Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Labour are currently the largest recipients of tactical vot
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Labour are currently the largest recipients of tactical voting
As part of this month’s Ipsos-Mori political monitor found that 22% of Lab voters saying they do so to keep another party out, rather than because the party represents their views. For the Tories the figure is 10%, for UKIP it is 9%and the Liberal Democrat’s it is 7%.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Well he should know...
http://ponyonthetories.blogspot.co.uk/
Charles said:
» show previous quotes
Out of interest, why do they structure it like that? I'd have thought that a standard shift pattern would make more sense, surely? Obviously there'd need to be some flex because you're not going to clock off in the middle of fighting a fire, but it does appear that you have a fairly odd system in place.
Because it cuts the number of staff required by 40%, saving a fortune in wages and pension contributions. There is an initial capital outlay to upgrade station facilities, but that gets classed as investment. The system is called Day Crewing Plus, and a lot of brigades are bringing it in.
From 08:00 to 20:00, it's a normal workday, but outside those times, you're on duty, but not actively doing any work related stuff-no paperwork, no computer work, no equipment testing, lectures or training. You can retire to your room, and watch TV, or cook in the communal kitchen. Attending incidents during downtime adds the accrued hours onto the end of your downtime. You can't leave the station, but family can visit and even stay the night, but, to be honest, once the novelty has worn off, not many do.
It's paid at a bonus of 27%, to account for the longer hours.
Good on you mate, just so long as you still post on here though?
I hope he hasn't disappeared.
I hope so as well. We all make typo's and mistakes and apart from the jihadist pedants, most of us let it go with perhaps a light comment at worst.
Any PBers in the North London area who are free on the evening of Wednesday 25th Feb might like to come along to this special screening of the film 'Cartoonists - Footsoldiers of Democracy', followed by a discussion with special guests Martha Richler (Marf of this parish), David Aaronovitch (The Times) and Jodie Ginsberg (Index of Censorship).
http://us2.campaign-archive2.com/?u=312cf720117fac1051bd1afe6&id=1819779b0b&e=3a59b60940
Tickets are £10 (25% discount for UKJF members, or 50% to anybody joining me as part of Marf's armed guard.)
I understand bullet-proof vests will be available to members of the audience, on request. Catering by Mossad.
Could be a lively nite.
PtP
Also the Conservative Catherine Fletcher in Ellesmere Port?
And was Stuart Penketh who stood there last time the person of the same name who used to post here? If so anyone know why he was replaced as Conservative candidate this time?
20-25 LD seats vs 2-5 UKIP seats.
On the other hand, the slight shreds in favour of the Tories are that the Labour incumbent is stepping down (though I don't think he was especially popular or had much of a personal vote) and also the swing against them last time was probably kept lower than it should've been because the Labour government had saved the Vauxhall plant. Still doubt it will be enough for the Tories to do it though.
For all Tory criticisms of the Lib Dems, the coalition has worked pretty well.
Thanks for that. From what I hear Katherine is very nice so if she comes knocking it'll be worth spending a few minutes listening. she apparently knew nothing of politics just a few years ago but decided she wanted to make a difference and looked at the parties and decided she'd become a Conservative despite all her family being Labour
That should be very good. I intended to go to the see some of the films in the Jewish Film festival which I think was at the end of last year but I wasn't around. Enjoy it. I'd go but I'm not able to go on that date. I'm going to try to get to see it though. Can we have a review when you've seen it
These evenings are generally good value. Looking forward to it.
Surprised at Dave. He normally strikes the right tone and is not so easily rattled.
HSBC apologised because there is clear evidence they were encouraging tax evasion.
But, some will say, only one person was found guilty in the UK, therefore it was very limited, and if more people were breaking the law name them!
Unfortunately, even if you have cast iron evidence that someone had broken the law, you would be sued if you mentioned their name,
As long as they agree on a settlement, they are granted immunity from prosecution, and without a court case there can be no guilt.
Probably easier to write it off as a left wing conspiracy though, it saves thinking.
MossadNews @MossadNews 4m4 minutes ago
BREAKING NEWS: Iraqi Troops In Anbar Province Could ‘Collapse Within Hours’ CNN reporting…..... http://fb.me/2nkltCiwW
Agence France-Presse @AFP 10m10 minutes ago
#BREAKING Police raid Internet cafe in vast Copenhagen operation after attacks: media
I've already posted my gut feeling that there is a real chance that Hillary may not even run. It is more of a feeling than anything supported by evidence. This story is evidence that the negative research on her is well under way and no doubt various anti-Clinton and GOP groups have been accumulating it for a while. If this sort of thing is true and starts getting traction, I can't really see Hillary running unless she divorces and condemns Bill.
Just something to consider for those betting on the 2016 primaries and presidential.
The no top down reorganisation of the NHS
The elimination of the deficit
The we are reducing debt
The net immigration will be down to....
Oh hang on was that even EIC
The dead man, as you would expect, was known to Danish authorities. It looks, however, like the police have stumbled on a potential intelligence haul.
PS I still can't quite grasp that Dan Ackroyd is the same person in The Blues Brothers...
EDIT WOW
The party by party breakdowns would be interesting, if YouGov has them...
There was plenty of evidence, and none of it would have ever come to light had the journalists not exposed it to the world.
The tax office held the information, and decided what was to be done with it, and apparently it had no interest in law breakers being punished in the courts, or indeed named.
I am going to pretend Ghostbusters 3 does not exist:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-2928976/Kristen-Wiig-Melissa-McCarthy-Kate-McKinnon-Leslie-Jones-lead-Ghostbusters-girl-reboot.html
http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/comment/
Also the infamous whistleblower email is - from what I have heard - less than it seems. Saying that here is a list of people who have Swiss bank accounts means nothing because it is perfectly legal to have bank accounts in foreign countries. What would have been more interesting is if he had said that he had proof that those people had not declared the interest - if any (and remember a lot of foreign accounts don't pay interest) - or that the capital in those accounts had not been declared. But he couldn't know that because an IT person in HSBC would not have the information about what declarations to the tax authorities those persons would have made.
That said, HMRC should have made inquiries. I'm willing to bet that the email was too vague for anyone at that time to really investigate, there was probably an over- stretched investigative team with other priorities, there was concern about obtaining possibly stolen information, which might well be difficult if not impossible to use and in 2008 and onwards there was near panic within the Treasury and HMRC and the BoE and the FSA at the possible collapse of our financial system. A few hundred people with Swiss bank accounts was really neither here nor there during that time.
And don't be so sanguine about the strength of the banking system now either if we get some Grexit c*ck up.
It is a good opening negotiating position
Exact opposite of the DUP's position (Cash for votes) and different again to the SNP/PC - favouring Labour s&c, no deal with the Conservatives.
The leadership who are cabinet ministers will have differing views.
I voted Lib Dem in York Outer in 2010.
Even though I placed bets on the Conservatives winning the seat.
This time it is hard to see a tactical vote worth pursuing in this seat.
.
7% of current LD voters don't know why they want to vote LD.
So, what you appear to be saying is that until the tax office received the documents, no one knew there was any form of wrong doing going on?
But, it happened under Labours watch, so they are responsible according to some of the present government??
Alas, for Scotland. They should've at least drawn and really should've won. There were a few missed opportunities, but it was the poor decision-making (throwing away penalties seeking glorious tries) which cost them.
Heard rumblings elsewhere about the referee. Comes to something when Jonathan Davies (in commentary) is suggesting Wales should've had a yellow card.
Labour probably has the oldest parliamentary group, so the natural death rate of their MP's is higher than in other parties, we already had 14 Labour by-elections in this parliament.
No, what irks me is that if you are wealthy, you don't commit a crime, you make an error of judgement.
If you are poor or powerless, then you need no defence or trial, you are obviously guilty.
I kept saying on here, and to anyone else who would listen, it was an illusion. As Conservative voters in many Greater York council seats voted Lib dem to keep Labour out, and from running the council.
I also made money in 2010 on Harrogate returning blue from yellow.
HYUFD
Agreed but it will not be a formal coalition.
Confidence and supply is the only option.
By isolating the SNP, national politics gets a preference.
To put it simply some of the left votes SNP because they think that the SNP cater to their interests in scotland and can keep a Labour government in power nationally, if you sever the possibility of the SNP propping Labour then the voter behavior changes to voting Labour directly in a national election.
Canada style (NDP-BQ in 2011).
Has your Ukip webmaster seen the proposals?
Odd, since the review hasn't even taken place?
But it won't happen. The LD have tasted ministerial salaries and cars and that bell cannot be unrung. They will never turn those down in favour of a single principle again (not that they ever had any).
However the Act can be abolished.
Honestly conflicted for 2015 - My priority is to keep Labour out and this is compounded by my feeling a debt to Sir Bob for getting stuck in to help my family with a problem we had with Essex CC - unlike certain others I could mention.
But if the numbers work the lib's might prop up a weak Labour government (and I would not like that)......
This is the result from 2010
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colchester_(UK_Parliament_constituency)#Elections_in_the_2010s
this is the Wiki entry on Sir Bob
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Russell_(British_politician)
I had forgotten about the expenses issue.
He looks safe though?
LD 36, CON 22, UKIP 18, LAB 17.
Looks safe.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/northernireland/11414130/Gerry-Adams-trampolines-naked-with-his-dog.html
The House of Commons will degenerate into the US Congress, we can have a government which can't pass legislation, like in America.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0-4FQAov2xI
HMRC were put on notice in 2008 that there might have been something worth looking at. In my professional capacity I deal with whistleblowing allegations - often anonymous, often very vague indeed and it is one hell of a job to get to the bottom of them - but I and my team are very focused on them. I suspect that whoever received the email was not so focused and this sort of investigation was probably not a priority.
HMRC can certainly be criticised for not putting in place proper investigative procedures - assuming that there weren't any or, possibly, the investigation was not done adequately (hard to tell) - and Ministers and those at the top can be criticised for the priorities they imposed on HMRC and also for determining what level of resources they obtained. There was plenty of criticism around at the time that the merger between the Inland Revenue and Customs & Excise had not worked well and that they lost a lot of their most experienced and talented investigators. I know because I hired one myself!
But - and this is a big but - the priority was almost certainly bringing in money (as much as possible) and it is hard to criticise HMRC for that.
The real criticism to be made of Labour Ministers at the time was (a) how they managed HMRC and its priorities; and (b) more widely that they did not take any sort of effective steps to clamp down on tax evasion etc or to build the sort of relationships with foreign authorities (regulators etc) which might have led to better co-operation to stop the sort of regulatory/legal arbitrage some financial institutions indulged in.
OK - I will probably go to this. It's very close to me. And it sounds interesting. Thank you.
In theory if Milliband can't form a majority then Cameron stays as PM even if he doesn't have a majority leading a government which can't pass legislation, however if Milliband does have a majority and becomes PM then he can stay as PM even if he loses it and if he loses a no confidence vote then after 2 weeks something happens but parliament is dissolved with a 2/3 vote or in a case of being totally confused right now with this silly Act.
I got confused a bit.
http://electionforecast.co.uk/
EICIPM (2.28 BETFAIR)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hf67SPzC3tQ
Bob's rock solid.
I've opted to vote in London this time round, but if I were back in Colchester I'd think nothing of voting for "Sir" Bob. Plenty of pointing at potholes...
It has all the provisions of being as dysfunctional as a typical american government.
Well, there appears to have been nothing wrong with the HMRC in 2011, indeed, these lines prove the point
"The report is based on partial information, inaccurate opinion and some misunderstanding of facts," the spokesman said.
"The idea Dave Hartnett cuts a large tax bill in return for a glass of wine and a cheese sandwich is just plain nonsense.
"If he was interested in feathering his nest he would have accepted one of the many highly lucrative offers of work he regularly receives from the private sector," the spokesman added."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-16253205
Hartnett? I am sure I have heard that name recently, I wonder how he is getting on these days?
In response to your second question, I assume in the event of a hung parliament Cameron would get first chance to form a government and stay PM for a short while as Brown did, however if Miliband leads the largest party and the other parties do not prop up Cameron it is he who will end up going to the Palace