Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Betfair punters rate Tory chances of an overall majority as
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Betfair punters rate Tory chances of an overall majority as being higher than a LAB but think that Labour will win more seats
A CON majority rated as being just a tad more likely than a LAB one on Betfair pic.twitter.com/PrVP160EJm
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Long-term polling chart anyone? Here are the monthly averages of every opinion poll for the last 35 years (big shout out to Mark Pack for the data)
https://twitter.com/NCPoliticsUK/status/554337877900152833
When something utterly outrages people and they have no consitutional remedy, they are likely to take the law in their own hands.
While in the UK, abortion was legalised by parliament and can be abolished if people elect MPs that so wish this, in the USA it was foisted on everyone by unelected judges interpreting the constition in an egregious way, with no way of overturning it democratically.
To follow that logic through, if we take scotland away completely, what % lead would labour need over the tories in E&W to get 325 seats?
6%? 8%?
"A West Midlands garage is thought to be selling the cheapest fuel in Britain – with a litre of petrol costing less than £1.
And as oil prices continue to plunge, the RAC said it anticipated the cost of fuel at forecourts across the country to drop even further.
Savvy motorists at The Harvest forecourt in the Maypole area of Birmingham can fill up their tanks at 99.7p a litre, which has seen demand at the garage’s pumps soar."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/oilprices/11338763/Does-this-garage-sell-the-cheapest-petrol-in-Britain.html
That said, abortion in much of the US was legalised on a state by state basis by legislatures prior to Roe vs. Wade, and likewise has been limited by subsequent state legislature action in some states since. Moreover, there are democratic mechanisms by which Roe vs. Wade can be overturned: in the short term, the Supreme Court members are appointed by elected politicians; in the long term, Roe vs. Wade could be overturned by a constitutional amendment. (The challenge for democratic anti-abortionists in the US is that only a minority of the US electorate actually want abortion to be illegal in all circumstances -- 21% in a recent poll.)
But, yeah, I can go with a take-home message of: make sure you have democratic mechanisms whereby people can express outrage.
Unfortunately both sides of SCOTUS have used their power to pass stuff not in the Constitution. Liberals, in the case of banning late stage abortion, and conservatives, in the case of removing campaign finance limits.
Hmmm... there were 3 amendments in the 19-teens, one in the twenties, two in the thirties, one in the fifties, three in the sixties, one in the seventies, and one in the nineties. About time for another one. Time to re-start the campaign for the District of Columbia Voting Rights Amendment (failed in 1985 after insufficient states ratified it by a deadline)!
The Conservatives would need an almighty late swing to get a majority, considering the Conservatives wouldn't be taking votes directly back from Labour, it'd take a total Lib Dem/UKIP collapse for them to get over 323.
Very, very unlikely versus very, very unlikely.
Must tune-in to Foyle's War to see the 'Pool stand in for 1940s London again...
Why on earth not? The Tories lost plenty of "votes" to Labour between 2009 and 2010. Not that I think it will happen but it's a sight more likely than Labour's route to a majority in my book.
Makes me very glad parliament can just abrogate any such decision by our supreme court by passing an act of parliament setting it aside.
I also wish Blair hadn't called it supreme court. Parliament is the surpreme court and even has the power (not used for many years ) to have citizens taken away and executed without trial by passing a bill of attainder.
It is the fact that unelected people in Brussels can pass laws in this country that makes me want to leave the EU, regardless of whether they are any good or not.
http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/isis-issues-mandatory-conscription-men-syria-iraq/
Finally met an indignant voter (usually Broxtowe voters are amiable even when they're anti) - "Of COURSE I'm not voting Labour! You betrayed the country! I was Tory last time and this time I'm bloody voting UKIP, that'll show you!" I smiled mysteriously, and he looked a bit puzzled. Must work on a shock-horror expression.
http://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/scottish-politics/murphy-opposed-devolution-of-abortion.26176374
Perhaps not a sensible approach though, you probably know your business better.
In this case, the content of Charlie Hebdo’s work is not the issue. The issue is the right of publication. Given the fact that violent extremists threaten to kill any journalist who violates their interpretation of Islam, establishing the freedom (I argue) requires committing the blasphemy. To argue, as some have, that the threat is wrong, but that journalists should avoid blasphemy out of prudence allows the extremists to set the rules.
“No mainstream western cartoonist would dare put their name on an anti-Jewish cartoon, even if done for satire purposes, because doing so would instantly and permanently destroy their career, at least … " writes Greenwald, “Why aren’t Douthat, Chait, Yglesias and their like-minded free speech crusaders calling for publication of anti-Semitic material in solidarity, or as a means of standing up to this repression?” Well, the answer is very simple: because nobody is murdering artists who publish anti-Semitic cartoons.
http://royaleleseaux.wordpress.com/
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-30769192
The more you ignore me
The closer I get
You're wasting your time
I will be
In the bar
With my head
On the bar
I am now
A central part
Of your mind's landscape
Whether you care
Or do not
Yeah, I've made up your mind
Beware
I bear more grudges
Than lonely high court judges
When you sleep
I will creep
Into your thoughts
Like a bad debt
That you can't pay
Take the easy way
And give in
Yeah, and let me in
It's war
I haven't because I have been busy this weekend with offspring returning to university.
I did in fact give some suggestions in other posts but anyway here are some suggestions, off the top of my head.
Fundamentally, it is not for the British government to reform Islam but what it can do is make clear what the proper role of Islam is within British society. Essentially, it is one of many religions which people are free to follow or not. It has no political role. And it is that latter aspect which I think causes problems. Islam has always from the start been about religious and political power and seen these as indivisible. And it was created at a time when the very idea of criticising those in power (across the medieval Christian world as well) was incomprehensible. So it finds it very difficult to come to terms with being purely a religion and with criticism from the outside and many of the behaviours which we find objectionable come from this expansionist aspect promulgated by extremists e.g. the belief that it should be accorded respect, the belief that nothing should be done to offend it (or its believers), the idea of a Muslim area (e.g. when we saw John Reid being assailed by persons shouting that he had no right to be there or the "alcohol-free" zone stickers in East London), the idea that where a preponderance of Muslims lived the women have to be veiled etc.
So we need to make clear that freedom of religion in Britain means the freedom to follow a religion or not but that it emphatically does not mean that you can impose it on others or expect others to respect what you believe (as opposed to your right to believe whatever it is you want). And we need to make it clear that where there is a clash between religious belief and the law of the land the latter prevails.
Part 2 to follow shortly
1. Curtail immigration from countries with terrorist/extremist issues, principally in Britain's case, Pakistan, Somalia etc and reintroduction of the primary purpose rule which has too often been used to pressurise young British women into being used as a vehicle for immigration or forced young men into marrying women with little idea of Britain and British values.
2. Limitations on foreign imams in mosques here. We have little hope of encouraging the development of an Islam in Britain in tune with British values if those preaching and teaching in them are steeped in Saudi-inspired Wahabbism.
3. No Islamic schools which do not follow the national curriculum in full. Any whiff of segregation/not teaching girls fully/teaching of anti-Semitism/trips to Saudi Arabia/use of Saudi textbooks etc - and they do not get a licence. Ditto for madrassahs. No opting out of learning about gay rights, the Holocaust, for instance.
4. I would seek to prevent any funding of teaching institutions of any kind by money directly or indirectly from Saudi Arabia, Qatar and other problematic countries.
5. Crackdown on Islamic charities, which are sometimes a front for the funding of terrorism.
6. Put pressure on / shame those institutions which provide a home / space / support for hate preachers e.g. UCL, the Quakers and others. How can a liberal university tolerate segregation of men and women and be taken seriously? There are plenty of ways of putting social pressures on such places such that they start to view such behaviour as similar to inviting the BNP to High Table.
7. Shun those who cosy up to hate preachers and the like. We should treat such people in the same way as we do those who excuse Nazism, for instance. They need to be put beyond the pale through social pressure.
8. Be more robust about using the law to prosecute such people when they do incite violence. When someone encourages someone to behead others, I find it hard to see that an offence has not been committed.
9. Repeal the Religious Hatred provisions.
10. Abolish any use of sharia law. You cannot have two systems of law in a country and particularly not one which has been declared to be incompatible with the ECHR.
11. Stop dealing with community leaders - an approach which reeks of colonial condescension to the natives. It also encourages those - usually male - who purport to speak for a community and use such a position to boost their own power, at the expense of individuals within the community. We have one man / one woman / one vote. We do not need to mediate with those people via community leaders. This is Britain not some desert in the 19th century.
12. Stop using silly language such as "Islamophobia". It is a weasel word designed to stop criticism. Where Muslims are attacked , their attackers should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.
13. Ban the burqa. Ban religious wear for girls under the age of majority.
Above all, say to Muslims: we think of you as British citizens and we expect you to think of yourselves as British citizens with your homes and futures here. You are equal citizens and are entitled to the full protection of British law. But that also means that you have responsibilities and duties as British citizens. And one of those means that you must stop thinking of yourselves as Pakistani or Algerian or whatever and have to fully embrace being British rather than having your head / heart somewhere else and only your body here. You can be whatever religion you want but as far as we - and your fellow Britons are concerned - this is your private affair. If it means more to you to be living in an Islamic state then that is your choice. But what you cannot do is seek to create an Islamic state of Britain or in Britain and nor can you expect others to accept or abide by the tenets of the faith you have chosen. If you want tolerance you have to give it - and to things/people you may not like. But do not expect us to tolerate the intolerable.
How about those for starters?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prince_Philip_Movement
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yaohnanen
OK so we’ve now had a full run of YouGov Westminster polls since the Scottish Labour leadership election, so we can properly take stock of what’s happened. The short answer is not very much. Compared with the ten polls right before the Labour leadership election, the swing from SNP to LAB is a little over 1%:
https://twitter.com/NCPoliticsUK/status/554384952830078976
Or, on the other hand, if you were meaning Labour were to win zero seats in Scotland [ and NI ]. Labour currently stands to win 290 seats on purely regional swings according to polls in E & W.
Moses: Ohhhhhh! So you are saying we should never eat milk and meat together.
G-d: No, what I'm saying is, never cook a calf in its mother's milk.
Moses: Oh, Lord forgive my ignorance! What you are really saying is we should wait six hours after eating meat to eat milk so the two are not in our stomachs.
G-d: No, Moses, what I'm saying is, never cook a calf in it's mother's milk!!!
Moses: Oh, Lord! Please don't strike me down for my stupidity! What you mean is we should have a separate set of dishes for milk and a separate set for meat and if we make a mistake we have to bury that dish outside...
G-d: Moses, do whatever you want....
"and the roar of his triumph was heard all over Israel"
But why should London always dictate ethics and policy? Why abortion and not, say, cancer treatment, or education? And why should that pair of Labour politicians make that decision?
Who's killing free speech in Britain?
Non-Muslims dare not enter Birmingham, says Fox News.
The cowardice of the press.
To be fair, most people try and avoid going to Birmingham since well before the Muslims took over.
How many Islamic organisations have come forward with a statement to the effect that in view of the atrocities in Paris we must look at ourselves and change the way we teach our faith to prevent youngsters being radicalised?
I did say earlier on in the week, Labour can achieve a majority on around 32%.
We will see.. at the moment it seems hung parliament, but events dear boy events...
Any way I found it, here it is. Quite relevant to the current headlines
http://aboutasfarasdelgados.blogspot.co.uk/
I only know, because there's a top 80s bar on Broad Street called "The Reflex"
As a former Tory Chief Whip told a batch of of new MPs
"Never be caught in bed with a live boy or a dead girl"
I have had my makeover gone for tomorrows visit anyone think i will get in?
Westminster paedophile ring: Top Tory MP 'murdered girl at vile orgy' claims new witness
"A victim of a VIP paedophile ring believes a girl of 15 was killed at a vile orgy.
The new witness has told police he watched the teenager being taken into a terrifying “medical room” by a senior Tory MP – and never saw her again.
The sickening events are said to have taken place at London’s notorious Dolphin Square flats in the 1990s, the Sunday People can reveal.
He fears the teenager may have been killed by a brutal sadist acting out his horrific fantasies.
It would make her the fourth reported murder victim of a Westminster-based pervert ring, some of them household names. "
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/westminster-paedophile-ring-top-tory-4957409
I blame it on the Night Nurse I've overdosed on.
Next I'll find out it was JFK who delivered the Winds of Change Speech.
On topic (discussion topic, not thread topic) the most likely political/legislative reaction to these attacks is not all the good and sensible stuff Socrates/cyclefree describe, but a further expansive of the State's surveillance powers with corollary impact on our civil liberties.
I have made some suggestions. I cannot promise that they will work.
We should be doing these steps at the very least. We have to change the climate, the ideological climate. We have to challenge and criticise and stop having the debate on the extremists terms. Stop, for instance, accepting implicitly the idea that Muslims here have some sort of special right to be consulted - or opine - on foreign policy issues affecting Muslims in other countries. All that does is reinforce the idea in their - and others minds - that their identity as Muslims is more important than their identity as Britons. We don't assume that the Archbishop of Westminster has a right to be consulted on EU policy just because the EU has a preponderance of Catholic citizens.
Look I'm just an ordinary Joe. Maybe others have ideas.
http://www.standpointmag.com/features-january-february-2015-great-betrayal-liberals-appease-islam-nick-cohen-the-left
Does Fox actually believe this stuff... or has Birmngham Alabama just become the Islamic centre of the United States?
Probably overkill even for me TGH
We asked some ad agencies to mock up general election posters
http://i100.independent.co.uk/article/we-asked-some-ad-agencies-to-mock-up-general-election-posters--lyghuJFj9e
Well it was no different in style to the others that got good marks to be honest, and was remarked and passed..
But thought I'd share as the point I was making seems to be relevant to the discussions on here in the last few days
To your list, I would add that we need measures to enable Muslims to renounce Islam without fear. The notion that people in Britain should be punished for no longer believing an ideology tantamount to bullying. We have national schemes for getting people off alcohol and drugs. We need similar schemes to support and encouragement apostates too. Any Imam that doesn't support it gets an ASBO.
TBH, I'd be happy to go a lot further (no new mosques, publish all sermons online, revise the Koran, ban religion in schools and the public sector) but can see it wouldn't plain sailing.
It's like turning a tanker round. Much like changing the culture in banks you cannot do it just by saying good stuff or by passing a law or even imposing a penalty.
However, I have an idea for a post which I may put to OGH. Though I expect he's probably sick of the whole topic by now.
I'm sure there are - eventually - betting opportunities in black swan events such as these, though at this precise moment that seems a little distasteful. There are people mourning and funerals to be held.
Beautiful City DAFUQ?
@sundersays: Steven Emerson @theipt says "terrible error" & apologises to "beautiful city of Birmingham" ht @rafsanchez @telegraph
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/11338985/Fox-News-terror-expert-says-everyone-in-Birmingham-is-a-Muslim.html …
"The Left will fight the white far-Right. In Britain, groups like Hope not Hate organise protests against UKIP. Think what you will about UKIP — and I think nothing but ill about them — but it is not actually recommending the rape of enslaved women. On Twitter and in the universities there are constant demands to ban and punish those who show the smallest disrespect to women — scientists who wear racy shirts, men who argue against abortion, pop singers who promote a rape culture, and pick-up artists who instruct men on seduction techniques. But with honourable exceptions, leftists will not argue against armed misogyny. On the contrary, they will ban those who try to take it on."
"But then I must face the fact that there is a vast woozy mass of liberal-leftists who will never change, and would not fight back even if a bomb exploded in their own back yard."
Economics is still up for debate, but the "liberal"-left have won (hands-down) the socio-cultural battle in the UK, and we're all suffering for it.
But - and it's a big 'but' - several of them are hardly consistent with the principles of civil liberties, are they? What she suggests is much, much more intrusive than what the government proposes.
Maybe that's what people want. But I can't help noticing that concern about civil liberties seems to depend an awful lot on whether it is 'us' or 'them' whose liberties are going to be compromised.
However, I have an idea for a post which I may put to OGH. Though I expect he's probably sick of the whole topic by now.
Go For It! Seriously.