Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Guest slot contributor, Stodge, casts his eye on the battl

24

Comments

  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,963
    Mr. Brooke, the Romans probably had similar feelings when Diocletian established the tetrarchy.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    scotslass said:

    Jack/Alanbroke/Rodger

    You sound more like Bitter Together. And things ain't getting any better for you.

    I've never found winning a "bitter" experience.

    Au contraire, Scotland remaining in the Union is a sweet experience.



  • scotslassscotslass Posts: 912
    Indigo

    If Cameron has only a minority he is going down straight away. The Liberals will be licking their wounds and the rest will have hee haw outside the SNP/Green/Plaid threesome. Ob current form this will be more than enough to sustain a Labour minority if the price is right. This will be Milliband's one and only chance to be somebody and you seriously believe he will pass it up!

    Remember, there can be no second election unless the majority is there to reepal the Parliament Act.
  • john_zimsjohn_zims Posts: 3,399
    @Roger

    'If you think Rod Crosby is the new Tory Messiah-following in the footsteps of Fitilass and Easterross-there's a lot of money to be made.'

    Rod Crosby was spot on with his 2010 GE prediction, get over it.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,514

    Mr. Brooke, the Romans probably had similar feelings when Diocletian established the tetrarchy.

    Are you seriously suggesting Nicola Sturgeon will bump off the FMs of Wales and NI by duplicitous means, invade England and massacre Ed Miliband as God guides her to victory at a battle on Westminster bridge ?

    Well at least it would make for a few interesting threads.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,411

    Pulpstar Dave was in opposition.

    Quite.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 42,155
    JackW said:

    scotslass said:

    Alanbroke/Roger/Jack

    What a tiresome threesome you make. Salmond and his band of 30/40/50 SNP MPs will be laughing at you all the way to Westminster! Get used to it guys.

    You lost the referendum. Get used to it.

    It's awful how petulant auld folk get in their dotage.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,975
    Scotslass

    "Hvae you three ever thought of why your weekends are so cold?"

    Lady Macbeth or a line from Burns?

    Fair is foul, and foul is fair;
    Hover through the fog and filthy air.
  • scotslassscotslass Posts: 912
    Alanbroke, Jack,Rodg

    I'm only going on current polls. You three seem to be operating on old prejudices.

    It's quite simple. The referendum was last year. The election is this year. Things are looking up for the NATS down for the Unionists hence the panic from Baker at all about the Grand Coalition - more like the Grand Old Duke of York!
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,514
    scotslass said:

    Indigo

    If Cameron has only a minority he is going down straight away. The Liberals will be licking their wounds and the rest will have hee haw outside the SNP/Green/Plaid threesome. Ob current form this will be more than enough to sustain a Labour minority if the price is right. This will be Milliband's one and only chance to be somebody and you seriously believe he will pass it up!

    Remember, there can be no second election unless the majority is there to reepal the Parliament Act.

    So you think the Tories wouldn't vote with Labour to repeal the act if it suited both parties ?
  • @OpiniumResearch: Opinium/Observer: #deadheat Lab 34% (-1), Con 34% (n/c), LibDem 8% (+2), UKIP 14% (n/c), Greens 7% (+1) http://t.co/LxGJVdrwp9
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,963
    Mr. Brooke, the modern equivalent of having multiple figures vying for leadership (even in a junior, Caesar rather than Augustus, capacity) is eminently plausible.

    However, my comment was more referring to your optimism. I think quite otherwise. An English Parliament can work, all else is doomed to failure. I suspect we'll end up with something else, alas.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,736
    Mike Smithson retweeted
    Opinium Research ‏@OpiniumResearch 9m9 minutes ago
    Opinium/Observer: #deadheat Lab 34% (-1), Con 34% (n/c), LibDem 8% (+2), UKIP 14% (n/c), Greens 7% (+1) http://tinyurl.com/lwuphn2
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    JackW said:

    scotslass said:

    Jack/Alanbroke/Rodger

    You sound more like Bitter Together. And things ain't getting any better for you.

    I've never found winning a "bitter" experience.

    Au contraire, Scotland remaining in the Union is a sweet experience.



    Scotland voted by a significant majority for continuing Union in the one and only plebescite on the issue. There is only one side that is bitter, and it is not Better Together.

    We should be very glad that the SNP are now so keen to join in the Westminster parliament.
  • IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966

    scotslass said:

    Indigo

    If Cameron has only a minority he is going down straight away. The Liberals will be licking their wounds and the rest will have hee haw outside the SNP/Green/Plaid threesome. Ob current form this will be more than enough to sustain a Labour minority if the price is right. This will be Milliband's one and only chance to be somebody and you seriously believe he will pass it up!

    Remember, there can be no second election unless the majority is there to reepal the Parliament Act.

    So you think the Tories wouldn't vote with Labour to repeal the act if it suited both parties ?
    Even if they didn't. Cameron still doesn't go straight away, the sitting PM stays so long as he has the confidence of the house, and a blood-letting, leaderless, penniless Labour Party might find a whole range of excuses not to bring them down for several months at least.
  • SmarmeronSmarmeron Posts: 5,099
    @richardDodd
    That's right Richard, he was in opposition, and heading for a landslide according to the polling.
    Then of course he wasn't, so after the election, the "guru's" made an intensive study of the factors that might have contributed to the discrepancy.

    "Study reveals that televised face-offs successfully attracted first-time voters and got them talking about politics"
    http://www.theguardian.com/media/organgrinder/2011/feb/09/tv-leaders-debates-general-election

    Now, this could be entirely coincidental to Dave's stance on the debates this time, but the article and study points to some very interesting demographic differences.
    It would appear that it wasn't for democratic reasons that Dave would have preferred the debates to slowly sink into oblivion, but the exact opposite.
    And he would have gotten away with it if it wasn't for those pesky broadcasters.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,514
    scotslass said:

    Alanbroke, Jack,Rodg

    I'm only going on current polls. You three seem to be operating on old prejudices.

    It's quite simple. The referendum was last year. The election is this year. Things are looking up for the NATS down for the Unionists hence the panic from Baker at all about the Grand Coalition - more like the Grand Old Duke of York!

    Right so you'll be running the country without an economy ?

    How will you pay the bills ?
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,975
    John Zimms


    "Rod Crosby was spot on with his 2010 GE prediction, get over it."

    Straw clutching turned into an art form.....


    http://imgc-cn.artprintimages.com/images/P-473-488-90/77/7741/IZY3300Z/posters/william-haefeli-i-d-like-to-meet-the-algorithm-that-thought-we-d-be-a-good-match-new-yorker-cartoon.jpg
  • SmarmeronSmarmeron Posts: 5,099
    @richardDodd
    If you were of a curious mind, you might wonder if their would be anything else he might try to stop the younger voters becoming engaged with the election?
    Fortunately of course, here on PB, curiosity is frowned on.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 43,363

    scotslass said:

    Alanbroke, Jack,Rodg

    I'm only going on current polls. You three seem to be operating on old prejudices.

    It's quite simple. The referendum was last year. The election is this year. Things are looking up for the NATS down for the Unionists hence the panic from Baker at all about the Grand Coalition - more like the Grand Old Duke of York!

    Right so you'll be running the country without an economy ?

    How will you pay the bills ?
    That question could with even more justice be asked of the UK. That was one of the interesting, and much suppressed, revelations of indyref.

    But we are dealing with a general election, not indyref. Unless you want another referendum within a few years?

  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,514

    Mr. Brooke, the modern equivalent of having multiple figures vying for leadership (even in a junior, Caesar rather than Augustus, capacity) is eminently plausible.

    However, my comment was more referring to your optimism. I think quite otherwise. An English Parliament can work, all else is doomed to failure. I suspect we'll end up with something else, alas.

    The UKneeds to restructure it's as simple as that . More power to the regions and let people make their own decisons. The Londoncentrric model has passed its sell by date.
  • scotslassscotslass Posts: 912
    Alanbroke/Jack/Rodg

    You three have 15,000 posts among you - I have but 150.

    As an observation you don't read like people who have just won a referendum. You sound like guys frightened of losing an election. You have every reason to be afraid.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,514
    Carnyx said:

    scotslass said:

    Alanbroke, Jack,Rodg

    I'm only going on current polls. You three seem to be operating on old prejudices.

    It's quite simple. The referendum was last year. The election is this year. Things are looking up for the NATS down for the Unionists hence the panic from Baker at all about the Grand Coalition - more like the Grand Old Duke of York!

    Right so you'll be running the country without an economy ?

    How will you pay the bills ?
    That question could with even more justice be asked of the UK. That was one of the interesting, and much suppressed, revelations of indyref.

    But we are dealing with a general election, not indyref. Unless you want another referendum within a few years?

    Yeah go on Carnyx answer it then. In the 3 years of the Indyref not a single Nat could give an effective answer on the risks to the Scottish economy. And if you want to have a go at the UK one by all means do I'll happily engage with you, it'll make a change from Nats scuttling off when the numbers come out.
  • coolagornacoolagorna Posts: 127

    Mike Smithson retweeted
    Opinium Research ‏@OpiniumResearch 9m9 minutes ago
    Opinium/Observer: #deadheat Lab 34% (-1), Con 34% (n/c), LibDem 8% (+2), UKIP 14% (n/c), Greens 7% (+1) http://tinyurl.com/lwuphn2

    4 polls in a row with the Tories either trailing or level

    Whatever happened to the much predicted crossover?

    The only crossover since Tuesday has been the chicken
    crossing over the road to avoid defending his record in front
    of a public still sceptical about this "long term economic plan"
    being anything more than a tedious and annoying catchphrase


  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,963
    Mr. Brooke, carving up England institutionalises political division within England and at the same time makes equality with Scotland impossible. As well as the sentimental argument against it, such a move would not work on a practical level, it would be short-sighted and foolish in the extreme.

    If an English Parliament then devolved some functions downwards that could be another matter, but just slicing England into pieces (why?) is madness.
  • nigel4englandnigel4england Posts: 4,800
    GIN1138 said:

    Ukip is on course to come second in at least 100 seats at the general election as it displaces the Tories, Labour and Lib Dems as the main opposition across large parts of the country, according to new analysis of the party’s electoral prospects on 7 May.

    The extraordinary potential haul of Ukip “silver medals” – in an addition to a likely tally of half-a-dozen or so seats at Westminster – would represent a massive breakthrough for Nigel Farage’s anti-EU party, which failed to achieve even a single second place in 2010.

    The analysis, conducted by Robert Ford at the University of Manchester for the Observer, suggests that the biggest threat to the established parties from Ukip will come in future local and national elections after May, once it has put down local roots and established itself in the minds of voters as a real alternative to the incumbent party.


    http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/mar/07/ukip-100-second-places-may-election-nigel-farage

    Excuse me for asking, but what's the point of coming second in a FPTP system?

    Platform for the future?

    As a Kipper I would be delighted if we get five or more seats and come second in 50+ more
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,514
    scotslass said:

    Alanbroke/Jack/Rodg

    You three have 15,000 posts among you - I have but 150.

    As an observation you don't read like people who have just won a referendum. You sound like guys frightened of losing an election. You have every reason to be afraid.

    Since I'm not actually backing any of the major parties it's odds on I'm going to be on the losing side and it doesn't frighten me in the least.
  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095

    Mike Smithson retweeted
    Opinium Research ‏@OpiniumResearch 9m9 minutes ago
    Opinium/Observer: #deadheat Lab 34% (-1), Con 34% (n/c), LibDem 8% (+2), UKIP 14% (n/c), Greens 7% (+1) http://tinyurl.com/lwuphn2

    4 polls in a row with the Tories either trailing or level

    Whatever happened to the much predicted crossover?

    The only crossover since Tuesday has been the chicken
    crossing over the road to avoid defending his record in front
    of a public still sceptical about this "long term economic plan"
    being anything more than a tedious and annoying catchphrase


    Change the record tim, you are as much of a bore on here as you are hilarious on your twitter feed.. Funny how you say you are not on twitter but the twitter feed reflects what you are saying here.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,736

    Mike Smithson retweeted
    Opinium Research ‏@OpiniumResearch 9m9 minutes ago
    Opinium/Observer: #deadheat Lab 34% (-1), Con 34% (n/c), LibDem 8% (+2), UKIP 14% (n/c), Greens 7% (+1) http://tinyurl.com/lwuphn2

    4 polls in a row with the Tories either trailing or level

    Whatever happened to the much predicted crossover?

    The only crossover since Tuesday has been the chicken
    crossing over the road to avoid defending his record in front
    of a public still sceptical about this "long term economic plan"
    being anything more than a tedious and annoying catchphrase


    Indeed the much revered Mr Crosby is out on January and February Crossovers and his 95% chance of a Tory majority is looking very strange.

    I am told he has an excellent record though so we are in for massive late swingback if he is to be proved correct.

    We will see.
  • perdixperdix Posts: 1,806
    scotslass said:

    Indigo

    How many people think that Cameron is capable of getting a majority he couldn't get in 2010 in 2015 and how many people think that Milliband is capable full stop.

    We're set for a hanging parliament and the 20 surviving Libs won't want to play with anyone, SF won't be there, the DUP will get six or seven, UKIP will be lucky to get that, leaving a minimum of 40 SNP/Plaid/Greens calling the shots.

    Sounds fine to me.

    If Cammo remains PM without a majority he will go for minority status. He would pick and choose who to talk to, avoiding bloody-minded fringes when at all possible.

  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 43,363

    Carnyx said:

    scotslass said:

    Alanbroke, Jack,Rodg

    I'm only going on current polls. You three seem to be operating on old prejudices.

    It's quite simple. The referendum was last year. The election is this year. Things are looking up for the NATS down for the Unionists hence the panic from Baker at all about the Grand Coalition - more like the Grand Old Duke of York!

    Right so you'll be running the country without an economy ?

    How will you pay the bills ?
    That question could with even more justice be asked of the UK. That was one of the interesting, and much suppressed, revelations of indyref.

    But we are dealing with a general election, not indyref. Unless you want another referendum within a few years?

    Yeah go on Carnyx answer it then. In the 3 years of the Indyref not a single Nat could give an effective answer on the risks to the Scottish economy. And if you want to have a go at the UK one by all means do I'll happily engage with you, it'll make a change from Nats scuttling off when the numbers come out.
    That was the point - that the Scottish economy was at least in as good health/strength as the UK average, as shown by e.g. the FT. The issue here is not so much that point, and I am not going to go over the figures yet again, but the approach which the unionist parties adopted. In which the entire indyref debate was couched by the unionists in terms of the terrible things that might happen in an independent Scotland in contrast to the wonderful sunlit uplands of a glorious Union. The problem was that, if indy was so awful, then the figures implied at least as awful a fate within the UK. For instance, lots of spending cuts in independent Scotland - but if you asked about the UK (if you could find a Unionist to ask), it was 'cuts? What cuts?" The logic fail became rather too obvious and it was very noticeable that the "too wee, too poor, too stupid" approach dropped the "too poor" bit about halfway through the debate.

    The GE is not about independence - but about the ways in which the Unionist parties propose to run the UK. Quite a different matter.



  • john_zimsjohn_zims Posts: 3,399
    edited March 2015
    @Roger

    '"Rod Crosby was spot on with his 2010 GE prediction, get over it."

    Straw clutching turned into an art form..... '

    Rod may be wrong in 2015 who knows, but however much you try to smear him he called it right in 2010,just suck it up
  • SmarmeronSmarmeron Posts: 5,099
    @bigjohnowls

    "Swingback" probably never existed, voter demographics just gave the appearance that it did.
  • chestnutchestnut Posts: 7,341
    edited March 2015

    4 polls in a row with the Tories either trailing or level

    Whatever happened to the much predicted crossover?

    36-35 Tory lead again on Certain To Vote.

    36-33 in England, Tories level at 29-29 in Wales.

    I would call the latter as odd, but Opinium had the Tories ahead in Wales in their last poll as well.

    Again, uniquely, they have Labour seven points ahead of the SNP in Scotland.
  • Is the drinks do still on tonight ?
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,736

    Mike Smithson retweeted
    Opinium Research ‏@OpiniumResearch 9m9 minutes ago
    Opinium/Observer: #deadheat Lab 34% (-1), Con 34% (n/c), LibDem 8% (+2), UKIP 14% (n/c), Greens 7% (+1) http://tinyurl.com/lwuphn2

    4 polls in a row with the Tories either trailing or level

    Whatever happened to the much predicted crossover?

    The only crossover since Tuesday has been the chicken
    crossing over the road to avoid defending his record in front
    of a public still sceptical about this "long term economic plan"
    being anything more than a tedious and annoying catchphrase


    Change the record tim, you are as much of a bore on here as you are hilarious on your twitter feed.. Funny how you say you are not on twitter but the twitter feed reflects what you are saying here.
    Is Coolagorna really Tim?

    I hope so and he starts posting more
  • coolagornacoolagorna Posts: 127

    Mike Smithson retweeted
    Opinium Research ‏@OpiniumResearch 9m9 minutes ago
    Opinium/Observer: #deadheat Lab 34% (-1), Con 34% (n/c), LibDem 8% (+2), UKIP 14% (n/c), Greens 7% (+1) http://tinyurl.com/lwuphn2

    4 polls in a row with the Tories either trailing or level

    Whatever happened to the much predicted crossover?

    The only crossover since Tuesday has been the chicken
    crossing over the road to avoid defending his record in front
    of a public still sceptical about this "long term economic plan"
    being anything more than a tedious and annoying catchphrase


    Change the record tim, you are as much of a bore on here as you are hilarious on your twitter feed.. Funny how you say you are not on twitter but the twitter feed reflects what you are saying here.

    Not a clue who the Tim is you refer to but please direct me to
    his twitter feed as it looks well worth a read judging by
    your comments

    Said it before and ill say it again..Not on Twitter..never have
    been on twitter and I never will be on twitter..

  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,736
    edited March 2015
    I keep reading Rod and Jack were very accurate in 2010.

    Others say ARSE underestimated LAB seats badly.

    Does anyone have the details?
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,411

    Mike Smithson retweeted
    Opinium Research ‏@OpiniumResearch 9m9 minutes ago
    Opinium/Observer: #deadheat Lab 34% (-1), Con 34% (n/c), LibDem 8% (+2), UKIP 14% (n/c), Greens 7% (+1) http://tinyurl.com/lwuphn2

    SNP weighted from 88 to 41 trolololol
  • FlightpathFlightpath Posts: 4,012

    Mike Smithson retweeted
    Opinium Research ‏@OpiniumResearch 9m9 minutes ago
    Opinium/Observer: #deadheat Lab 34% (-1), Con 34% (n/c), LibDem 8% (+2), UKIP 14% (n/c), Greens 7% (+1) http://tinyurl.com/lwuphn2

    4 polls in a row with the Tories either trailing or level

    Whatever happened to the much predicted crossover?

    The only crossover since Tuesday has been the chicken
    crossing over the road to avoid defending his record in front
    of a public still sceptical about this "long term economic plan"
    being anything more than a tedious and annoying catchphrase


    As I see it this poll shows Labour going backwards and the LDs gaining ground. It shows the coalition government on 42 and Labour opposition on 34.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,736

    Mike Smithson retweeted
    Opinium Research ‏@OpiniumResearch 9m9 minutes ago
    Opinium/Observer: #deadheat Lab 34% (-1), Con 34% (n/c), LibDem 8% (+2), UKIP 14% (n/c), Greens 7% (+1) http://tinyurl.com/lwuphn2

    4 polls in a row with the Tories either trailing or level

    Whatever happened to the much predicted crossover?

    The only crossover since Tuesday has been the chicken
    crossing over the road to avoid defending his record in front
    of a public still sceptical about this "long term economic plan"
    being anything more than a tedious and annoying catchphrase


    Change the record tim, you are as much of a bore on here as you are hilarious on your twitter feed.. Funny how you say you are not on twitter but the twitter feed reflects what you are saying here.

    Not a clue who the Tim is you refer to but please direct me to
    his twitter feed as it looks well worth a read judging by
    your comments

    Said it before and ill say it again..Not on Twitter..never have
    been on twitter and I never will be on twitter..

    Boo

    We want Tim, we want Tim
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,514

    Mr. Brooke, carving up England institutionalises political division within England and at the same time makes equality with Scotland impossible. As well as the sentimental argument against it, such a move would not work on a practical level, it would be short-sighted and foolish in the extreme.

    If an English Parliament then devolved some functions downwards that could be another matter, but just slicing England into pieces (why?) is madness.

    Pah you're as stuck to the status quo as a Byzantine eunnuch. Basil II would have sent you to Bulgaria.

  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    Smarmeron said:

    @richardDodd
    That's right Richard, he was in opposition, and heading for a landslide according to the polling.
    Then of course he wasn't, so after the election, the "guru's" made an intensive study of the factors that might have contributed to the discrepancy.

    "Study reveals that televised face-offs successfully attracted first-time voters and got them talking about politics"
    http://www.theguardian.com/media/organgrinder/2011/feb/09/tv-leaders-debates-general-election

    Now, this could be entirely coincidental to Dave's stance on the debates this time, but the article and study points to some very interesting demographic differences.
    It would appear that it wasn't for democratic reasons that Dave would have preferred the debates to slowly sink into oblivion, but the exact opposite.
    And he would have gotten away with it if it wasn't for those pesky broadcasters.

    I do not think that true: the first debate was April 15 2010. This PB thread list from before the first debate seems to show pretty much the final percentages:

    http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2010/03/page/4/

    Though the spreadbetting was predicting a Con majority, the polls were not.
  • richardDoddrichardDodd Posts: 5,472
    Smarmeron What is Cameron doing to stop young people being engaged in politics.. lots of TV newscast over the last few weeks have shown Cameron talking to schoolchildren.. in their schools.. and kids can also watch news TV,.. they can also presumably read papers and from all of that begin to form an opinion Obviously it is Camerons fault if they don't.
  • DairDair Posts: 6,108

    Yeah go on Carnyx answer it then. In the 3 years of the Indyref not a single Nat could give an effective answer on the risks to the Scottish economy. And if you want to have a go at the UK one by all means do I'll happily engage with you, it'll make a change from Nats scuttling off when the numbers come out.

    The primary risk to the Scottish Economy is the same to any country during a dissolution of a larger state - short term economic shocks and the ability of the government to handle them. The vast majority of those are avoided by remaining in currency Union with the UK and effectively making the international dimension currency neutral. If Currency Union was denied, then a debt free, new state, would be in a far better place to absorb any shock and have the added ability of having currency devaluation as a potent option (in the worst case scenario).

    The second biggest risk would be on retaliation of the larger part of the former Union. This didn't happen in Czechoslovakia and has never previously happened with the United Kingdom. In fact, the only previosu dissolution of a UK constituent, Ireland, left Ireland with extremely favourable terms which last to this day, including free movement of Labour and People, free trade, citizenship and Voting Rights (not all of which are reciprocated).

    Finally in terms of major impact, there would be the potential for transitory job losses in firms which made a decision to move location and production. This was the single most exagerrated aspect of the Union case as in almost every case, these would have been Brass Plate movements, not Activity Movement.

    All the impact was exagerated by the Union. The vast majority of potentially negative consequences were never likely to materialise (in some cases even if there had been a will to impose negative consequences the reciprocal cost would have outweighed the benefit.

    But the downsides are tiny, absolutely inconsequential compared to the positives of being an separate economy retain all tax revenues, a positive balance of trade and far, far, far better fiscal position (short and long term) than the UK.

    The core problem with the Union argument is - like most commentary on the UK by British Nationalists - it completely overstates the UKs relevant position, economic strength, economic potential while completely ignoring the UKs very real and dire structural economic problems.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,963
    Mr. Brooke, an English Parliament is not the status quo. I fear your perception and foresight is on a par with Alexius Angelus.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,736
    Mike Smithson ‏@MSmithsonPB 5m5 minutes ago
    ENGLAND ONLY figures from Opinium/Observer poll
    CON 36
    LAB 33
    LD 8
    UKIP 14
    GRN 7
    Represents a 4.2% CON to LAB swing in England since GE10
  • coolagornacoolagorna Posts: 127

    Mike Smithson retweeted
    Opinium Research ‏@OpiniumResearch 9m9 minutes ago
    Opinium/Observer: #deadheat Lab 34% (-1), Con 34% (n/c), LibDem 8% (+2), UKIP 14% (n/c), Greens 7% (+1) http://tinyurl.com/lwuphn2

    4 polls in a row with the Tories either trailing or level

    Whatever happened to the much predicted crossover?

    The only crossover since Tuesday has been the chicken
    crossing over the road to avoid defending his record in front
    of a public still sceptical about this "long term economic plan"
    being anything more than a tedious and annoying catchphrase


    As I see it this poll shows Labour going backwards and the LDs gaining ground. It shows the coalition government on 42 and Labour opposition on 34.
    Whereas in 2010 the Coalition was on 60 and Labour 29

    So Lab up 5 ...Coalition down 18

  • SmarmeronSmarmeron Posts: 5,099
    edited March 2015
    @richardDodd
    OK, I put forward a theory that appears to fit Dave's choices (you did read the article?), I would be interested in your explanation of his attitude (to the debates)
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,514
    Carnyx said:

    Carnyx said:

    scotslass said:

    Alanbroke, Jack,Rodg

    I'm only going on current polls. You three seem to be operating on old prejudices.

    It's quite simple. The referendum was last year. The election is this year. Things are looking up for the NATS down for the Unionists hence the panic from Baker at all about the Grand Coalition - more like the Grand Old Duke of York!

    Right so you'll be running the country without an economy ?

    How will you pay the bills ?
    That question could with even r referendum within a few years?

    Yeah go on Carnyx scuttling off when the numbers come out.
    That was the point - that the Scottish economy was at least in as good health/strength as the UK average, as shown by e.g. the FT. The issue here is not so much that point, and I am not going to go over the figures yet again, but the approach which the unionist parties adopted. In which the entire indyref debate was couched by the unionists in terms of the terrible things that might happen in an independent Scotland in contrast to the wonderful sunlit uplands of a glorious Union. The problem was that, if indy was so awful, then the figures implied at least as awful a fate within the UK. For instance, lots of spending cuts in independent Scotland - but if you asked about the UK (if you could find a Unionist to ask), it was 'cuts? What cuts?" The logic fail became rather too obvious and it was very noticeable that the "too wee, too poor, too stupid" approach dropped the "too poor" bit about halfway through the debate.

    The GE is not about independence - but about the ways in which the Unionist parties propose to run the UK. Quite a different matter.



    The UK has a tough time ahead with NS falling off a cliff on tax if nothing else. But it controls it's own currency so can adapt to the knocks. Scotland would at present be lightly screwed and heading for a royal screwing in 3 years time if something isn't done to support the oil industry whiuch is circa 20% of Scotland's economy.

    However while you're going on abour Unionist pessimism which was vastly overdone it was simply the mirror image of Nationalist bullshit. There never was a sensible debate on the economy, bu8t of the two narratives the nats had more holes by a long way.

    As I said at the time too wee too poor were never the killers, it was too stupid did for the Nats.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,514

    Mr. Brooke, an English Parliament is not the status quo. I fear your perception and foresight is on a par with Alexius Angelus.

    Mr. Brooke, an English Parliament is not the status quo. I fear your perception and foresight is on a par with Alexius Angelus.

    How very dare you compare me to an Emperor who passed his time morris dancing, if he;s have waived his sword instead of a wiffle stick Byzantium would still be there.
  • JackW's forecast of Labour winning 250 seats makes my long shot suggestion of backing SkyBet's 10/1 odds for the Red Team to win between 226-250 seats look like really good value. Sadly those odds have since been trimmed back to 8/1, but those nice folk at Hills continue to offer 9/1 for this band. Should Labour get close to this band on the night, then this should prove to be a profitable trading bet.
    DYOR.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,963
    Mr. Brooke, I'd sooner blame Enrico Dandolo, to be honest.

    And the Angeli never morris danced, unlike Alexius Comnenus, who was renowned for it (as was Basil II).
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,975
    "Not a clue who the Tim is you refer to but please direct me to
    his twitter feed as it looks well worth a read judging by
    your comments"

    Tim was the best Labour poster on here. Sharp and funny. Seth was the funniest Tory poster and they both went at the same time. Coincidence?
  • scotslassscotslass Posts: 912
    Pulpstar

    Good Point. Without the Opininium "reweighting" the SNP vote would be at 47 per cent in their sub sample ie is 88 out of 238 then allowing for 22 pe cent don't know , don't care.
  • chestnutchestnut Posts: 7,341
    Approval | Disapproval ratings (Opinium 03 - 06 Mar):
    Cameron: +40 | -44
    Farage: +25 | -48
    Miliband: +20 | -51
    Clegg: +14 | -51
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,411
    scotslass said:

    Pulpstar

    Good Point. Without the Opininium "reweighting" the SNP vote would be at 47 per cent in their sub sample ie is 88 out of 238 then allowing for 22 pe cent don't know , don't care.

    It's done all the time for UKIP internet panels - but then again UKIP don't do so well on the phone surveys when you look at the unweighted numbers so it's probably correct.
  • SmarmeronSmarmeron Posts: 5,099
    @Roger
    I am without doubt the best Pragmatic Communist poster.
    (n.b. party membership numbers are on a need to know basis)
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,736

    Mike Smithson retweeted
    Opinium Research ‏@OpiniumResearch 9m9 minutes ago
    Opinium/Observer: #deadheat Lab 34% (-1), Con 34% (n/c), LibDem 8% (+2), UKIP 14% (n/c), Greens 7% (+1) http://tinyurl.com/lwuphn2

    4 polls in a row with the Tories either trailing or level

    Whatever happened to the much predicted crossover?

    The only crossover since Tuesday has been the chicken
    crossing over the road to avoid defending his record in front
    of a public still sceptical about this "long term economic plan"
    being anything more than a tedious and annoying catchphrase


    As I see it this poll shows Labour going backwards and the LDs gaining ground. It shows the coalition government on 42 and Labour opposition on 34.
    Whereas in 2010 the Coalition was on 60 and Labour 29

    So Lab up 5 ...Coalition down 18

    11.5% SWING from coalition to Lab

    Is this the swingback people keep referring to!!
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,514
    Dair said:

    Yeah go on Carnyx answer it then. In the 3 years of the Indyref not a single Nat could give an effective answer on the risks to the Scottish economy. And if you want to have a go at the UK one by all means do I'll happily engage with you, it'll make a change from Nats scuttling off when the numbers come out.

    The primary risk to the Scottish Economy is the same to any country during a dissolution of a larger state - short term economic shocks and the ability of the government to handle them. The vast majority of those are avoided by remaining in currency Union with the UK and effectively making the international dimension currency neutral. If Currency Union was denied, then a debt free, new state, would be in a far better place to absorb any shock and have the added ability of having currency devaluation as a potent option (in the worst case scenario).

    of trade and far, far, far better fiscal position (short and long term) than the UK.

    The core problem with the Union argument is - like most commentary on the UK by British Nationalists - it completely overstates the UKs relevant position, economic strength, economic potential while completely ignoring the UKs very real and dire structural economic problems.

    The exit proposed by Nats while great at telling everyone else what they wanted ignored the fact those meant to grant Nats wishes didn't agree with the proposals.

    The Nats advanced no viable currency option their strategy being dictated by opportunism rather than economic need

    The Nats had no viable argument trading with their major partners. forgetting that they aren't just in one Union but two a british one and a European one and in both cases their former partners would be best advised to put their own interests first

    The Nats also ignored the basic of their economy and it's ability to absorb shocks. An overdependence of the energy sector leaves Scotland poorly placed to pay it's way. Scotland's other main hope of finanicial services suffers the same problem as the UK as a whole and would be even more impacted post Indy since Scotland doesn't have the scale to support its financial services in a global economy.

    So no currency, uncertain trading partners and an economy based on an unstable commodity I ask again how will you pay the bills ?
  • FlightpathFlightpath Posts: 4,012

    Mike Smithson retweeted
    Opinium Research ‏@OpiniumResearch 9m9 minutes ago
    Opinium/Observer: #deadheat Lab 34% (-1), Con 34% (n/c), LibDem 8% (+2), UKIP 14% (n/c), Greens 7% (+1) http://tinyurl.com/lwuphn2

    4 polls in a row with the Tories either trailing or level

    Whatever happened to the much predicted crossover?

    The only crossover since Tuesday has been the chicken
    crossing over the road to avoid defending his record in front
    of a public still sceptical about this "long term economic plan"
    being anything more than a tedious and annoying catchphrase


    As I see it this poll shows Labour going backwards and the LDs gaining ground. It shows the coalition government on 42 and Labour opposition on 34.
    Whereas in 2010 the Coalition was on 60 and Labour 29

    So Lab up 5 ...Coalition down 18

    There was not a coalition in the 2010 election. There were two opposition parties. Labour has had a free run at being the opposition for 5 years. The upshot of this is the last poll quoted shows the Labour vote going backwards by 1% to 34.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,514
    Roger said:

    "Not a clue who the Tim is you refer to but please direct me to
    his twitter feed as it looks well worth a read judging by
    your comments"

    Tim was the best Labour poster on here. Sharp and funny. Seth was the funniest Tory poster and they both went at the same time. Coincidence?

    Roger, you're turning in to Tap. :-)
  • coolagornacoolagorna Posts: 127
    chestnut said:

    Approval | Disapproval ratings (Opinium 03 - 06 Mar):
    Cameron: +40 | -44
    Farage: +25 | -48
    Miliband: +20 | -51
    Clegg: +14 | -51

    Meaningless

    Labour people like myself may not be totally "satisfied" or
    express "approval" of Ed as I want him to kick out the
    Blairites and promote more real Labour Mps to strengthen
    a weak shadow cabinet..but I will still vote for him

    Tories are just cap doffing sycophants who will give their
    leader 12 minute standing ovations just weeks before kicking
    them out like a dog in the night to use the Beast of Bolsovers
    memorable phrase (see Thatcher 90 and IDS 03)

  • Danny565Danny565 Posts: 8,091
    Btw, what's happened to Audreyanne?
  • chestnutchestnut Posts: 7,341
    chestnut said:

    36-35 Tory lead again on Certain To Vote.

    Correction: 35-34.

    Third Opinium poll lead running using the Ipsos-Mori standard.

  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,963
    Incidentally, those into Byzantine history may wish to try Michael Psellus' Chronographia, which, I think, covers not only the splendid Basil II (although I'm unclear if it includes the fascinating reigns of Nicephorus Phocas II and John Tzimisces) but the slightly less splendid period which followed.

    Been meaning to get it for a while but I've got a small mountain of books to read.
  • ZenPaganZenPagan Posts: 689

    Is the drinks do still on tonight ?


    I belioeve it is on the 17th not today
  • coolagornacoolagorna Posts: 127

    Mike Smithson retweeted
    Opinium Research ‏@OpiniumResearch 9m9 minutes ago
    Opinium/Observer: #deadheat Lab 34% (-1), Con 34% (n/c), LibDem 8% (+2), UKIP 14% (n/c), Greens 7% (+1) http://tinyurl.com/lwuphn2

    4 polls in a row with the Tories either trailing or level

    Whatever happened to the much predicted crossover?

    The only crossover since Tuesday has been the chicken
    crossing over the road to avoid defending his record in front
    of a public still sceptical about this "long term economic plan"
    being anything more than a tedious and annoying catchphrase


    As I see it this poll shows Labour going backwards and the LDs gaining ground. It shows the coalition government on 42 and Labour opposition on 34.
    Whereas in 2010 the Coalition was on 60 and Labour 29

    So Lab up 5 ...Coalition down 18

    There was not a coalition in the 2010 election. There were two opposition parties. Labour has had a free run at being the opposition for 5 years. The upshot of this is the last poll quoted shows the Labour vote going backwards by 1% to 34.
    Going backwards LOL 1 point..Not heard of M O E?

    Going backwards is as BJO says a 11.5% swing away from you over five
    years despite a "booming economy" "jobs bonanza" and
    Ed Miliband apparently being useless, weird and weak


  • chestnutchestnut Posts: 7,341
    edited March 2015

    Meaningless

    Of course they are.


  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,411
    I note the SNP have timed their spring conference for the end of this month.

    Scottish Labour getting theirs in too early imo.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,514

    chestnut said:

    Approval | Disapproval ratings (Opinium 03 - 06 Mar):
    Cameron: +40 | -44
    Farage: +25 | -48
    Miliband: +20 | -51
    Clegg: +14 | -51

    Meaningless

    Labour people like myself may not be totally "satisfied" or
    express "approval" of Ed as I want him to kick out the
    Blairites and promote more real Labour Mps to strengthen
    a weak shadow cabinet..but I will still vote for him

    Tories are just cap doffing sycophants who will give their
    leader 12 minute standing ovations just weeks before kicking
    them out like a dog in the night to use the Beast of Bolsovers
    memorable phrase (see Thatcher 90 and IDS 03)

    Walter Wolfgang

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1499466/Heckler-82-who-dared-called-Straw-a-liar-is-held-under-terrorist-law.html
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,514

    Incidentally, those into Byzantine history may wish to try Michael Psellus' Chronographia, which, I think, covers not only the splendid Basil II (although I'm unclear if it includes the fascinating reigns of Nicephorus Phocas II and John Tzimisces) but the slightly less splendid period which followed.

    Been meaning to get it for a while but I've got a small mountain of books to read.

    is it as good as the Julian Norwich books ?
  • DairDair Posts: 6,108

    The exit proposed by Nats while great at telling everyone else what they wanted ignored the fact those meant to grant Nats wishes didn't agree with the proposals.

    The Nats advanced no viable currency option their strategy being dictated by opportunism rather than economic need

    The Nats had no viable argument trading with their major partners. forgetting that they aren't just in one Union but two a british one and a European one and in both cases their former partners would be best advised to put their own interests first

    The Nats also ignored the basic of their economy and it's ability to absorb shocks. An overdependence of the energy sector leaves Scotland poorly placed to pay it's way. Scotland's other main hope of finanicial services suffers the same problem as the UK as a whole and would be even more impacted post Indy since Scotland doesn't have the scale to support its financial services in a global economy.

    So no currency, uncertain trading partners and an economy based on an unstable commodity I ask again how will you pay the bills ?

    As usual the Unionist argument is overblow very unlikely scenarios and then make up outright lies.

    It makes no difference what currency an independent Scottish state would have in terms of its economic viability. There are good arguments in favour of all four options - Sterlingisation, Sterling Union, Euro or new Currency. Not one of them would be a barrier to independence.

    How do we know this? Because viable economies exist all round the world using all these options. Problems based on currency also take considerable periods to develop. Even in the case of Greece it took nearly 20 years to actually suffer from the problems it's fiscal imprudence was storing up.

    Trade is either a good thing or a bad thing. It is genuinely farcical that the rUK would suddenly decide to throw up trade barriers where none exists. Predominantly because regardless of relative economic strength, there would be a negative impact on rUK. Again we KNOW how the UK deals with this, we have seen it with the Dominions and with Ireland.

    As usual all you demonstrate is a weak understanding of both economics and politics.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,636
    Dair said:

    The exit proposed by Nats while great at telling everyone else what they wanted ignored the fact those meant to grant Nats wishes didn't agree with the proposals.

    The Nats advanced no viable currency option their strategy being dictated by opportunism rather than economic need

    The Nats had no viable argument trading with their major partners. forgetting that they aren't just in one Union but two a british one and a European one and in both cases their former partners would be best advised to put their own interests first

    The Nats also ignored the basic of their economy and it's ability to absorb shocks. An overdependence of the energy sector leaves Scotland poorly placed to pay it's way. Scotland's other main hope of finanicial services suffers the same problem as the UK as a whole and would be even more impacted post Indy since Scotland doesn't have the scale to support its financial services in a global economy.

    So no currency, uncertain trading partners and an economy based on an unstable commodity I ask again how will you pay the bills ?

    As usual the Unionist argument is overblow very unlikely scenarios and then make up outright lies.

    It makes no difference what currency an independent Scottish state would have in terms of its economic viability. There are good arguments in favour of all four options - Sterlingisation, Sterling Union, Euro or new Currency. Not one of them would be a barrier to independence.

    How do we know this? Because viable economies exist all round the world using all these options. Problems based on currency also take considerable periods to develop. Even in the case of Greece it took nearly 20 years to actually suffer from the problems it's fiscal imprudence was storing up.

    Trade is either a good thing or a bad thing. It is genuinely farcical that the rUK would suddenly decide to throw up trade barriers where none exists. Predominantly because regardless of relative economic strength, there would be a negative impact on rUK. Again we KNOW how the UK deals with this, we have seen it with the Dominions and with Ireland.

    As usual all you demonstrate is a weak understanding of both economics and politics.
    I think 2000 to 2010 is only 10 years rather than 20.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 22,195
    Pulpstar said:

    I note the SNP have timed their spring conference for the end of this month.

    Scottish Labour getting theirs in too early imo.

    A Spring Conference in Scotland any earlier than June is wildly optimistic!
  • richardDoddrichardDodd Posts: 5,472
    Smarmeron It is Cameron's choice re the Debates... if it is not to his liking then tough shit.. live with it
  • ZenPagan said:

    Is the drinks do still on tonight ?


    I belioeve it is on the 17th not today
    ok, thanks.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 22,195
    On topic, I can't have been the only misguided Labourite to tactically vote LibDem in Ealing Central & Acton last time. Correcting that mistake should see a Labour gain. I hope.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,514
    Dair said:

    The exit proposed by Nats while great at telling everyone else what they wanted ignored the fact those meant to grant Nats wishes didn't agree with the proposals.

    The Nats advanced no viable currency option their strategy being dictated by opportunism rather than economic need

    The Nats had no viable argument trading with their major partners. forgetting that they aren't just in one Union but two a british one and a European one and in both cases their former partners would be best advised to put their own interests first

    The Nats also ignored the basic of their economy and it's ability to absorb shocks. An overdependence of the energy sector leaves Scotland poorly placed to pay it's way. Scotland's other main hope of finanicial services suffers the same problem as the UK as a whole and would be even more impacted post Indy since Scotland doesn't have the scale to support its financial services in a global economy.

    So no currency, uncertain trading partners and an economy based on an unstable commodity I ask again how will you pay the bills ?

    As usual the Unionist argument is overblow very unlikely scenarios and then make up egative impact on rUK. Again we KNOW how the UK deals with this, we have seen it with the Dominions and with Ireland.

    As usual all you demonstrate is a weak understanding of both economics and politics.
    It actually does make a difference since there;s a difference in being in a currency union ( you own someone lses problems ) and being in your own. The bariiers are getting other people to agree that they want a Union with you. The only deliverable option is own currency which the SNP rejected.

    On trading blocs while the UK has been pragmatic as ever on trade, it is also part of a trading bloc the EU. The Nat assumption that they would just gain all the rights accrued to date doesn't stack up, UK opt outs would not apply to and Indy Scotland. Likewise agreements of fishing, financial services etc. would not apply to Scotland. So while trade will continue, it will not continue under the same condition and to the detriment of Scots

    So to put that in context Scotland's terms of trade with its partners will worsen.

    So again how do you pay your bills ?

    You can tell me when I get back from the pub,off out have a good evening.
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    scotslass said:

    Pulpstar

    Good Point. Without the Opininium "reweighting" the SNP vote would be at 47 per cent in their sub sample ie is 88 out of 238 then allowing for 22 pe cent don't know , don't care.

    The SNP will win independence in a totally different manner. They could make UK ungovernable and many in the rUK may wish them the very best of luck !

    In fact, when I go to Scotland, it does look as if I am in Europe, particularly Edinburgh.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,736
    Danny565 said:

    Btw, what's happened to Audreyanne?

    Her algorithm findings were so amazing he self combusted?
  • SmarmeronSmarmeron Posts: 5,099
    @richardDodd
    Wise words Richard, and Dave has to live with the fact, that they are not going away quietly now.
    Such is life?
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,411
    Scotland would be better off independent, then again so would England. And London would be the best off of all independent.

    Wales, Northern England and Northern Ireland would not fare so well, though the latter would become part of Ireland.
  • DairDair Posts: 6,108
    rcs1000 said:



    I think 2000 to 2010 is only 10 years rather than 20.

    ERM from 1992.

    But that's not the point.

    In the case of Greece, with widespread day to day Faki Laki and the complete inability to collect taxes, it took - in your best case for the Unionist argument - 10 years for the country to fall apart.

    It is not only a pretty risible insult to the people and institutions of Scotland that despite running the British Empire for 200 years (based on Free Universal Education meaning Scots were the only option) they would somehow be unable to run their own economy to basic OECD standards.

    It's simply not rational as an argument.

    It takes the worst run economies significant time to fall apart. The Unionists make bloated, risible claims about it happening (even that it would ALREADY have happened even though Independence would still have been 14 months away).
  • richardDoddrichardDodd Posts: 5,472
    I love millionaire commies like Roger.. urging on the revolution. They should all read up on some fairly recent French history..lotsa room in the tumbrils boys
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    edited March 2015
    john_zims said:

    @Roger

    '"Rod Crosby was spot on with his 2010 GE prediction, get over it."

    Straw clutching turned into an art form..... '

    Rod may be wrong in 2015 who knows, but however much you try to smear him he called it right in 2010,just suck it up

    Yes, who can forget his Losers and NoHopers model which predicted with 99% certainty an absolute Tory majority just a few months back !
  • SmarmeronSmarmeron Posts: 5,099
    @richardDodd
    Try not to flail around aimlessly Richard, you risk drowning before your friends can rescue you.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,736
    Will we have Elbow Crossover tomorrow?

    Should either be that or lowest ever LAB lead unless the remaining polls have LAB leads of more than 1%
  • richardDoddrichardDodd Posts: 5,472
    Smarmeron What..who is drowning and why..
  • DairDair Posts: 6,108


    It actually does make a difference since there;s a difference in being in a currency union ( you own someone lses problems ) and being in your own. The bariiers are getting other people to agree that they want a Union with you. The only deliverable option is own currency which the SNP rejected.

    On trading blocs while the UK has been pragmatic as ever on trade, it is also part of a trading bloc the EU. The Nat assumption that they would just gain all the rights accrued to date doesn't stack up, UK opt outs would not apply to and Indy Scotland. Likewise agreements of fishing, financial services etc. would not apply to Scotland. So while trade will continue, it will not continue under the same condition and to the detriment of Scots

    So to put that in context Scotland's terms of trade with its partners will worsen.

    So again how do you pay your bills ?

    You can tell me when I get back from the pub,off out have a good evening.

    Again, when caught out your default position is to lie, lie and exaggerate.

    You can argue all you want about the EU position because the UK government REFUSED to ask for it. It is entirely speculative and with 18 months to work out the position, would not have been even remotely unachievable.

    Then you start the lies. The fishing grounds ARE SCOTTISH. It is not that Scotland needs to access EU fishing grounds it is that several EU economies are significantly reliant on being able to access Scottish Waters (around 30% of ALL EU Fish Stocks)

    It all ties back to the Little Englander mindset. England is important, everywhere else isn't. England matters, nowhere else does. England's economy makes a difference to the world, none of our partners benefit us.

    It's no wonder UKIP has such a hold in a country with these sorts of insular, xenophobic attitudes.
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549

    Dair said:

    The exit proposed by Nats while great at telling everyone else what they wanted ignored the fact those meant to grant Nats wishes didn't agree with the proposals.

    The Nats advanced no viable currency option their strategy being dictated by opportunism rather than economic need

    The Nats had no viable argument trading with their major partners. forgetting that they aren't just in one Union but two a british one and a European one and in both cases their former partners would be best advised to put their own interests first

    The Nats also ignored the basic of their economy and it's ability to absorb shocks. An overdependence of the energy sector leaves Scotland poorly placed to pay it's way. Scotland's other main hope of finanicial services suffers the same problem as the UK as a whole and would be even more impacted post Indy since Scotland doesn't have the scale to support its financial services in a global economy.

    So no currency, uncertain trading partners and an economy based on an unstable commodity I ask again how will you pay the bills ?

    As usual the Unionist argument is overblow very unlikely scenarios and then make up egative impact on rUK. Again we KNOW how the UK deals with this, we have seen it with the Dominions and with Ireland.

    As usual all you demonstrate is a weak understanding of both economics and politics.
    It actually does make a difference since there;s a difference in being in a currency union ( you own someone lses problems ) and being in your own. The bariiers are getting other people to agree that they want a Union with you. The only deliverable option is own currency which the SNP rejected.

    On trading blocs while the UK has been pragmatic as ever on trade, it is also part of a trading bloc the EU. The Nat assumption that they would just gain all the rights accrued to date doesn't stack up, UK opt outs would not apply to and Indy Scotland. Likewise agreements of fishing, financial services etc. would not apply to Scotland. So while trade will continue, it will not continue under the same condition and to the detriment of Scots

    So to put that in context Scotland's terms of trade with its partners will worsen.

    So again how do you pay your bills ?

    You can tell me when I get back from the pub,off out have a good evening.
    Scotland will survive like every other nation survives. They may have a few years of transitional difficulties but I cannot believe they will not be in EU one way or the other. Some kind of status will be given to them with all the rights they have now until they formally join again.
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    Regarding Kingston & Surbiton, I would not be too confident that the Lib Dems will hold. The Labour vote may go upto 20%
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,411
    I reckon that after the next General Election one will be able to drive from Lands End to John O Groats and not pass through a single Labour or Lib Dem constituency :)
  • Danny565Danny565 Posts: 8,091

    Will we have Elbow Crossover tomorrow?

    Should either be that or lowest ever LAB lead unless the remaining polls have LAB leads of more than 1%

    The fractured-Elbow yesterday had Labour 0.2% ahead.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,411
    surbiton said:

    Regarding Kingston & Surbiton, I would not be too confident that the Lib Dems will hold. The Labour vote may go upto 20%

    Ed Davey seems to have done everything in his power to dissuade any sort of tactical voting for him - in fact I reckon one could argue if the Lib Dems are decapitated, even if it means a few more Conservative seats there is less chance of a Conservative Gov't.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,514
    edited March 2015
    Boko Haram 'joins Islamic State'

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-31784538
  • YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 4,382
    Pulpstar said:

    I reckon that after the next General Election one will be able to drive from Lands End to John O Groats and not pass through a single Labour or Lib Dem constituency :)

    Smarmeron What..who is drowning and why..

    Richard speak in latin to confuse the plebs.
  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 7,382
    Pulpstar said:

    I reckon that after the next General Election one will be able to drive from Lands End to John O Groats and not pass through a single Labour or Lib Dem constituency :)

    Are you a gambler or just another PB Tory fantastist
  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143
    The Guardian reports on UKIPs prospects of establishing themselves as the main challenger to the incumbent in more than one hundred constituencies at the general election.
    Rob Ford said:

    Ford sees Ukip coming second to several shadow cabinet members including Ed Miliband in Doncaster North, Ed Balls in Morley and Outwood, Yvette Cooper in Normanton, Pontefract and Castleford and Rachel Reeves in Leeds West.

  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    rcs1000 said:

    Dair said:

    The exit proposed by Nats while great at telling everyone else what they wanted ignored the fact those meant to grant Nats wishes didn't agree with the proposals.

    The Nats advanced no viable currency option their strategy being dictated by opportunism rather than economic need

    The Nats had no viable argument trading with their major partners. forgetting that they aren't just in one Union but two a british one and a European one and in both cases their former partners would be best advised to put their own interests first

    The Nats also ignored the basic of their economy and it's ability to absorb shocks. An overdependence of the energy sector leaves Scotland poorly placed to pay it's way. Scotland's other main hope of finanicial services suffers the same problem as the UK as a whole and would be even more impacted post Indy since Scotland doesn't have the scale to support its financial services in a global economy.

    So no currency, uncertain trading partners and an economy based on an unstable commodity I ask again how will you pay the bills ?

    As usual the Unionist argument is overblow very unlikely scenarios and then make up outright lies.

    It makes no difference what currency an independent Scottish state would have in terms of its economic viability. There are good arguments in favour of all four options - Sterlingisation, Sterling Union, Euro or new Currency. Not one of them would be a barrier to independence.

    How do we know this? Because viable economies exist all round the world using all these options. Problems based on currency also take considerable periods to develop. Even in the case of Greece it took nearly 20 years to actually suffer from the problems it's fiscal imprudence was storing up.

    Trade is either a good thing or a bad thing. It is genuinely farcical that the rUK would suddenly decide to throw up trade barriers where none exists. Predominantly because regardless of relative economic strength, there would be a negative impact on rUK. Again we KNOW how the UK deals with this, we have seen it with the Dominions and with Ireland.

    As usual all you demonstrate is a weak understanding of both economics and politics.
    I think 2000 to 2010 is only 10 years rather than 20.
    I had 2 bets with you coming to £20 on the lib Dems doing badly at the GE... Can you remember what they were? I have asked several times now

    Think it was under 10% and under 8% and the second one might have been at 11/2
This discussion has been closed.