Categories
Options
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » A week into the new year and the betting markets still very
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » A week into the new year and the betting markets still very uncertain about what’s going to happen
Yesterday evening I was at the BBC offices next to parliament to record a discussion with Ipsos-MORI boss, Ben Page, about the coming election and what’s going to happen. This is due to go out on Radio 4’s “The Week in Westminster” programme at 11am on Saturday morning.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
I think the SNP may do better than suggested above, and UKIP/Labour a little worse.
Edited extra bit: on the French situation, there's reportedly been an explosion in a kebab shop adjoining a mosque.
Bums on seats is the determining factor.
Wouldn't take much to tip the current polling position into a Labour majority. And when you look at polls for seats like Southampton Itchen, Tory gains are not impossible either.
NickPalmer said:
To respond to False Flag, there are two different issues here. One, whether we should mock each others' beliefs, is a matter of taste, courtesy, context and individual judgment. The other, whether we should be physically attacked, even murdered, for whatever we decide, should not be open to debate. Of course we bloody shouldn't.
I remember when I was an MP someone had an exhibit in (I think) the ICA of Christ on a crucifix in a vase of urine. He was obviously trying to be provocative and upsetting, and he succeeded - I had lots of letters demanding that his exhibit should be banned. I made a distinction between what I thought about the exhibit (yuck) and what I thought about banning it (no). The same applies, 1000 times over, to murder, and I'd be surprised if anyone here really disagrees (but if they do, they're entitled to their opinions too).
Nick, I agree with you on this. What I have difficulty with is having such a position and then voting for the Racial and Religious Hatred Act 2006. That Act was an unacceptable restriction of free speech and one of the reasons at least some of the cartoons from the French publication are shown here in pixilated form is apprehension that showing them entire might well be an offence. The amendments to the Public Order Act included the following:
s29C (1) A person who publishes or distributes written material which is threatening is guilty of an offence if he intends thereby to stir up religious hatred.
(2) References in this Part to the publication or distribution of written material are to its publication or distribution to the public or a section of the public."
"Threatening" is not defined.
This Act should be repealed. It would be a fitting and appropriate response to yesterday's disgrace. Our assertions of our principles cannot be merely words. We need to be more vigorous in defending our values, even if some are offended as a result.
The journalist was right: all the hard talking was done by Merkel.
This time around even that is uncertain although I personally think that Labour are fairly strong favourites and become more so with every tied or MoE poll that comes out. If it wasn't for Scotland they would be fairly nailed on, possibly even for a majority.
"If freedom of expression can be sacrificed for criminalising incitement & hatred, Why not for insulting the Prophet of Allah?"
Which he has since been pedalling in America as a "counterpoint"
http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2015/01/07/islam-allah-muslims-shariah-anjem-choudary-editorials-debates/21417461/
C 32%, 306 seats,
LD 22%, 57 seats
wouldn't have been allowed to happen.
http://newstonoone.blogspot.co.uk/2015/01/political-betting-resources.html
To move it to a less emotive area, I've no problem with someone saying that he thinks all Labour policies are ridiculous, but I would think it dubious if someone said that anyone who was Labour was a traitor who should be treated accordingly. In practice, this sort of thing mainly arises in the racial and religious area, which is why the Act is limited to those.
But I'll leave it there - need to do some work. On topic, I don't think PtP is right that NOM is nailed on - the Tory and Labour voting shares are pretty stable, but it's still hard to predict what will happen to the others.
http://www.euractiv.com/sections/uk-europe/uk-report-short-shrift-sceptics-310993?utm_source=EurActiv+Newsletter&utm_campaign=490b60977d-newsletter_uk_in_europe&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_bab5f0ea4e-490b60977d-245514803
I think Merkel could live with repatriation of car seat regulations!
SNP gain a few from Lab
Lab gain a few from LD
a few others shuffle about and the line up aint to much different from 2010 - status quo.
Con-LD coalition.
You've got X number of seats which indicates x amount of support (albeit via FPTP). The last election doesn't count anymore.
And then vote Cons. To get the referendum they so desperately want. And then vote: "NO".
But of course the world does not work in a logical way.
Two elections in 2015 looking interesting.
You're on even weaker ground with the political example anyway, I'm afraid, because you're talking about political opinions and parties.
There's no doubt that the Tories were hated by millions by 1997, and plenty more still think they're lower than vermin - just read Commentisfree. Should those people all be locked up? No, of course not.
Lab ........ 284
Con ....... 281
SNP ........ 35
LibDems .. 25
UKIP ..........3
NI etc ...... 22
Total ...... 650
LibDem lovers here believe that their party are assured of winning at least 30-35 seats, whilst others are equally convinced that they could struggle to win half that number. At this stage, this is probably the last potential game changer. LibDems on 35 seats or more probably assures Labour of victory, however should the Yellows win 15 seats or fewer then the Tories are likely to win the most seats, although probably not an overall majority in either instance.
https://twitter.com/patrickwintour/status/553131769218990080
BTW What is your view of Inverness? Danny Alexander to hold on or a cert SNP gain?
http://media.ofcom.org.uk/news/2015/major-parties-consultation/
The report recommended that the EU’s working time directive, water standards, car safety seats and agency working standards should be taken back under Britain’s control.
That's it? That's the starting point of Cameron's repatriation demands? No one can claim the Conservatives are a eurosceptic party any more.
Plus, they've launched a raft of other changes,
But it is fundamentally wrong. it is an aggressive act. What people like Sacranie are doing is saying that in Islam it is wrong to draw Mohammed. Fine - for Muslims. But by saying that they are offended when non-Muslims do it they are effectively - and this is an act of aggression - saying that non-Muslims too must abide by this particular Islamic tenet.
And to that I say no.
Whether you choose to be offended or, if offended, to react is your own affair. You have a choice. But do not presume to impose your beliefs on others because that is what you are doing by saying that I cannot draw him or write about him or whatever other than in the manner you dictate.
Muslims are free to practise their faith. But what they cannot - must not - be allowed to do is to impose it on others.
We need to stop seeing those who use this "I am offended" canard as victims and treat them as the passive-aggressors that they really are.
Also Calvary, which was more sombre than In Bruges and The Guard, but a towering performance again from Brendan Gleeson.
I also caught up with the LEGO Movie. Which confirmed one thing.
Everything is awesome.
Lab + LD = 314, and the Lib Dems have had a poor night. But they know the other parties still need them to form a Government.
Cameron out as Tory leader but still PM maybe ?
http://thefederalist.com/2015/01/06/have-we-already-reached-peak-leftism/
http://www.icmunlimited.com/data/media/pdf/2014_libdems_inverness.pdf
However, it didn't prompt for him by name, so it's very doubtful whether it captures any incumbency advantage that he might have. But it predated the referendum, which seems to have given the SNP a further boost from earlier in the year.
My assumptions again put him in third, a bit behind Labour and far behind the SNP. But they only made partial allowance for an MP's incumbency.
I would love Danny Alexander to hold on. He has been an extremely useful and loyal part of this government. I don't think the tories should even put up a candidate but should endorse Danny as the Unionist candidate (they won't).
As I said before yesterday's announcement I expect Danny to have a high profile in this election and that large numbers of people will find themselves agreeing with him if they bother to listen. That might help. He has the sort of balanced position between the extremes that the media like (esp the BBC).
My head says he has no chance. For him to hold on the SNP surge would have to fade to an extent I just can't see. If they are really going to storm the ramparts of SLAB's western fortresses they should take this seat at a canter. And I think they will.
The odd thing about Cameron's demands is that they vaguely relate to trade matters (apart from the water standards) - things you might accept can be negotiated in a common market.
He could have asked for them a couple of years ago, when he promised the referendum, and we could have had the referendum by now.
So I ask again, why kick it into the long grass of 2017? And why not make any demands until now?
Yes, I suspect the answer is to keep the Tory Eurosceptics on board for the 2015 election.
I'd like to stay in a common market, the problem is the political union.
Do I trust Cameron? No. Will he hold a referendum in 2017? Yes, if he's in power, and he'll campaign for staying in even without any concessions.
My conclusion .. we are heading for political union even if it takes another decade.
Just shows the priority of their leadership - will this manifesto include Muslim/African women's protection against FGM and Equality etc and how it will be enforced? Doubt it somehow as they will not want to upset their supporters
Well the Times has found out what she said.
A Ukip councillor was expelled from the party for allegedly saying that she had a problem with “negroes” because there was “something about their faces,” The Times can reveal.
Rozanne Duncan was kicked out last month after making “jaw-dropping” remarks to a BBC documentary-maker, but both the party and the broadcaster declined to reveal what she had said.
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/politics/article4316972.ece
He will campaign for "IN". So effing what?!
You are surely not saying that Cam, the man vilified many times over, who is like a wet fish in wetland, Mr U-Turn himself, will be able to persuade the great people of these Isles to stay if they don't want to?
Really? He has that much power?
Or do you think that while you are able to look at the issues critically and make your own mind up, regardless of what the politicians say, perhaps the great unwashed are not able to do so?
Just admit it. You don't REALLY want out. You just want the EU to be always there as a perpetual scapegoat for every ill that afflicts your life, rather than be put in your box by the British voters having taken the view that IN is the least worst result.
What is the basis for making UKIP major party but not the Greens ?
Polls, by-elections ?
I think that whilst tactical voting is a useful tool it can have drawbacks - and this demonstrates that possibly votes, not just seats do matter at some level.
- Reform structural funds, including a cap on the budget
- Repatriate regional spending for rich member states
- Entirely remove market support subsidies in Common Agricultural Policy
- Prepare ground for the removal of rural development subsidies
- Force a reduction in overall CAP budget
- Reduction in EU agricultural tariffs
- Repatriate UK's territorial waters from Common Fisheries Policy
- Half the fiscal cost of overall EU budget
- Removal from EU budget of funds for NGOs, pressure groups and taxpayer funded lobbying
- Deregulate or repatriate EU social & employment policy
- UK veto over all new financial regulation
- 'Yellow card' system where EU has to reconsider if one third of national parliaments reject proposal
- Opt out of policing and criminal justice measures
- Safeguards for EU immigration, such as requirement for self-sufficiency before given right to reside in another member state
So before negotiations have even started, out of these 14 measures, Cameron has given up entirely on 11 of them, and has retreated to half way demands on 2 more.
(*There were a lot more minor ones, but I didn't want to waste people's times with the minutiae.)
To me it makes sense to link negotiations in with the inevitable coming closer together of the Eurozone since we will not be part of that and any proposed 'closer union with the EU generally.
Your conclusion is wrong. With a tory govt we will not be part of a closer union. With Labour maybe. But if we do ever have a Labour govt wanting to be part of a closer union we will have a tory opposition campaigning against it - assuming Labour provide a referendum. So we can vote. Do you think it would be YES to closer union? I think the likely choice in a referendum 2017 is to leave the EU (for where?) or stay in with whatever reforms but out of the Euro and outside any closer political union. To me the latter choice is marginally better than the EEA, or any alternate trade deal we could get, but from trade and labour movement the EEA is little different to now.
I think OGH should rename these forums PoliticalCheapPointScoring.com
http://www.stripes.com/news/europe/raf-mildenhall-to-close-amid-other-europe-consolidations-1.322825
Burnham has scored some useful hits in the last few days. The NHS crisis is a systemic response to austerity biting all over the shop. Council cuts in particular, but also resources available to carers have clearly impacted on our capacity to care for the old and infirm at home. Et voila... Hospitals and in particular A&E overstretched.
[edit] make that thirded.