
Also today, "The BBC's Hugh Schofield in Paris reports on the publication of a provocative new book (new novel by France's most famous living author Michel Houellebecq) which depicts France as an Islamicised country where universities are compelled to teach the Koran, women are made to wear the veil and polygamy is lawful.
In the year 2022, France has continued its slow collapse and a Muslim party leader takes over as the country's new president.
Women are encouraged to leave their jobs and unemployment falls. Crime evaporates in the banlieues. Veils become the norm and polygamy is authorised.
I've followed you in on that Cumbernauld seat, Mr Antifrank
I put a fair bit more money on constituencies in and around Glasgow last night. I deliberately didn't put any tips up yesterday, because I don't want to influence other people's money decisions on something so rough. But I'm willing to risk my own money because I know where the rough edges are - and it would be very galling if I turned out to be even remotely right not to have got some kind of return out of it!
Despite the large swings, I've not put any extra money on the SNP in the three Lib Dem held seats in the Highlands. I feel that I have probably not fully accounted for Lib Dem incumbency there.
I am told by those who carry out private polls in Scotland that there is a much greater tactical and incumbency element there than south of the border, especially when you name the incumbent.
Without seeing any data I am loathe to put any more credence on that but it is a fair point.
don't have the time to pop in as often as I would like, so to deal with number of points at onc: 1 Andy Burnham. Stafford. Credibility on NHS: 0. Did better on Hillsborough, so should stick to football. Chances of becoming next Lab leader: laughable. 2 UKIP do have something to say on NHS: build a load of big A&E only units. Said on BBC Berks this am by UKIP spokesman. How to fund? Apparently just need to spend existing money better and not pay agency staff. Fascinating approach. Scores 0 for practicality. 3 Populism is the millstone round the neck of democracy. What would do the most good in the long run is a bit more leadership from politicians and a bit less followership. 4 Anyone who thinks that the EU would be nice to the UK if we left is in cloud cuckoo land. Norway still has to obey all the EU rules in order to trade with them. So would we. And we would be worse off than Norway, because no-one hates the Norwegians. 5 And finally, 2014 was the warmest year on record. We should really be worrying about that. Even UKIP - because the pressure from migrants now is nothing compared to what it will be like when equatorial zones become uninhabitable.
Even though I loather lots about the EU, we are better off in, leaving the EU would be an unmitigated disaster.. That's why you must not pander to little Englanders
Do you have any evidence that leaving the EU would be an 'unmitigated disaster' beyond asserting that it would be so?
It stands to reason dunnit. One country isolated, do you think the EU would be friendly towards uf if we left?
Ah, so you have no evidence whatsoever beyond your unsubstantiated fearmongering. Thanks.
Why does anyone waste their time attempting to discuss anything with MG..
Ha Ha Ha , the odious cretin doddery appears from under his rock, bereft of anything to add to topic as usual. Limited to personal insults , what a ****
Telegraphs Allister Heath has a very interesting and precise assessment of Labours Mansion Tax and the horrific damage it would do to all and this country despite it bending a class war based tax.
"This is a truly dreadful idea from a Labour Party that has lost touch with economic reality"
No doubt written in his London mansion, whinging deadbeat.
Obviously you did not read the entire piece and not only who it will effect but how mission creep in the future will sucker in a lot more people. It also is very likely ( as shown elsewhere) an exodus of the top % who pay the majority of the tax in this country. How this can be a good position to be in other than for those obsessed with class war really is failing to assess the overall implications.
What they need to concentrate on is making all who should do so pay their tax. Too many loopholes for their chums to avoid paying what they should. Simplify the system and make sure people with lots of money cannot employ accountants to make up schemes to let them avoid paying tax. HMRC should tax first and make them prove they do not need to pay, and all costs are on them if any issues. They have little interest in taxing those who should be paying , they prefer to nickel and dime the PAYE mugs who have no option. We need a fair tax system.
Problem is quite a lot of those schemes are brought about by being in the EU. Funnily enough Mr Junker has been in trouble recently for enabling such schemes when he was incharge in Luxembourg.
1 Andy Burnham. Stafford. Credibility on NHS: 0. Did better on Hillsborough, so should stick to football. Chances of becoming next Lab leader: laughable.
Probably - pity their record in Wales is even worse - and of course the SNP have cut Scottish NHS Spending......(and only publish records on A&E quarterly - last time they were worse than England's)......So the irony is, on this metric, England is doing best not that you'd know it from Burnham.....
just shows the Scottish NHS is more efficient than the lardy English one. All that cash and they are declaring daily emergencies.
I know you are allergic to 'facts':
However, the performance in England is still better than elsewhere in the UK. The data in the other nations lags a bit behind England.
Scotland has a slightly tougher waiting time target - 98% of patients should be seen in four hours - but in September 93.5% were.
Comparing the September figures for England and Scotland shows England was performing slightly better in that month.
So outwith your selective month , do you have any real data. SNP in Scotland are more efficient , less cost and tougher targets , I see your point ............LOL
Why does anyone waste their time attempting to discuss anything with MG..
Ha Ha Ha , the odious cretin doddery appears from under his rock, bereft of anything to add to topic as usual. Limited to personal insults , what a ****
What an ungrateful wretch he is malc - we all owe you a debt of gratitude for your contribution to the NO campaign- thanks again from this exiled Scot - some sort of legionne d'honor for MI5 "agent M" should be imminent.
No policies from London and the devastation of most of industry happened. Oil boom excepted , Westminster builds all its infrastructure in the south , hence why Scotland , Northern England , Wales etc are wastelands compared to London and south east.
Ah yes, the Nissan (Sunderland London) plant, the Honda (Swindon SevenOaks) plant and Toyota (Deeside Romford) plant. Then there was those two aircraft carriers they commissioned from BAE Systems Marine (Govan & Rosyth Canterbury).
As I recall, when it was discussed a year or two back, it was agreed on PB that much/most of the value of the carriers was actually being spent south of the border, because the shipyards (at least one of them also south of the border, BTW) just make the hull and install the high-value equipment made elsewhere. So I wouldn't be too keen to wave that particular example if I were you, without checking exactly where much of that lot was made. For instance, the Type 997 radar is developed and manufactured in the SE.
(And an awful lot of money is going to the US, especially if the F-35B finally gets sorted out, but then if it doesn't there are other things to worry about).
It's also becoming increasingly clear that the Government is suddenly unwilling to order the ships about which it made so much fuss during indyref - to the degree that I suspect there will be a cancellation in mid-May conveniently after the election.
One has to feel sorry for those Labour supporters desperately disappointed that armed police aren't putting down those forced to wait more than 4 hours for medical attention.
Even though I loather lots about the EU, we are better off in, leaving the EU would be an unmitigated disaster.. That's why you must not pander to little Englanders
Do you have any evidence that leaving the EU would be an 'unmitigated disaster' beyond asserting that it would be so?
It stands to reason dunnit. One country isolated, do you think the EU would be friendly towards uf if we left?
Of course they would be friendly. They would have no choice given the £88bn balance of payments deficit we are currently running with them.
There are no upsides to our remaining members of the EU. The words 'unmitigated disaster' are a perfect summary of our membership over the last 40 years.
I remain to be convinced that the Germans would seek to punish us by refusing to sell their cars to us.
They'd get over it. It's just as plausible, if not more so, that several EU countries would be delighted we'd finally left.
I've followed you in on that Cumbernauld seat, Mr Antifrank
I put a fair bit more money on constituencies in and around Glasgow last night. I deliberately didn't put any tips up yesterday, because I don't want to influence other people's money decisions on something so rough. But I'm willing to risk my own money because I know where the rough edges are - and it would be very galling if I turned out to be even remotely right not to have got some kind of return out of it!
Despite the large swings, I've not put any extra money on the SNP in the three Lib Dem held seats in the Highlands. I feel that I have probably not fully accounted for Lib Dem incumbency there.
I am told by those who carry out private polls in Scotland that there is a much greater tactical and incumbency element there than south of the border, especially when you name the incumbent.
Without seeing any data I am loathe to put any more credence on that but it is a fair point.
If that's true, then backing the Lib Dems at 8/1 in Argyll & Bute may be a good bet. They are surprisingly close to holding the seat on my assumptions.
One has to feel sorry for those Labour supporters desperately disappointed that armed police aren't putting down those forced to wait more than 4 hours for medical attention.
Will there be a judge led inquiry into the deception peddled during the Olympic opening ceremony ? Is Danny Boyle a war criminal ?
@pulpstar 10-1 on Andy Burnham for next Labour leader eh? if you limit your bet to £1 and agree that whoever wins pays over the money to help run this wonderful website, you're on. Surely even Labour wouldn't be THAT stupid????
One has to feel sorry for those Labour supporters desperately disappointed that armed police aren't putting down those forced to wait more than 4 hours for medical attention.
Will there be a judge led inquiry into the deception peddled during the Olympic opening ceremony ? Is Danny Boyle a war criminal ?
Surely it's only a matter of time before BBC News run excerpts from 'Threads', as footage from a local A&E today?
Just heard the headline 8am news on R4 today. German sources say that Merkel is likely to cede very little ground to Cameron when she meets him for talks on the UK's EU renegotiation later. Apparently, there was talk of German backpeddling even on the very small reforms on EU migrant benefit claim rights in the UK that Cameron has already outlined.
There are just not serious about keeping the UK in the EU. Better off out.
Damian Green wrote an article the other day saying that while the Government didn't agree with all the reforms demanded by the FreshStart group, they will get a reformed EU with such mighty changes as "more liberalised trade in services" and "a focus on the TTIP". That was it.
Damian Green is a well-known Tory europhile. But you're right, I expect Cameron's EU 'renegotiation' to achieve precisely nothing.
In fact, I wonder if this is the real reason he's now keen to bring the vote forward. It allows him to campaign off the back of promises, not achieved results. When he wins it (which he probably will) he thinks he can deal with any weaselling that happens afterwards off the back of the electoral mandate he feels he'll have.
Probably - pity their record in Wales is even worse - and of course the SNP have cut Scottish NHS Spending......(and only publish records on A&E quarterly - last time they were worse than England's)......So the irony is, on this metric, England is doing best not that you'd know it from Burnham.....
just shows the Scottish NHS is more efficient than the lardy English one. All that cash and they are declaring daily emergencies.
I know you are allergic to 'facts':
However, the performance in England is still better than elsewhere in the UK. The data in the other nations lags a bit behind England.
Scotland has a slightly tougher waiting time target - 98% of patients should be seen in four hours - but in September 93.5% were.
Comparing the September figures for England and Scotland shows England was performing slightly better in that month.
@pulpstar 10-1 on Andy Burnham for next Labour leader eh? if you limit your bet to £1 and agree that whoever wins pays over the money to help run this wonderful website, you're on. Surely even Labour wouldn't be THAT stupid????
Will somebody keep a record of this?
That's fine
I owe the site £50 still btw due to getting the oil price errm... wrong, though I didn't invest in roubles...
I need to top up my Scotland bets. I have a limited budget, so I've been dribbling in a few squids each month after I'm paid. I'm on Glasgow East, North, Central, and Dundee West for SNP. I'm on Dumfries, DC&T, WA&K and BR&S for the Tories.
Any other suggestions for best value bets on the SNP? I can afford to pick 2/3 other seats with perhaps £20-£30 on each.
The Greens are on the verge of taking the lead in the crucial 18-24 age group: Lab 27, Con 26, Grn 24.
Natalie Bennett to become Britain's second female, and second Australian, Prime Minister!
More seriously, whatever YouGov are doing to give the Greens high scores in the polls, if it continues then they're only an outlier away from a double-figure score. Will we have ten Natalie Bennett's to adorn PB if such a day ever arrives?
@IsabelHardman: I have learned that Labour is seeking an urgent question on the A&E crisis. Here’s why that’s actually quite odd http://t.co/dyvANjRgVr
The Greens are on the verge of taking the lead in the crucial 18-24 age group: Lab 27, Con 26, Grn 24.
Natalie Bennett to become Britain's second female, and second Australian, Prime Minister!
More seriously, whatever YouGov are doing to give the Greens high scores in the polls, if it continues then they're only an outlier away from a double-figure score. Will we have ten Natalie Bennett's to adorn PB if such a day ever arrives?
The Green party is opposing the scrapping of physical (paper) bus timetables in Sheffield which is definitely more red than green as a policy I think.
Arf! 40% of Eck's twitter followers aren't real....
Two out of five people who sign up to get Mr Salmond's tweets are "suspicious or empty", according to the Fake Followers app from Social Bakers, a digital analysis firm.
That figure, the highest in British politics, means 55,000 of the former nationalist leader's 134,000 followers are in doubt.
Ms Sturgeon saw her following triple over 2014 and now has 114,000 - but 34 per cent of them are iffy, reckons Social Bakers.
Mr. P, isn't it a bit weird to have an 'urgent question', when there's the opportunity for six (from the leader alone of the Labour Party) immediately beforehand?
In spite of the current consensus among professional pollsters that Labour will have the most seats after the next election, a YouGov poll conducted exclusively for Red Box reveals that the public still believes the Conservatives will end up the winners, writes YouGov's Stephan Shakespeare.
Among Conservative voters, the proportion who believe their party will win is 72 to 7, among Labour voters it is 57 to 15, while both Lib Dems and Ukip supporters (by margins of 54 to 5 and 36 to 10 respectively) believe that the Conservatives will end up ahead. On Sunday, we also saw that when we asked what election outcomes people wanted, preferences for either a Conservative majority or a Conservative-Lib Dem coalition outnumbered preferences for either a Labour majority or a Labour-Lib Dem coalition, even among a sample where Labour were ahead in voting intention.
These are mere straws but to me, if they suggest anything, it's that tactical or uncertain votes will break against Labour.
Mr. P, isn't it a bit weird to have an 'urgent question', when there's the opportunity for six (from the leader alone of the Labour Party) immediately beforehand?
We'll see what Bercow decides.
Yes, that's what the article says. It speculates Burnham might be freelancing
@ScottyNational: Top tips section : Simply ignore the Westminster conspiracy re oil prices by paying the petrol station twice what the value is on the pump
@pulpstar 10-1 on Andy Burnham for next Labour leader eh? if you limit your bet to £1 and agree that whoever wins pays over the money to help run this wonderful website, you're on. Surely even Labour wouldn't be THAT stupid????
Will somebody keep a record of this?
That's fine
I owe the site £50 still btw due to getting the oil price errm... wrong, though I didn't invest in roubles...
Still need a paypal or w/e to settle that up.
Please drop me an email so that I can keep a record.
I note that you concluded that Stirling is a cliff hanger SNP win, I live in Stirling and reached the conclusion last week that a comfortable SNP win puts them in to 40+ seats territory. I think the SNP will win Stirling – SNP 40%, SLAB 25%, Tories 20%, LibDems 5%, UKIP 5% and Greens 5%. You will note there is scope for tactical voting. My post of last week is pasted in below:
‘’ I’m not sure how Lord Ashcroft is selecting his Scottish constituency seats but my seat, Stirling, which is a key 4 way marginal, would be worthwhile considering. If the SNP can take Stirling comfortably, that would put them into 40+ seats territory.
As a SNP ex-SLAB supporter here is my current perspective on the SNP surge and its likely impact in May 2015.
The majority of people joining the SNP are motivated, working, new to political activism, aged 25 to 55 and from a range of socio-economic backgrounds. Therefore, I think the media portrayal of the SNP surge as being driven by blind faith cyber-Nats and benefit junkies is way off the mark. Interestingly, the surge is being lead by women, who now make up 44% of the SNP membership, pre-surge it was 33%.
Turning to the May 2015 election in Stirling, currently Ladbrokes have Labour at 4/6, SNP at 11/10 and Tories at 50/1. In 2010 the result was Labour 42%, Tories 24%, SNP 17% and LibDem 15%. In the referendum, Stirling was 60% No and 40% Yes. I think the SNP will win Stirling with around 40% support. I do not anticipate any significant Unionist tactical voting.
In terms of the GE2015 ground campaign, the SNP now have over 1500 members in Stirling. Candidate selection is underway with 7 good candidates, 3 with political and 4 with ‘’normal’’ backgrounds. The sitting SLAB MP, Anne McGuire, is retiring and the leader of Stirling Council (Johanna Boyd) is standing. Interestingly, Johanna leads a SLAB/Tory coalition with SNP being the largest party, suffice to say SLAB and the Tories make uneasy bedfellows.
Looking at Scotland more broadly, I think the SNP membership surge is pretty much across the board, so to the extent that the GOTV effort makes a difference the SNP are in an extremely strong position on the ground. One of SLAB’s problems is that it has taken for granted it’s dominant position in Scotland, so it does not seem to have much of a grassroots effort to combat the SNP. ’’
More seriously, whatever YouGov are doing to give the Greens high scores in the polls, if it continues then they're only an outlier away from a double-figure score. Will we have ten Natalie Bennett's to adorn PB if such a day ever arrives?
Unweighted Sample: 158 Weighted Sample: 211
24% of 158 is only 37 real people in the sample of 1769 or about 2% of the sample. Its such a tiny proportion of the sample it's effectively meaningless, every extra person they find for the Greens is effectively 0.6% of the VI in the subsample. There are four times as many people sampled in the older age groups.
33% upweighting is going to make its quite over representative in the overall VI I would think.
I note that you concluded that Stirling is a cliff hanger SNP win, I live in Stirling and reached the conclusion last week that a comfortable SNP win puts them in to 40+ seats territory. I think the SNP will win Stirling – SNP 40%, SLAB 25%, Tories 20%, LibDems 5%, UKIP 5% and Greens 5%. You will note there is scope for tactical voting. My post of last week is pasted in below:
‘’ I’m not sure how Lord Ashcroft is selecting his Scottish constituency seats but my seat, Stirling, which is a key 4 way marginal, would be worthwhile considering. If the SNP can take Stirling comfortably, that would put them into 40+ seats territory.
As a SNP ex-SLAB supporter here is my current perspective on the SNP surge and its likely impact in May 2015.
The majority of people joining the SNP are motivated, working, new to political activism, aged 25 to 55 and from a range of socio-economic backgrounds. Therefore, I think the media portrayal of the SNP surge as being driven by blind faith cyber-Nats and benefit junkies is way off the mark. Interestingly, the surge is being lead by women, who now make up 44% of the SNP membership, pre-surge it was 33%.
Turning to the May 2015 election in Stirling, currently Ladbrokes have Labour at 4/6, SNP at 11/10 and Tories at 50/1. In 2010 the result was Labour 42%, Tories 24%, SNP 17% and LibDem 15%. In the referendum, Stirling was 60% No and 40% Yes. I think the SNP will win Stirling with around 40% support. I do not anticipate any significant Unionist tactical voting.
In terms of the GE2015 ground campaign, the SNP now have over 1500 members in Stirling. Candidate selection is underway with 7 good candidates, 3 with political and 4 with ‘’normal’’ backgrounds. The sitting SLAB MP, Anne McGuire, is retiring and the leader of Stirling Council (Johanna Boyd) is standing. Interestingly, Johanna leads a SLAB/Tory coalition with SNP being the largest party, suffice to say SLAB and the Tories make uneasy bedfellows.
Looking at Scotland more broadly, I think the SNP membership surge is pretty much across the board, so to the extent that the GOTV effort makes a difference the SNP are in an extremely strong position on the ground. One of SLAB’s problems is that it has taken for granted it’s dominant position in Scotland, so it does not seem to have much of a grassroots effort to combat the SNP. ’’
I defer to local knowledge - what I have tried to do was put together an engine that will produce as much as anything an order of marginality (particularly between Labour and the SNP) based on the changes in voter preferences from 2010 to the referendum result. I'm not claiming any accuracy, I'm just trying to get the thinking beyond uniform national swing, which is almost certainly not going to be of much help in 2015.
As you can see, my model suggests that the SNP get 40 seats even with Stirling as a cliffhanger win!
1) If the idea takes hold that London is a cash cow for other areas' benefit, that could be damaging with some voters.
I'm not expecting it to make any difference in practice (I expect Labour to do very well in London this year), but it's one to watch.
The problem with Labour's mansion tax is different to what commentators have been saying. To my mind it's this. During the Blair/Brown years, Labour were mesmerised by the revenues from the City and thought they'd found the answer to Labour's problems: use those revenues to pay for the public sector and avoid the "tax'n'spend" charge.
And the result of that Faustian pact was that the City was not effectively regulated and that it made Britain far too dependant on one source of wealth.
Labour are making the same mistake again: they remain mesmerised by the idea that they can get revenues to pay for everything from bankers' bonuses or mansions. And the problems are that:-
(a) it's not true; (b) it means they have a vested interest in high house prices and high bankers' bonuses - the same old Faustian pact - even though these are not good for the rest of us.
It means that Labour never make a convincing case for why the public sector is needed and what needs to be spent on it and, crucial this, why this has to be paid for by all of us not just some rich bankers living in London mansions.
If Labour truly had the courage of their public sector convictions they'd make the case for it and try and get us to agree to pay more (a la Sweden or Denmark). But they don't. Mesmerised as they are by the idea that there is a pot of gold (owned by a group of unloved bad people) they can use, they are dishonest with us - and themselves - about how much we all of us (including the not very well off) need to pay if we really want all the public sector goodies we say we do.
And I suspect the reason they don't want to have that conversation is because they don't believe in their heart of hearts that if they asked us we would - in reality - be willing to put our hands in our pockets - as opposed to pointing to others and asking them to pay.
Now I know that the polls show that people are willing to pay etc but if so why are Labour so relentlessly dishonest on this point? Why won't they make the positive case for more taxation for the public sector?
I think Labour's loss of economic nerve - dating back to the 1992 election - and the "golden goose" fiction of the post-1997 City revenue years have allowed the Left in this country to avoid asking themselves some very hard questions about how to run an economy from a left of centre perspective, what the role of the state is and how to pay for it.
And I see no evidence that anyone in Labour now is thinking about any of these points. The shallowness of the proposed mansion tax is, to my mind, evidence of that.
The Greens are on the verge of taking the lead in the crucial 18-24 age group: Lab 27, Con 26, Grn 24.
Natalie Bennett to become Britain's second female, and second Australian, Prime Minister!
More seriously, whatever YouGov are doing to give the Greens high scores in the polls, if it continues then they're only an outlier away from a double-figure score. Will we have ten Natalie Bennett's to adorn PB if such a day ever arrives?
The Green party is opposing the scrapping of physical (paper) bus timetables in Sheffield which is definitely more red than green as a policy I think.
If printing a few paper timetables encourages a few more people to use the bus, rather than their car, then it is definitely the Green option.
I note that you concluded that Stirling is a cliff hanger SNP win, I live in Stirling and reached the conclusion last week that a comfortable SNP win puts them in to 40+ seats territory. I think the SNP will win Stirling – SNP 40%, SLAB 25%, Tories 20%, LibDems 5%, UKIP 5% and Greens 5%. You will note there is scope for tactical voting. My post of last week is pasted in below:
‘’ I’m not sure how Lord Ashcroft is selecting his Scottish constituency seats but my seat, Stirling, which is a key 4 way marginal, would be worthwhile considering. If the SNP can take Stirling comfortably, that would put them into 40+ seats territory.
As a SNP ex-SLAB supporter here is my current perspective on the SNP surge and its likely impact in May 2015.
The majority of people joining the SNP are motivated, working, new to political activism, aged 25 to 55 and from a range of socio-economic backgrounds. Therefore, I think the media portrayal of the SNP surge as being driven by blind faith cyber-Nats and benefit junkies is way off the mark. Interestingly, the surge is being lead by women, who now make up 44% of the SNP membership, pre-surge it was 33%.
Turning to the May 2015 election in Stirling, currently Ladbrokes have Labour at 4/6, SNP at 11/10 and Tories at 50/1. In 2010 the result was Labour 42%, Tories 24%, SNP 17% and LibDem 15%. In the referendum, Stirling was 60% No and 40% Yes. I think the SNP will win Stirling with around 40% support. I do not anticipate any significant Unionist tactical voting.
In terms of the GE2015 ground campaign, the SNP now have over 1500 members in Stirling. Candidate selection is underway with 7 good candidates, 3 with political and 4 with ‘’normal’’ backgrounds. The sitting SLAB MP, Anne McGuire, is retiring and the leader of Stirling Council (Johanna Boyd) is standing. Interestingly, Johanna leads a SLAB/Tory coalition with SNP being the largest party, suffice to say SLAB and the Tories make uneasy bedfellows.
I defer to local knowledge - what I have tried to do was put together an engine that will produce as much as anything an order of marginality (particularly between Labour and the SNP) based on the changes in voter preferences from 2010 to the referendum result. I'm not claiming any accuracy, I'm just trying to get the thinking beyond uniform national swing, which is almost certainly not going to be of much help in 2015.
As you can see, my model suggests that the SNP get 40 seats even with Stirling as a cliffhanger win!
I think your model is great and getting behind the UNS is essential. My sense is that Alistair's SMAP model combined with yours would be interesting. I don't think Stirling will be a cliff hanger unless their is significant Unionist tactical voting. Lets hope Lord Ashcroft picks this seat and asks all the right questions.
In unrelated news, it was sad that Mandy Rice-Davies passed away last month.
Otoh, it is interesting to see how the official astroturfers' spin lines have changed over the course of this parliament:
First) Lansley's sensible not-top-down reorganisation will fix it Later) Jeremy Hunt works part-time in A&E to discover and solve the real problems Right now) nothing to do with us, guv: everything is Labour's fault and anyway it's worse in Wales
Now I know that the polls show that people are willing to pay etc but if so why are Labour so relentlessly dishonest on this point? Why won't they make the positive case for more taxation for the public sector?
Because as usual the polls really mean people would be happy for other people to pay more for them to get better services. I think this sort of question is also massively subject to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_desirability_bias.
....Left in this country to avoid asking themselves some very hard questions about how to run an economy from a left of centre perspective, what the role of the state is and how to pay for it.
In the current financial climate this has broadened in the more general question of what a left of centre political party stands for, and what its reason for existence is, when there is negligible amounts of spare public money to spray around. Paying with other peoples money was always the easy answer and let the left get intellectually lazy, they now need creative solutions for improving lives of the less well off that dont involve spending money.
And I see no evidence that anyone in Labour now is thinking about any of these points. The shallowness of the proposed mansion tax is, to my mind, evidence of that.
Not to mention the insignificance of the amount raised, its really a dog whistle for soaking the rich cunningly disguised as a tax raising measure, it won't change anything, the question is, they are going in the tax direction isn't how to make a billion quid or so on a good day, but how to make several tens of billions of quid in a sustainable way that won't scare away the golden goose.
The Greens are on the verge of taking the lead in the crucial 18-24 age group: Lab 27, Con 26, Grn 24.
Natalie Bennett to become Britain's second female, and second Australian, Prime Minister!
More seriously, whatever YouGov are doing to give the Greens high scores in the polls, if it continues then they're only an outlier away from a double-figure score. Will we have ten Natalie Bennett's to adorn PB if such a day ever arrives?
The public want to see fairness and the Greens in the TV debates too.It shows Cameron's weakness,lack of a spine,that he is too frightened to allow the debates to go ahead with Greens or no Greens.Cameron will reinforce his weakness again with Angela today.He is an Old Etonian fool and an embarrassment to the nation.
The Greens are on the verge of taking the lead in the crucial 18-24 age group: Lab 27, Con 26, Grn 24.
Natalie Bennett to become Britain's second female, and second Australian, Prime Minister!
More seriously, whatever YouGov are doing to give the Greens high scores in the polls, if it continues then they're only an outlier away from a double-figure score. Will we have ten Natalie Bennett's to adorn PB if such a day ever arrives?
The public want to see fairness and the Greens in the TV debates too.It shows Cameron's weakness,lack of a spine,that he is too frightened to allow the debates to go ahead with Greens or no Greens.Cameron will reinforce his weakness again with Angela today.He is an Old Etonian fool and an embarrassment to the nation.
You cant be serious, if the Greens appear on TV the Green vote will go up, the Greens being lefties will take votes from Labour not the Conservatives, its in Cameron's interest to have the Greens on a TV debate. You should make a New Years resolution to cut back on the tin foil hats.
The Greens are on the verge of taking the lead in the crucial 18-24 age group: Lab 27, Con 26, Grn 24.
Natalie Bennett to become Britain's second female, and second Australian, Prime Minister!
More seriously, whatever YouGov are doing to give the Greens high scores in the polls, if it continues then they're only an outlier away from a double-figure score. Will we have ten Natalie Bennett's to adorn PB if such a day ever arrives?
The public want to see fairness and the Greens in the TV debates too.It shows Cameron's weakness,lack of a spine,that he is too frightened to allow the debates to go ahead with Greens or no Greens.Cameron will reinforce his weakness again with Angela today.He is an Old Etonian fool and an embarrassment to the nation.
All very convincing except for the fact that Cameron actually wants the Greens to be involved in the debates (for reasons that should be obvious).
The Greens are on the verge of taking the lead in the crucial 18-24 age group: Lab 27, Con 26, Grn 24.
Natalie Bennett to become Britain's second female, and second Australian, Prime Minister!
More seriously, whatever YouGov are doing to give the Greens high scores in the polls, if it continues then they're only an outlier away from a double-figure score. Will we have ten Natalie Bennett's to adorn PB if such a day ever arrives?
The public want to see fairness and the Greens in the TV debates too.It shows Cameron's weakness,lack of a spine,that he is too frightened to allow the debates to go ahead with Greens or no Greens.Cameron will reinforce his weakness again with Angela today.He is an Old Etonian fool and an embarrassment to the nation.
All very convincing except for the fact that Cameron actually wants the Greens to be involved in the debates (for reasons that should be obvious).
I think your model is great and getting behind the UNS is essential. My sense is that Alistair's SMAP model combined with yours would be interesting. I don't think Stirling will be a cliff hanger unless their is significant Unionist tactical voting. Lets hope Lord Ashcroft picks this seat and asks all the right questions.
Why Stirling looks close in my model is because I have assumed that in such seats the Lib Dems have lost votes not just to the SNP but to a lesser extent to Labour, and that such new voters from the referendum who do not vote for the SNP will nearly all vote for Labour. I don't regard the first of these as tactical voting - the Lib Dem collapse in the polls predated the referendum and is apparently a reaction to their joining the coalition with the Conservatives.
These are both pure assumptions and I'm keenly aware that they may be wrong.
The Greens are on the verge of taking the lead in the crucial 18-24 age group: Lab 27, Con 26, Grn 24.
Natalie Bennett to become Britain's second female, and second Australian, Prime Minister!
More seriously, whatever YouGov are doing to give the Greens high scores in the polls, if it continues then they're only an outlier away from a double-figure score. Will we have ten Natalie Bennett's to adorn PB if such a day ever arrives?
The public want to see fairness and the Greens in the TV debates too.It shows Cameron's weakness,lack of a spine,that he is too frightened to allow the debates to go ahead with Greens or no Greens.Cameron will reinforce his weakness again with Angela today.He is an Old Etonian fool and an embarrassment to the nation.
All very convincing except for the fact that Cameron actually wants the Greens to be involved in the debates (for reasons that should be obvious).
If Bennett is there then so is Farage though... !
Farage may be there in any case, he has double her MPs and double her poll rating. Crucially UKIP is standing in all seats and the Greens are not.
Comments
And they would be as friendly as they are now - what would they gain by not being?
*innocent face*
That said, it's not that people have become alienated from UKIP, just that the "oh sod it, who cares who actually wins my seat, I want to protest" view is becoming rarer. UKIP may be doing better where they're clearly contenders. For example, Broxtowe UKIP's website doesn't mention the candidate, even though they selected him some months ago.
By the way, 100% agree with FrancisUrquhart on the last thread that online GP surgery booking should be pushed - it's bonkers how many surgeries still do the "telephone at 8am and if it's busy try again" routine. It's an area where a Government push with a standard recommended solution could help - GP surgeries often seem just too busy to innovate much.
So he might be basing his observations on the first few constituencies.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-30708132
"A former UKIP general election candidate who quit over offensive remarks made in a phone call will contest the seat as an independent.
Kerry Smith is to announce he will run in the Essex seat of Basildon South and East Thurrock, the BBC has learned."
It only succeeded because of British leadership.
@PickardJE: 113 pages of minutes of Bank of England Court meetings from July to December 2008: mentions of RBS? 1. Mentions of HBOS and Lloyds? 0.
We will see what instructions Farage gets from Murdoch at their next secret meeting.He could pull the plug on the whole thing if he sees he can't win South Thanet.
My guess is most of the current Ukip tribe will be DNVs like Russell Brand,angrily pessimistic,shouting at the telly-"they are all the same and that includes Ukip".
Incidentally, the Irish press have the same headlines - about the A&E crisis in the Republic. It's that time of year, you see.
Despite the large swings, I've not put any extra money on the SNP in the three Lib Dem held seats in the Highlands. I feel that I have probably not fully accounted for Lib Dem incumbency there.
As an aside, OGH thinks Danny Alexander's anticipated promotion, backing him at 2/1 to hold his seat is a good bet.
Charlie Kennedy also isn't safe on your model. But I think he will hold.
However, the performance in England is still better than elsewhere in the UK. The data in the other nations lags a bit behind England.
Scotland has a slightly tougher waiting time target - 98% of patients should be seen in four hours - but in September 93.5% were.
Comparing the September figures for England and Scotland shows England was performing slightly better in that month.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-30705689
But Mr Smith must know the UKIP strategy for winning the seat, which should cheer up the Tories, as he splits the Purple vote.
That said, on the down side, I've heard from a few sources Mr Smith is an appalling person, and should be a terrible candidate.
So anecdote alert. Went to two very different social functions over the Christmas/New Year period. At one, there were some Welsh AMs and MPs whose complaint was that it was 'not fair' that global companies were not majorly investing in Wales. When I asked them, "Why should they" they were dumbfounded as having never thought of that scenario of a small outpost on the western edge of Europe. Again lack of gap analysis and long term thinking.
The other function contained many Russians and French now living in London. The Russians were mainly those who would not miss losing the odd £billion. They were quite vocal about the freedom to think and express those thoughts in the UK and compared that with the growing situation in Russia under Putin where freedom of thought and speech was diminishing. (Some English present expressed their view how that was starting to occur in the UK). The Russians liked their security and also the quality of education provided (for their children) by our top Public Schools and Universities.
The French, whilst escaping the economic clutches of Hollande, sw much more opportunity for business in the UK than France which was restricted by employment and tax laws.
However, both nationalities are ready to leave the UK for fresh fields should both personal and business economic and social conditions change.
Also today, "The BBC's Hugh Schofield in Paris reports on the publication of a provocative new book (new novel by France's most famous living author Michel Houellebecq) which depicts France as an Islamicised country where universities are compelled to teach the Koran, women are made to wear the veil and polygamy is lawful.
In the year 2022, France has continued its slow collapse and a Muslim party leader takes over as the country's new president.
Women are encouraged to leave their jobs and unemployment falls. Crime evaporates in the banlieues. Veils become the norm and polygamy is authorised.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-30694811
Without seeing any data I am loathe to put any more credence on that but it is a fair point.
1 Andy Burnham. Stafford. Credibility on NHS: 0. Did better on Hillsborough, so should stick to football. Chances of becoming next Lab leader: laughable.
2 UKIP do have something to say on NHS: build a load of big A&E only units. Said on BBC Berks this am by UKIP spokesman. How to fund? Apparently just need to spend existing money better and not pay agency staff. Fascinating approach. Scores 0 for practicality.
3 Populism is the millstone round the neck of democracy. What would do the most good in the long run is a bit more leadership from politicians and a bit less followership.
4 Anyone who thinks that the EU would be nice to the UK if we left is in cloud cuckoo land. Norway still has to obey all the EU rules in order to trade with them. So would we. And we would be worse off than Norway, because no-one hates the Norwegians.
5 And finally, 2014 was the warmest year on record. We should really be worrying about that. Even UKIP - because the pressure from migrants now is nothing compared to what it will be like when equatorial zones become uninhabitable.
Envy of the World Update http://order-order.com/2015/01/07/envy-of-the-world-update-4/ … pic.twitter.com/Y2vcX4QsLp
(And an awful lot of money is going to the US, especially if the F-35B finally gets sorted out, but then if it doesn't there are other things to worry about).
It's also becoming increasingly clear that the Government is suddenly unwilling to order the ships about which it made so much fuss during indyref - to the degree that I suspect there will be a cancellation in mid-May conveniently after the election.
Well done. Good job.
Happy now?
A prominent Tory replied "He's not that articulate."
10-1 on Andy Burnham for next Labour leader eh?
if you limit your bet to £1 and agree that whoever wins pays over the money to help run this wonderful website, you're on. Surely even Labour wouldn't be THAT stupid????
Will somebody keep a record of this?
In fact, I wonder if this is the real reason he's now keen to bring the vote forward. It allows him to campaign off the back of promises, not achieved results. When he wins it (which he probably will) he thinks he can deal with any weaselling that happens afterwards off the back of the electoral mandate he feels he'll have.
Oh yes, that's right.....the SNP government only publish it quarterly......I wonder why?
don't have much time at the moment. There's a General Election coming, don't you know?
Compared to the rest of my lift, this website is a haven of sanity. Which tells you all you need to know....
I owe the site £50 still btw due to getting the oil price errm... wrong, though I didn't invest in roubles...
Still need a paypal or w/e to settle that up.
Any other suggestions for best value bets on the SNP? I can afford to pick 2/3 other seats with perhaps £20-£30 on each.
Natalie Bennett to become Britain's second female, and second Australian, Prime Minister!
More seriously, whatever YouGov are doing to give the Greens high scores in the polls, if it continues then they're only an outlier away from a double-figure score. Will we have ten Natalie Bennett's to adorn PB if such a day ever arrives?
you are now the proud instigator of my first ever political bet.
Two out of five people who sign up to get Mr Salmond's tweets are "suspicious or empty", according to the Fake Followers app from Social Bakers, a digital analysis firm.
That figure, the highest in British politics, means 55,000 of the former nationalist leader's 134,000 followers are in doubt.
Ms Sturgeon saw her following triple over 2014 and now has 114,000 - but 34 per cent of them are iffy, reckons Social Bakers.
http://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/scottish-politics/twitter-fakes-flock-to-salmond-and-sturgeon-as-they-surge-on-social-media.115642877
We'll see what Bercow decides.
https://twitter.com/timesredbox/status/552743472160313344
In spite of the current consensus among professional pollsters that Labour will have the most seats after the next election, a YouGov poll conducted exclusively for Red Box reveals that the public still believes the Conservatives will end up the winners, writes YouGov's Stephan Shakespeare.
Among Conservative voters, the proportion who believe their party will win is 72 to 7, among Labour voters it is 57 to 15, while both Lib Dems and Ukip supporters (by margins of 54 to 5 and 36 to 10 respectively) believe that the Conservatives will end up ahead. On Sunday, we also saw that when we asked what election outcomes people wanted, preferences for either a Conservative majority or a Conservative-Lib Dem coalition outnumbered preferences for either a Labour majority or a Labour-Lib Dem coalition, even among a sample where Labour were ahead in voting intention.
These are mere straws but to me, if they suggest anything, it's that tactical or uncertain votes will break against Labour.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-30707644
First time since 2009 they've had it.
arklebar@gmail.com
Thanks
‘’ I’m not sure how Lord Ashcroft is selecting his Scottish constituency seats but my seat, Stirling, which is a key 4 way marginal, would be worthwhile considering. If the SNP can take Stirling comfortably, that would put them into 40+ seats territory.
As a SNP ex-SLAB supporter here is my current perspective on the SNP surge and its likely impact in May 2015.
The majority of people joining the SNP are motivated, working, new to political activism, aged 25 to 55 and from a range of socio-economic backgrounds. Therefore, I think the media portrayal of the SNP surge as being driven by blind faith cyber-Nats and benefit junkies is way off the mark. Interestingly, the surge is being lead by women, who now make up 44% of the SNP membership, pre-surge it was 33%.
Turning to the May 2015 election in Stirling, currently Ladbrokes have Labour at 4/6, SNP at 11/10 and Tories at 50/1. In 2010 the result was Labour 42%, Tories 24%, SNP 17% and LibDem 15%. In the referendum, Stirling was 60% No and 40% Yes. I think the SNP will win Stirling with around 40% support. I do not anticipate any significant Unionist tactical voting.
In terms of the GE2015 ground campaign, the SNP now have over 1500 members in Stirling. Candidate selection is underway with 7 good candidates, 3 with political and 4 with ‘’normal’’ backgrounds. The sitting SLAB MP, Anne McGuire, is retiring and the leader of Stirling Council (Johanna Boyd) is standing. Interestingly, Johanna leads a SLAB/Tory coalition with SNP being the largest party, suffice to say SLAB and the Tories make uneasy bedfellows.
Looking at Scotland more broadly, I think the SNP membership surge is pretty much across the board, so to the extent that the GOTV effort makes a difference the SNP are in an extremely strong position on the ground. One of SLAB’s problems is that it has taken for granted it’s dominant position in Scotland, so it does not seem to have much of a grassroots effort to combat the SNP. ’’
Weighted Sample: 211
24% of 158 is only 37 real people in the sample of 1769 or about 2% of the sample. Its such a tiny proportion of the sample it's effectively meaningless, every extra person they find for the Greens is effectively 0.6% of the VI in the subsample. There are four times as many people sampled in the older age groups.
33% upweighting is going to make its quite over representative in the overall VI I would think.
'hence why Scotland , Northern England , Wales etc are wastelands compared to London and south east.'
Or for a variety of reasons people don't want to invest or live in those regions.
As you can see, my model suggests that the SNP get 40 seats even with Stirling as a cliffhanger win!
And the result of that Faustian pact was that the City was not effectively regulated and that it made Britain far too dependant on one source of wealth.
Labour are making the same mistake again: they remain mesmerised by the idea that they can get revenues to pay for everything from bankers' bonuses or mansions. And the problems are that:-
(a) it's not true;
(b) it means they have a vested interest in high house prices and high bankers' bonuses - the same old Faustian pact - even though these are not good for the rest of us.
It means that Labour never make a convincing case for why the public sector is needed and what needs to be spent on it and, crucial this, why this has to be paid for by all of us not just some rich bankers living in London mansions.
If Labour truly had the courage of their public sector convictions they'd make the case for it and try and get us to agree to pay more (a la Sweden or Denmark). But they don't. Mesmerised as they are by the idea that there is a pot of gold (owned by a group of unloved bad people) they can use, they are dishonest with us - and themselves - about how much we all of us (including the not very well off) need to pay if we really want all the public sector goodies we say we do.
And I suspect the reason they don't want to have that conversation is because they don't believe in their heart of hearts that if they asked us we would - in reality - be willing to put our hands in our pockets - as opposed to pointing to others and asking them to pay.
Now I know that the polls show that people are willing to pay etc but if so why are Labour so relentlessly dishonest on this point? Why won't they make the positive case for more taxation for the public sector?
I think Labour's loss of economic nerve - dating back to the 1992 election - and the "golden goose" fiction of the post-1997 City revenue years have allowed the Left in this country to avoid asking themselves some very hard questions about how to run an economy from a left of centre perspective, what the role of the state is and how to pay for it.
And I see no evidence that anyone in Labour now is thinking about any of these points. The shallowness of the proposed mansion tax is, to my mind, evidence of that.
Splitters!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-30708132
Otoh, it is interesting to see how the official astroturfers' spin lines have changed over the course of this parliament:
First) Lansley's sensible not-top-down reorganisation will fix it
Later) Jeremy Hunt works part-time in A&E to discover and solve the real problems
Right now) nothing to do with us, guv: everything is Labour's fault and anyway it's worse in Wales
What is Ed going to do now?
Has Lansley's madness finally caught up with the beached Porpoise?
These are both pure assumptions and I'm keenly aware that they may be wrong.
"building stormed by gunmen"
Their last tweet was anti-ISIS.