Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Lord Ashcroft’s 160+ seat polls are already making it a ve

2

Comments

  • nigel4englandnigel4england Posts: 4,800

    Am on Lewis Baker to score anytime for the MK Dons at 9/2 with bet365

    I shall hopefully be attending the real Wimbledon FCs crunch match against Preston today.

    I must say it was very obliging of my local club to move grounds to somewhere near me just after I evacuated from Streatham after nearly forty years to come to Mid Beds.
    Good for you!

    Baker is 19 and really highly rated by Chelsea, he is two footed and a goalscoring midfielder, I can see him being a Lampard type player of the future. He had a couple of games for Wednesday on loan that didn't work out but scored a great goal for the Dons the other night.

    A quality player in the making, some of the bookies have cottoned on with odds of 3.3 and 3.8 but bet365 have him at 5.5 which looks value to me.
  • PongPong Posts: 4,693

    Charles said:

    Charles said:



    Thought for the day. Did Cameron and Gideon agree to the Scottish referendum, precisely because one effect of it might well be to electorally destroy Labour north of the border?

    Question for the day: are you merely discourteous, or do you have another reason for wishing to continually draw attention to George Osborne's (inaccurately) alleged Jewish heritage?
    What the hell are you on about? Osborne is not Jewish and I rather doubt he is as thin skinned as you seem to be about his name. If he is then Im surprised he has got so far as he has in public life.

    Would you prefer me to refer to him as Gidiot which is what most people I know refer to him as?

    If you must know people I know refer to him as Gideon or -ot as a reference to class and perceived upper elite out of touchness with the reality of most peoples lives. Its nor exactly a common name in council estates and comprehensive schools is it?

    Nonetheless, probably better to be known as Gideon than Dwayne Dibbley as our poor old opposition was dubbed in the Tory press years ago. In any case, if Wikipedia is to believed he is still actually called Gideon, he added the name George not replaced

    So it's just discourtesy then. Thank goodness for small mercies.

    In my view, if someone explicitly decides that he wants to be called X rather than Y then it's only polite to use his given name

    Now come on, politicians are fair game on this sort of thing. I call Farage Nargle Fargle even though I'm planning to vote UKIP. I obviously wouldn't refer to him as Gideon in a more formal setting unless I knew him well enough to wind him up intentionally (which I obviously don't)

    The thing is, if you say Gideon, everyone immediately knows who you mean as there isn't anyone else in public life with the name Gideon (reputidated or otherwise).



    Geoffrey

    *snigger*
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    BREAKING WIND NEWS **** BREAKING WIND NEWS **** BREAKING WIND NEWS ****

    The breaking news is that WIND is reporting to the JNN the contents of the latest ARSE with added APLOMB 2015 General Election and "JackW Dozen" Projections. (Changes From 3rd March Projection) :

    Con 310 (+4) .. Lab 250 (-6) .. LibDem 32 (-2) .. SNP 32 (+4) .. PC 2 .. NI 18 .. UKIP 3 .. Respect 1 .. Green 1 .. Ind 0 .. Speaker 1

    Conservatives 16 seats short of a majority
    ......................................................................................

    "JackW Dozen" - 13 seats that will shape the General Election result :

    Bury North - Likely Con Hold
    Pudsey - Likely Con Hold
    Broxtowe - TCTC from Likely Lab Gain
    Warwickshire North - Likely Lab Gain
    Cambridge - LibDem Hold
    Ipswich - Likely Con Hold
    Watford - Likely LibDem Gain
    Croydon Central - Con Hold
    Enfield North - TCTC
    Cornwall North - TCTC from Likely LibDem Hold
    Great Yarmouth - Con Hold
    Vale of Glamorgan - Con Hold
    Ochil and South Perthshire - SNP Gain from Likely SNP Gain

    Changes From 3 Mar - Broxtowe moves from Likely Lab Gain to TCTC. Cornwall North moves from Likely LibDem Hold to TCTC. Ochil & South Perthshire moves from Likely SNP Gain to SNP Gain.

    TCTC - Too Close To Call - Less than 500 votes
    Likely Hold/Gain - 500 - 2500 votes
    Gain/Hold - Over 2500
    .......................................................................................

    ARSE is sponsored by Auchentennach Fine Pies (Est 1745)

    WIND - Whimsical Independent News Division
    JNN - Jacobite News Network
    ARSE - Anonymous Random Selection of Electors
    APLOMB - Auchentennach Pies Leading Outsales Mainland Britain
  • anotherDaveanotherDave Posts: 6,746
    Indigo said:



    "criticised in some quarters" is classic Sir Humphrey speak.

    The BES criticised it:

    "Constituency polls by Lord Ashcroft suggest that prompting people to think about the candidates in their constituency when asking people whom they will vote for results in much more Liberal Democrat voting in Liberal Democrat seats. But there is a danger that such prompting over-states incumbency advantage."

    http://www.britishelectionstudy.com/bes-resources/what-the-bes-suggests-about-constituency-variation-in-party-performance-by-stephen-fisher-university-of-oxford/

    The Ashcroft polls ask the same thing, in two different ways. When the answers differ how can you pick one over another?
  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983

    Neil said:

    These associate nations clogging up the world cup with matches noone wants to watch...

    Off to change my pants now.

    I'm a bit disappointed that the Afghans haven't done better, at one point they were definitely rising stars but seem to have plateaued a bit since finding life at the top a bit harder.

    There must be a case for granting Ireland Test status, especially as England likes to help out by poaching your show ponies and finding out they are not as good as they are cracked up to be.

    We're not ready for test status.

    Just make the other sides play us and the likes of Afghanistan more regularly. It's not a big ask. We only ever play Zimbabwe at World Cups these days.

  • Paul_Mid_BedsPaul_Mid_Beds Posts: 1,409
    Crap Jokes on the radio, broadcast to Bedfordshire Herts and Bucks by BBC 3 Counties Radio this morning.

    Mary had a little lamb,
    Her Father shot it dead,
    After that she took it to school,
    Between two bits of bread.

    Mary had a little lamb,
    She tied it to a pylon,
    10,000 volts went up its **m,
    And Turned its Wool to Nylon.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,568

    Charles said:

    Charles said:



    Thought for the day. Did Cameron and Gideon agree to the Scottish referendum, precisely because one effect of it might well be to electorally destroy Labour north of the border?

    Question for the day: are you merely discourteous, or do you have another reason for wishing to continually draw attention to George Osborne's (inaccurately) alleged Jewish heritage?
    What the hell are you on about? Osborne is not Jewish and I rather doubt he is as thin skinned as you seem to be about his name. If he is then Im surprised he has got so far as he has in public life.

    Would you prefer me to refer to him as Gidiot which is what most people I know refer to him as?

    If you must know people I know refer to him as Gideon or -ot as a reference to class and perceived upper elite out of touchness with the reality of most peoples lives. Its nor exactly a common name in council estates and comprehensive schools is it?

    Nonetheless, probably better to be known as Gideon than Dwayne Dibbley as our poor old opposition was dubbed in the Tory press years ago. In any case, if Wikipedia is to believed he is still actually called Gideon, he added the name George not replaced

    So it's just discourtesy then. Thank goodness for small mercies.

    In my view, if someone explicitly decides that he wants to be called X rather than Y then it's only polite to use his given name

    Now come on, politicians are fair game on this sort of thing. I call refer tp Farage as Nargle Fargle even though I'm planning to vote UKIP. I obviously wouldn't refer to him as Gideon in a more formal setting unless I knew him well enough to wind him up intentionally (which I obviously don't).

    Its when such names are obviously abusive or refer to a disability that it is beyond the pale (e.g.: if someone came up with a mocking name for Gordon Brown or for example published photos of him with a pirates eye mask based upon his loss of one eye).

    The thing is, if you say Gideon, everyone immediately knows who you mean as there isn't anyone else in public life with the name Gideon (reputidated or otherwise).



    Doubt it, I don't get half the nicknames used here until someone explains them. Renaming people is childish.

    In fact, I agree with Chuck.

  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    I have now lined up Ashcroft polling with the results of SMAPS, you can see it here:

    https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/12NKEIQU2XLtS1xEjnDh15ylV1oD2RJxWwe_99tN85eE/edit?usp=sharing

    It's not 1-to-1, basically the heaviest Yes areas haven't polled as strong SNP as a straight YES=SNP would have you conclude but it's a really very strong correlation.
  • frpenkridgefrpenkridge Posts: 670
    Some of my best friends are not Jews but have funny names.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    Alistair said:


    Frankly any VI poll that doesn't use IndyRef recall to weight is a touch suspect in my view.

    How do you weight by political party for Indyref recall?

    Beyond the Tories, and to a lesser extent, the SNP, its fraught with problems.
  • Paul_Mid_BedsPaul_Mid_Beds Posts: 1,409
    RobD said:


    Everyone immediately knows? I'm calling BS on that one.

    Alright, amongst those who have any interest in politics, everybody already knows.
  • JohnLilburneJohnLilburne Posts: 6,312

    Indigo said:



    "criticised in some quarters" is classic Sir Humphrey speak.

    The BES criticised it:

    "Constituency polls by Lord Ashcroft suggest that prompting people to think about the candidates in their constituency when asking people whom they will vote for results in much more Liberal Democrat voting in Liberal Democrat seats. But there is a danger that such prompting over-states incumbency advantage."

    http://www.britishelectionstudy.com/bes-resources/what-the-bes-suggests-about-constituency-variation-in-party-performance-by-stephen-fisher-university-of-oxford/

    The Ashcroft polls ask the same thing, in two different ways. When the answers differ how can you pick one over another?
    I guess you need to do a poll a day or so before a real election and see if the results differ. Has anyone done this? Of course it might not make that much difference that close to an election as the publicity will mean people are more aware of who the candidates are.

  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,386
    JackW said:

    BREAKING WIND NEWS **** BREAKING WIND NEWS **** BREAKING WIND NEWS ****

    The breaking news is that WIND is reporting to the JNN the contents of the latest ARSE with added APLOMB 2015 General Election and "JackW Dozen" Projections. (Changes From 3rd March Projection) :

    Con 310 (+4) .. Lab 250 (-6) .. LibDem 32 (-2) .. SNP 32 (+4) .. PC 2 .. NI 18 .. UKIP 3 .. Respect 1 .. Green 1 .. Ind 0 .. Speaker 1

    Conservatives 16 seats short of a majority
    ......................................................................................

    "JackW Dozen" - 13 seats that will shape the General Election result :

    Bury North - Likely Con Hold
    Pudsey - Likely Con Hold
    Broxtowe - TCTC from Likely Lab Gain
    Warwickshire North - Likely Lab Gain
    Cambridge - LibDem Hold
    Ipswich - Likely Con Hold
    Watford - Likely LibDem Gain
    Croydon Central - Con Hold
    Enfield North - TCTC
    Cornwall North - TCTC from Likely LibDem Hold
    Great Yarmouth - Con Hold
    Vale of Glamorgan - Con Hold
    Ochil and South Perthshire - SNP Gain from Likely SNP Gain

    Changes From 3 Mar - Broxtowe moves from Likely Lab Gain to TCTC. Cornwall North moves from Likely LibDem Hold to TCTC. Ochil & South Perthshire moves from Likely SNP Gain to SNP Gain.

    TCTC - Too Close To Call - Less than 500 votes
    Likely Hold/Gain - 500 - 2500 votes
    Gain/Hold - Over 2500
    .......................................................................................

    ARSE is sponsored by Auchentennach Fine Pies (Est 1745)

    WIND - Whimsical Independent News Division
    JNN - Jacobite News Network
    ARSE - Anonymous Random Selection of Electors
    APLOMB - Auchentennach Pies Leading Outsales Mainland Britain

    I was expecting Con to go backwards with ARSE after cowardly Cam's ducking and diving Re. the debates. :(

  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983

    Charles said:

    Charles said:



    Thought for the day. Did Cameron and Gideon agree to the Scottish referendum, precisely because one effect of it might well be to electorally destroy Labour north of the border?

    Question for the day: are you merely discourteous, or do you have another reason for wishing to continually draw attention to George Osborne's (inaccurately) alleged Jewish heritage?
    What the hell are you on about? Osborne is not Jewish and I rather doubt he is as thin skinned as you seem to be about his name. If he is then Im surprised he has got so far as he has in public life.

    Would you prefer me to refer to him as Gidiot which is what most people I know refer to him as?

    If you must know people I know refer to him as Gideon or -ot as a reference to class and perceived upper elite out of touchness with the reality of most peoples lives. Its nor exactly a common name in council estates and comprehensive schools is it?

    Nonetheless, probably better to be known as Gideon than Dwayne Dibbley as our poor old opposition was dubbed in the Tory press years ago. In any case, if Wikipedia is to believed he is still actually called Gideon, he added the name George not replaced

    So it's just discourtesy then. Thank goodness for small mercies.

    In my view, if someone explicitly decides that he wants to be called X rather than Y then it's only polite to use his given name

    Now come on, politicians are fair game on this sort of thing. I call refer tp Farage as Nargle Fargle even though I'm planning to vote UKIP. I obviously wouldn't refer to him as Gideon in a more formal setting unless I knew him well enough to wind him up intentionally (which I obviously don't).

    Its when such names are obviously abusive or refer to a disability that it is beyond the pale (e.g.: if someone came up with a mocking name for Gordon Brown or for example published photos of him with a pirates eye mask based upon his loss of one eye).

    The thing is, if you say Gideon, everyone immediately knows who you mean as there isn't anyone else in public life with the name Gideon (reputidated or otherwise).



    Doubt it, I don't get half the nicknames used here until someone explains them. Renaming people is childish.
    Remember wage slave?!

    *shudders*
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216

    Indigo said:



    "criticised in some quarters" is classic Sir Humphrey speak.

    The BES criticised it:
    No, Stephen Fisher criticised it.

    He also wrote:

    So the remainder of the analysis in this paper will focus on variation within England and Wales.

    Which may be why Mr Kelly was coy about 'certain quarters'.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    GIN1138 said:

    JackW said:

    BREAKING WIND NEWS **** BREAKING WIND NEWS **** BREAKING WIND NEWS ****

    The breaking news is that WIND is reporting to the JNN the contents of the latest ARSE with added APLOMB 2015 General Election and "JackW Dozen" Projections. (Changes From 3rd March Projection) :

    Con 310 (+4) .. Lab 250 (-6) .. LibDem 32 (-2) .. SNP 32 (+4) .. PC 2 .. NI 18 .. UKIP 3 .. Respect 1 .. Green 1 .. Ind 0 .. Speaker 1

    Conservatives 16 seats short of a majority
    ......................................................................................

    "JackW Dozen" - 13 seats that will shape the General Election result :

    Bury North - Likely Con Hold
    Pudsey - Likely Con Hold
    Broxtowe - TCTC from Likely Lab Gain
    Warwickshire North - Likely Lab Gain
    Cambridge - LibDem Hold
    Ipswich - Likely Con Hold
    Watford - Likely LibDem Gain
    Croydon Central - Con Hold
    Enfield North - TCTC
    Cornwall North - TCTC from Likely LibDem Hold
    Great Yarmouth - Con Hold
    Vale of Glamorgan - Con Hold
    Ochil and South Perthshire - SNP Gain from Likely SNP Gain

    Changes From 3 Mar - Broxtowe moves from Likely Lab Gain to TCTC. Cornwall North moves from Likely LibDem Hold to TCTC. Ochil & South Perthshire moves from Likely SNP Gain to SNP Gain.

    TCTC - Too Close To Call - Less than 500 votes
    Likely Hold/Gain - 500 - 2500 votes
    Gain/Hold - Over 2500
    .......................................................................................

    ARSE is sponsored by Auchentennach Fine Pies (Est 1745)

    WIND - Whimsical Independent News Division
    JNN - Jacobite News Network
    ARSE - Anonymous Random Selection of Electors
    APLOMB - Auchentennach Pies Leading Outsales Mainland Britain

    I was expecting Con to go backwards with ARSE after cowardly Cam's ducking and diving Re. the debates. :(

    Those are the numbers regardless of my personal dismay at the attitude of the PM.

  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670

    Alistair said:


    Frankly any VI poll that doesn't use IndyRef recall to weight is a touch suspect in my view.

    How do you weight by political party for Indyref recall?

    Beyond the Tories, and to a lesser extent, the SNP, its fraught with problems.
    If you produce a Scottish VI poll that shows 70% of the population voted Yes then that's just wrong.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,963
    Mr. W, must say I'd be surprised if the Conservatives do that well, or Labour/SNP quite so badly.

    Still, it would at least offer the country the possibility of sound governance.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    Alistair said:

    Alistair said:


    Frankly any VI poll that doesn't use IndyRef recall to weight is a touch suspect in my view.

    How do you weight by political party for Indyref recall?

    Beyond the Tories, and to a lesser extent, the SNP, its fraught with problems.
    If you produce a Scottish VI poll that shows 70% of the population voted Yes then that's just wrong.
    Isn't that a poll that is likely overstating SNP support?
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    I regard it as basic manners to address people by their preferred name or abbreviation, be that Gordon, George, Jack or Tim. Even I, however, find (Sir) Simon Jenkins' decision to take a knighthood but to ask not to be addressed by it to be bloody ridiculous.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,386
    edited March 2015
    Just noticed ARSE predicting Labour to have fewer seats in 2015 than they had in 2010!!!

    And even NPEXMP has gone TCTC.

    That's actually a VERY ugly ARSE for Lab.

  • IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966

    Indigo said:



    "criticised in some quarters" is classic Sir Humphrey speak.

    The BES criticised it:

    "Constituency polls by Lord Ashcroft suggest that prompting people to think about the candidates in their constituency when asking people whom they will vote for results in much more Liberal Democrat voting in Liberal Democrat seats. But there is a danger that such prompting over-states incumbency advantage."

    http://www.britishelectionstudy.com/bes-resources/what-the-bes-suggests-about-constituency-variation-in-party-performance-by-stephen-fisher-university-of-oxford/

    The Ashcroft polls ask the same thing, in two different ways. When the answers differ how can you pick one over another?
    He should ask half his sample one question and half the other and see if there is any statistically significant difference in the level of response from each. AB Testing for the win ;)
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    I'd be most surprised if the SNP end up with as few as 32 seats.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    antifrank said:

    I'd be most surprised if the SNP end up with as few as 32 seats.

    Money wise I'd also be upset to go along with suprised.
  • YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 4,382
    JackW.

    His attitude seems correct to me, he is representing the Conservative Party not the government in any proposed debate.
    Therefore it is their interests he considers.
    As you can see on here, most of his supporters agree with his decisions.
    In that, he does want the debates to go ahead in the short 3 week campaign.

    If he wins a majority, as you are nearly suggesting, he should bring this position in to law for future general elections.
  • calumcalum Posts: 3,046
    malcolmg said:

    Carnyx said:

    JPJ2 said:

    Per the article:

    "In Scotland there’s increasing talk of pro-unionist tactical voting and you can bet that the parties seen to be best placed to stop the SNP will go to great lengths to highlight Ashcroft numbers to demonstrate their case. "

    Mundell is in deep trouble now after the Ashcroft poll showing him neck and neck with the SNP. I expect more anti-Tory voting for the SNP than anti-SNP voting for the Tories.

    Interestingly that does not necessarily mean that the Tories will be completely wiped out in Scotland, though it probably does. I remember that in 2005 GE they lost there only seat but replaced it with Mundell.

    Of course, the traditional Scottish GE voting pattern was one that included a great deal of anti-Tory tactical voting from which Labour benefited, to the extent that there were no Tory MPs at one fairly recent point IIRC.

    Indeed, the Ashcroft polling shows that the SNP are plainly breaking through the plausibility barrier, and a vote for the SNP is much less likely to be seen as risking being wasted. So the UKGE voting pattern is shifting far more to the underlying one which is seen at Holyrood.

    Neither is a particularly original observation but they do need to be remembered in the current discussion, as indeed you imply.

    There is also the question of the ethics and morality of the Unionist parties refighting a general election as if it were indyref, at the same time as trying to claim that Scottish MPs should not be allowed to have their full role in the Parliament of the UK. That sort of thinking will destroy the UK very rapidly without the pro-independence side having to do anything more than spectate while sitting happily on their thumbs.

    Tories = Dodo's and Labour = Dinosaur's, both will soon be extinct instead of just one of them.
    Don't forget the LibDems = Mammoth.
  • MP_SEMP_SE Posts: 3,642
    Does Dave still want people to call him Dave or is he now a David?
  • MarkHopkinsMarkHopkins Posts: 5,584
    calum said:

    malcolmg said:

    Carnyx said:

    JPJ2 said:

    Per the article:

    "In Scotland there’s increasing talk of pro-unionist tactical voting and you can bet that the parties seen to be best placed to stop the SNP will go to great lengths to highlight Ashcroft numbers to demonstrate their case. "

    Mundell is in deep trouble now after the Ashcroft poll showing him neck and neck with the SNP. I expect more anti-Tory voting for the SNP than anti-SNP voting for the Tories.

    Interestingly that does not necessarily mean that the Tories will be completely wiped out in Scotland, though it probably does. I remember that in 2005 GE they lost there only seat but replaced it with Mundell.

    Of course, the traditional Scottish GE voting pattern was one that included a great deal of anti-Tory tactical voting from which Labour benefited, to the extent that there were no Tory MPs at one fairly recent point IIRC.

    Indeed, the Ashcroft polling shows that the SNP are plainly breaking through the plausibility barrier, and a vote for the SNP is much less likely to be seen as risking being wasted. So the UKGE voting pattern is shifting far more to the underlying one which is seen at Holyrood.

    Neither is a particularly original observation but they do need to be remembered in the current discussion, as indeed you imply.

    There is also the question of the ethics and morality of the Unionist parties refighting a general election as if it were indyref, at the same time as trying to claim that Scottish MPs should not be allowed to have their full role in the Parliament of the UK. That sort of thinking will destroy the UK very rapidly without the pro-independence side having to do anything more than spectate while sitting happily on their thumbs.

    Tories = Dodo's and Labour = Dinosaur's, both will soon be extinct instead of just one of them.
    Don't forget the LibDems = Mammoth.

    Does that make the SNP an insect stuck in a piece of amber?

  • IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966
    Yorkcity said:

    If he wins a majority, as you are nearly suggesting, he should bring this position in to law for future general elections.

    If he wins a majority the BBC might come to rue their "robust" stance, especially with their charter soon up for renewal, they can probably also forget about the £5 License Tax wheeze.

  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    antifrank said:

    I'd be most surprised if the SNP end up with as few as 32 seats.

    @JackW

    I too would be surprised. How do the remaining Scottish seats fall? 27 unaccounted for, in particular how many LD or Tory?
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787

    Mr. W, must say I'd be surprised if the Conservatives do that well, or Labour/SNP quite so badly.

    Still, it would at least offer the country the possibility of sound governance.

    The fact is this ARSE has the largest number of seats in the tight marginal range in this round of ARSE projections.

    A further small swing to Con/Lab/SNP will see the numbers move quite significantly in that direction. We are in for an exciting night !!

  • anotherDaveanotherDave Posts: 6,746
    There was a 'wonks talking about the election' event the other day.

    http://www.phm.org.uk/whatson/public-opinion-the-2015-election/

    "Peter Kellner: I think that the party with the more votes will be the largest in parliament"

    "Peter Kellner: we may revert to a 2 party system again eventually. But I simply don't know who those 2 parties will be"

    "I think the SNP vote will hold up says @ProfJaneGreen . Only a few weeks to go till polling day after all."

    https://twitter.com/BESResearch
  • DairDair Posts: 6,108
    JackW said:

    Mr. W, must say I'd be surprised if the Conservatives do that well, or Labour/SNP quite so badly.

    Still, it would at least offer the country the possibility of sound governance.

    The fact is this ARSE has the largest number of seats in the tight marginal range in this round of ARSE projections.

    A further small swing to Con/Lab/SNP will see the numbers move quite significantly in that direction. We are in for an exciting night !!

    Definately looks low for the SNP. Maybe there's something brewing in your ARSE but it certainly doesn't smell right at the moment.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    antifrank said:

    I'd be most surprised if the SNP end up with as few as 32 seats.

    antifrank said:

    I'd be most surprised if the SNP end up with as few as 32 seats.

    @JackW

    I too would be surprised. How do the remaining Scottish seats fall? 27 unaccounted for, in particular how many LD or Tory?
    Remember my ARSE is not a nowcast but a projection for May 7th based on a diverse set of economic, social, demographic and political criteria. Polls are weighted according to previous performance, sample size, closeness to election date and other factors

  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,963
    Mr. W, a fair point. The results will be very interesting.
  • anotherDaveanotherDave Posts: 6,746
    JackW said:

    antifrank said:

    I'd be most surprised if the SNP end up with as few as 32 seats.

    antifrank said:

    I'd be most surprised if the SNP end up with as few as 32 seats.

    @JackW

    I too would be surprised. How do the remaining Scottish seats fall? 27 unaccounted for, in particular how many LD or Tory?
    Remember my ARSE is not a nowcast but a projection for May 7th based on a diverse set of economic, social, demographic and political criteria. Polls are weighted according to previous performance, sample size, closeness to election date and other factors

    So these predictions have nothing to do with the journey taken by Kellog's All-Bran? I did think it was an odd thing to post about!
  • David_EvershedDavid_Evershed Posts: 6,506
    Meanwhile in Banbury, North Oxfordshire

    A gang which groomed vulnerable young girls at parties they had organised on social media has been convicted of a string of sex offences.

    The group, five men and a teenager, were found guilty of subjecting the girls to offences including rape.

    Attacks took place over five years on seven victims, aged 13 to 15, in cars, woods or at the defendants' homes.

    The verdicts were -

    Ahmed Hassan-Sule, 21, of Glyndebourne Gardens, Banbury, was found guilty of 13 counts of sexual activity with a child and one count of assault by penetration

    Kagiso Manase, 20, of Warwick Road, Banbury, was convicted of three counts of sexual activity with a child, two counts of inciting a child to engage in sexual activity and one count of sexual assault

    Takudzwa Hova, 21, of Broughton Road, Banbury, was found guilty of one count of rape, one count of sexual activity with a child and two counts of causing or inciting a child to engage in sexual activity. He was found not guilty of one count of rape

    Mohamed Saleh, 21, of Orchard Way, Banbury, was found guilty of two counts of sexual activity with a child. He was found not guilty of one count of sexual activity with a child and one count of rape

    Said Saleh, 20, of Orchard Way, Banbury, was convicted of one count of sexual activity with a child but was found not guilty of another count

    The 17-year-old, who cannot be identified for legal reasons, was found guilty of one count of rape



  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,928
    Would a Labour/SNP deal be so disastrous? It could be, but the SNP have a basic problem. They are at heart now an anti-Tory party as well as a pro-independence one. If they won't endorse the possibility of the Tories in power in any circumstances then they have very few bargaining chips to play as Nick Clegg has found out the other way around. Labour can continually point out that the SNP pulled the plug on Labour in 1979 which (prematurely) brought Mrs Thatcher to power. I can't believe it would be that difficult for Ed Miliband to differentiate himself from the coalition in a way that pleased most Scots. Would it be enough given the SNP give the impression that Scotland would get a big voice at Westminster if they have 50+ MPs?
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,712
    Mr Evershed, to be sentenced at a later date I take it. Oxfordhire Childrens Services found wanting again.
  • GrandioseGrandiose Posts: 2,323
    If you had to pick one bookie for constituency markets, who would it be?
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    On topic, one man has transformed the election campaign. We don't really know his motives and he may not feel the same way at the next election. So this abundance of constituency polls may be unique to this election cycle.
  • anotherDaveanotherDave Posts: 6,746
    "Martin Dobson, Greens. Liverpool Riverside is our top target in NW"

    http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/2015guide/liverpoolriverside/
  • MP_SEMP_SE Posts: 3,642

    Mr Evershed, to be sentenced at a later date I take it. Oxfordhire Childrens Services found wanting again.

    The children are far less important than the valuable enrichment the perpetrators have brought to Oxfordshire.
  • YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 4,382
    Indigo said:

    Yorkcity said:

    If he wins a majority, as you are nearly suggesting, he should bring this position in to law for future general elections.

    If he wins a majority the BBC might come to rue their "robust" stance, especially with their charter soon up for renewal, they can probably also forget about the £5 License Tax wheeze.

    He could, but I though this currently is a joint position from the BBC Sky channel 4 and ITV.

    If he does not want to debate, or the conservative party to be represented, that is his and you and the rest of the memberships decision.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,025
    I would also be surprised (and delighted) if the SNP only got 32 seats. They are clearly going to win the vast majority of the 11 Lib Dems seats, probably at least 8 of them. So the assumption underlying this calculation is that they are only going to win 18 off SLAB (assuming they don't take the Tory seat). That seems low to me.

    I do think that the SNP will fall back a bit from their current highs. I think the vote Labour to keep the tories out cannot have lost all its efficacy in 5 years. But the ground operation, number of activists and polling information from the Indy Ref has given the SNP a base the like of which they have never had before. I would expect them to take something around 40 at the moment with the risk being on the higher side.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 42,155

    RobD said:

    It's a blog about PB with some mentions of Scottish independence ;)
    One might suggest Kelly & co get a life.

    Yep, people on an obscure political blog commenting on people on another obscure political blog commenting on people on the first blog are definite high rollers in the life stakes.
  • anotherDaveanotherDave Posts: 6,746
    edited March 2015
    MP_SE said:

    Mr Evershed, to be sentenced at a later date I take it. Oxfordhire Childrens Services found wanting again.

    The children are far less important than the valuable enrichment the perpetrators have brought to Oxfordshire.
    The absence of consequences for the council and police staff involved in these
    areas is disappointing. Careers should be ending.
  • dugarbandierdugarbandier Posts: 2,596

    RobD said:

    It's a blog about PB with some mentions of Scottish independence ;)
    One might suggest Kelly & co get a life.

    Yep, people on an obscure political blog commenting on people on another obscure political blog commenting on people on the first blog are definite high rollers in the life stakes.
    happen you'll be on your way soon
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 42,155

    Labour can continually point out that the SNP pulled the plug on Labour in 1979 which (prematurely) brought Mrs Thatcher to power.

    That's one of SLab's recurring themes. It doesn't really seem to be working for them.
  • Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,039
    antifrank said:

    On topic, one man has transformed the election campaign. We don't really know his motives and he may not feel the same way at the next election. So this abundance of constituency polls may be unique to this election cycle.

    Quite. Alex Salmond has been extraordinary.
  • notmenotme Posts: 3,293

    MP_SE said:

    Mr Evershed, to be sentenced at a later date I take it. Oxfordhire Childrens Services found wanting again.

    The children are far less important than the valuable enrichment the perpetrators have brought to Oxfordshire.
    The absence of consequences for the Council and Police staff involved in these
    areas is disappointing. Careers should be ending.
    No, in any civilised society these people would have been lynched and left to hang from lamp posts.
  • Paul_Mid_BedsPaul_Mid_Beds Posts: 1,409

    Charles said:

    Charles said:



    Thought for the day. Did Cameron and Gideon agree to the Scottish referendum, precisely because one effect of it might well be to electorally destroy Labour north of the border?

    Question for the day: are you merely discourteous, or do you have another reason for wishing to continually draw attention to George Osborne's (inaccurately) alleged Jewish heritage?
    What the hell are you on about? Osborne is not Jewish and I rather doubt he is as thin skinned as you seem to be about his name. If he is then Im surprised he has got so far as he has in public life.

    Would you prefer me to refer to him as Gidiot which is what most people I know refer to him as?

    If you must know people I know refer to him as Gideon or -ot as a reference to class and perceived upper elite out of touchness with the reality of most peoples lives. Its nor exactly a common name in council estates and comprehensive schools is it?

    Nonetheless, probably better to be known as Gideon than Dwayne Dibbley as our poor old opposition was dubbed in the Tory press years ago. In any case, if Wikipedia is to believed he is still actually called Gideon, he added the name George not replaced

    So it's just discourtesy then. Thank goodness for small mercies.

    In my view, if someone explicitly decides that he wants to be called X rather than Y then it's only polite to use his given name

    Now come on, politicians are fair game on this sort of thing. I call refer tp Farage as Nargle Fargle even though I'm planning to vote UKIP. I obviously wouldn't refer to him as Gideon in a more formal setting unless I knew him well enough to wind him up intentionally (which I obviously don't).

    Its when such names are obviously abusive or refer to a disability that it is beyond the pale (e.g.: if someone came up with a mocking name for Gordon Brown or for example published photos of him with a pirates eye mask based upon his loss of one eye).

    The thing is, if you say Gideon, everyone immediately knows who you mean as there isn't anyone else in public life with the name Gideon (reputidated or otherwise).



    Doubt it, I don't get half the nicknames used here until someone explains them. Renaming people is childish.

    In fact, I agree with Chuck.

    The behaviour of most MPs in parliamentary debates, especially when the subject is controversial or PM/Senior ministers question time is childish. Sometimes childishness is just a fact of life.
  • Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,039
    Grandiose said:

    If you had to pick one bookie for constituency markets, who would it be?

    Ladbrokes.
  • Paul_Mid_BedsPaul_Mid_Beds Posts: 1,409
    DavidL said:

    I would also be surprised (and delighted) if the SNP only got 32 seats. They are clearly going to win the vast majority of the 11 Lib Dems seats, probably at least 8 of them. So the assumption underlying this calculation is that they are only going to win 18 off SLAB (assuming they don't take the Tory seat). That seems low to me.

    I do think that the SNP will fall back a bit from their current highs. I think the vote Labour to keep the tories out cannot have lost all its efficacy in 5 years. But the ground operation, number of activists and polling information from the Indy Ref has given the SNP a base the like of which they have never had before. I would expect them to take something around 40 at the moment with the risk being on the higher side.

    I've got a feeling Jack is on the mark. I'm sceptical that all bar 3 Scottish seats will vote for SNP. Especially if they start allieing with the Green Party showing themselves as the hard left that they are. I think it is also likely that the Tories will win 3 or 4 Scottish seats.
  • Paul_Mid_BedsPaul_Mid_Beds Posts: 1,409
    edited March 2015
    I'm willing to bet that in one constitunency, large numbers of tory and UKIP voters will tactically vote Labour. That constituency is in Brighton.

    Is anyone offering odds on the Greens winning no seats?
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,928

    Labour can continually point out that the SNP pulled the plug on Labour in 1979 which (prematurely) brought Mrs Thatcher to power.

    That's one of SLab's recurring themes. It doesn't really seem to be working for them.
    It might when thy refuse to give the SNP what they want in government. I just don't see what leverage the SNP is likely to have at the moment.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    DavidL said:

    I would also be surprised (and delighted) if the SNP only got 32 seats. They are clearly going to win the vast majority of the 11 Lib Dems seats, probably at least 8 of them. So the assumption underlying this calculation is that they are only going to win 18 off SLAB (assuming they don't take the Tory seat). That seems low to me.

    I do think that the SNP will fall back a bit from their current highs. I think the vote Labour to keep the tories out cannot have lost all its efficacy in 5 years. But the ground operation, number of activists and polling information from the Indy Ref has given the SNP a base the like of which they have never had before. I would expect them to take something around 40 at the moment with the risk being on the higher side.

    Labour have been making this argument for weeks and so far it has had no effect on the polls at all. If anything, Labour seem to be going backwards in Scotland.
  • coolagornacoolagorna Posts: 127

    I'm willing to bet that in one constitunency, large numbers of tory and UKIP voters will tactically vote Labour. That constituency is in Brighton.

    Is anyone offering odds on the Greens winning no seats?

    Lucas is a certainty...2/5 is literally buying money

    She is an extraordinary talented politician..many Tories and Lib
    Dems there will vote for her and I as someone who intends to vote for
    Eds party would definitely vote for her if I lived there

    Joey Jones of Sky News couldnt find anyone with a bad word to
    say about her even those who hated the council

  • FlightpathFlightpath Posts: 4,012
    DavidL said:

    I would also be surprised (and delighted) if the SNP only got 32 seats. They are clearly going to win the vast majority of the 11 Lib Dems seats, probably at least 8 of them. So the assumption underlying this calculation is that they are only going to win 18 off SLAB (assuming they don't take the Tory seat). That seems low to me.

    I do think that the SNP will fall back a bit from their current highs. I think the vote Labour to keep the tories out cannot have lost all its efficacy in 5 years. But the ground operation, number of activists and polling information from the Indy Ref has given the SNP a base the like of which they have never had before. I would expect them to take something around 40 at the moment with the risk being on the higher side.

    The SNP are now saying that they will not insist on the abolition or removal of Trident as part of a coalition with Labour. I am not sure how this will go with the loony lefties of both parties. Anything which helps a SNP Labour alliance cannot surely be good for English independence.
    Quite why its now OK to continue with Trident when it was such a part of the indyef campaign seems strange to me. On the other hand Labour itself may not be committed to the deterrent in the end.
    On balance I think this news might well help Labour not the SNP.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 42,155

    Labour can continually point out that the SNP pulled the plug on Labour in 1979 which (prematurely) brought Mrs Thatcher to power.

    That's one of SLab's recurring themes. It doesn't really seem to be working for them.
    It might when thy refuse to give the SNP what they want in government. I just don't see what leverage the SNP is likely to have at the moment.
    They have the leverage of being potentially the biggest prop to a Miliband government, so it'll depend how much Miliband wants to be in government; some of his MPs appear decidedly reluctant. It looks like most of the SLab MPs won't even have the option therefore they're loudest about no deals.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,025

    DavidL said:

    I would also be surprised (and delighted) if the SNP only got 32 seats. They are clearly going to win the vast majority of the 11 Lib Dems seats, probably at least 8 of them. So the assumption underlying this calculation is that they are only going to win 18 off SLAB (assuming they don't take the Tory seat). That seems low to me.

    I do think that the SNP will fall back a bit from their current highs. I think the vote Labour to keep the tories out cannot have lost all its efficacy in 5 years. But the ground operation, number of activists and polling information from the Indy Ref has given the SNP a base the like of which they have never had before. I would expect them to take something around 40 at the moment with the risk being on the higher side.

    I've got a feeling Jack is on the mark. I'm sceptical that all bar 3 Scottish seats will vote for SNP. Especially if they start allieing with the Green Party showing themselves as the hard left that they are. I think it is also likely that the Tories will win 3 or 4 Scottish seats.
    I agree that they will not win 54 seats. Other than that I am struggling. The Greens are irrelevant up here. At best they will cost the SNP a couple of per cent.

    I may not have managed to keep my distaste for the SNP entirely hidden but even I would struggle to describe the Scottish Government as "hard left". Centralising, bossy, arrogant, complacent, self satisfied, bureaucratic and with a disappointing choice of priorities yes, but hard left? I don't think so.

    And the tories 4 seats? Keep taking the pills.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,411
    Look at the trend in JackW's ARSE - SNP +4 from last time. If they don't slip back as we get closer then that will improve.
  • chestnutchestnut Posts: 7,341
    English Ed Miliband tells Scotland what it has to do.

    http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-31764576

    I can't imagine that the 45% are particularly minded to listen to him.
  • EasterrossEasterross Posts: 1,915
    Afternoon all and delighted Jack has managed to drag himself away from Mrs W's shoe shopping to deliver his ARSE and what an ARSE it has been.

    Been spending this morning flitting between transcribing the Ashcroft seat projects on to Andy JS' wonderful target seat lists and reading the twitter feed on the SLAB conference. In relation to the latter, I feel a little guilty as it is a bit like being an onlooker at someone else's funeral.
  • IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966

    Would a Labour/SNP deal be so disastrous? It could be, but the SNP have a basic problem. They are at heart now an anti-Tory party as well as a pro-independence one. If they won't endorse the possibility of the Tories in power in any circumstances then they have very few bargaining chips to play as Nick Clegg has found out the other way around. Labour can continually point out that the SNP pulled the plug on Labour in 1979 which (prematurely) brought Mrs Thatcher to power. I can't believe it would be that difficult for Ed Miliband to differentiate himself from the coalition in a way that pleased most Scots. Would it be enough given the SNP give the impression that Scotland would get a big voice at Westminster if they have 50+ MPs?

    His three big problems would seem to be:

    1) The SNP are an anti-austerity party, and he has been spending a modest amount of effort trying to restore a degree of fiscal credibility to his party. I guess if they go on a spending spree and the economy starts to tank he might be able to blame the SNP for holding a gun to his head, but I am not sure the electorate would go for it.

    2) The SNP need the Tories in power to drive their main selling point of their independence campaign vis, Scotland has to leave the UK to escape the policies of the nasty Tories. If they have a cuddly Labour government in power, especially one that has kicked austerity into the long grass its a much harder sell. "Leave the UK to escape the left-wing government that the SNP has by the balls" doesn't quite have the same ring about it.

    3) Labour almost certainly won't give them devomax, because they will be quietly confident the SNP won't bring a Labour government down, and more to the point because they are hoping to get their Scottish seats back after the novelty of the SNP wears off. The Tories would almost certainly give them devomax, for precisely the same reasons, to remove those potential Labour seats which are dead to the Tories from the equation.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,736
    edited March 2015
    This weeks BJESUS (forgot to post on Tuesday)

    3.3.15 LAB 295 (297) CON 269(269) LD 30(30) UKIP 2(2) Others 54(52) (Ed is crap is PM)
    Last weeks BJESUS in brackets
    BJESUS (Big John Election Service Uniform Swing) BJESUS (Big John Election Service Uniform Swing)
    Using current polling adjusted for 65 days left to go factor and using UKPR standard swingometer plus Scotland predictor
  • Paul_Mid_BedsPaul_Mid_Beds Posts: 1,409
    edited March 2015
    Bloody Hell. Confetior Deo Omnipotens, Mea Culpa, Mea Culpa, Mea Maxima Culpa...

    "'Campaigners like me seriously believed that if we could prevent people expressing prejudiced ideas then eventually they would stop thinking them.

    'But now I'm convinced we were utterly wrong.'

    Mr Phillips, a Labour party member, says anti-racism began with good intentions but turned into 'thought control'.

    Now, he insists that only a willingness to talk more openly about race, despite risk of causing offence, will help those in need.....

    And former home secretary Jack Straw, who is also interviewed, tells Mr Phillips that many MPs are wary of expressing their views for fear of being branded racist.

    But Mr Phillips insists people should be free to use racial stereotypes, such as that many Jews are rich or that black people are more likely to be convicted for robbery, because they are true.

    Explaining the issue, he said: 'The dividing lines of race, religion and culture are probably the most dangerous flashpoints in Britain today, but they're also the ones we find hardest to talk about in public."


    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2983851/We-wrong-try-ban-racism-existence-says-former-equality-chief.html

    My own view. Racism is unpleasant, just as any rude behaviour is unpleasant. Trying to ban rudeness is counter productive and authoritarian.

    Hopefully all the hate crime laws will be repealed. They are gateways to apartheid as they treat people differently under the law. They also provide a way in which a hard right government could persecute minorities without any legislation being passed - an instruction to police to give special attention and extra resources to hate crimes committed against white people, would do the job.

    If people assualt or attack each other the sentence should be stiff, aligning with the current sentence for racially agravated assault, whatever the reason. If there are mitigating circumstances then the Judge can apply them and give a discount to the sentence.

    The current situation where if I go out and hit an old lady on the head because I think she looks ugly is an offence with a far lesser maximum sentence than if I go out and hit an old lady on the head because she is black, is a disgrace. Both should be the same offence and both attract the sentence that currently applies to the racially aggravated offence.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 42,155

    I feel a little guilty as it is a bit like being an onlooker at someone else's funeral.

    Surely, except for one very specific occasion, we are always onlookers at someone else's funeral!
  • coolagornacoolagorna Posts: 127

    This weeks BJESUS (forgot to post on Tuesday)

    3.3.15 LAB 295 (297) CON 269(269) LD 30(30) UKIP 2(2) Others 54(52) (Ed is crap is PM)
    Last weeks BJESUS in brackets
    BJESUS (Big John Election Service Uniform Swing) BJESUS (Big John Election Service Uniform Swing)
    Using current polling adjusted for 65 days left to go factor and using UKPR standard swingometer plus Scotland predictor

    At least a poll reflecting reality

    Jack W is a nice enough fella but its clear in polling terms
    he doesnt know his ARSE from his elbow

    As a Blades fan myself I cant see anything other than 3 points for the
    blue half of Sheffield down at the Seaside today?
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 43,363
    Indigo said:

    Would a Labour/SNP deal be so disastrous? It could be, but the SNP have a basic problem. They are at heart now an anti-Tory party as well as a pro-independence one. If they won't endorse the possibility of the Tories in power in any circumstances then they have very few bargaining chips to play as Nick Clegg has found out the other way around. Labour can continually point out that the SNP pulled the plug on Labour in 1979 which (prematurely) brought Mrs Thatcher to power. I can't believe it would be that difficult for Ed Miliband to differentiate himself from the coalition in a way that pleased most Scots. Would it be enough given the SNP give the impression that Scotland would get a big voice at Westminster if they have 50+ MPs?

    His three big problems would seem to be:

    1) The SNP are an anti-austerity party, and he has been spending a modest amount of effort trying to restore a degree of fiscal credibility to his party. I guess if they go on a spending spree and the economy starts to tank he might be able to blame the SNP for holding a gun to his head, but I am not sure the electorate would go for it.

    2) The SNP need the Tories in power to drive their main selling point of their independence campaign vis, Scotland has to leave the UK to escape the policies of the nasty Tories. If they have a cuddly Labour government in power, especially one that has kicked austerity into the long grass its a much harder sell. "Leave the UK to escape the left-wing government that the SNP has by the balls" doesn't quite have the same ring about it.

    3) Labour almost certainly won't give them devomax, because they will be quietly confident the SNP won't bring a Labour government down, and more to the point because they are hoping to get their Scottish seats back after the novelty of the SNP wears off. The Tories would almost certainly give them devomax, for precisely the same reasons, to remove those potential Labour seats which are dead to the Tories from the equation.
    Hmm, interesting, but one thought occurs to me. The difference between 1979 and today is that there is likely to be a SNP majority vote in Scotland. So if the SNP bring down Labour then they have the implicit backing of most of the Scots voters (who could, remember, have voted Labour if they wanted a Labour Government). The other factor is that Labour in Scotland is now increasingly seen as a branch of the Tory Party - especially after fighting to keep Scotland under Tory rule in the UK. So the difference between Labour and Tory is not what it was, especially after the Blair years, and picking a Blairite to manage the local branch office may not have been a good step.

  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 7,382
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    I would also be surprised (and delighted) if the SNP only got 32 seats. They are clearly going to win the vast majority of the 11 Lib Dems seats, probably at least 8 of them. So the assumption underlying this calculation is that they are only going to win 18 off SLAB (assuming they don't take the Tory seat). That seems low to me.

    I do think that the SNP will fall back a bit from their current highs. I think the vote Labour to keep the tories out cannot have lost all its efficacy in 5 years. But the ground operation, number of activists and polling information from the Indy Ref has given the SNP a base the like of which they have never had before. I would expect them to take something around 40 at the moment with the risk being on the higher side.

    I've got a feeling Jack is on the mark. I'm sceptical that all bar 3 Scottish seats will vote for SNP. Especially if they start allieing with the Green Party showing themselves as the hard left that they are. I think it is also likely that the Tories will win 3 or 4 Scottish seats.
    I agree that they will not win 54 seats. Other than that I am struggling. The Greens are irrelevant up here. At best they will cost the SNP a couple of per cent.

    I may not have managed to keep my distaste for the SNP entirely hidden but even I would struggle to describe the Scottish Government as "hard left". Centralising, bossy, arrogant, complacent, self satisfied, bureaucratic and with a disappointing choice of priorities yes, but hard left? I don't think so.

    And the tories 4 seats? Keep taking the pills.
    Always great to read your analysis of Scotland David.
  • IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966

    I'm willing to bet that in one constitunency, large numbers of tory and UKIP voters will tactically vote Labour. That constituency is in Brighton.

    Is anyone offering odds on the Greens winning no seats?

    I was startled to read today that Brighton Pavillion was 302nd out of 326 councils for recycling... possibly because they care more about being red than being green.
  • SMukeshSMukesh Posts: 1,759
    I would caution that Ashcroft`s latest polling suggesting Labour will be down to 3 seats has not been replicated by other polls.

    The Glasgow majorities for Labour are rather huge and though Glasgow voted for Independence,it was very marginal.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,025
    antifrank said:

    DavidL said:

    I would also be surprised (and delighted) if the SNP only got 32 seats. They are clearly going to win the vast majority of the 11 Lib Dems seats, probably at least 8 of them. So the assumption underlying this calculation is that they are only going to win 18 off SLAB (assuming they don't take the Tory seat). That seems low to me.

    I do think that the SNP will fall back a bit from their current highs. I think the vote Labour to keep the tories out cannot have lost all its efficacy in 5 years. But the ground operation, number of activists and polling information from the Indy Ref has given the SNP a base the like of which they have never had before. I would expect them to take something around 40 at the moment with the risk being on the higher side.

    Labour have been making this argument for weeks and so far it has had no effect on the polls at all. If anything, Labour seem to be going backwards in Scotland.
    The Labour campaign in Scotland seems to be Jim Murphy and Jenny Marra but as usual they are struggling with a serious lack of quality support.

    Once the Darling and Brown generation go there is a serious lack of ability. Mark Lazarowicz generally has a good name but I am struggling to think of many more.

    But I still think that as the election starts to dominate the media and as that media is inevitably focussed on the UK situation with poor quality Scottish tag alongs Labour will get something of a boost. As long as not too much of that coverage involves Ed of course.
  • MP_SEMP_SE Posts: 3,642
    edited March 2015

    Bloody Hell. Confetior Deo Omnipotens, Mea Culpa, Mea Culpa, Mea Maxima Culpa...

    "'Campaigners like me seriously believed that if we could prevent people expressing prejudiced ideas then eventually they would stop thinking them.

    'But now I'm convinced we were utterly wrong.'

    Mr Phillips, a Labour party member, says anti-racism began with good intentions but turned into 'thought control'.

    Now, he insists that only a willingness to talk more openly about race, despite risk of causing offence, will help those in need.....

    And former home secretary Jack Straw, who is also interviewed, tells Mr Phillips that many MPs are wary of expressing their views for fear of being branded racist.

    But Mr Phillips insists people should be free to use racial stereotypes, such as that many Jews are rich or that black people are more likely to be convicted for robbery, because they are true.

    Explaining the issue, he said: 'The dividing lines of race, religion and culture are probably the most dangerous flashpoints in Britain today, but they're also the ones we find hardest to talk about in public."


    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2983851/We-wrong-try-ban-racism-existence-says-former-equality-chief.html

    My own view. Racism is unpleasant, just as any rude behaviour is unpleasant. Trying to ban rudeness is counter productive and authoritarian.

    Hopefully all the hate crime laws will be repealed. They are gateways to apartheid as they treat people differently under the law. They also provide a way in which a hard right government could persecute minorities without any legislation being passed - an instruction to police to give special attention and extra resources to hate crimes committed against white people, would do the job.

    If people assualt or attack each other the sentence should be stiff, aligning with the current sentence for racially agravated assault, whatever the reason. If there are mitigating circumstances then the Judge can apply them and give a discount to the sentence.

    The current situation where if I go out and hit an old lady on the head because I think she looks ugly is an offence with a far lesser maximum sentence than if I go out and hit an old lady on the head because she is black, is a disgrace. Both should be the same offence and both attract the sentence that currently applies to the racially aggravated offence.

    I was quite shocked to see some casual anti-semitism thrown in there. There are some Jewish communities, especially within London, who live in poverty. It is not suprising Jewish people are getting spat on and verbally abused when such comments go unchecked.
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    I suspect Mr Vine is overcompensating during his TV appearances. My dad made me an employee when I was 17 so he'd avoid paying any uni fees. And paid me below the NI threshold.

    I felt a really valued family member being tax deductable and all. My mother was paid a notional salary - she felt similarly valued.

    I really don't get why those who use others like this think they've gotten away with it. They never do - she never forgave him and neither did I. We never said, but we remember it.

    BBC star Jeremy Vine made his ten-year-old daughter a company director to help lower his tax bill by channelling funds through private firm

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2983593/Jeremy-Vine-daughter-10-company-director-lower-tax-bill.html

    I wonder what Ed thinks about this kind of tax avoidance?

  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143
    edited March 2015
    Pulpstar said:

    Look at the trend in JackW's ARSE - SNP +4 from last time. If they don't slip back as we get closer then that will improve.

    Sounds about right.

    I recall that before 2010 some polls encouraged optimism among some that the SNP would make gains, but they fell back as polling day approached. Presumably JackW's ARSE has that experience incorporated. I think this time will be different. We will see.
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724

    Some of my best friends are not Jews but have funny names.

    The best funny names I've known are Ethiopian. Ethiopian ones are all g's, e's and o's. It's a Scrabble nightmare.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 42,155
    SMukesh said:


    The Glasgow majorities for Labour are rather huge and though Glasgow voted for Independence,it was very marginal.

    53.5-46.5.

    Depends what you call 'very marginal'.

  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216

    RobD said:

    It's a blog about PB with some mentions of Scottish independence ;)
    One might suggest Kelly & co get a life.

    Yep, people on an obscure political blog commenting on people on another obscure political blog commenting on people on the first blog are definite high rollers in the life stakes.
    Devoting entire threads to them?

    Not bitter at all........
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,928
    Miliband's speech in Scotland doesn't look too inspiring. Yet again using the fear of the Tories to insist everyone does what's good for them and votes Labour. I know what they'll say, negative campaigning works. But why not be more positive? Point out he wants a fairer Britain that would be better for Scotland and that the SNP has hardly been the egalitarian party in power it purports to be.

    I thought QT (which I hardly ever watch any more) was interesting on Thursday when the Labour woman mentioned the mansion tax. The audience largely groaned.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,712

    MP_SE said:

    Mr Evershed, to be sentenced at a later date I take it. Oxfordhire Childrens Services found wanting again.

    The children are far less important than the valuable enrichment the perpetrators have brought to Oxfordshire.
    The absence of consequences for the council and police staff involved in these
    areas is disappointing. Careers should be ending.
    Isn’t there an Inquiry under way there at this moment? But I agree, surely someone, and hopefully senior, will be hung out to dry there.
    I really, really struggle with this. As a medium rank NHS worker I regularly went to conferences/professional meetings with people from other area and, particularly in the bar afterwards things would be said. Why, how, was there this culture of silence.

    No, I didn’t know about Stafford, but I did know there were places one should avoid if sick or old.
  • IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966
    edited March 2015
    Seems Lord Bilimoria wouldnt give a XXXX Cobra Beer for a Labour-SNP coalition.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/general-election-2015/11456516/Lord-Bilimoria-Labour-SNP-coalition-would-be-disaster-for-UK.html
    Ed Miliband would be a “disaster” for the British economy if Labour won power with the help of the Scottish National Party, one of Britain’s leading entrepreneurs has warned.

    The prospect of a Labour-SNP coalition after the general election in two months’ time is “terrifying”, Lord Bilimoria, the chairman and founder of Cobra Beer, said.
  • weejonnieweejonnie Posts: 3,820

    Labour can continually point out that the SNP pulled the plug on Labour in 1979 which (prematurely) brought Mrs Thatcher to power.

    That's one of SLab's recurring themes. It doesn't really seem to be working for them.
    If they're having to rely on something 40 years old then they're not scraping the bottom of the barrel - they're digging under it.
  • JohnLilburneJohnLilburne Posts: 6,312
    edited March 2015
    MP_SE said:

    I was quite shocked to see some casual anti-semitism thrown in there. There are some Jewish communities, especially within London, who live in poverty. It is not suprising Jewish people are getting spat on and verbally abused when such comments go unchecked.

    In fact, you could almost imagine the whole point of Trevor Phillips making that statement would be to slip in a piece of anti-semitism that he otherwise wouldn't have got away with. He's comparing a pure racial stereotype with something that is indubitably true and we have stats to prove it. Compare "many Jews are rich" (meaningless statement, many black people are also rich) with "more likely to be convicted" (alludes to a higher proportion and to a basis in fact).

  • DairDair Posts: 6,108

    Pulpstar said:

    Look at the trend in JackW's ARSE - SNP +4 from last time. If they don't slip back as we get closer then that will improve.

    Sounds about right.

    I recall that before 2010 some polls encouraged optimism among some that the SNP would make gains, but they fell back as polling day approached. Presumably JackW's ARSE has that experience incorporated. I think this time will be different. We will see.
    Arguably the SNP fell back in 2010 because they were marginalised by exclusion from the biased TV debates.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 42,155

    RobD said:

    It's a blog about PB with some mentions of Scottish independence ;)
    One might suggest Kelly & co get a life.

    Yep, people on an obscure political blog commenting on people on another obscure political blog commenting on people on the first blog are definite high rollers in the life stakes.
    Devoting entire threads to them?

    Not bitter at all........
    Perhaps he's bitter about being arbitrarily banned and then seeing posters make snide remarks about him with no option to answer them.

    Of course his PB fan club could make their criticisms to James directly during their many forays to his site. However it appears they'd rather scamper back here to a place where he has no right of reply.
  • DairDair Posts: 6,108

    SMukesh said:


    The Glasgow majorities for Labour are rather huge and though Glasgow voted for Independence,it was very marginal.

    53.5-46.5.

    Depends what you call 'very marginal'.

    As usual a 5-10 pt result is viewed as "very marginal" when its for Yes, and "resounding" when its for No.
  • JohnLilburneJohnLilburne Posts: 6,312

    RobD said:

    It's a blog about PB with some mentions of Scottish independence ;)
    One might suggest Kelly & co get a life.

    Yep, people on an obscure political blog commenting on people on another obscure political blog commenting on people on the first blog are definite high rollers in the life stakes.
    Devoting entire threads to them?

    Not bitter at all........
    My comment being aimed not at people spending time on a political blog (which clearly I also do) but people getting quite so emotionally uptight about it.

  • GrandioseGrandiose Posts: 2,323
    MP_SE said:

    Bloody Hell. Confetior Deo Omnipotens, Mea Culpa, Mea Culpa, Mea Maxima Culpa...

    Mr Phillips insists people should be free to use racial stereotypes, such as that many Jews are rich or that black people are more likely to be convicted for robbery, because they are true....

    My own view. Racism is unpleasant, just as any rude behaviour is unpleasant. Trying to ban rudeness is counter productive and authoritarian.

    [...]

    I was quite shocked to see some casual anti-semitism thrown in there. There are some Jewish communities, especially within London, who live in poverty. It is not suprising Jewish people are getting spat on and verbally abused when such comments go unchecked.
    I can't possible accept this. A stereotype would only be "true" if a majority - even a large majority - of those in the group subscribed to it at which point, linguistically, it stops being a stereotype as most people understand the term.
  • AndreaParma_82AndreaParma_82 Posts: 4,714
    Nick Thomas-Symonds wins Labour selection in Torfaen
    http://nickthomassymonds.com

    He works as a barrister and he has been Torfaen CLP Secretary since 2009
  • YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 4,382
    Darren McCaffrey @DMcCaffreySKY · 44m 44 minutes ago
    BREAK: Ed Miliband announces Labour has formally accepted invitations to appear in all three of the live TV debates on April 2, 16 and 30.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,386

    This weeks BJESUS (forgot to post on Tuesday)

    3.3.15 LAB 295 (297) CON 269(269) LD 30(30) UKIP 2(2) Others 54(52) (Ed is crap is PM)
    Last weeks BJESUS in brackets
    BJESUS (Big John Election Service Uniform Swing) BJESUS (Big John Election Service Uniform Swing)
    Using current polling adjusted for 65 days left to go factor and using UKPR standard swingometer plus Scotland predictor

    At least a poll reflecting reality

    Jack W is a nice enough fella but its clear in polling terms
    he doesnt know his ARSE from his elbow

    Far be it for me to speak up for Scottish aristocrats on a Saturday afternoon, but JackW would say his ARSE is a projection, not a poll.

    And Mr Jack + RodCrosby had a good record back in 2010, though post performance is not necessarily a reflection of future accuracy...
  • calumcalum Posts: 3,046
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    I would also be surprised (and delighted) if the SNP only got 32 seats. They are clearly going to win the vast majority of the 11 Lib Dems seats, probably at least 8 of them. So the assumption underlying this calculation is that they are only going to win 18 off SLAB (assuming they don't take the Tory seat). That seems low to me.

    I do think that the SNP will fall back a bit from their current highs. I think the vote Labour to keep the tories out cannot have lost all its efficacy in 5 years. But the ground operation, number of activists and polling information from the Indy Ref has given the SNP a base the like of which they have never had before. I would expect them to take something around 40 at the moment with the risk being on the higher side.

    I've got a feeling Jack is on the mark. I'm sceptical that all bar 3 Scottish seats will vote for SNP. Especially if they start allieing with the Green Party showing themselves as the hard left that they are. I think it is also likely that the Tories will win 3 or 4 Scottish seats.
    I agree that they will not win 54 seats. Other than that I am struggling. The Greens are irrelevant up here. At best they will cost the SNP a couple of per cent.

    I may not have managed to keep my distaste for the SNP entirely hidden but even I would struggle to describe the Scottish Government as "hard left". Centralising, bossy, arrogant, complacent, self satisfied, bureaucratic and with a disappointing choice of priorities yes, but hard left? I don't think so.

    And the tories 4 seats? Keep taking the pills.
    I think the general dislike of the SNP on this site seems to have clouded many folks thinking. Even with the weight of evidence from the national polls and the much anticipated Lord Ashcroft polls, still many seem to doubt that SLAB is facing extinction (as well as the LibDems).

    I think the SNP's position is only going to strengthen as we approach May - consider the following factors:

    - SLAB are already in meltdown, with recriminations about their impending defeat already setting in.

    - In terms of tactical voting, other than a few diehard Unionist Scottish Tories who might vote Labour, the vast majority of Scottish Tories and SLAB supporters, hate each other more than they hate the SNP. So the SNP are likely to be net beneficiaries of any tactical voting.

    - Ed Milliband is so unpopular in Scotland that the more we see of him on the TV screens yet more SLAB support will melt away to the SNP, Greens, UKIP and even the LibDems.

  • Was out canvassing in Edinburgh East this morning. Yes tactical voting is on the cards, but I did not meet a single voter who said they where going to certainly vote Labour. Many say they are considering voting Tory instead because of the potential of a snp-labour pact. This is a 'safe' labour seat.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,025
    calum said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    I would also be surprised (and delighted) if the SNP only got 32 seats. They are clearly going to win the vast majority of the 11 Lib Dems seats, probably at least 8 of them. So the assumption underlying this calculation is that they are only going to win 18 off SLAB (assuming they don't take the Tory seat). That seems low to me.

    I do think that the SNP will fall back a bit from their current highs. I think the vote Labour to keep the tories out cannot have lost all its efficacy in 5 years. But the ground operation, number of activists and polling information from the Indy Ref has given the SNP a base the like of which they have never had before. I would expect them to take something around 40 at the moment with the risk being on the higher side.

    I've got a feeling Jack is on the mark. I'm sceptical that all bar 3 Scottish seats will vote for SNP. Especially if they start allieing with the Green Party showing themselves as the hard left that they are. I think it is also likely that the Tories will win 3 or 4 Scottish seats.
    I agree that they will not win 54 seats. Other than that I am struggling. The Greens are irrelevant up here. At best they will cost the SNP a couple of per cent.

    I may not have managed to keep my distaste for the SNP entirely hidden but even I would struggle to describe the Scottish Government as "hard left". Centralising, bossy, arrogant, complacent, self satisfied, bureaucratic and with a disappointing choice of priorities yes, but hard left? I don't think so.

    And the tories 4 seats? Keep taking the pills.
    I think the general dislike of the SNP on this site seems to have clouded many folks thinking. Even with the weight of evidence from the national polls and the much anticipated Lord Ashcroft polls, still many seem to doubt that SLAB is facing extinction (as well as the LibDems).

    I think the SNP's position is only going to strengthen as we approach May - consider the following factors:

    - SLAB are already in meltdown, with recriminations about their impending defeat already setting in.

    - In terms of tactical voting, other than a few diehard Unionist Scottish Tories who might vote Labour, the vast majority of Scottish Tories and SLAB supporters, hate each other more than they hate the SNP. So the SNP are likely to be net beneficiaries of any tactical voting.

    - Ed Milliband is so unpopular in Scotland that the more we see of him on the TV screens yet more SLAB support will melt away to the SNP, Greens, UKIP and even the LibDems.

    I bet Jim Murphy is thrilled to have his leader up here for a speech. Just thrilled. As if his job is not hard enough.
  • AndreaParma_82AndreaParma_82 Posts: 4,714
    Jack

    why do you consider Enfield North too close too call?
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,025
    edited March 2015

    Was out canvassing in Edinburgh East this morning. Yes tactical voting is on the cards, but I did not meet a single voter who said they where going to certainly vote Labour. Many say they are considering voting Tory instead because of the potential of a snp-labour pact. This is a 'safe' labour seat.

    Welcome.

    I am not sure there is any such thing as a safe Labour seat in Scotland anymore. And of course they have a huge number of useless time servers who would never have been selected if they thought they were facing a battle. Sheila Gilmore being a good example.

    Labour voters turning to the tories in disgust is a bit of a stretch though.
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    At the same point in 2010 there were two polls published giving the Tories leads of 2% and 5% – an average of 3.5%. This compared with the May 2010 outcome of a Tory lead of 7.3% – a swing to the Opposition of almost 2% in the final two months
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,708
    GIN1138 said:


    And Mr Jack + RodCrosby had a good record back in 2010, though post performance is not necessarily a reflection of future accuracy...

    If the election result ends up where the polls currently are then Rod's by-election swing-back will have nailed it again, although Scotland will screw up any seat predictions you might have made from it.
This discussion has been closed.