Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » So far at least the post-IndyRef SNP surge has barely been

124

Comments

  • FlightpathFlightpath Posts: 4,012

    FF42 said:

    I always go with the polls. I am sure they are an accurate snapshot of Scottish political opinion. In any case there is a steady 0.85 correlation between support for independence and the SNP as a party. We know from the referendum that the first is 45%, so these prospective voting figures are in line. [snip for length]

    That's a really good post. I love the rare PB posts where you can't instantly work out what the writer's personal preference is.

    The SNP say they want to govern the uk with Labour, according to the Times.
    I do not see how any region should hold the rest hostage. Pushing for a policy for the whole UK by a UK wide party is one thing. Can we stomach Labour peddling pork to the SNP to stay in power? With Salmond as deputy PM?

    Can we count on you to denounce any Tory-DUP deal that might arise involving pork given to Northern Ireland in return for support?

    Simple answer. Yes. Because there is a Conservative Party in Northern Ireland these days. Pork gets given to NI anyway of course, which is wrong, but leaving that aside there is nothing wrong with giving regions help on a fair UK wide basis. But putting a regional party, a nationalist regional party, into govt that you have campaigned against - one which wants to undermine our national defence as well - and do deals which work against the rest of the country is no way to run a country - not a unified one anyway.

    The problem with minority govts is it is true that deals get done in back rooms. But they do not normally put narrow regional interests in the cabinet.

    But taking another look - this works well even as a bogus demand for the SNP and its loony left outlook. They get to peddle their anti nuclear anti Trident demands. Its the anti nuclear CND left which they want to keep from going back to Labour. And it allows them to forget oil at $45. The question is what do the moderate economically sane non left in the SNP make of it all.
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    Spelling not your strong suit there...
    Smarmeron said:

    @TheScreamingEagles
    Best comment about "page three" was on the radio this morning.
    "Thanks for the mamaries"

  • IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966
    edited January 2015

    RodCrosby said:
    The polling shows the public disagree with the Bishop of Rome's comment.
    The ex-MI6 boss also said in the same article
    Sir John said there cannot be any "no-go areas" either in the physical or virtual world and said there cannot be a trade-off between security and privacy.
    This is de facto a plea for a camera in everyone's bedroom "just in case", so I am not sure we should treat his comments as a guiding light for protecting civil liberties.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,704
    edited January 2015
    antifrank said:

    For those of us betting on Portsmouth South

    Disgraced MP Mike Hancock has said he is undecided about whether to stand in the general election.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-30895747

    Go for it, Mr H.

    I still have hopes that the Greens might campaign hard there, given the large student vote, and that George Galloway will seek to extend Respect's geographical reach to the Hampshire shoreline so that we might see a seven way marginal.
    I'm not saying that you're saying this, but I don't know where this idea of a motivated student vote, that sort of acts like a co-ordinated self-interested lefty block, comes from.

    When I was at university in Bristol, the vast majority of students I knew couldn't be arsed. Plenty of those that did were very private school, middle-class and not an inconsiderable number voted at home in Mum & Dad's constituency. The elections also tended to be right in amongst finals, or just after them, when students have better things to think about, or get drunk about.

    It's a bit different in places like Cambridge and Oxford, where students are ultra-political. But in Bristol there would only be a few hundred orientated around the NUS and Student's Union who are lefty and political enough to lap up the Green's offering.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,498
    Plato said:

    And the fact remains that the Yestapo lost the argument. We remain GB.

    Alistair said:

    DavidL said:


    The feeling in Scotland is that this is not over. I walked past 3 or 4 YES posters in Edinburgh this morning walking into work. We are at war and if that means being in alliance with the Soviet Union so be it.

    I see one NO Thanks poster still up in a window opposite my bus stop.

    My favourite of the Yes posters still up is the one which someone has stuck an additional poster above it saying "STILL"
    For now
  • Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,039
    Plato said:

    Spelling not your strong suit there...

    Smarmeron said:

    @TheScreamingEagles
    Best comment about "page three" was on the radio this morning.
    "Thanks for the mamaries"

    There's many a slip 'twixt cup and nip.
  • Ishmael_XIshmael_X Posts: 3,664
    Socrates said:

    @Casino_Royale

    The "anti-immigrant" term is just a smear used to avoid proper debate on this. UKIP support immigration, just at reasonable and controlled levels. A lot of people that oppose UKIP either aren't intelligent enough to read what their actual position is, or know full well their position but realise it's not one they can argue against so try to pretend it's something different.

    It's the same when people argue things about Huguenot and Jewish immigration here. The entirety of big waves of Jewish and Huguenot immigration, which each took a couple of decades, are less than one year of current immigration.

    A double smear in that anti-immigration =/= anti-immigrant.

  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,704

    Pulpstar said:

    For those of us betting on Portsmouth South

    Disgraced MP Mike Hancock has said he is undecided about whether to stand in the general election.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-30895747

    It SHOULD be a Conservative gain, but the Lib Dems are stickier than shit down there.
    That's what was thought about Winchester and Montgomeryshire last time.

    Where the Liberal Democrat incumbent has been controversial - and, with all due respect to both of them, both of those two constituencies incumbent's weren't exactly out of the headlines - there is evidence that they suffer.

    There's also seemingly solid Lib Dem constituencies that just eventually revert to type. Such as Guildford, Newbury, and Oxford West & Abingdon. Perilously close at St. Ives, too.

    The sorts of places that are impenetrable are citadels like Eastleigh, and Yeovil, where the Lib Dems have it sewn up top to bottom, and consistently pwn at all levels.
    Boundary changes at Winchester made a difference, too. Montgomeryshire could be "interesting" this time.
    Not as much as you might think. A lot of the Conservative's best areas were hived off into Meon Valley.

    I don't think the Conservatives hold on Montgomeryshire is under serious threat from anyone.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,498

    The SNP say they want to govern the uk with Labour, according to the Times.
    I do not see how any region should hold the rest hostage. Pushing for a policy for the whole UK by a UK wide party is one thing. Can we stomach Labour peddling pork to the SNP to stay in power? With Salmond as deputy PM?

    It will be great to hear you squealing like a stuck pig
  • Ishmael_XIshmael_X Posts: 3,664

    antifrank said:

    For those of us betting on Portsmouth South

    Disgraced MP Mike Hancock has said he is undecided about whether to stand in the general election.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-30895747

    Go for it, Mr H.

    I still have hopes that the Greens might campaign hard there, given the large student vote, and that George Galloway will seek to extend Respect's geographical reach to the Hampshire shoreline so that we might see a seven way marginal.

    It's a bit different in places like Cambridge and Oxford, where students are ultra-political.
    Naah, not the vast majority. Unless things have changed a lot in the last 30 years.

  • SmarmeronSmarmeron Posts: 5,099
    @Plato
    Yes, I should have enabled the spell check.
    I feel a complete tit now.
    (pendantry on blog sites is the last resort of the unimaginitive)
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    I'm getting an advert for "georeferenced historical data".
  • RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737

    Pulpstar said:

    For those of us betting on Portsmouth South

    Disgraced MP Mike Hancock has said he is undecided about whether to stand in the general election.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-30895747

    It SHOULD be a Conservative gain, but the Lib Dems are stickier than shit down there.
    That's what was thought about Winchester and Montgomeryshire last time.

    Where the Liberal Democrat incumbent has been controversial - and, with all due respect to both of them, both of those two constituencies incumbent's weren't exactly out of the headlines - there is evidence that they suffer.

    There's also seemingly solid Lib Dem constituencies that just eventually revert to type. Such as Guildford, Newbury, and Oxford West & Abingdon. Perilously close at St. Ives, too.

    The sorts of places that are impenetrable are citadels like Eastleigh, and Yeovil, where the Lib Dems have it sewn up top to bottom, and consistently pwn at all levels.
    Boundary changes at Winchester made a difference, too. Montgomeryshire could be "interesting" this time.
    Could be a LibDem gain, I suppose. They lost it once before (first time since 1880) in 1979, probably due to the Thorpe case, but regained it in 1983.

    Now that the most improbable MP since Trebitsch-Lincoln has left the scene, the LibDems are sitting pretty again.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,498
    geoffw said:

    Patrick said:

    There aren't that many Tories in Scotland - but will we see tactical voting in favour of SNP from the ones there are trying to keep Labour out?

    I'd vote labour to keep the SNP out.
    So we have two turkeys instead of one, SNP must be trembling in their boots.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Doesn't he get a bigger pension if he stands again? Or something like that.

    For those of us betting on Portsmouth South

    Disgraced MP Mike Hancock has said he is undecided about whether to stand in the general election.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-30895747

  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,498
    Dair said:

    DavidL said:

    JPJ2 said:

    David L:

    "No. That used to happen but it will not post referendum. Scottish tories know what their priority is and that is remaining British."

    Very true-but the result of their votes this time will not determine whether Scotland becomes independent, or even if their is another referendum.

    For that reason alone, manyTtory leaning opponents of Labour will continue to vote SNP to stop Labour NOW, rather than vote for a unionist candidate to stop the not-happening-NOW independence.

    Consider how effective the SNP strategy of-correctly-telling the electorate in 2011 Holyrood that an SNP vote and victory would not automatically trigger independence.

    I think you underestimate how much of a fright tories got in the referendum and its continuing effect on Scottish politics. I for one am seriously considering voting Labour for the first time in my life in a probably vain attempt to stop the SNP taking Dundee West. It was a hot topic of conversation at the Dundee Conservative party lunch.

    The feeling in Scotland is that this is not over. I walked past 3 or 4 YES posters in Edinburgh this morning walking into work. We are at war and if that means being in alliance with the Soviet Union so be it.
    You seem to be saying there is no guarantee or threshold that could ever be provided under which you would support Scotland's natural independence, whereas you would be more than willing to accept the poverty and oppression of an SSR if it meant maintaining the Union.

    The Loyalist No Matter What attitude is truly bizarre.
    One of the "Haves" that is desperate to hold onto it by any means regardless of beggaring the rest of the population. That is Tories for you cannot look beyond their own pockets.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    The SNP are amateur pork-barrellers, while the DUP are consummate professionals with generations of experience. Not only that, there is something that northern Irish politicians would dearly love right now, which is oodles of money so that they don't have to keep carrying out spending cuts.

    The aims of northern Irish politicians are simpler to accede to and will be pressed by more experienced negotiators. Their only drawback is their limited numbers of seats.

    There are already hints that the DUP is cuddling up to UKIP to rectify this. I expect that the DUP would do rather better out of any such arrangement than UKIP would, particularly since their aims are more grounded in the near term and the tangible.
  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143
    isam said:

    Hang on... It feels like the site Shrewdies are about to come to the conclusion that this is peak kipper

    Again

    On previous form there will be another peak in UKIP support, coinciding with the general election, and a bit higher than previous peaks.

    But their support might drift down a bit afterwards, so I expect there'll be another chance to declare that the peak in kipper support has passed...
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    antifrank said:

    The SNP are amateur pork-barrellers, while the DUP are consummate professionals with generations of experience. Not only that, there is something that northern Irish politicians would dearly love right now, which is oodles of money so that they don't have to keep carrying out spending cuts.

    The aims of northern Irish politicians are simpler to accede to and will be pressed by more experienced negotiators. Their only drawback is their limited numbers of seats.

    There are already hints that the DUP is cuddling up to UKIP to rectify this. I expect that the DUP would do rather better out of any such arrangement than UKIP would, particularly since their aims are more grounded in the near term and the tangible.

    The only thing I've heard from UKIP is the idea of an earlier EU referendum. This is a mistake to me, as I think a lot of people want to try renegotiation first. They'd be much better off demanding something like control of immigration (perhaps a cap of 100,000) as a red line in EU negotiation. That way, they can win over the "I wanted to try renegotiation, but it's failed" segment of the public, which would be enough to win the overall referendum.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Mr Mushy Peas has come out against the Mansion Tax. Recommends Lib Dem policy instead.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,704
    edited January 2015
    Socrates said:

    @Casino_Royale

    The "anti-immigrant" term is just a smear used to avoid proper debate on this. UKIP support immigration, just at reasonable and controlled levels. A lot of people that oppose UKIP either aren't intelligent enough to read what their actual position is, or know full well their position but realise it's not one they can argue against so try to pretend it's something different.

    It's the same when people argue things about Huguenot and Jewish immigration here. The entirety of big waves of Jewish and Huguenot immigration, which each took a couple of decades, are less than one year of current immigration.

    Another one is the "we've always been a nation of immigrants" line. In some respects, that can be argued to be true. The UK *has* experienced several major waves of immigration over its history, including Celts, Romans, Angles, Saxons, Jutes and Vikings. To a lesser extent, since then, the Normans (politically very significant, but relatively few in number), Huguenots, Jews, Dutch refugees, and Irish.

    But, then again, so has virtually every single nation in the world, particularly over a 1,000 year time frame. So it's not much use as a differentiator.

    Limited immigration, yes. We do have a proud history of assimilating smaller waves of people's and successfully integrating them into England, and later the UK. But, in fact, you have to go back to the Vikings in the 9th-10th Century's to find mass immigration on the sheer scale that the UK has experienced over the last 15 years.

    It's the motive of the argument that counts. Too often, in the case of that particular one, what the speaker is really saying, 'look, mass immigration is a good thing, and we don't really have any common identity or heritage anyway. So stop raising it as an issue, and accept as I do the vast benefits it offers, and, if you can't do that, just suck it up.'
  • AndyJS said:

    Doesn't he get a bigger pension if he stands again? Or something like that.

    For those of us betting on Portsmouth South

    Disgraced MP Mike Hancock has said he is undecided about whether to stand in the general election.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-30895747

    Yes he gets upwards of £30 Grand tax free if he loses.
  • MarkSeniorMarkSenior Posts: 4,699
    AndyJS said:

    Doesn't he get a bigger pension if he stands again? Or something like that.

    For those of us betting on Portsmouth South

    Disgraced MP Mike Hancock has said he is undecided about whether to stand in the general election.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-30895747

    No there are no benefits these days for a defeated v retirng MP
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340

    antifrank said:

    For those of us betting on Portsmouth South

    Disgraced MP Mike Hancock has said he is undecided about whether to stand in the general election.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-30895747

    Go for it, Mr H.

    I still have hopes that the Greens might campaign hard there, given the large student vote, and that George Galloway will seek to extend Respect's geographical reach to the Hampshire shoreline so that we might see a seven way marginal.
    I'm not saying that you're saying this, but I don't know where this idea of a motivated student vote, that sort of acts like a co-ordinated self-interested lefty block, comes from.

    When I was at university in Bristol, the vast majority of students I knew couldn't be arsed. Plenty of those that did were very private school, middle-class and not an inconsiderable number voted at home in Mum & Dad's constituency. The elections also tended to be right in amongst finals, or just after them, when students have better things to think about, or get drunk about.

    It's a bit different in places like Cambridge and Oxford, where students are ultra-political. But in Bristol there would only be a few hundred orientated around the NUS and Student's Union who are lefty and political enough to lap up the Green's offering.
    The Green candidate in Portsmouth South is called Ian McCulloch. Sometimes TSE's job does itself.
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118

    isam said:

    Hang on... It feels like the site Shrewdies are about to come to the conclusion that this is peak kipper

    Again

    On previous form there will be another peak in UKIP support, coinciding with the general election, and a bit higher than previous peaks.

    But their support might drift down a bit afterwards, so I expect there'll be another chance to declare that the peak in kipper support has passed...
    It's the PB version of police academy movies... Gets less credible and less funny every time... And goes on too long
  • AndyJS said:

    Doesn't he get a bigger pension if he stands again? Or something like that.

    For those of us betting on Portsmouth South

    Disgraced MP Mike Hancock has said he is undecided about whether to stand in the general election.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-30895747

    No there are no benefits these days for a defeated v retirng MP
    Perhaps an exception could be made for Mr Hancock, in view of his long years of distinguished and selfless service.
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,173
    Pulpstar said:

    felix said:

    FF42 said:

    I always go with the polls. I am sure they are an accurate snapshot of Scottish political opinion. In any case there is a steady 0.85 correlation between support for independence and the SNP as a party. We know from the referendum that the first is 45%, so these prospective voting figures are in line. [snip for length]

    That's a really good post. I love the rare PB posts where you can't instantly work out what the writer's personal preference is.

    The SNP say they want to govern the uk with Labour, according to the Times.
    I do not see how any region should hold the rest hostage. Pushing for a policy for the whole UK by a UK wide party is one thing. Can we stomach Labour peddling pork to the SNP to stay in power? With Salmond as deputy PM?

    Can we count on you to denounce any Tory-DUP deal that might arise involving pork given to Northern Ireland in return for support?

    It'd take a lot less pork to get the DUP than you'll need to get the SNP don't you think?
    Wrong.
    Right.
  • calumcalum Posts: 3,046
    I think its the bookies and political commentators who have been slow to react to events in Scotland, which is odd given the polling evidence and feedback from those of us on the ground in Scotland. I think those punters who are waiting for Lord Ashcroft's constituency polling before committing, have potentially missed one of the best ever political betting opportunities.

    To date, I’ve avoided the constituency markets and focused my betting on William Hill’s SLAB seats market. I’ve built a decent position in the 0-20 seats area, I’ll make profits if SLAB wins 0-5, 6-10, 11-15 and will break even at 16-20 seats. I built most of my 0-5 position at 125/1 (now down to 8/1) and it would pay out £18,000. Realistically though 16-20 seats at 5/1, is probably now the best value bet.

    Interestingly, looking into the Scottish polling methodologies, it appears that Survation are weighting by Scottish region, whereas Panelbase and YouGov don't. I think given the uneven dispersion of SNP support, not weighting regionally is a flaw in Panelbase and YouGov's methodologies. YouGov weight by place of birth ie. Scotland, rUK and Overseas. Panelbase don't even try.

    An interesting feature of the SNP surge, is that its being led by women, they now account for 44% (pre-surge 33%), which is the largest % of any of the mainstream parties. I think Jim Murphy may continue to drive women into the hands of the SNP, the fact that he is targeting the lost 190,000 older male voters, says it all.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,410
    felix said:

    Pulpstar said:

    felix said:

    FF42 said:

    I always go with the polls. I am sure they are an accurate snapshot of Scottish political opinion. In any case there is a steady 0.85 correlation between support for independence and the SNP as a party. We know from the referendum that the first is 45%, so these prospective voting figures are in line. [snip for length]

    That's a really good post. I love the rare PB posts where you can't instantly work out what the writer's personal preference is.

    The SNP say they want to govern the uk with Labour, according to the Times.
    I do not see how any region should hold the rest hostage. Pushing for a policy for the whole UK by a UK wide party is one thing. Can we stomach Labour peddling pork to the SNP to stay in power? With Salmond as deputy PM?

    Can we count on you to denounce any Tory-DUP deal that might arise involving pork given to Northern Ireland in return for support?

    It'd take a lot less pork to get the DUP than you'll need to get the SNP don't you think?
    Wrong.
    Right.
    See Antifrank's comment.
  • AndyJS said:

    Doesn't he get a bigger pension if he stands again? Or something like that.

    For those of us betting on Portsmouth South

    Disgraced MP Mike Hancock has said he is undecided about whether to stand in the general election.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-30895747

    No there are no benefits these days for a defeated v retirng MP
    "There has been speculation that Hancock will run as an Independent candidate in the 2015 General Election.[7] Under the terms of the Parliamentary Resettlement Grant, if he announces he will not be standing as a candidate he will not receive any redundancy pay-out, whereas, as the incumbent, if he fights and loses his seat in the election he would be eligible to receive six months’ MPs salary (the first £30,000 tax-free)."

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mike_Hancock_(British_politician)
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,704
    antifrank said:

    antifrank said:

    For those of us betting on Portsmouth South

    Disgraced MP Mike Hancock has said he is undecided about whether to stand in the general election.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-30895747

    Go for it, Mr H.

    I still have hopes that the Greens might campaign hard there, given the large student vote, and that George Galloway will seek to extend Respect's geographical reach to the Hampshire shoreline so that we might see a seven way marginal.
    I'm not saying that you're saying this, but I don't know where this idea of a motivated student vote, that sort of acts like a co-ordinated self-interested lefty block, comes from.

    When I was at university in Bristol, the vast majority of students I knew couldn't be arsed. Plenty of those that did were very private school, middle-class and not an inconsiderable number voted at home in Mum & Dad's constituency. The elections also tended to be right in amongst finals, or just after them, when students have better things to think about, or get drunk about.

    It's a bit different in places like Cambridge and Oxford, where students are ultra-political. But in Bristol there would only be a few hundred orientated around the NUS and Student's Union who are lefty and political enough to lap up the Green's offering.
    The Green candidate in Portsmouth South is called Ian McCulloch. Sometimes TSE's job does itself.
    The oldest "non-mature" students will have been born no earlier than 1993. They probably don't know who he is!
  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143
    edited January 2015

    Socrates said:

    @Casino_Royale

    The "anti-immigrant" term is just a smear used to avoid proper debate on this. UKIP support immigration, just at reasonable and controlled levels. A lot of people that oppose UKIP either aren't intelligent enough to read what their actual position is, or know full well their position but realise it's not one they can argue against so try to pretend it's something different.

    It's the same when people argue things about Huguenot and Jewish immigration here. The entirety of big waves of Jewish and Huguenot immigration, which each took a couple of decades, are less than one year of current immigration.

    Another one is the "we've always been a nation of immigrants" line. In some respects, that can be argued to be true. The UK *has* experienced several major waves of immigration over its history, including Celts, Romans, Angles, Saxons, Jutes and Vikings. To a lesser extent, since then, the Normans (politically very significant, but relatively few in number), Huguenots, Jews, Dutch refugees, and Irish.

    But, then again, so has virtually every single nation in the world, particularly over a 1,000 year time frame. So it's not much use as a differentiator.

    In fact, you have to go back to the Vikings in the 9th-10th Century's to find immigration on the sheer scale that the UK has experienced over the last 15 years.

    It's the motive of the argument that counts. Too often, in the case of that particular one, what the speaker is really saying, 'look, immigration is a good thing, and we don't really have any common identity or heritage anyway. So stop complaining about it, and accept the vast benefits it offers, or just suck it up.'
    In slightly more recent history - say over the last 500 hundred years - England has been a nation of emigrants.

    The ONS has some of the figures. It looks like a turning point was the end of the "Ten Pound Poms" emigration to Australia in 1982. 1993 was the last year in which the balance of migration was outwards from the UK.
  • FlightpathFlightpath Posts: 4,012
    TGOHF said:

    Wondering what chance there is of "that Tory" Carswell leaving UKIP before the election? Would be a knee to the balls for Farage and the Kippers if he did....

    He'd have to stand as an Independent. Would he keep the seat under that banner?
    He might have some fellow ex-Faragians for company...


    Ukip health spox Louise Bours MEP slaps down her leader: 'Nigel is entitled to his opinion [but] I will always favour a state funded NHS'
    She wants to side with UNITE over health.
    Do I take it that after saying he wanted to see a private funded health service and then changing his mind and saying (pretending?) he wants it public, that today, being a Tuesday, Farage has said he wants it private again?

    ''Ukip in chaos as party turns on Farage over claim NHS cannot survive... while policy chief is sacked for not coming up with any policies''
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2918072/Ukip-policy-chief-sacked-not-coming-policies-Farage-warns-NHS-survive.html#ixzz3PMu64iCC

    Can we expect a party that cannot programme its own manifesto to be fit to programme the NHS budget? Or anything?
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,704
    Socrates said:

    antifrank said:

    The SNP are amateur pork-barrellers, while the DUP are consummate professionals with generations of experience. Not only that, there is something that northern Irish politicians would dearly love right now, which is oodles of money so that they don't have to keep carrying out spending cuts.

    The aims of northern Irish politicians are simpler to accede to and will be pressed by more experienced negotiators. Their only drawback is their limited numbers of seats.

    There are already hints that the DUP is cuddling up to UKIP to rectify this. I expect that the DUP would do rather better out of any such arrangement than UKIP would, particularly since their aims are more grounded in the near term and the tangible.

    The only thing I've heard from UKIP is the idea of an earlier EU referendum. This is a mistake to me, as I think a lot of people want to try renegotiation first. They'd be much better off demanding something like control of immigration (perhaps a cap of 100,000) as a red line in EU negotiation. That way, they can win over the "I wanted to try renegotiation, but it's failed" segment of the public, which would be enough to win the overall referendum.
    The exact opposite of your argument there might explain why Cameron is considering bringing forward the EU referendum.
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    calum said:

    I think its the bookies and political commentators who have been slow to react to events in Scotland, which is odd given the polling evidence and feedback from those of us on the ground in Scotland. I think those punters who are waiting for Lord Ashcroft's constituency polling before committing, have potentially missed one of the best ever political betting opportunities.

    To date, I’ve avoided the constituency markets and focused my betting on William Hill’s SLAB seats market. I’ve built a decent position in the 0-20 seats area, I’ll make profits if SLAB wins 0-5, 6-10, 11-15 and will break even at 16-20 seats. I built most of my 0-5 position at 125/1 (now down to 8/1) and it would pay out £18,000. Realistically though 16-20 seats at 5/1, is probably now the best value bet.

    Interestingly, looking into the Scottish polling methodologies, it appears that Survation are weighting by Scottish region, whereas Panelbase and YouGov don't. I think given the uneven dispersion of SNP support, not weighting regionally is a flaw in Panelbase and YouGov's methodologies. YouGov weight by place of birth ie. Scotland, rUK and Overseas. Panelbase don't even try.

    An interesting feature of the SNP surge, is that its being led by women, they now account for 44% (pre-surge 33%), which is the largest % of any of the mainstream parties. I think Jim Murphy may continue to drive women into the hands of the SNP, the fact that he is targeting the lost 190,000 older male voters, says it all.

    I am guilty of talking my book as much as the next man but his many times have you posted that second paragraph?
  • "It's a bit different in places like Cambridge and Oxford, where students are ultra-political."

    Hmmm, personal experience says its much the same. Most people are trying not to fail, a select few are playing sport but those that are interested in politics are highly interested.

    And seem to adopt extreme viewpoints for the thrillz and lolz.
  • antifrank said:

    antifrank said:

    For those of us betting on Portsmouth South

    Disgraced MP Mike Hancock has said he is undecided about whether to stand in the general election.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-30895747

    Go for it, Mr H.

    I still have hopes that the Greens might campaign hard there, given the large student vote, and that George Galloway will seek to extend Respect's geographical reach to the Hampshire shoreline so that we might see a seven way marginal.
    I'm not saying that you're saying this, but I don't know where this idea of a motivated student vote, that sort of acts like a co-ordinated self-interested lefty block, comes from.

    When I was at university in Bristol, the vast majority of students I knew couldn't be arsed. Plenty of those that did were very private school, middle-class and not an inconsiderable number voted at home in Mum & Dad's constituency. The elections also tended to be right in amongst finals, or just after them, when students have better things to think about, or get drunk about.

    It's a bit different in places like Cambridge and Oxford, where students are ultra-political. But in Bristol there would only be a few hundred orientated around the NUS and Student's Union who are lefty and political enough to lap up the Green's offering.
    The Green candidate in Portsmouth South is called Ian McCulloch. Sometimes TSE's job does itself.
    Oh my, it's Heaven up here with that revelation
  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 6,621
    Original? No. Endlessly amusing? Yes.
  • Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,039
    Private Eye on the money here. Is it too much to hope that they have printed any Charlie Hebdo cartoons?

    https://twitter.com/Kevin_Maguire/status/557532707790786560
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,963
    edited January 2015
    How newspapers will cover the election for the next 4 months, according to Private Eye

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B7zCOb9CQAEBjtS.jpg

    I would have thought the Express would lead with "Not voting UKIP will lead to a collapse in house prices"
  • Who is Cressida Bonas?
  • Who is Cressida Bonas?

    A slightly less serious condition than Cressida Dick?
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    antifrank said:

    antifrank said:

    For those of us betting on Portsmouth South

    Disgraced MP Mike Hancock has said he is undecided about whether to stand in the general election.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-30895747

    Go for it, Mr H.

    I still have hopes that the Greens might campaign hard there, given the large student vote, and that George Galloway will seek to extend Respect's geographical reach to the Hampshire shoreline so that we might see a seven way marginal.
    I'm not saying that you're saying this, but I don't know where this idea of a motivated student vote, that sort of acts like a co-ordinated self-interested lefty block, comes from.

    When I was at university in Bristol, the vast majority of students I knew couldn't be arsed. Plenty of those that did were very private school, middle-class and not an inconsiderable number voted at home in Mum & Dad's constituency. The elections also tended to be right in amongst finals, or just after them, when students have better things to think about, or get drunk about.

    It's a bit different in places like Cambridge and Oxford, where students are ultra-political. But in Bristol there would only be a few hundred orientated around the NUS and Student's Union who are lefty and political enough to lap up the Green's offering.
    The Green candidate in Portsmouth South is called Ian McCulloch. Sometimes TSE's job does itself.
    Mike Hancock - Nothing lasts forever?
    George Osborne - The cutter?
  • Don't panic, Roger's called the election for Ed.
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,300
    norman smith ‏@BBCNormanS 6m6 minutes ago
    Labour won't set out details of mansion tax for homes over £3m until first Budget says @edballsmp #wato

    Why is another tax needed, rather than changes to council tax bands? Guess the something must be done to get a headline brigade are in charge of Labour today.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,704

    Who is Cressida Bonas?

    I can't decide if it reminds me more of a stage name for a lady performing in a gentleman's nightclub, or the trading name of a dyslexic bookie.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,704

    Don't panic, Roger's called the election for Ed.
    Phew.
  • Who is Cressida Bonas?

    I can't decide if it reminds me more of a stage name for a lady performing in a gentleman's nightclub, or the trading name of a dyslexic bookie.
    I've googled her, apparently she's Prince Harry's ex.

    She might also be in the next season of Downton Abbey.

    I'm not sure if she floats my boat.
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    I made this point a while ago although was shouted down a bit.. Perhaps rightly I don't know

    Telegraph Politics (@TelePolitics)
    20/01/2015 13:48
    How a 'fair' mansion tax would hit homes worth £340,000 in the North tgr.ph/1J7xnES
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340

    Private Eye on the money here. Is it too much to hope that they have printed any Charlie Hebdo cartoons?

    https://twitter.com/Kevin_Maguire/status/557532707790786560

    It's odd that the Sun is omitted.
  • fitalassfitalass Posts: 4,320
    IRRC, I think it was Harmen that had to step in because Douglas Alexander was in danger of failing to deliver the last Labour manifesto at the GE.
    Plato said:

    Didn't Hattie get panned for failing to deliver Labour's manifesto before 2010?

    It's a while ago - but a bell rang for me.

    isam said:

    I knew Carswell would eventually fall out with Farage, but before the GE?

    "Long-serving, more traditional, golf clubbing UKIP veterans are said to be “upset” by Carswell’s maverick modernising moves, and things are so bad that they sneeringly call him “that Tory” behind his back."
    http://order-order.com/2015/01/20/ukip-hit-puberty-slam-doors-shouts-at-parentsfaragecarswell-fall-out-semi-denied-by-party/

    Interesting about Aker too

    "Between being an MEP and duffing up Labour in Thurrock, it was only a matter of time before Aker stepped back from his party role, but only a fool would suggest he’s not still a serious player within the party."
    Are we to believe that this Alker was writing up ukip policy on his own? And now it's going to be dashed off in a jiffy. Who ever heard of not being able to finish a manifesto?
    You do wonder at what goes on in Carswells head
    Indeed, food for thought, and very bad news for Ukip down South if this narrative gains some traction during the GE campaign. It really could be a game changer in that handful of seats that Ukip hope to win of the Conservatives.
    Pulpstar said:
  • Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,039
    antifrank said:

    Private Eye on the money here. Is it too much to hope that they have printed any Charlie Hebdo cartoons?

    https://twitter.com/Kevin_Maguire/status/557532707790786560

    It's odd that the Sun is omitted.
    They usually wait to see who is going to win before declaring.
  • antifrank said:

    Private Eye on the money here. Is it too much to hope that they have printed any Charlie Hebdo cartoons?

    https://twitter.com/Kevin_Maguire/status/557532707790786560

    It's odd that the Sun is omitted.
    In the old days it would have been "I think Ed Miliband is weird", says Louise, 20, from Romford, but I understand change is afoot.
  • I still love this Yes Prime Minister scene on who reads the papers

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DGscoaUWW2M
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,410
    isam said:

    I made this point a while ago although was shouted down a bit.. Perhaps rightly I don't know

    Telegraph Politics (@TelePolitics)
    20/01/2015 13:48
    How a 'fair' mansion tax would hit homes worth £340,000 in the North tgr.ph/1J7xnES

    Will homeowners outside London be given the proportional "fair" equity shares that the counterfactual of buying a property in London would have given them ;p ?
  • ArtistArtist Posts: 1,893
    ICM alert..
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,173
    Pulpstar said:

    felix said:

    Pulpstar said:

    felix said:

    FF42 said:

    I always go with the polls. I am sure they are an accurate snapshot of Scottish political opinion. In any case there is a steady 0.85 correlation between support for independence and the SNP as a party. We know from the referendum that the first is 45%, so these prospective voting figures are in line. [snip for length]

    That's a really good post. I love the rare PB posts where you can't instantly work out what the writer's personal preference is.

    The SNP say they want to govern the uk with Labour, according to the Times.
    I do not see how any region should hold the rest hostage. Pushing for a policy for the whole UK by a UK wide party is one thing. Can we stomach Labour peddling pork to the SNP to stay in power? With Salmond as deputy PM?

    Can we count on you to denounce any Tory-DUP deal that might arise involving pork given to Northern Ireland in return for support?

    It'd take a lot less pork to get the DUP than you'll need to get the SNP don't you think?
    Wrong.
    Right.
    See Antifrank's comment.
    Seen it but Scotland is bigger, and the SNP will want much more than the DUP. Their hatred of all things English will see to that. We got the wrong referendum result, Scotland needs to do its own thing.
  • Labour lead falls as Greens hit 20-year high in Guardian/ICM poll
    Conservatives, Lib Dems and Labour record lowest-ever combined total as UKip falls but SNP and Greens make gains

    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/jan/20/poll-labour-lead-fall-green-conservative-lib-dem-ukip
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,963
    edited January 2015
  • TheWatcherTheWatcher Posts: 5,262

    Labour lead falls as Greens hit 20-year high in Guardian/ICM poll
    Conservatives, Lib Dems and Labour record lowest-ever combined total as UKip falls but SNP and Greens make gains

    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/jan/20/poll-labour-lead-fall-green-conservative-lib-dem-ukip

    Green / UKIP crossover could be fun.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,410
    Greens up to 9% with ICM - it's on like Donkey Kong, is that nice Irish man offering any more 25-1 on them beating the Lib Dems :) ?
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 52,123
    edited January 2015
    Must be an outlier! UKIP level with LibDems???
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    Those are appalling figures for the Lib Dems with ICM in the run-up to the election, and incredible figures for the Greens with the Gold Standard.

    And though it will be largely ignored, they're pretty decent for Labour too.
  • Can I feel like an unbelievably smug bastard for a bit.

    I have a bet on the Greens out polling the Lib Dems in May and a bet on the Greens being third or higher with Ipsos-Mori next month.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,410

    Must be an outlier! UKIP level with LibDems???
    ICM's methodology is very harsh on up and coming parties with their spiral of silence adjustment. 11 for UKIP is fine, 9 for the Greens is astonishing. 11 for the Lib Dems is not alot of comfort for them with ICM.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 52,123
    edited January 2015
    Pulpstar said:

    Greens up to 9% with ICM - it's on like Donkey Kong, is that nice Irish man offering any more 25-1 on them beating the Lib Dems :) ?


    This graph up to date for last week's ELBOW (18th Jan):

    https://twitter.com/Sunil_P2/status/556884375057739776
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,410
    I'm going to guess that Greens had more respondents than Lib Dem in this poll.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,704
    Interesting poll. One suspects Cameron hoped the Greens would asset-strip Labour, not the Lib Dems.

    Labour's poll share is starting to look quite sticky. It needs to take a 2% haircut - with Cameron mopping up a similar amount of UKIP defectors - for the incumbent PM to start to feel things are looking up for a return to office.
  • Pulpstar said:

    Greens up to 9% with ICM - it's on like Donkey Kong, is that nice Irish man offering any more 25-1 on them beating the Lib Dems :) ?

    It was 20/1, and last night he offered me the opportunity to extend my stake.
  • Poor Labour and Ed......

    While health continues to be a Conservative weakness, the Tories can take some comfort from a question regarding the blame game for rising A&E waits. A substantial minority, 38%, blame “reforms and financial choices” made by the coalition, but a slender majority – 52% – regard the root problem as being “budgetary pressures and mismanagement which would be much the same under any government”
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,567
    Reasonably comfortable with that - a 3-point lead and left-of-centre possible tactical support in marginals at 11+9=20 vs 11 for UKIP. It's not that simple as there's plenty of people who don't vote left/right, but strategically it's not a bad position for Labour.

    In my marginal, where the LIbDems scored 17% last time, w don't have a LibDem candidate at all, as yet.
  • You should remember the analysis yesterday, that shows the polls under estimate the Tories and Greens and over estimate Labour.

    By that metric the Tories are ahead of Lab, and the Greens ahead of UKIP and the Lib Dems.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,410
    One thing about the Green vote, if the UKIP vote share is going to be badly positioned for seats under FPTP, the Green vote share will be even worse. The minor party exception to the rule will be the SNP - where they will be THE major party.

  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983

    Pulpstar said:

    Greens up to 9% with ICM - it's on like Donkey Kong, is that nice Irish man offering any more 25-1 on them beating the Lib Dems :) ?

    It was 20/1, and last night he offered me the opportunity to extend my stake.
    I'd be happier to lose the bet than I would be with the contribution to the PB Tory cocktail fund but sadly I'm still pretty certain that the net result will be JohnO waking up at the last station on some railway line out of Waterloo.

  • Can I feel like an unbelievably smug bastard for a bit.

    I have a bet on the Greens out polling the Lib Dems in May and a bet on the Greens being third or higher with Ipsos-Mori next month.

    ICM tables... must have ICM tables...

    (ELBOW so far this week - YG/Pop/Ash - has Labour ahead by a paltry 0.1%!)
  • BenMBenM Posts: 1,795
    Good poll for Labour.

    Clock is ticking ever louder for the flatlining Tories. 35% in May is looking a daunting ask for them.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,963
    edited January 2015
    Neil said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Greens up to 9% with ICM - it's on like Donkey Kong, is that nice Irish man offering any more 25-1 on them beating the Lib Dems :) ?

    It was 20/1, and last night he offered me the opportunity to extend my stake.
    I'd be happier to lose the bet than I would be with the contribution to the PB Tory cocktail fund but sadly I'm still pretty certain that the net result will be JohnO waking up at the last station on some railway line out of Waterloo.

    WhenIf I were to win the bet, I would donate half the winnings to the PB Tory cocktail fund.
  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    Pulpstar said:

    One thing about the Green vote, if the UKIP vote share is going to be badly positioned for seats under FPTP, the Green vote share will be even worse.

    This is counteracted to a degree by the fact that the Green party has been far better at targeting in successive GEs than UKIP (as evidenced by the fact that they won a seat with far fewer votes last time).
  • Neil said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Greens up to 9% with ICM - it's on like Donkey Kong, is that nice Irish man offering any more 25-1 on them beating the Lib Dems :) ?

    It was 20/1, and last night he offered me the opportunity to extend my stake.
    I'd be happier to lose the bet than I would be with the contribution to the PB Tory cocktail fund but sadly I'm still pretty certain that the net result will be JohnO waking up at the last station on some railway line out of Waterloo.

    Waterloo, Belgium? :)
  • ArtistArtist Posts: 1,893
    Labour must be getting votes from somewhere else if they're managing to compensate for losing some to the Greens recently.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    It would be good to know what the SNP tally was in the ICM poll. It's obviously good, since the Guardian mention a good performance by them in the sub-heading and in the text, but they neglect to give a separate figure. Irritating.
  • MonikerDiCanioMonikerDiCanio Posts: 5,792
    edited January 2015
    Greens and LBs along with working class UKIP and SNP all moving up. Middle class UKIP and SNP returning to the Tories.
    A witches' brew for Labour and a looming landslide for the Tories.
    That's my reading.
  • Greens on 9, makes the Ashcroft poll with them on 11 look less outlandish
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,410

    Greens and LBs along with working class UKIP and SNP all moving up. Middle class UKIP and SNP returning to the Tories.
    A witches' brew for Labour and a looming landslide for the Tories.
    That's my reading.

    Pile on, it's 6 or 7-1 on Betfair or so.
  • BenMBenM Posts: 1,795
    Of course the NHS is the most important issue.

    Getting ill is a real risk.

    Coming a cropper because of foreigners is a UKIP \ tabloid fantasy.
  • Greens on 9, makes the Ashcroft poll with them on 11 look less outlandish

    I wonder if the next data point of my LD v. Green chart (due Sunday 25th) will show crossover, or at least level pegging.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    A thread appeared and disappeared there. Eerie.
  • antifrank said:

    A thread appeared and disappeared there. Eerie.

    Yeah Mike put up a thread not realising ICM was out.
  • shadsyshadsy Posts: 289
    Here's how the election result would look if the current favourite wins in each of Ladbrokes' constituency markets.

    296 Lab
    273 Cons
    31 LD
    22 SNP
    5 UKIP
    3 PC
    1 Green
    1 Speaker
    18 NI

    http://politicalbookie.com/2015/01/20/the-ladbrokes-election-forecast/
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,410
    Neil said:

    Pulpstar said:

    One thing about the Green vote, if the UKIP vote share is going to be badly positioned for seats under FPTP, the Green vote share will be even worse.

    This is counteracted to a degree by the fact that the Green party has been far better at targeting in successive GEs than UKIP (as evidenced by the fact that they won a seat with far fewer votes last time).
    Yes but where is the next gain coming from - I'm on Norwich South for tuppence ha'penny, whereas UKIP have realistic prospects all along the east coast. Brighton is also far more marginal than Clacton.
  • Greens on 9, makes the Ashcroft poll with them on 11 look less outlandish

    I wonder if the next data point of my LD v. Green chart (due Sunday 25th) will show crossover, or at least level pegging.
    The only polls I'm expecting this week are the usual YouGovs and Populus
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322

    RodCrosby said:
    The polling shows the public disagree with the Bishop of Rome's comment.
    I'm still waiting to hear what the Archbishop of Constantinople thinks.
  • FlightpathFlightpath Posts: 4,012

    Greens on 9, makes the Ashcroft poll with them on 11 look less outlandish

    On the other hand the tories went up.
    Seems UKIP to tory and LD to Green. Lab headless chickens.
  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    Pulpstar said:


    Neil said:

    Pulpstar said:

    One thing about the Green vote, if the UKIP vote share is going to be badly positioned for seats under FPTP, the Green vote share will be even worse.

    This is counteracted to a degree by the fact that the Green party has been far better at targeting in successive GEs than UKIP (as evidenced by the fact that they won a seat with far fewer votes last time).
    Yes but where is the next gain coming from - I'm on Norwich South for tuppence ha'penny, whereas UKIP have realistic prospects all along the east coast. Brighton is also far more marginal than Clacton.
    I dont expect any gains in 2015. The name of the game is 2nd places to be converted into gains in 2020. I think Bristol West, Sheffield Central and Norwich South have potential on that front.

  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,410
    shadsy said:

    Here's how the election result would look if the current favourite wins in each of Ladbrokes' constituency markets.

    296 Lab
    273 Cons
    31 LD
    22 SNP
    5 UKIP
    3 PC
    1 Green
    1 Speaker
    18 NI

    http://politicalbookie.com/2015/01/20/the-ladbrokes-election-forecast/

    Well... Dave is gone for sure on those numbers. Quite how we get a Government is another matter.
  • TCPoliticalBettingTCPoliticalBetting Posts: 10,819
    edited January 2015
    Pulpstar said:

    Must be an outlier! UKIP level with LibDems???
    ICM's methodology is very harsh on up and coming parties with their spiral of silence adjustment. 11 for UKIP is fine, 9 for the Greens is astonishing. 11 for the Lib Dems is not alot of comfort for them with ICM.
    True. Very bad news for LDs. Indicates that they are below 9%. 30+ seat losses.
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    RodCrosby said:
    "If you show disrespect for others' core values then you are going to provoke an angry response. That doesn't justify anything, but I think we just need to bear it in mind."

    So what he's effectively saying is that we should refrain from criticizing the beliefs of any group that reacts to criticism with violence. Sod that. If anything, if a belief system is so screwed up that it teaches to respond to criticism with violence, then that belief system deserves MORE criticism, not less.

    Frankly, I think what people should bear in mind is that if you believe a warlord and slave-trader is the perfect human being, your beliefs are going to get criticized.
  • antifrank said:

    Private Eye on the money here. Is it too much to hope that they have printed any Charlie Hebdo cartoons?

    https://twitter.com/Kevin_Maguire/status/557532707790786560

    It's odd that the Sun is omitted.
    The Sun say "Vote for Dave as he has bigger moobs"
This discussion has been closed.