So Labour, the Tories, the Times and the Mirror co-ordinate to time a defection and a leaked video together in an anti-UKIP manouver. It just shows how they're both part of one self-interested, corrupt elite. They put on this Punch and Judy act in public, but work together behind the scenes to try to stop the common man being represented, lest it shake-up their jealously-held ownership of government power.
Look after that one eye.. its the only one you have.
Oh dear watch the Kippers turn on this chap now...
@ShippersUnbound: Matthew Richardson of UKIP also rude about Farage: "He's a man of Kent. Well, sounds like Kent anyway..."
Lets face it - when you look at the publicity and the 'target seats' Kent does not come out of it too well. I do hope the man and women of Kent can show that they are not part of the hundreds of thousands of bigots'. I hope the whole UK can see through UKIP.
Going back a while barrister Matthew Richardson was appointed party secretary in order to decide “whether to take injunctions out” in the event that the party is criticised in the media.
Off topic betting post. Ritchie Porte looking a good shot for the podium in this year's Tour de France. I've had a slice of the 80/1 e/w price with Hills amongst others.
He won in January last year and then flaked out as usual. Never shown the capability to ride for 3 weeks without a bad day (despite chances when his leader has crashed in the past) and will be expected to ride for Froome unless he gets unlucky again.
We shall see, still think the effective 20/1 for top 3 is value
You would be better finding a bet on Geraint Thomas for top 15. You might get better odds.
Is there a market on that yet?
Not seen one in the UK markets, if you speak French you might be able to find one on French sites, as I understand it top 15 is a fairly common bet (especially in recent years with French performance : ).
Incidentally, the reaction to Leon Brittan's death among family, friends and workmates was:
"So that's why the government has been delaying the child abuse investigation."
Now the people I know might be more cynical than average but to me there seems to be a complete breakdown in trust towards the establishment among those who would have been instinctively its supporters only a decade or so ago.
The political elite are quite happy to protect their own and stop any information coming out, even while they make it legal for the government to go through everyone else's emails.
Time for England to start running Scotland again, and to privatise the NHS?
SCOTLAND’S health service has been rated inferior to its English counterpart, despite receiving greater public spending, in a new international report.
The euro health consumer index — which measures healthcare performance in 36 European countries — ranks England 14th, with Scotland trailing in 16th position despite about £200 per head more being spent north of the border.
The difference between 14th and 16th is, one imagines, close enough that more detailed examination by those who've coughed up for paywall access, or when we see the source report, will show that England and Wales are ahead on some measures, and Scotland on others.
So Labour, the Tories, the Times and the Mirror co-ordinate to time a defection and a leaked video together in an anti-UKIP manouver. It just shows how they're both part of one self-interested, corrupt elite. They put on this Punch and Judy act in public, but work together behind the scenes to try to stop the common man being represented, lest it shake-up their jealously-held ownership of government power.
Yes and your Opt Out is UKIP - which is also part of the self same establishment. Hence those with a Scooby are voting SNP and Green. Two parties who will expel members for taking a Knighthood.
So Labour, the Tories, the Times and the Mirror co-ordinate to time a defection and a leaked video together in an anti-UKIP manouver. It just shows how they're both part of one self-interested, corrupt elite. They put on this Punch and Judy act in public, but work together behind the scenes to try to stop the common man being represented, lest it shake-up their jealously-held ownership of government power.
Yes and your Opt Out is UKIP - which is also part of the self same establishment. Hence those with a Scooby are voting SNP and Green. Two parties who will expel members for taking a Knighthood.
Give me a break. The SNP and Greens are just as happy to import more left-wing immigrants to stack the deck in favour of social democracy as Labour and the Tories. The Greens even more so.
Evening all and I see our resident Kippers are riled. I do hope Andrew Marr makes a serious effort to question Farage in the morning.
Ah, this is why Cameron doesn't want debates. The Tories can get your centre-left journalist mates to grill Farage and give Cameron an easy time, but realise that if you put them up on stage the truth will come spilling out.
We now have an entire generation of University graduates, who have huge levels of debt (even in Scotland there is debt due to the removal of grants) and the likelihood is that significant numbers of these students will not understand why they have this debt when there is no prospect for the bulk of them in earning more during their life. In many cases they will be behind the progression curve of, for example, someone who left school at 16, took a book-keepers apprenticeship (the few that still exist) then qualified as an accountant and with their years of experience are much higher up the the work pyramid than the recent graduate.
Perhaps the most lasting legacy of New Labour is how much they have devalued Higher Education in the UK, especially England where they have fees on top of living costs. It is an appalling legacy.
I needed to have a degree to get the job that I do, but in five and a half years I've not applied anything from my degree to what I do. That's probably got more to do with the fact that I did a geography degree, but I feel I'd have been better off not bothering with university and just going out to work at 18.
Yes and this is reflected in so many careers, especially what one would have considered "Comfortably Well Off" careers back in the 60s and 70s. Accountancy is the big bogeyman where today's youth require a degree in Accountancy, Business or Maths to become an accountant when 40 years ago the idea of an Accountant needing a degree was farcical.
If the expansion of Higher Education had been focused on subjects which were academically based and free then the workforce would be in a far better place than we have with the Media Studies with £27k of debt typical graduate of today.
Strangely Media Studies graduates have the second highest employment rate (Medicine is first), albeit at fairly low salary:
Mind you a lot of my Medical degree was fairly pointless. I have not needed to draw the Krebs cycle in a very long time.
Media Studies faces much of the same criticism that a century ago was hurled at newly-introduced English degrees, when Classics ruled the roost. Why give degrees for reading stories/watching soaps?
What on Earth is wrong with describing Farage as a "man of Kent"? It's an accurate statement. The Times trying to spin it as an insult is laughable. It's embarrassing how the Tory sycophants on here believe every word Rupert Murdoch feeds them.
You don't think he's on about 'rhymes with...' then? Don't you play charades?
Anyway when a senior kipper admits UKIP are simply catering for bigots to get votes there is little more to be said. You pays your money and takes your choice.
Time for England to start running Scotland again, and to privatise the NHS?
SCOTLAND’S health service has been rated inferior to its English counterpart, despite receiving greater public spending, in a new international report.
The euro health consumer index — which measures healthcare performance in 36 European countries — ranks England 14th, with Scotland trailing in 16th position despite about £200 per head more being spent north of the border.
The difference between 14th and 16th is, one imagines, close enough that more detailed examination by those who've coughed up for paywall access, or when we see the source report, will show that England and Wales are ahead on some measures, and Scotland on others.
But the underlying message has to be 'so much for he best health care system in the world'. We all knew that was utter garbage in spite of some on here trying to pretend otherwise.
I might have to revise my view on Bashir if only because of the papers: dreadful headlines for UKIP.
Of course you will. Which just goes to show what a hypocrite you are - just like all the other party fanatics.
LOL
The Kippers on here were loving it speculating on defections from the Tories and how many. Now the boot is on the other foot , the bile is being truly spat.
Bashir isnt an impressive politician or speaker by any stretch, and i am quite surprised The tories accepted him and Cameron has directly associated himself with him
And yet he had so many ukip roles.. surely it wasn't tokenism?
How many times do you want me to say that I think it was tokenism? This is the hat trick by the way
So UKIP is really another political party after all; except led by a dictator.
I never thought the set up of the party was any different to any other to be honest... It's quite difficult to be
But they are different in my views because they want out of europe, openly criticise mass immigration and multiculturalism, and favour grammar schools... And it's policies that matter to me not party politics
When you supported the Labour party, what were your views on:
immigration multiculturism grammar schools
To be honest I voted labour because my family did and I never thought much about politics. Sounds glib, but it was only when I grew up a bit and started really analysing politics, policies etc that I stopped voting for them
Voters like that (as you used to be) probably account for around 50-60% of Labour's core support, particularly in the northern industrial heartlands.
Most of them never get around to the second part, as you did.
Dan Hannan is a very bright guy, but he's going to be in for a very big shock when the pro-EU Cameron gets replaced by the pro-EU Johnson. He's working tirelessly for a party that opposes everything he believes in. Naive. It's like the Repubican reformers in the US - they always think party change is just around the corner.
Dan Hannan is a very bright guy, but he's going to be in for a very big shock when the pro-EU Cameron gets replaced by the pro-EU Johnson. He's working tirelessly for a party that opposes everything he believes in. Naive. It's like the Repubican reformers in the US - they always think party change is just around the corner.
I might have to revise my view on Bashir if only because of the papers: dreadful headlines for UKIP.
Of course you will. Which just goes to show what a hypocrite you are - just like all the other party fanatics.
LOL
The Kippers on here were loving it speculating on defections from the Tories and how many. Now the boot is on the other foot , the bile is being truly spat.
Not at all. I have a disdain verging on disgust for all parties - even the one I nominally support - and think that people like you who blindly parrot the party line are mindless gimps who bring nothing of value to life at all beyond a target for justified abuse.
Of course you won't see this because you are too think to understand the concept of independent thought undirected by your party leadership.
So Labour, the Tories, the Times and the Mirror co-ordinate to time a defection and a leaked video together in an anti-UKIP manouver. It just shows how they're both part of one self-interested, corrupt elite. They put on this Punch and Judy act in public, but work together behind the scenes to try to stop the common man being represented, lest it shake-up their jealously-held ownership of government power.
Yes and your Opt Out is UKIP - which is also part of the self same establishment. Hence those with a Scooby are voting SNP and Green. Two parties who will expel members for taking a Knighthood.
Give me a break. The SNP and Greens are just as happy to import more left-wing immigrants to stack the deck in favour of social democracy as Labour and the Tories. The Greens even more so.
UKIP are a party dominated by southern Public school boys, just the B team establishment rather than the first team.
SNP and Greens are far far more subversive and threatening to the Establishment, both the Conservative and Labour Establishment.
Time for England to start running Scotland again, and to privatise the NHS?
SCOTLAND’S health service has been rated inferior to its English counterpart, despite receiving greater public spending, in a new international report.
The euro health consumer index — which measures healthcare performance in 36 European countries — ranks England 14th, with Scotland trailing in 16th position despite about £200 per head more being spent north of the border.
The difference between 14th and 16th is, one imagines, close enough that more detailed examination by those who've coughed up for paywall access, or when we see the source report, will show that England and Wales are ahead on some measures, and Scotland on others.
But the underlying message has to be 'so much for he best health care system in the world'. We all knew that was utter garbage in spite of some on here trying to pretend otherwise.
The best health care system in the world, at least for most of its consumers, is of course the American one. What the NHS is, is cheap.
I might have to revise my view on Bashir if only because of the papers: dreadful headlines for UKIP.
Of course you will. Which just goes to show what a hypocrite you are - just like all the other party fanatics.
LOL
The Kippers on here were loving it speculating on defections from the Tories and how many. Now the boot is on the other foot , the bile is being truly spat.
I wonder if the Tories would be happy if Lutfur Rahman defected to them.
If the allegations of what occurred in Bradford are true, no political party should welcome him. The same has happened to Labour in Rotherham. The emergence of third world politics in the UK is deeply troubling as it undermines politics and more importantly, democracy.
Time for England to start running Scotland again, and to privatise the NHS?
SCOTLAND’S health service has been rated inferior to its English counterpart, despite receiving greater public spending, in a new international report.
The euro health consumer index — which measures healthcare performance in 36 European countries — ranks England 14th, with Scotland trailing in 16th position despite about £200 per head more being spent north of the border.
The difference between 14th and 16th is, one imagines, close enough that more detailed examination by those who've coughed up for paywall access, or when we see the source report, will show that England and Wales are ahead on some measures, and Scotland on others.
But the underlying message has to be 'so much for he best health care system in the world'. We all knew that was utter garbage in spite of some on here trying to pretend otherwise.
The best health care system in the world, at least for most of its consumers, is of course the American one. What the NHS is, is cheap.
Clinical outcomes do not support this. The United States is well down the league table on clinical outcomes compared to the socialised medicine systems.
For anyone wishing to read a damning indictment of the Atlee government I can recommend 'The Lost Victory - British Dreams , British Realities 1945-1950' by Corelli Barnett.
If it turns out that there is substance to the Bashir allegations then I think whoever persuaded him to defect will have made a big error. It would surely have been better to have him stay with UKIP and cause further stain on their reputation than have to almost immediately disown him if it turns out he has been a naughty boy.
I think the Tories might end up being as guilty in not properly vetting him as UKIP were in the first place.
What on Earth is wrong with describing Farage as a "man of Kent"? It's an accurate statement. The Times trying to spin it as an insult is laughable. It's embarrassing how the Tory sycophants on here believe every word Rupert Murdoch feeds them.
I think the Conservatives will have to try and better than this if they hope to win in May (maybe they've given up).
We now have an entire generation of University graduates, who have huge levels of debt (even in Scotland there is debt due to the removal of grants) and the likelihood is that significant numbers of these students will not understand why they have this debt when there is no prospect for the bulk of them in earning more during their life. In many cases they will be behind the progression curve of, for example, someone who left school at 16, took a book-keepers apprenticeship (the few that still exist) then qualified as an accountant and with their years of experience are much higher up the the work pyramid than the recent graduate.
Perhaps the most lasting legacy of New Labour is how much they have devalued Higher Education in the UK, especially England where they have fees on top of living costs. It is an appalling legacy.
I needed to have a degree to get the job that I do, but in five and a half years I've not applied anything from my degree to what I do. That's probably got more to do with the fact that I did a geography degree, but I feel I'd have been better off not bothering with university and just going out to work at 18.
Yes and this is reflected in so many careers, especially what one would have considered "Comfortably Well Off" careers back in the 60s and 70s. Accountancy is the big bogeyman where today's youth require a degree in Accountancy, Business or Maths to become an accountant when 40 years ago the idea of an Accountant needing a degree was farcical.
If the expansion of Higher Education had been focused on subjects which were academically based and free then the workforce would be in a far better place than we have with the Media Studies with £27k of debt typical graduate of today.
Strangely Media Studies graduates have the second highest employment rate (Medicine is first), albeit at fairly low salary:
What on Earth is wrong with describing Farage as a "man of Kent"? It's an accurate statement. The Times trying to spin it as an insult is laughable. It's embarrassing how the Tory sycophants on here believe every word Rupert Murdoch feeds them.
I think the Conservatives will have to try and better than this if they hope to win in May (maybe they've given up).
I think the Tories are saving their best for April.
If it turns out that there is substance to the Bashir allegations then I think whoever persuaded him to defect will have made a big error. It would surely have been better to have him stay with UKIP and cause further stain on their reputation than have to almost immediately disown him if it turns out he has been a naughty boy.
I think the Tories might end up being as guilty in not properly vetting him as UKIP were in the first place.
So Labour, the Tories, the Times and the Mirror co-ordinate to time a defection and a leaked video together in an anti-UKIP manouver. It just shows how they're both part of one self-interested, corrupt elite. They put on this Punch and Judy act in public, but work together behind the scenes to try to stop the common man being represented, lest it shake-up their jealously-held ownership of government power.
Yes and your Opt Out is UKIP - which is also part of the self same establishment. Hence those with a Scooby are voting SNP and Green. Two parties who will expel members for taking a Knighthood.
Give me a break. The SNP and Greens are just as happy to import more left-wing immigrants to stack the deck in favour of social democracy as Labour and the Tories. The Greens even more so.
UKIP are a party dominated by southern Public school boys, just the B team establishment rather than the first team.
SNP and Greens are far far more subversive and threatening to the Establishment, both the Conservative and Labour Establishment.
It doesn't matter where someone comes from. It matters who and what they stand for. FDR was capable of sticking up for the working man despite his very wealthy background. The SNP get involved with dodgy dealings with Gadaffi, and the Greens are the party of middle class white guilt. Neither are the party of the common man.
Dan Hannan is a very bright guy, but he's going to be in for a very big shock when the pro-EU Cameron gets replaced by the pro-EU Johnson. He's working tirelessly for a party that opposes everything he believes in. Naive.
Daniel Hannan is anything but naive. He does very well in pulling the grassroots of the Conservative party over to the EU-sceptic Right, from the inside. He's not exactly a shrinking violet when it comes to Cameron either:
What I like about Hannan is that he's intelligent and dispartisan enough to understand that an EU withdrawal referendum will only be won through a cross-party effort. One that puts a warm optimistic internationalist case for a future independent Britain, because the BOO'er votes are already in the bag, and that won't be enough. Some left-wing votes will be needed too.
So Labour, the Tories, the Times and the Mirror co-ordinate to time a defection and a leaked video together in an anti-UKIP manouver. It just shows how they're both part of one self-interested, corrupt elite. They put on this Punch and Judy act in public, but work together behind the scenes to try to stop the common man being represented, lest it shake-up their jealously-held ownership of government power.
Yes and your Opt Out is UKIP - which is also part of the self same establishment. Hence those with a Scooby are voting SNP and Green. Two parties who will expel members for taking a Knighthood.
Give me a break. The SNP and Greens are just as happy to import more left-wing immigrants to stack the deck in favour of social democracy as Labour and the Tories. The Greens even more so.
UKIP are a party dominated by southern Public school boys, just the B team establishment rather than the first team.
SNP and Greens are far far more subversive and threatening to the Establishment, both the Conservative and Labour Establishment.
It doesn't matter where someone comes from. It matters who and what they stand for. FDR was capable of sticking up for the working man despite his very wealthy background. The SNP get involved with dodgy dealings with Gadaffi, and the Greens are the party of middle class white guilt. Neither are the party of the common man.
So Labour, the Tories, the Times and the Mirror co-ordinate to time a defection and a leaked video together in an anti-UKIP manouver. It just shows how they're both part of one self-interested, corrupt elite. They put on this Punch and Judy act in public, but work together behind the scenes to try to stop the common man being represented, lest it shake-up their jealously-held ownership of government power.
That's a false assumption
They could have simultaneously been fed by the same source (which is more likely)
What on Earth is wrong with describing Farage as a "man of Kent"? It's an accurate statement. The Times trying to spin it as an insult is laughable. It's embarrassing how the Tory sycophants on here believe every word Rupert Murdoch feeds them.
It wasn't "man of Kent" that was the insult. It was the next sentence "well sounds like 'Kent' anyway". Use your imagination.
So Labour, the Tories, the Times and the Mirror co-ordinate to time a defection and a leaked video together in an anti-UKIP manouver. It just shows how they're both part of one self-interested, corrupt elite. They put on this Punch and Judy act in public, but work together behind the scenes to try to stop the common man being represented, lest it shake-up their jealously-held ownership of government power.
That's a false assumption
They could have simultaneously been fed by the same source (which is more likely)
Are you suggesting that there is a mole in the circus? Where is Smiley when he is needed?
Time for England to start running Scotland again, and to privatise the NHS?
SCOTLAND’S health service has been rated inferior to its English counterpart, despite receiving greater public spending, in a new international report.
The euro health consumer index — which measures healthcare performance in 36 European countries — ranks England 14th, with Scotland trailing in 16th position despite about £200 per head more being spent north of the border.
The difference between 14th and 16th is, one imagines, close enough that more detailed examination by those who've coughed up for paywall access, or when we see the source report, will show that England and Wales are ahead on some measures, and Scotland on others.
But the underlying message has to be 'so much for he best health care system in the world'. We all knew that was utter garbage in spite of some on here trying to pretend otherwise.
The best health care system in the world, at least for most of its consumers, is of course the American one. What the NHS is, is cheap.
Clinical outcomes do not support this. The United States is well down the league table on clinical outcomes compared to the socialised medicine systems.
Otoh, pick a dozen recent advances and most will have come from the United States.
So Labour, the Tories, the Times and the Mirror co-ordinate to time a defection and a leaked video together in an anti-UKIP manouver. It just shows how they're both part of one self-interested, corrupt elite. They put on this Punch and Judy act in public, but work together behind the scenes to try to stop the common man being represented, lest it shake-up their jealously-held ownership of government power.
That's a false assumption
They could have simultaneously been fed by the same source (which is more likely)
Are you suggesting that there is a mole in the circus? Where is Smiley when he is needed?
No, just that one of the main parties (probably Crosby's team, but I don't know) is feeding stories to the papers.
So Labour, the Tories, the Times and the Mirror co-ordinate to time a defection and a leaked video together in an anti-UKIP manouver. It just shows how they're both part of one self-interested, corrupt elite. They put on this Punch and Judy act in public, but work together behind the scenes to try to stop the common man being represented, lest it shake-up their jealously-held ownership of government power.
That's a false assumption
They could have simultaneously been fed by the same source (which is more likely)
Are you suggesting that there is a mole in the circus? Where is Smiley when he is needed?
No, just that one of the main parties (probably Crosby's team, but I don't know) is feeding stories to the papers.
I think it is partly revenge.
There's a lot of Tories who were really pissed off with UKIP's very public attempt to destabilise the Tory conference and over shadow Dave's speech.
There was speculation in the summer that he might defect to UKIP, I'd be truly gutted if he did.
I don't think he will. It's a battle between his heart and head: most of his political friends have moved to UKIP (Carswell, Reckless, and Helmer) and part of him would probably like to join them. But he knows that if he does leave there'll be no-one left behind within the Conservatives who can put the EU withdrawlist case internally to the party as persuasively and credibly as he can.
The risk is that the Conservatives would then start to drift away from that position through inertia, which would make it that much harder to win an in/out referendum.
The tribal partisan colours could end up getting hoisted on either side of the referendum divide, rather than members freely campaigning across it in mutual common interest.
So Labour, the Tories, the Times and the Mirror co-ordinate to time a defection and a leaked video together in an anti-UKIP manouver. It just shows how they're both part of one self-interested, corrupt elite. They put on this Punch and Judy act in public, but work together behind the scenes to try to stop the common man being represented, lest it shake-up their jealously-held ownership of government power.
That's a false assumption
They could have simultaneously been fed by the same source (which is more likely)
Are you suggesting that there is a mole in the circus? Where is Smiley when he is needed?
No, just that one of the main parties (probably Crosby's team, but I don't know) is feeding stories to the papers.
I think it is partly revenge.
There's a lot of Tories who were really pissed off with UKIP's very public attempt to destabilise the Tory conference and over shadow Dave's speech.
Tomorrow is Farage's big day on Marr.
What is sauce for the goose....
The difference is that UKIP didn't co-operate with Labour to do it. The Tories are more likely to prop up Labour after the next election than UKIP are. That is now clear.
So Labour, the Tories, the Times and the Mirror co-ordinate to time a defection and a leaked video together in an anti-UKIP manouver. It just shows how they're both part of one self-interested, corrupt elite. They put on this Punch and Judy act in public, but work together behind the scenes to try to stop the common man being represented, lest it shake-up their jealously-held ownership of government power.
That's a false assumption
They could have simultaneously been fed by the same source (which is more likely)
Are you suggesting that there is a mole in the circus? Where is Smiley when he is needed?
No, just that one of the main parties (probably Crosby's team, but I don't know) is feeding stories to the papers.
I think it is partly revenge.
There's a lot of Tories who were really pissed off with UKIP's very public attempt to destabilise the Tory conference and over shadow Dave's speech.
Tomorrow is Farage's big day on Marr.
What is sauce for the goose....
Yes but no one made the UKIP party secretary admit they were a party for bigots. He was not hypnotised by svengali Lynton. Just like no one made all the other kippers say what they did. They say what they say and act the way they do because they are what they are. I think we have all seen and heard enough for the 'harmless banter in the pub' excuse to have worn thin a long time ago. The rights and wrongs of the EU disappeared a long time ago as well.
So Labour, the Tories, the Times and the Mirror co-ordinate to time a defection and a leaked video together in an anti-UKIP manouver. It just shows how they're both part of one self-interested, corrupt elite. They put on this Punch and Judy act in public, but work together behind the scenes to try to stop the common man being represented, lest it shake-up their jealously-held ownership of government power.
That's a false assumption
They could have simultaneously been fed by the same source (which is more likely)
Are you suggesting that there is a mole in the circus? Where is Smiley when he is needed?
No, just that one of the main parties (probably Crosby's team, but I don't know) is feeding stories to the papers.
I am not so sure. If I were approached by a high level UKIP defector (or re-defector?), I would want them to act as double agent for as long as they could, then get them to spectacularly defect, perhaps the day before a debate. I am sure UKIP would have much the same plan themselves...
So Labour, the Tories, the Times and the Mirror co-ordinate to time a defection and a leaked video together in an anti-UKIP manouver. It just shows how they're both part of one self-interested, corrupt elite. They put on this Punch and Judy act in public, but work together behind the scenes to try to stop the common man being represented, lest it shake-up their jealously-held ownership of government power.
That's a false assumption
They could have simultaneously been fed by the same source (which is more likely)
Are you suggesting that there is a mole in the circus? Where is Smiley when he is needed?
No, just that one of the main parties (probably Crosby's team, but I don't know) is feeding stories to the papers.
I think it is partly revenge.
There's a lot of Tories who were really pissed off with UKIP's very public attempt to destabilise the Tory conference and over shadow Dave's speech.
Tomorrow is Farage's big day on Marr.
What is sauce for the goose....
The difference is that UKIP didn't co-operate with Labour to do it. The Tories are more likely to prop up Labour after the next election than UKIP are. That is now clear.
You are reduced to incoherence. You must hope Farage can do better.
There was speculation in the summer that he might defect to UKIP, I'd be truly gutted if he did.
I don't think he will. It's a battle between his heart and head: most of his political friends have moved to UKIP (Carswell, Reckless, and Helmer) and part of him would probably like to join them. But he knows that if he does leave there'll be no-one left behind within the Conservatives who can put the EU withdrawlist case internally to the party as persuasively and credibly as he can.
The risk is that the Conservatives would then start to drift away from that position through inertia, which would make it that much harder to win an in/out referendum.
The tribal partisan colours could end up getting hoisted on either side of the referendum divide, rather than members freely campaigning across it in mutual common interest.
When we do have an in/out referendum my prediction is the side with the more measured/tempered approach as well as tone will win it.
Which is why Daniel Hannan is so crucial, and why I like him.
So Labour, the Tories, the Times and the Mirror co-ordinate to time a defection and a leaked video together in an anti-UKIP manouver. It just shows how they're both part of one self-interested, corrupt elite. They put on this Punch and Judy act in public, but work together behind the scenes to try to stop the common man being represented, lest it shake-up their jealously-held ownership of government power.
That's a false assumption
They could have simultaneously been fed by the same source (which is more likely)
Are you suggesting that there is a mole in the circus? Where is Smiley when he is needed?
No, just that one of the main parties (probably Crosby's team, but I don't know) is feeding stories to the papers.
I think it is partly revenge.
There's a lot of Tories who were really pissed off with UKIP's very public attempt to destabilise the Tory conference and over shadow Dave's speech.
Tomorrow is Farage's big day on Marr.
What is sauce for the goose....
The difference is that UKIP didn't co-operate with Labour to do it. The Tories are more likely to prop up Labour after the next election than UKIP are. That is now clear.
The conflict between the Conservatives and Labour is bitter. It's over which faction should enjoy the fruits of office. It's not a philosophical difference.
The former Tory MP Eric Forth famously said "there are large numbers of bigots in the country and they need to be represented". Sounds like someone in UKIP has copied him.
So the Westminster Bubble is getting excited about an MEP defecting. Someone I think Mr and Mrs (not Ms) Average Voter aren't going to be paying much attention to this story. I predict it won't impact the polls.
Off topic betting post. Ritchie Porte looking a good shot for the podium in this year's Tour de France. I've had a slice of the 80/1 e/w price with Hills amongst others.
Porte is a great cyclist and world class contender. In one week tours.
He has never shown the stamina to compete over three weeks, not once in his career has he been able to maintain form over that length of time. He's gutsy, talented and strong but a three week Grand Tour man he really isn't.
Certainly a top cyclist can domestique on the hills as Froome demonstrated in Vuelta 2011 and Tour 2012 when he still was able to hold on and compete for a podium. But Porte in the same roll has failed to stay competitive every time he has had this roll. He can't maintain the stamina required for 3 weeks.
Having said all that, 80/1 may have some value. However this would be mainly to get very excited for the first 8 to 12 days, not to make a profit.
No, backing Porte each way is ok but for God's sake lay off before his bad day. My Froome 5 or more TdFs is still live but hopefully he won, t crock himself again.
Did I just hear right on the news? The Tories say the MEP is being investigated. So they accept him as a defection. Sounds a bit odd. Apologies if I've got it wrong.
Sun trailing a labour NHS bombshell in their paper. This cannot be right as the elite are all ganging up on the Kippers...
Interesting that Sky is missing the Sun's front page, which may mean a genuine scoop is being protected from the other papers, though it is getting a bit late for that to be necessary.
Another example of UKIP failing to vet top candidates for MEP positions. UKIPs selection processes are beyond a joke. Either Mr Bashir is a bad sort and guilty of what UKIP say = Bad Choice by UKIP or Mr Bashir was never a Kipper at any point = Bad Choice by UKIP
Another example of UKIP failing to vet top candidates for MEP positions. UKIPs selection processes are beyond a joke. Either Mr Bashir is a bad sort and guilty of what UKIP say = Bad Choice by UKIP or Mr Bashir was never a Kipper at any point = Bad Choice by UKIP
Why are the Tories "delighted" to accept him given those allegations?
Sun trailing a labour NHS bombshell in their paper. This cannot be right as the elite are all ganging up on the Kippers...
Interesting that Sky is missing the Sun's front page, which may mean a genuine scoop is being protected from the other papers, though it is getting a bit late for that to be necessary.
Report on baby deaths and cover ups from 10 years ago is in the Sunday Times.
Also in the Sunday Times is a comment by the now famous Richardson of UKIP where he ''compared NHS spending to the activities of Nazi Germany'' At a right wing political conference in Washington in 2010 Richardson declared: “The biggest waste of money of course in the United Kingdom is the NHS, the National Health Service.” He followed this up at another right wing conference by saying ''the Reichstag bunker of socialism is the National Health Service.”
But what will - if they see it - cause any lefty worth their salt to foam at the mouth is not simply him saying 'the biggest waste of money in the UK is the NHS, the national health service'' but saying all this in front of a massive stars and stripes flag. All guaranteed to produces a bout of tactical antikipper voting.
Meantime friends if he has any left of Carswell will be pleased to know that ''a tape emerged of Patrick O’Flynn, the party’s economics spokesman, denouncing the “hardline libertarians” in Ukip as “completely away with the fairies”.
Not at all. I have a disdain verging on disgust for all parties - even the one I nominally support - and think that people like you who blindly parrot the party line are mindless gimps
bravo. that's the only way to live.
all those gimps tell me not to vote ukip. if they were telling me not to vote snp and the snp weren't indicating a desire to prop up labour then maybe.....
Can I just say that the fact that MEPs can defect and hold onto seats they were given in a list system is just another example of the sort of delusions that members of the European Parliament have about being real politicians in a real Parliament. It is kinda pathetic.
Off topic betting post. Ritchie Porte looking a good shot for the podium in this year's Tour de France. I've had a slice of the 80/1 e/w price with Hills amongst others.
Porte is a great cyclist and world class contender. In one week tours.
He has never shown the stamina to compete over three weeks, not once in his career has he been able to maintain form over that length of time. He's gutsy, talented and strong but a three week Grand Tour man he really isn't.
Certainly a top cyclist can domestique on the hills as Froome demonstrated in Vuelta 2011 and Tour 2012 when he still was able to hold on and compete for a podium. But Porte in the same roll has failed to stay competitive every time he has had this roll. He can't maintain the stamina required for 3 weeks.
Having said all that, 80/1 may have some value. However this would be mainly to get very excited for the first 8 to 12 days, not to make a profit.
No, backing Porte each way is ok but for God's sake lay off before his bad day. My Froome 5 or more TdFs is still live but hopefully he won, t crock himself again.
Froome is 29, to think he can win 4 more tours is... not in sync with pro-tour cycling. Contador is 32 and has 2 wins and he was an expected "win everything" candidate 6 years ago.
Again for Porte, he will not be on the podium. If you want a really star bet you probably need to look at Stybar but again even that great man isn't probably podium but he is certainly top 10. And UK betting shops don't seem to have that sort of market.
Stybar, Thomas and Peraud are very good value for top 15. Certainly they are much better bets than Froome or Contador to win or, pretty much, any podium bet,
George Osborne defecting to Labour, or Ed Balls to the Tories - that would be a story that might even shift a few votes. A member of a parliament few care about and even fewer vote for defecting is not even up there with 'dog bites man'. 'They're all as bad as each other' will be the overwhelming response, in so far as there is any at all......
Sun trailing a labour NHS bombshell in their paper. This cannot be right as the elite are all ganging up on the Kippers...
Interesting that Sky is missing the Sun's front page, which may mean a genuine scoop is being protected from the other papers, though it is getting a bit late for that to be necessary.
Neil Henderson of the BBC (tomorrow's papers today) hasn't tweeted it either - it may just be late for some reason.....
What I like about Hannan is that he's intelligent and dispartisan enough to understand that an EU withdrawal referendum will only be won through a cross-party effort. One that puts a warm optimistic internationalist case for a future independent Britain...
As I mentioned before (I think it was to you, so apologies for the repetition), Hannan used to list freedom of movement as a desideratum, but at some point in the last two years he stopped and now when listing his desiderata he conspicuously fails to mention it. So although you could argue he wanted "a warm optimistic internationalist case for a future independent Britain" then, it's difficult to say that's what he's arguing for now.
Incidentally, did you ask him to put an actual number on his threshold for limited, controlled immigration afterwards? I think you were the poster who has spoken to him at some point in the past.
Is the supposed Nazi comparison just using the term "Reichstag bunker of socialism"?
The Reichstag was of course built in the 19th Century... what inept journalism by the Times.
The bunker was built by Hitler - although to avoid yet more pedantry - he did not build it personally. It seems the kipper is confused about the 'Reich Chancellery' but I'll happily forgive him that. I'm not sure the labour voters he is after will though. Its no surprise that his ignorant remarks totally ignored the 20 billion savings that were being carried out by this govt.
Sun trailing a labour NHS bombshell in their paper. This cannot be right as the elite are all ganging up on the Kippers...
Interesting that Sky is missing the Sun's front page, which may mean a genuine scoop is being protected from the other papers, though it is getting a bit late for that to be necessary.
Report on baby deaths and cover ups from 10 years ago is in the Sunday Times.
Also in the Sunday Times is a comment by the now famous Richardson of UKIP where he ''compared NHS spending to the activities of Nazi Germany'' At a right wing political conference in Washington in 2010 Richardson declared: “The biggest waste of money of course in the United Kingdom is the NHS, the National Health Service.” He followed this up at another right wing conference by saying ''the Reichstag bunker of socialism is the National Health Service.”
But what will - if they see it - cause any lefty worth their salt to foam at the mouth is not simply him saying 'the biggest waste of money in the UK is the NHS, the national health service'' but saying all this in front of a massive stars and stripes flag. All guaranteed to produces a bout of tactical antikipper voting.
Meantime friends if he has any left of Carswell will be pleased to know that ''a tape emerged of Patrick O’Flynn, the party’s economics spokesman, denouncing the “hardline libertarians” in Ukip as “completely away with the fairies”.
It all makes the kipper conversion to saving the NHS a little implausible doesn't it?
Sun trailing a labour NHS bombshell in their paper. This cannot be right as the elite are all ganging up on the Kippers...
Interesting that Sky is missing the Sun's front page, which may mean a genuine scoop is being protected from the other papers, though it is getting a bit late for that to be necessary.
Neil Henderson of the BBC (tomorrow's papers today) hasn't tweeted it either - it may just be late for some reason.....
Perhaps it's the Sun's new policy of having a Page One Girl!
Anyhoo, Hannan-fisking isn't why I'm here. A few nights ago you may remember a discussion of if given the betting odds for A and the betting odds for B, how do you extract the odds of (neither A nor B )?
Some kind poster was kind enough to point out that the probabilities derived from all betting odds for a given event do not add up to 100%: they exceed it. This excess over 100% is known as the "overround" or, if you are acquainted with men in shiny suits called Vinnie, the "vigorish" or "vig". For example, if the probabilities add up to 110%, then for every $110 bet, the bookie will only have to pay out $100: the 10% difference is the overround and is his profit.
OK, fine, I get it. The question then becomes: how big is the vig? Is it constant and, if not, what i the variance between firms and within firms? Does a betting firm have the same vig as another, and does the vig vary between events for the same firm?
So. If anybody knows if the answer to this question is written down somewhere, I'd be grateful. Otherwise I'll have to bother Shadsy.
Anyhoo, Hannan-fisking isn't why I'm here. A few nights ago you may remember a discussion of if given the betting odds for A and the betting odds for B, how do you extract the odds of (neither A nor B )?
Some kind poster was kind enough to point out that the probabilities derived from all betting odds for a given event do not add up to 100%: they exceed it. This excess over 100% is known as the "overround" or, if you are acquainted with men in shiny suits called Vinnie, the "vigorish" or "vig". For example, if the probabilities add up to 110%, then for every $110 bet, the bookie will only have to pay out $100: the 10% difference is the overround and is his profit.
OK, fine, I get it. The question then becomes: how big is the vig? Is it constant and, if not, what i the variance between firms and within firms? Does a betting firm have the same vig as another, and does the vig vary between events for the same firm?
So. If anybody knows if the answer to this question is written down somewhere, I'd be grateful. Otherwise I'll have to bother Shadsy.
It varies, though for tote-like pools, it will be known in advance. If you look at Oddschecker, you can easily see (or calculate) that the overround varies between events, between bookmakers, and from one time to another.
Sun trailing a labour NHS bombshell in their paper. This cannot be right as the elite are all ganging up on the Kippers...
Interesting that Sky is missing the Sun's front page, which may mean a genuine scoop is being protected from the other papers, though it is getting a bit late for that to be necessary.
Neil Henderson of the BBC (tomorrow's papers today) hasn't tweeted it either - it may just be late for some reason.....
Perhaps it's the Sun's new policy of having a Page One Girl!
Or like the Sunday People they are leading on a Leon Brittan story......
Anyhoo, Hannan-fisking isn't why I'm here. A few nights ago you may remember a discussion of if given the betting odds for A and the betting odds for B, how do you extract the odds of (neither A nor B )?
Some kind poster was kind enough to point out that the probabilities derived from all betting odds for a given event do not add up to 100%: they exceed it. This excess over 100% is known as the "overround" or, if you are acquainted with men in shiny suits called Vinnie, the "vigorish" or "vig". For example, if the probabilities add up to 110%, then for every $110 bet, the bookie will only have to pay out $100: the 10% difference is the overround and is his profit.
OK, fine, I get it. The question then becomes: how big is the vig? Is it constant and, if not, what i the variance between firms and within firms? Does a betting firm have the same vig as another, and does the vig vary between events for the same firm?
So. If anybody knows if the answer to this question is written down somewhere, I'd be grateful. Otherwise I'll have to bother Shadsy.
It varies, though for tote-like pools, it will be known in advance. If you look at Oddschecker, you can easily see (or calculate) that the overround varies between events, between bookmakers, and from one time to another.
That totals to 1.078558965, which is a vig of about 8%.
Fine. But I have to do this for all of them since 2010. Ouch.
It will I think be easier if I calculate the vig for a sample, work out the average vig, and assume that average for all cases. That'll make the calculations much simpler.
Can I just say that the fact that MEPs can defect and hold onto seats they were given in a list system is just another example of the sort of delusions that members of the European Parliament have about being real politicians in a real Parliament. It is kinda pathetic.
Dunno what the "real parliament" thing is about, the EP are far more influential than Westminster MPs, not least because they actually consider issues and decide how to vote on them rather than just doing what the executive tell them.
On topic, why would the voters care about Farage's leadership style? They don't vote for him to lead, they vote for him to say "Bah humbug". Normally I guess there might be potential internal party management issues involved, but even UKIP isn going to start openly plotting against their leader three months before a genera election.
Been having a wicked thought about how The Sun can continue to wind people up over the Page 3 issue...
If they had a pic of a breast-feeding mother feeding her baby, they could blow the minds of those who oppose female nudity but support the right to breast-feed. I am not sure that those people would ever quite recover!
The way I understand it, the factors affecting the overround are;
How competitive the market is - If noone else is offering odds, then you can go 4/5 either way on an evens shot.
How much is being wagered -eg a Saturday PL football match odds market will attract millions of pounds in bets, with the main bookmakers competing for business. Some of the biggest asian/us bookies offer "juice" as low as 1% (or even 0.5%) to their highest staking punters.
High turnover - If an event is occurring very often (eg, horse races on a saturday) the bookies can afford to offer a lower vig.
Confidence - if you can calculate the exact odds of an event occurring (eg, which team will win the toss) then you can offer odds knowing a punter with inside information can't get an edge. Consequently you can offer a lower vig. If it's a first goalscorer market, anyone with inside info on the teams (and anyone with a twitter account, if the teams/strategy is leaked) potentially has an edge on the bookie. eg, the odds on a striker who starts on the bench being FGS goes down considerably.
So politics odds tend to have a higher overround because;
A) Historically elections haven't been big betting events (the Indyref changed this, and GE2015 looks set to break all records)
B ) Only a few bookmakers offer odds, and those odds are usually compiled by non-specialist traders. Again, lots more bookies are getting involved in the GE, and this will hopefully lead to lower overrounds. I suspect most won't make a profit (although they may not care, if they get new punters from the publicity of offering odds that get printed in the papers)
C) elections don't happen very often.
D) There's a lot of inside polling/on-the-ground information that leave bookies vulnerable to punters having an edge.
As a side note – I suspect the most successful bookmakers in the future will be the ones with the best personalisation models to maximise profit from each customer. We're in the early days of this transition - but I can’t see the classic chalk board with static odds and a set overround available to all customers for whatever stakes bookmaker model of business being around for much longer.
I haven't read mike's book, but probably worth picking up a copy if you want to get your head around this sort of stuff.
Been having a wicked thought about how The Sun can continue to wind people up over the Page 3 issue...
If they had a pic of a breast-feeding mother feeding her baby, they could blow the minds of those who oppose female nudity but support the right to breast-feed. I am not sure that those people would ever quite recover!
I doubt even the sun would stoop so low as to sexualise breast feeding.
"But get ready for a Labour NHS bombshell in tomorrow's @TheSunNewspaper"
Can the newspaper's lawyers really still be poring over this at 1.44 a.m.?
Not for today's paper, no. Lawyers will pore over articles, but that's earlier in the day. It would be very rare that they would get to the evening and still not have taken a legal view. The paper layout is being set by evening. Papers vary with their cut-off for final copy. It's generally slightly earlier with the Sundays than the dailies, but they all go to print by 23h00 latest.
Printed newspapers are declining at fast but variable rates.
The way I understand it, the factors affecting the overround are;
How competitive the market is - If noone else is offering odds, then you can go 4/5 either way on an evens shot.
How much is being wagered -eg a Saturday PL football match odds market will attract millions of pounds in bets, with the main bookmakers competing for business. Some of the biggest asian/us bookies offer "juice" as low as 1% (or even 0.5%) to their highest staking punters.
High turnover - If an event is occurring very often (eg, horse races on a saturday) the bookies can afford to offer a lower vig.
Confidence - if you can calculate the exact odds of an event occurring (eg, which team will win the toss) then you can offer odds knowing a punter with inside information can't get an edge. Consequently you can offer a lower vig. If it's a first goalscorer market, anyone with inside info on the teams (and anyone with a twitter account, if the teams/strategy is leaked) potentially has an edge on the bookie. eg, the odds on a striker who starts on the bench being FGS goes down considerably.
So politics odds tend to have a higher overround because;
A) Historically elections haven't been big betting events (the Indyref changed this, and GE2015 looks set to break all records)
B ) Only a few bookmakers offer odds, and those odds are usually compiled by non-specialist traders. Again, lots more bookies are getting involved in the GE, and this will hopefully lead to lower overrounds. I suspect most won't make a profit (although they may not care, if they get new punters from the publicity of offering odds that get printed in the papers)
C) elections don't happen very often.
D) There's a lot of inside polling/on-the-ground information that leave bookies vulnerable to punters having an edge.
As a side note – I suspect the most successful bookmakers in the future will be the ones with the best personalisation models to maximise profit from each customer. We're in the early days of this transition - but I can’t see the classic chalk board with static odds and a set overround available to all customers for whatever stakes bookmaker model of business being around for much longer.
I haven't read mike's book, but probably worth picking up a copy if you want to get your head around this sort of stuff.
Comments
Anyway when a senior kipper admits UKIP are simply catering for bigots to get votes there is little more to be said. You pays your money and takes your choice.
The Kippers on here were loving it speculating on defections from the Tories and how many. Now the boot is on the other foot , the bile is being truly spat.
Most of them never get around to the second part, as you did.
Of course you won't see this because you are too think to understand the concept of independent thought undirected by your party leadership.
SNP and Greens are far far more subversive and threatening to the Establishment, both the Conservative and Labour Establishment.
If the allegations of what occurred in Bradford are true, no political party should welcome him. The same has happened to Labour in Rotherham. The emergence of third world politics in the UK is deeply troubling as it undermines politics and more importantly, democracy.
There was speculation in the summer that he might defect to UKIP, I'd be truly gutted if he did.
I think the Tories might end up being as guilty in not properly vetting him as UKIP were in the first place.
I wonder if his comments on the NHS held him back from running as an MP, especially if he still openly holds such views.
No point using your best weapon in January.
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2014/10/cameron-could-win-in-2015-if-he-were-serious-about-europe-but-he-isnt/
http://www.spectator.co.uk/features/9349402/how-cameron-could-make-the-eu-a-winning-issue-and-why-he-wont/
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danielhannan/100289389/david-cameron-isnt-remotely-eurosceptic-but-he-alone-can-deliver-an-inout-referendum/
What I like about Hannan is that he's intelligent and dispartisan enough to understand that an EU withdrawal referendum will only be won through a cross-party effort. One that puts a warm optimistic internationalist case for a future independent Britain, because the BOO'er votes are already in the bag, and that won't be enough. Some left-wing votes will be needed too.
I think he's doing excellent work for the cause.
They could have simultaneously been fed by the same source (which is more likely) It wasn't "man of Kent" that was the insult. It was the next sentence "well sounds like 'Kent' anyway". Use your imagination.
There's a lot of Tories who were really pissed off with UKIP's very public attempt to destabilise the Tory conference and over shadow Dave's speech.
Tomorrow is Farage's big day on Marr.
What is sauce for the goose....
The risk is that the Conservatives would then start to drift away from that position through inertia, which would make it that much harder to win an in/out referendum.
The tribal partisan colours could end up getting hoisted on either side of the referendum divide, rather than members freely campaigning across it in mutual common interest.
I think we have all seen and heard enough for the 'harmless banter in the pub' excuse to have worn thin a long time ago.
The rights and wrongs of the EU disappeared a long time ago as well.
Which is why Daniel Hannan is so crucial, and why I like him.
Either Mr Bashir is a bad sort and guilty of what UKIP say = Bad Choice by UKIP
or
Mr Bashir was never a Kipper at any point = Bad Choice by UKIP
Also in the Sunday Times is a comment by the now famous Richardson of UKIP where he ''compared NHS spending to the activities of Nazi Germany''
At a right wing political conference in Washington in 2010 Richardson declared: “The biggest waste of money of course in the United Kingdom is the NHS, the National Health Service.”
He followed this up at another right wing conference by saying ''the Reichstag bunker of socialism is the National Health Service.”
But what will - if they see it - cause any lefty worth their salt to foam at the mouth is not simply him saying 'the biggest waste of money in the UK is the NHS, the national health service'' but saying all this in front of a massive stars and stripes flag. All guaranteed to produces a bout of tactical antikipper voting.
Meantime friends if he has any left of Carswell will be pleased to know that ''a tape emerged of Patrick O’Flynn, the party’s economics spokesman, denouncing the “hardline libertarians” in Ukip as “completely away with the fairies”.
all those gimps tell me not to vote ukip. if they were telling me not to vote snp and the snp weren't indicating a desire to prop up labour then maybe.....
Again for Porte, he will not be on the podium. If you want a really star bet you probably need to look at Stybar but again even that great man isn't probably podium but he is certainly top 10. And UK betting shops don't seem to have that sort of market.
Stybar, Thomas and Peraud are very good value for top 15. Certainly they are much better bets than Froome or Contador to win or, pretty much, any podium bet,
Is the supposed Nazi comparison just using the term "Reichstag bunker of socialism"?
The Reichstag was of course built in the 19th Century... what inept journalism by the Times.
Incidentally, did you ask him to put an actual number on his threshold for limited, controlled immigration afterwards? I think you were the poster who has spoken to him at some point in the past.
Some kind poster was kind enough to point out that the probabilities derived from all betting odds for a given event do not add up to 100%: they exceed it. This excess over 100% is known as the "overround" or, if you are acquainted with men in shiny suits called Vinnie, the "vigorish" or "vig". For example, if the probabilities add up to 110%, then for every $110 bet, the bookie will only have to pay out $100: the 10% difference is the overround and is his profit.
OK, fine, I get it. The question then becomes: how big is the vig? Is it constant and, if not, what i the variance between firms and within firms? Does a betting firm have the same vig as another, and does the vig vary between events for the same firm?
So. If anybody knows if the answer to this question is written down somewhere, I'd be grateful. Otherwise I'll have to bother Shadsy.
That's a total probability of 15/(8+15) + 8/(13+8) + 1/(25+1) + 1/(200+1) + 1/(500+1).
That simplifies to 15/23 + 8/21 + 1/26 + 1/201 + 1/501
That's 0.652173913 + 0.380952381 + 0.038461538 + 0.004975124 + 0.001996008
That totals to 1.078558965, which is a vig of about 8%.
Fine. But I have to do this for all of them since 2010. Ouch.
It will I think be easier if I calculate the vig for a sample, work out the average vig, and assume that average for all cases. That'll make the calculations much simpler.
"But get ready for a Labour NHS bombshell in tomorrow's @TheSunNewspaper"
Can the newspaper's lawyers really still be poring over this at 1.44 a.m.?
If they had a pic of a breast-feeding mother feeding her baby, they could blow the minds of those who oppose female nudity but support the right to breast-feed. I am not sure that those people would ever quite recover!
The way I understand it, the factors affecting the overround are;
How competitive the market is - If noone else is offering odds, then you can go 4/5 either way on an evens shot.
How much is being wagered -eg a Saturday PL football match odds market will attract millions of pounds in bets, with the main bookmakers competing for business. Some of the biggest asian/us bookies offer "juice" as low as 1% (or even 0.5%) to their highest staking punters.
High turnover - If an event is occurring very often (eg, horse races on a saturday) the bookies can afford to offer a lower vig.
Confidence - if you can calculate the exact odds of an event occurring (eg, which team will win the toss) then you can offer odds knowing a punter with inside information can't get an edge. Consequently you can offer a lower vig. If it's a first goalscorer market, anyone with inside info on the teams (and anyone with a twitter account, if the teams/strategy is leaked) potentially has an edge on the bookie. eg, the odds on a striker who starts on the bench being FGS goes down considerably.
So politics odds tend to have a higher overround because;
A) Historically elections haven't been big betting events (the Indyref changed this, and GE2015 looks set to break all records)
B ) Only a few bookmakers offer odds, and those odds are usually compiled by non-specialist traders. Again, lots more bookies are getting involved in the GE, and this will hopefully lead to lower overrounds. I suspect most won't make a profit (although they may not care, if they get new punters from the publicity of offering odds that get printed in the papers)
C) elections don't happen very often.
D) There's a lot of inside polling/on-the-ground information that leave bookies vulnerable to punters having an edge.
As a side note – I suspect the most successful bookmakers in the future will be the ones with the best personalisation models to maximise profit from each customer. We're in the early days of this transition - but I can’t see the classic chalk board with static odds and a set overround available to all customers for whatever stakes bookmaker model of business being around for much longer.
I haven't read mike's book, but probably worth picking up a copy if you want to get your head around this sort of stuff.
Printed newspapers are declining at fast but variable rates.
Dailies:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_newspapers_in_the_United_Kingdom_by_circulation#Circulations_2010_to_present
Sundays:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_newspapers_in_the_United_Kingdom_by_circulation#Circulation_since_2010
The biggest story there is probably how pitiful is the circulation of The Independent.