Almost two-thirds of Scots think immigration should be reduced, a poll commissioned by the BBC has suggested.
Somehow my brain initially parsed this as two-thirds of voters wanting to reduce immigration by Scots. Which come to think of it would be an interesting thing to poll English voters on, and vice versa.
Almost two-thirds of Scots think immigration should be reduced, a poll commissioned by the BBC has suggested.
It suggests that Scots are almost as negative about immigration as the population in the rest of Britain. The poll found that 49% wanted to see less immigration, exactly the same proportion as across Britain, and 15% said it should be stopped altogether.
This is in contrast to politicians at Holyrood who tend to agree that Scotland needs more skilled migrants.
Hardly surprising in view of the recent popularity of the SNP xenophobes amongst Scotland's lower orders. Depressing tendency egged on by wee Scotlanders.
Almost two-thirds of Scots think immigration should be reduced, a poll commissioned by the BBC has suggested.
Somehow my brain initially parsed this as two-thirds of voters wanting to reduce immigration by Scots. Which come to think of it would be an interesting thing to poll English voters on, and vice versa.
In the run up to the Indyref, I was YouGov'd on that last year, I'll see if it was published.
I doubt that'll work well - not many people will have any idea who the man in the picture is, and only the (photoshopped?) EU symbol on the tie gives an indication.
I'm waiting for one of Farage in Putin's pocket, or perhaps more accurately sticking out of somewhere else entirely ...
How many non Euro fanatics will recognise the bloke in the glasses?
The target audience will know and that's all that matters
All but the terminally stupid will have noticed the EU symbol on his tie, and that is the bit of the message that matters, the identity of the man in question is just a bonus.
I have not made any call on the election and will not do so. I simply look for value bets.
So please no statements from anybody suggesting I have. Betting is all about perceptions of value..
I take a dim view of people trying to put words in my mouth
You have lied about things I have said (or rather didn't say) before on here mike so that is a bit precious of you
You have taken a lot of criticism from Tory posters for only seeing the negatives for the Tories, and I was pointing out that once someone has put up bets that turned out to be duds it is difficult to write enthusiastically about events that run against them
The first task for Labour on the night of the general election will be to try to establish a consensus that the Conservatives have lost the mandate to govern. Of course, that won't be credible unless the Conservative lead in votes and/or seats has appreciably reduced, which is by no means clear, but if it does we should expect to hear Labour people say repeatedly throughout the night "We have not made the progress we would have liked, but the message from this election is clear: the Conservatives have lost the support of the British people/the right to govern". They'll hope the Conservatives will defenestrate Cameron, and worry about May 8 on May 8.
Its going to get very messy if the nett effect is 35ish seats have moved from the LDs to the SNP with LAB and CON seats staying roughly as they are.
With 304 seats the CONs are going so struggle to form a credible government, if the got into coalition with the LDs (with 22 LDs led by Farron that seems unlikely) and with C&S from the DUP they will get a Majority of 8 and its going to be as unstable as hell.
258 LAB + 52 SNP plus greens/PC wont be quite enough to cross the line either.
A new LIBDEM leader is not going to emerge on 8th May. Clegg will probably hold his seat IMO; even if he didn't there would be the matter of a party election. The formation of a governement would however be of the essence. I expect Cameron would just say to the Libs "It makes sense to continue the coalition. Take it or leave it". A bit like the debates really!
The problem for the Lib Dems in this scenario is that if Labour get a credible leader and Farron is seen to prevaricate about sticking the knife in... they really will head for oblivion by 2020.
Why would there be a need to stick a knife anywhere? The Libs would have taken a drubbing but would still be in government. LibDem spokesmen should quit their janus faced whinging about their own government. They have greatly improved their long-term credibility as a party of government and ought to be pleased about a coalition with a successful track record.
I have not made any call on the election and will not do so. I simply look for value bets.
So please no statements from anybody suggesting I have. Betting is all about perceptions of value..
I take a dim view of people trying to put words in my mouth
You've been suggesting people back Labour Most Seats for ages (since it was dead-level, at least). Should they cut their losses?
Paddy Power Electoral Bias market is a decent way to do this, and makes sense for any book that has decent greens on Lab votes, Con seats or a good sized SNP position *cough*
Single To Win Conservatives to poll more votes and win more seats than Labour @ 4/5 Effect Of Electoral Bias No. of Votes v No. of Seats
@Tissue_Price People should bet according to whatever reason takes their fancy. For me, I would like to know why the polls seem to be shifting, and what caused them to shift, and if possible who shifted. Anyone who assumes that Dave and "debategate" can only be a positive, is either over 50, or a rabid tribalist.
To my mind, the current polling trend began following the May 2012 local elections. Click chart to enlarge...
Since then, the averaged party shares have changed as follows...
Labour have fallen 9.1 points from 42.4 to 33.3 Tories have gained 2.3 points from 31.7 to 34 LibDem have fallen 1.5 points from 8.9 to 7.4 UKIP have gained 6.1 points from 8.3 to 14.4 I don't have full data for the Greens, but they have essentially come from nowhere to 6 points.
On the face of this, it does appear to be the case that Labour are losing the battle for support, as opposed to the Tories winning it.
Anyone offering a bet that UKIP will take more seats off Labour than the Tories?
That's complicated by the fact that the Tories currently hold the marginal seats that in normal elections move between the two big parties - such as Cannock Chase, South Thanet, Thurrock, South Basildon and East Thurrock, which were all Conservative gains from Labour in 2010, but are now UKIP targets.
On a bad night for the Tories, and a good one for UKIP, seats like those would be declared as UKIP gains from the Conservatives, but they are seats that would go Labour in UKIP's absence. So this makes it hard for Labour to lose more seats than the Tories, as most of the Lab/Con marginals at risk are already blue.
Incidentally, this seems to me quite different from the experience of the Lib Dems, who mainly made inroads in previously safe Tory, or safe Labour seats, with only a small number of seats that would be marginal in their absence. I think this changes the electoral dynamic in a way that hasn't been remarked upon.
If Labour were actually to go backwards, in terms of vote share, they could lose more seats to UKIP than the Conservatives did.
How many non Euro fanatics will recognise the bloke in the glasses?
The target audience will know and that's all that matters
All but the terminally stupid will have noticed the EU symbol on his tie, and that is the bit of the message that matters, the identity of the man in question is just a bonus.
I guessed it was Junker, but honestly, I didn't know for sure. And that's kind of the point.
Almost two-thirds of Scots think immigration should be reduced, a poll commissioned by the BBC has suggested.
It suggests that Scots are almost as negative about immigration as the population in the rest of Britain. The poll found that 49% wanted to see less immigration, exactly the same proportion as across Britain, and 15% said it should be stopped altogether.
This is in contrast to politicians at Holyrood who tend to agree that Scotland needs more skilled migrants.
Hardly surprising in view of the recent popularity of the SNP xenophobes within Scotland's lower orders. Depressing tendency egged on by wee Scotlanders.
Keir Hardie was very opposed to immigration. Ironic?
How many non Euro fanatics will recognise the bloke in the glasses?
The target audience will know and that's all that matters
All but the terminally stupid will have noticed the EU symbol on his tie, and that is the bit of the message that matters, the identity of the man in question is just a bonus.
Exactly.
I get it, and I don't know who the eu bloke is! The Faceless beauracrats that run our country look the same
@Tissue_Price People should bet according to whatever reason takes their fancy. For me, I would like to know why the polls seem to be shifting, and what caused them to shift, and if possible who shifted. Anyone who assumes that Dave and "debategate" can only be a positive, is either over 50, or a rabid tribalist.
The Ashcroft polls north of the border are even worse than the first batch for Labour, SNP+35.5 seats is now decent odds on on Betfair, they don't seem to have had any conference boost whatsoever.
Also all the phone polls Seem to point to around a 4% lead for the Tories in England. That is good enough as Labour will likely outperform in London (In my view) and there aren't enough marginals there.
To my mind, the current polling trend began following the May 2012 local elections. Click chart to enlarge...
Since then, the averaged party shares have changed as follows...
Labour have fallen 9.1 points from 42.4 to 33.3 Tories have gained 2.3 points from 31.7 to 34 LibDem have fallen 1.5 points from 8.9 to 7.4 UKIP have gained 6.1 points from 8.3 to 14.4 I don't have full data for the Greens, but they have essentially come from nowhere to 6 points.
On the face of this, it does appear to be the case that Labour are losing the battle for support, as opposed to the Tories winning it.
Anyone offering a bet that UKIP will take more seats off Labour than the Tories?
That's complicated by the fact that the Tories currently hold the marginal seats that in normal elections move between the two big parties - such as Cannock Chase, South Thanet, Thurrock, South Basildon and East Thurrock, which were all Conservative gains from Labour in 2010, but are now UKIP targets.
On a bad night for the Tories, and a good one for UKIP, seats like those would be declared as UKIP gains from the Conservatives, but they are seats that would go Labour in UKIP's absence. So this makes it hard for Labour to lose more seats than the Tories, as most of the Lab/Con marginals at risk are already blue.
Incidentally, this seems to me quite different from the experience of the Lib Dems, who mainly made inroads in previously safe Tory, or safe Labour seats, with only a small number of seats that would be marginal in their absence. I think this changes the electoral dynamic in a way that hasn't been remarked upon.
If Labour were actually to go backwards, in terms of vote share, they could lose more seats to UKIP than the Conservatives did.
Very unlikely to lose more seats to UKIP. What is now concievable is for Labour to have a vote share under 29%. Which would be in line with the pattern in the "1st GE after Labour lost power"..... But Miliband may still be PM.
I expect we'll see most posters in this campaign spoofed from various angles. The UKIP spoof one will cheer up the already-fervent kippers (which is the main point of it).
I have not made any call on the election and will not do so. I simply look for value bets.
So please no statements from anybody suggesting I have. Betting is all about perceptions of value..
I take a dim view of people trying to put words in my mouth
You have lied about things I have said (or rather didn't say) before on here mike so that is a bit precious of you
You have taken a lot of criticism from Tory posters for only seeing the negatives for the Tories, and I was pointing out that once someone has put up bets that turned out to be duds it is difficult to write enthusiastically about events that run against them
Isam, it is very rude to use the word "lying". Maybe it is down to your youth? Reflect please.
@Tissue_Price People should bet according to whatever reason takes their fancy. For me, I would like to know why the polls seem to be shifting, and what caused them to shift, and if possible who shifted. Anyone who assumes that Dave and "debategate" can only be a positive, is either over 50, or a rabid tribalist.
I would suggest its nothing more than the public slowing waking up after a long hibernation, taking their first steps outside the burrow, and noticing a total shambles, but with Dave trying to look like a PM and Ed looking like an opportunist muppet talking complete boll*cks about his Debates or Jail Act (2016) and considering doing a deal with the marauders north of Hadrian's Wall. Labour would have done better keeping Miliband in the sock drawer and letting the public wake up gently.
Or to put it in a less partisan fashion. The stability and balance in the polls has been from public indifference to politics and pulling the name of their "default" political party out of the air, now they are starting to wake up.
Smile at us, pay us, pass us; but do not quite forget; For we are the people of England, that never have spoken yet.
Labour will surely choose a better leader in the next Parliament.
I wouldn't be at all confident of that, given that the leading contender is Andy Burnham.
If Labour have any sense then Ed will hang around for a bit, change the leadership rules to one member, one vote and don't change the leader until after their conference.
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 7th March Projection) :
Con 314 (+4) .. Lab 248 (-2) .. LibDem 30 (-2) .. SNP 32 .. PC 2 .. NI 18 .. UKIP 3 .. Respect 1 .. Green 1 .. Ind 0 .. Speaker 1
Conservatives 12 seats short of a majority ......................................................................................
"JackW Dozen" - 13 seats that will shape the General Election result :
Bury North - Con Hold from Likely Con Hold Pudsey - Likely Con Hold Broxtowe - TCTC Warwickshire North - TCTC from Likely Lab Gain Cambridge - LibDem Hold Ipswich - Con Hold from Likely Con Hold Watford - Likely LibDem Gain Croydon Central - Con Hold Enfield North - TCTC Cornwall North - TCTC Great Yarmouth - Con Hold Vale of Glamorgan - Con Hold Ochil and South Perthshire - SNP Gain
Changes From 7 Mar - Bury North moves from Likely Con Hold to Con Hold. Warwickshire North moves from Likely Lab Gain to TCTC. Ipswich moves from Likely Con Hold to Con Hold.
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
Conservatives now inching towards an overall majority with The ARSE!
How many non Euro fanatics will recognise the bloke in the glasses?
The target audience will know and that's all that matters
Kippers? Seems a bit pointless advertising to those fanatics already in the cult, rather than prospective converts.
I think thats over thinking it, they saw an opportunity to have a little fun and get a little publicity at the Conservative's expense, so they took it.
In any case, portraying Cameron as being a poodle to the EU is just the right message to try and win over BoO Conservatives and Blue Labour patriotic types, their main target audiences.
I have not made any call on the election and will not do so. I simply look for value bets.
So please no statements from anybody suggesting I have. Betting is all about perceptions of value..
I take a dim view of people trying to put words in my mouth
You have lied about things I have said (or rather didn't say) before on here mike so that is a bit precious of you
You have taken a lot of criticism from Tory posters for only seeing the negatives for the Tories, and I was pointing out that once someone has put up bets that turned out to be duds it is difficult to write enthusiastically about events that run against them
Isam, it is very rude to use the word "lying". Maybe it is down to your youth? Reflect please.
Mike has both invented things I haven't said and accused me of lying about a bet I had... I wish I was young! I am old enough to wear the insults of people that can't argue properly
There is a ruthless adherence to the message — “We are a New Model Army
Excellent politics, reaching out across their fractious demographics by identifying themselves with an eclectic band with a 30-year creative history combining raw anger, uplifting melody and understated, soulful emotional power in a way that defies conventional categorization.
@Indigo Perfectly valid way of thinking, (the bit about jailing people is of course rabid nonsense). My theory is that it is indeed floating voters starting to firm up as we get closer to the polls, and possibly it is the older voters increasing their certainty. As they were the least interested in the debates last time, a firming up of blue support from them might be the reason. As always, theories get tested and rejected as evidence comes in.
Labour will surely choose a better leader in the next Parliament.
I wouldn't be at all confident of that, given that the leading contender is Andy Burnham.
I'd still like to know why Burnham is vehemently (and rightly, IMHO) in favour of the Hillsborough inquiry that will help families in Liverpool and excoriate the police, yet seems to think the inquiry into Stafford, which helped families in Staffordshire and excoriated the NHS, was a mistake?
A couple of days ago I asked for the collective view on key seats but got no response. No-one with an opinion to share?
The holding of which seat would signal the Tories are on course to be the biggest party at Westminster?
The winning of which seat would signal that a Tory majority is possible?
The loss of which seat would signal that Labour could end up with fewer seats than in 2010?
The holding of which seat would signal the LibDems have defied gravity and could end up with 30+ seats?
The failure to win/hold which seat indicates lots of votes but few, if any seats for UKIP?
The winning of which seat really does establish a game changer for the SNP at Westminster?
The "JackW Dozen" is deliberately reflective of your questions :
1. Con largest party - Pudsey 2. Con maj - Warwick N 3. Lab fewer seats - Ochil 4. LibDem 30+ - Cornwall N 5. Ukip performance - Gt Yarmouth 6. SNP gamechanger - Ochil again
Ofcourse, because a right-wing eurosceptic is bound to be in the pocket of a leftie eurofederalist.
Said it yesterday - Putin with Nige in his pocket is the zinger.
Cameron in Victoria Nuland's pocket with a bunch of questionable donors would actually be accurate though. Farage seems to promote a traditional Tory Britain first foreign policy.
Of course given neo con failings in the Ukraine, Libya, Syria an Iraq I wouldn't expect Cameron wants to go there.
It is interesting that Cameron is willing to create a major clash in Europe over his continued support for the US position in the Ukraine but is unwilling to stand up for actual British interest in regard to freedom of movement or welfare payments to EU migrants.
Good to see Broxtowe slipping to TCTC in the latest effusions from Jack's nether region.
One wonders if accepting the £1000 from Blair was worth the adverse publicity. Has Soubry mentioned expenses recently? The last time she did, hers appeared lower than the previous incumbents.
Mr. Easterross, no idea, alas. I'd still be surprised if Morley & Outwood went to the blues, but apart from that I couldn't say.
Bizzarely, if the 2010 Lib Dems end up moving disproportionately to the Blues, and Labour loses more votes to UKIP than the Conservatives do in the north, then that's perfectly possible.
Both would be in complete defiance of the leading assumptions we were working to barely 12 months ago: that the 2010 Lib Dems were Labour's 'firewall', and that UKIP hurt the Tories most by a good 2/1 margin.
EdM simply isn't papabile, there's no getting around that reality as the moment of decision approaches. A ridiculous choice by Labour and its pay masters.
On topic, if they were going to take a hit this wouldn't be the time. What would potentially hurt would be either a debate with Cameron missing or a big "Will he, won't he show up" fake drama got up by the broadcasters resulting in him not showing up. If nothing happens and Cameron gets the blame for nothing happening, that's not good, but it's not particularly bad.
Either way the downside is limited by the fact that Cameron has been PM for 5 years, so the voters generally already know what they think of him.
Mr. Easterross, no idea, alas. I'd still be surprised if Morley & Outwood went to the blues, but apart from that I couldn't say.
Bizzarely, if the 2010 Lib Dems end up moving disproportionately to the Blues, and Labour loses more votes to UKIP than the Conservatives do in the north, then that's perfectly possible.
Both would be in complete defiance of the leading assumptions we were working to barely 12 months ago: that the 2010 Lib Dems were Labour's 'firewall', and that UKIP hurt the Tories most by a good 2/1 margin.
Relations between Greece and Europe's creditor powers are dangerously close to breaking point. Both sides have issued ultimatums, each insisting angrily on fixed positions and lashing out at each other with barely concealed animosity.
Far from subsiding, the defiant language from Athens is growing louder. "If Europe leaves us in crisis, we will flood it with migrants,” said Panos Kammenos, the defence minister and leader of the Independent Greeks party.
“Too bad for Berlin if there are some Jihadis from Islamic State in that wave of millions. If they strike us, we will strike them,” he told La Repubblica, vowing to give illegal migrants valid documents and open Europe’s Schengen frontiers to all comers.
One Syriza MP said the government itself has no idea how this high-stakes brinkmanship will end, but emotions are hardening by the day. “The party has learned quickly over the last three weeks that Europe is not a nice place,” he said.
Carry on with that attitude and they'll be lucky not to be kicked out of the EU, never mind the euro.
A couple of days ago I asked for the collective view on key seats but got no response. No-one with an opinion to share?
The holding of which seat would signal the Tories are on course to be the biggest party at Westminster?
The winning of which seat would signal that a Tory majority is possible?
The loss of which seat would signal that Labour could end up with fewer seats than in 2010?
The holding of which seat would signal the LibDems have defied gravity and could end up with 30+ seats?
The failure to win/hold which seat indicates lots of votes but few, if any seats for UKIP?
The winning of which seat really does establish a game changer for the SNP at Westminster?
I think Norfolk North is going to be interesting. In 2010 it was a safe LD seat.
2011 Conservatives win control of N.Norfolk district council 2013 County council elections three way Con/LD/UKIP tie 2014 Euros 1. UKIP, 2. Con, 3. LD
While the Conservatives won in 2011, they didn't field a full slate of candidates, which suggests a weak organisation.
While the LDs placed above the Greens in 2014, the Greens fielded close to a full slate of candidates in 2011, which suggests a strong local organisation.
Both the Con and UKIP candidates look good. Local councillors with strong local ties. The UKIP candidate owns some local businesses with 250 employees, (builders merchant and supermarket) and that business sponsors the local football team.
On Tory majority, one question is whether Cameron can snaffle a further 2-3% off the current UKIP vote to get his polling up to 36-38%.
If he did that, and Labour continued to slide, a majority would be possible. Albeit a small one.
Certainly possible in principle. I've always thought it likely that there would be a bit of differential swingback from UKIP, i.e. that some traditional Tory defectors who don't like Cameron would, when push comes to shove, hold their noses and vote Conservative, when faced with the imminent prospect of Ed Miliband in Number 10. The possibility of an Ed Miliband government in thrall to Nicola Sturgeon makes that even more likely.
Conversely, I don't see Ed M grabbing back many of the lost WWC Labour voters.
It's pure speculation, of course: but then, political betting is all about trying to second-guess how will things will change, not just reading across current polling.
Mr. Easterross, no idea, alas. I'd still be surprised if Morley & Outwood went to the blues, but apart from that I couldn't say.
Bizzarely, if the 2010 Lib Dems end up moving disproportionately to the Blues, and Labour loses more votes to UKIP than the Conservatives do in the north, then that's perfectly possible.
Both would be in complete defiance of the leading assumptions we were working to barely 12 months ago: that the 2010 Lib Dems were Labour's 'firewall', and that UKIP hurt the Tories most by a good 2/1 margin.
I have to say that if Norman Lamb loses North Norfolk, it would be a seriously bad night for the LibDems. Iain Dale seems to still be traumatised from the absolute kicking Norman Lamb gave him.
How many non Euro fanatics will recognise the bloke in the glasses?
The target audience will know and that's all that matters
Kippers? Seems a bit pointless advertising to those fanatics already in the cult, rather than prospective converts.
As someone else has said - it does not work if it is not true. The Miliband ad is spot on true. The SNP have Miliband by the short and curlies and the SNP will be voting on English only matters in parliament in order to keep Labour in power - hence 'vote Tory' as the ad's message.
I have to say that if Norman Lamb loses North Norfolk, it would be a seriously bad night for the LibDems. Iain Dale seems to still be traumatised from the absolute kicking Norman Lamb gave him.
Talking of Iain Dale, didn't he say he was going to quit the Tories if Cameron wriggled out of the debates?
Lib dem accuses kipper of lying... Kipper proved right
AGAIN
Nigel Farage (@Nigel_Farage) 10/03/2015 10:40 I warned last year of an EU Army. Nick Clegg said this was a "dangerous fantasy". Who was right? youtube.com/watch?v=G2Iyol…
Cameron in the pocket of Juncker.. the man he bitterly opposed ..does not compute..
He bitterly opposed him because it was politically expedient to do so, I doubt very much he was fussed one way or the other, one eurocrat is much like another.
As a Hannanite Conservative I am not planning to vote kipper, but on balance I think they have been a good thing, as it has forced Dave to take a stronger position on the EU that he otherwise would, before UKIP he felt complacent about ignoring the eurosceptics, now he can't. who knows, he might find a backbone on the issue soon. I still don't think he feels it (or very much tbh) viscerally, its just politics.
A couple of days ago I asked for the collective view on key seats but got no response. No-one with an opinion to share?
The holding of which seat would signal the Tories are on course to be the biggest party at Westminster?
The winning of which seat would signal that a Tory majority is possible?
The loss of which seat would signal that Labour could end up with fewer seats than in 2010?
The holding of which seat would signal the LibDems have defied gravity and could end up with 30+ seats?
The failure to win/hold which seat indicates lots of votes but few, if any seats for UKIP?
The winning of which seat really does establish a game changer for the SNP at Westminster?
I put together a list of Four Seats to Forego Forgetting, which I reckon are likely to be key threshold seats in the Labour/Conservative contest, and likely to declare early.
These seats were: Kingswood, Pendle, Vale of Glamorgan and Harlow. However, events have rather overtaken this list, because the Labour collapse in Scotland changes all the numbers.
Lib dem accuses kipper of lying... Kipper proved right
AGAIN
Nigel Farage (@Nigel_Farage) 10/03/2015 10:40 I warned last year of an EU Army. Nick Clegg said this was a "dangerous fantasy". Who was right? youtube.com/watch?v=G2Iyol…
I have to say that if Norman Lamb loses North Norfolk, it would be a seriously bad night for the LibDems. Iain Dale seems to still be traumatised from the absolute kicking Norman Lamb gave him.
Talking of Iain Dale, didn't he say he was going to quit the Tories if Cameron wriggled out of the debates?
Cameron in the pocket of Juncker.. the man he bitterly opposed ..does not compute..
He bitterly opposed him because it was politically expedient to do so, I doubt very much he was fussed one way or the other, one eurocrat is much like another.
That was the weird thing about it - as Eurocrats go, Juncker was pretty much the Tories' ideal candidate: Conservative, pragmatic, from a low-tax country with an over-sized finance industry. If anyone else had won the election they'd have been opposing them instead and pushing Juncker as their acceptable compromise candidate.
On Tory majority, one question is whether Cameron can snaffle a further 2-3% off the current UKIP vote to get his polling up to 36-38%.
If he did that, and Labour continued to slide, a majority would be possible. Albeit a small one.
Certainly possible in principle. I've always thought it likely that there would be a bit of differential swingback from UKIP, i.e. that some traditional Tory defectors who don't like Cameron would, when push comes to shove, hold their noses and vote Conservative, when faced with the imminent prospect of Ed Miliband in Number 10. The possibility of an Ed Miliband government in thrall to Nicola Sturgeon makes that even more likely.
Conversely, I don't see Ed M grabbing back many of the lost WWC Labour voters.
It's pure speculation, of course: but then, political betting is all about trying to second-guess how will things will change, not just reading across current polling.
My position has been consistent for months. I tipped a Tory minority at 10/1 on Ladbrokes back in October, and blogged about a possible path for a Conservative minority before Christmas. I
Jack, in Scotland I see Ochil as being pretty much low hanging fruit for the SNP. They already hold the Holyrood seat with Annabel Ewing in post. It only needs a 5% swing. Ironically the SNP candidate was until recently a Tory candidate in Glasgow.
I think Hendon, Lincoln, North Warwickshire and Carlisle are seats to watch. Tories hold them all and Dave is going nowhere. Pbers may not like her but the rather combative attitude of Anna Soubry does her no harm in my opinion. She is alleged to have said what most voters appear to think, namely that Ed is a sanctimonious c**t. No doubt he will propose a law to outlaw such suggestions.
FF..I am delighted with Cameron's stance re benefits payments to newly arrived migrants.. it might just slow down the flow.
Unfortunately its for show. It needs a treaty change, which Poland have said it will veto, and in any case Merkel has blocked any treaty changes for British renegotiations.
Carry on with that attitude and they'll be lucky not to be kicked out of the EU, never mind the euro.
Idiotically the EU didn't give itself the mechanism to do so, and couldn't without treaty change which would require unanimity, including Greece. And then there is this from Junker, which is rather like Cameron renegotiating after saying he would never countenance leaving the EU:
“There will never be a Grexit. The country is and will remain a member of monetary union. A Greek withdrawal would lead to an irreparable loss of global prestige for the whole EU.”
That was mentioned yesterday. Despicable but not surprising, given that the Islamic Human Rights Commission defines human rights as only those rights permitted under sharia law. So not human rights at all, in fact.
It should properly be named the Islamic Theocracy Commission.
For me on 7th/8th May the "Portillo revenge" moment would be if around 2am we have a 1st recount in Morley and Outwood and then around 3am a 1st recount in Twickenham followed at breakfast time by confirmation both Ed and Vince had lost by fewer than 500 votes.
For me on 7th/8th May the "Portillo revenge" moment would be if around 2am we have a 1st recount in Morley and Outwood and then around 3am a 1st recount in Twickenham followed at breakfast time by confirmation both Ed and Vince had lost by fewer than 500 votes.
Jim Murphy and Wee Dougie out would also be entertaining
Relations between Greece and Europe's creditor powers are dangerously close to breaking point. Both sides have issued ultimatums, each insisting angrily on fixed positions and lashing out at each other with barely concealed animosity.
Far from subsiding, the defiant language from Athens is growing louder. "If Europe leaves us in crisis, we will flood it with migrants,” said Panos Kammenos, the defence minister and leader of the Independent Greeks party.
“Too bad for Berlin if there are some Jihadis from Islamic State in that wave of millions. If they strike us, we will strike them,” he told La Repubblica, vowing to give illegal migrants valid documents and open Europe’s Schengen frontiers to all comers.
One Syriza MP said the government itself has no idea how this high-stakes brinkmanship will end, but emotions are hardening by the day. “The party has learned quickly over the last three weeks that Europe is not a nice place,” he said.
Carry on with that attitude and they'll be lucky not to be kicked out of the EU, never mind the euro.
Immediate immigration controls for all Greek EU passport holders, if they follow through on that threat. Increased border checks would piss off a lot of tourists too. Fun, fun, fun.
That was mentioned yesterday. Despicable but not surprising, given that the Islamic Human Rights Commission defines human rights as only those rights permitted under sharia law. So not human rights at all, in fact.
It should properly be named the Islamic Theocracy Commission.
Some unsurprising names in that list e.g Lord Ahmed...the man who claimed a Jewish conspiracy was behind his own conviction and sentencing for dangerous driving shortly before being involved in a fatal car crash.
FF..I am delighted with Cameron's stance re benefits payments to newly arrived migrants.. it might just slow down the flow.
Unfortunately its for show. It needs a treaty change, which Poland have said it will veto, and in any case Merkel has blocked any treaty changes for British renegotiations.
Carry on with that attitude and they'll be lucky not to be kicked out of the EU, never mind the euro.
Idiotically the EU didn't give itself the mechanism to do so, and couldn't without treaty change which would require unanimity, including Greece. And then there is this from Junker, which is rather like Cameron renegotiating after saying he would never countenance leaving the EU:
“There will never be a Grexit. The country is and will remain a member of monetary union. A Greek withdrawal would lead to an irreparable loss of global prestige for the whole EU.”
They have to say that, and keep saying that, - right up to the last minute before they announce it.
Mostly good stuff from Hammond, except the b*llocks about "U.K. Must ‘Draw a Line’ Under Online Spying Debate" when that debate hasn't even started yet. What he appears to mean is nothing to see here, move along"
That was mentioned yesterday. Despicable but not surprising, given that the Islamic Human Rights Commission defines human rights as only those rights permitted under sharia law. So not human rights at all, in fact.
It should properly be named the Islamic Theocracy Commission.
Some unsurprising names in that list e.g Lord Ahmed...the man who claimed a Jewish conspiracy was behind his own conviction and sentencing for dangerous driving shortly before being involved in a fatal car crash.
Jews want to behead people too... There was a link from someone yesterday on here.. Apparently it's a middle eastern thing not a Muslim thing
Unfortunately its for show. It needs a treaty change, which Poland have said it will veto, and in any case Merkel has blocked any treaty changes for British renegotiations.
Really?
Amazing that you know this, given that the negotiations haven't started.
Mostly good stuff from Hammond, except the b*llocks about "U.K. Must ‘Draw a Line’ Under Online Spying Debate" when that debate hasn't even started yet. What he appears to mean is nothing to see here, move along"
Relations between Greece and Europe's creditor powers are dangerously close to breaking point. Both sides have issued ultimatums, each insisting angrily on fixed positions and lashing out at each other with barely concealed animosity.
Far from subsiding, the defiant language from Athens is growing louder. "If Europe leaves us in crisis, we will flood it with migrants,” said Panos Kammenos, the defence minister and leader of the Independent Greeks party.
“Too bad for Berlin if there are some Jihadis from Islamic State in that wave of millions. If they strike us, we will strike them,” he told La Repubblica, vowing to give illegal migrants valid documents and open Europe’s Schengen frontiers to all comers.
One Syriza MP said the government itself has no idea how this high-stakes brinkmanship will end, but emotions are hardening by the day. “The party has learned quickly over the last three weeks that Europe is not a nice place,” he said.
Carry on with that attitude and they'll be lucky not to be kicked out of the EU, never mind the euro.
Immediate immigration controls for all Greek EU passport holders, if they follow through on that threat. Increased border checks would piss off a lot of tourists too. Fun, fun, fun.
Not possible for the same reason we can't reduce immigration from our EU partners.
The EU treaties all are written with the assumption that everyone in it are fellow travellers playing by the rules. There is no article that allows expulsion of a member, and no article that allows curtailment of the fundamental freedoms, especially of movement.
Mostly good stuff from Hammond, except the b*llocks about "U.K. Must ‘Draw a Line’ Under Online Spying Debate" when that debate hasn't even started yet. What he appears to mean is nothing to see here, move along"
The BBC might want to look at themselves...in their own report on Hammond's speech.
Cage, an advocacy group for those "impacted by the War on Terror", has said MI5 played a role in the radicalisation of Emwazi.
So Cage are just an advocacy group, not even controversial, no? How can you write such bollocks. Legitimizing a group that have no rights to be considered legitimate group.
And their insistence on calling terrorists "militants", because of some spurious nonsense about no official definition of exactly what a terrorist is.
We are in familiar territory for anyone over the age of about 50, with Russia’s behaviour a stark reminder that it has the potential to pose the single greatest threat to our security.
Mr. Urquhart, quite despicable, that was mentioned yesterday.
Glad to see Hammond having a go at apologists for murderers today.
A speech is a start. It's not sufficient. There needs to be action. I have suggested a range of actions which could be taken. Is it too much to expect someone in government to come up with some ideas, some practical steps and some timings?
A very close look at the charitable status of the IHRC, for instance, is needed. Given that sharia law has been deemed by the ECHR to be incompatible with the European Convention I find it hard to see how it can properly be described as a charity.
It will be interesting to see the Labour reaction. I do worry that they lack the willingness to take the tough decisions needed to really challenge the ideology of extremism and terrorism, even if they are clear on being against it.
Unfortunately its for show. It needs a treaty change, which Poland have said it will veto, and in any case Merkel has blocked any treaty changes for British renegotiations.
Really?
Amazing that you know this, given that the negotiations haven't started.
Poland would block David Cameron's plans to clampdown on European Union migrants claiming benefits unless he applies the measures to Britons as well, one of its ministers has said.
Rafal Trzaskowski said it was an ''absolute red line'' for his government that there is no discrimination in the welfare system on grounds of nationality.
Mr. Urquhart, quite despicable, that was mentioned yesterday.
Glad to see Hammond having a go at apologists for murderers today.
A speech is a start. It's not sufficient. There needs to be action. I have suggested a range of actions which could be taken. Is it too much to expect someone in government to come up with some ideas, some practical steps and some timings?
A very close look at the charitable status of the IHRC, for instance, is needed. Given that sharia law has been deemed by the ECHR to be incompatible with the European Convention I find it hard to see how it can properly be described as a charity.
It will be interesting to see the Labour reaction. I do worry that they lack the willingness to take the tough decisions needed to really challenge the ideology of extremism and terrorism, even if they are clear on being against it.
We have few politicians of any stripes that will just stand up and tell it like it is. Much that Thatcher was wrong on many things, I can't imagine she would be mincing her words and talking nonsense like this issue has nothing to do with Islam, rather than as Sajid Javid said it is "lazy" to make such a statement.
'It is no good for people to say they are not Muslims, that is what they call themselves."
Remember we weren't even allowed to hear Jerry Adams voice.
It isn't rocket science, as one of my best friends (who is a Muslim explained), there are not insignificant group of people who want to the world to return to the 7th Century with a world that is ruled by a totally literal interpretation of the Koran. This is totally incompatible with the world and especially the western world. The Old and New Testaments has lots of similar stuff, but virtually nobody wants to live their life according to every single word of it.
Jack, in Scotland I see Ochil as being pretty much low hanging fruit for the SNP. They already hold the Holyrood seat with Annabel Ewing in post. It only needs a 5% swing. Ironically the SNP candidate was until recently a Tory candidate in Glasgow.
I think Hendon, Lincoln, North Warwickshire and Carlisle are seats to watch. Tories hold them all and Dave is going nowhere. Pbers may not like her but the rather combative attitude of Anna Soubry does her no harm in my opinion. She is alleged to have said what most voters appear to think, namely that Ed is a sanctimonious c**t. No doubt he will propose a law to outlaw such suggestions.
She is too aggressive. I don't like Nick Palmer's politics, but I don't like her either.
To be honest, and I don't want to be rude, I take your predictions with a bit of a pinch of salt given your exuberant forecasts for Tory performance in Scotland in GE2010. The flipside of that was the way you gave up all hope just a few weeks out from the indyref, whilst DavidL was out fighting and campaigning every day. You were all negativity in your posts on here.
I'm sure I'm not the only Conservative who was disappointed in you. I'm afraid I now heavily discount your analysis.
Question here - does anyone know if Yougov believe their entire panel is slightly UKIP heavy/Tory light or some such, as in if every single one of the 300,000 were polled then would adjustments have to be made ?
We are in familiar territory for anyone over the age of about 50, with Russia’s behaviour a stark reminder that it has the potential to pose the single greatest threat to our security.
Potential is one thing actuality is another. In reality between 1970 and 1997 the IRA posed a far greater threat to the people of this country than the USSR!
Unfortunately its for show. It needs a treaty change, which Poland have said it will veto, and in any case Merkel has blocked any treaty changes for British renegotiations.
Really?
Amazing that you know this, given that the negotiations haven't started.
Poland would block David Cameron's plans to clampdown on European Union migrants claiming benefits unless he applies the measures to Britons as well, one of its ministers has said.
Rafal Trzaskowski said it was an ''absolute red line'' for his government that there is no discrimination in the welfare system on grounds of nationality.
But she declined to support the idea of any change in EU treaties to give national governments more power to restrict benefits to European citizens.
So, let's get this straight, when you start a negotiation you give up before the start and simply accept the other side's indications of the opening position as final?
In any case Angela Merkel hasn't said what you think she has said. It may well be that changing the treaties is not the best way of restricting benefits for EU migrants. The EU has a very distinguished record of finding creative ways of getting round problems like that. From your own link:
She insisted she wanted to keep Britain in the EU and would work to find a compromise to meet British concerns about welfare tourism.
Comments
I'm waiting for one of Farage in Putin's pocket, or perhaps more accurately sticking out of somewhere else entirely ...
(Speaking of which:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-31794523 and http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-31796226)
You have taken a lot of criticism from Tory posters for only seeing the negatives for the Tories, and I was pointing out that once someone has put up bets that turned out to be duds it is difficult to write enthusiastically about events that run against them
Single To Win
Conservatives to poll more votes and win more seats than Labour @ 4/5
Effect Of Electoral Bias
No. of Votes v No. of Seats
People should bet according to whatever reason takes their fancy.
For me, I would like to know why the polls seem to be shifting, and what caused them to shift, and if possible who shifted.
Anyone who assumes that Dave and "debategate" can only be a positive, is either over 50, or a rabid tribalist.
I get it, and I don't know who the eu bloke is! The Faceless beauracrats that run our country look the same
Also all the phone polls Seem to point to around a 4% lead for the Tories in England. That is good enough as Labour will likely outperform in London (In my view) and there aren't enough marginals there.
The holding of which seat would signal the Tories are on course to be the biggest party at Westminster?
The winning of which seat would signal that a Tory majority is possible?
The loss of which seat would signal that Labour could end up with fewer seats than in 2010?
The holding of which seat would signal the LibDems have defied gravity and could end up with 30+ seats?
The failure to win/hold which seat indicates lots of votes but few, if any seats for UKIP?
The winning of which seat really does establish a game changer for the SNP at Westminster?
Or to put it in a less partisan fashion. The stability and balance in the polls has been from public indifference to politics and pulling the name of their "default" political party out of the air, now they are starting to wake up.
Smile at us, pay us, pass us; but do not quite forget;
For we are the people of England, that never have spoken yet.
Andy Burnham Will Never Be Prime Minister
In any case, portraying Cameron as being a poodle to the EU is just the right message to try and win over BoO Conservatives and Blue Labour patriotic types, their main target audiences.
Perfectly valid way of thinking, (the bit about jailing people is of course rabid nonsense).
My theory is that it is indeed floating voters starting to firm up as we get closer to the polls, and possibly it is the older voters increasing their certainty.
As they were the least interested in the debates last time, a firming up of blue support from them might be the reason.
As always, theories get tested and rejected as evidence comes in.
Pudsey
Sherwood
Dumfries and Galloway
Hornsey & Wood Green & Torbay
Thurrock
Edinburgh South / Glasgow Northwest
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2873911/Outcry-Burnham-claims-Mid-Staffs-probe-mistake-Labour-accused-insulting-victims-saying-better-report-never-published.html
Obviously Liverpudlians are more deserving of the truth than Staffordians.
1. Con largest party - Pudsey
2. Con maj - Warwick N
3. Lab fewer seats - Ochil
4. LibDem 30+ - Cornwall N
5. Ukip performance - Gt Yarmouth
6. SNP gamechanger - Ochil again
Of course given neo con failings in the Ukraine, Libya, Syria an Iraq I wouldn't expect Cameron wants to go there.
The New One (Antepost 1 year ago)
Jezki (Advised by PtP) @ 9-2/BoG 1 pt E/W
Vibrato Valtat @ 7-1 1 Pt E/W (888 Sport)
Josses Hill @ 12-1/BoG 0.5 pt E/W (Paddy Power, Money back as free bet if UdS wins)
Best of luck all
Both would be in complete defiance of the leading assumptions we were working to barely 12 months ago: that the 2010 Lib Dems were Labour's 'firewall', and that UKIP hurt the Tories most by a good 2/1 margin.
If he did that, and Labour continued to slide, a majority would be possible. Albeit a small one.
Either way the downside is limited by the fact that Cameron has been PM for 5 years, so the voters generally already know what they think of him.
I find this funny. Many may not.
What was the value bet on that?
2011 Conservatives win control of N.Norfolk district council
2013 County council elections three way Con/LD/UKIP tie
2014 Euros 1. UKIP, 2. Con, 3. LD
While the Conservatives won in 2011, they didn't field a full slate of candidates, which suggests a weak organisation.
While the LDs placed above the Greens in 2014, the Greens fielded close to a full slate of candidates in 2011, which suggests a strong local organisation.
Both the Con and UKIP candidates look good. Local councillors with strong local ties. The UKIP candidate owns some local businesses with 250 employees, (builders merchant and supermarket) and that business sponsors the local football team.
Conversely, I don't see Ed M grabbing back many of the lost WWC Labour voters.
It's pure speculation, of course: but then, political betting is all about trying to second-guess how will things will change, not just reading across current polling.
For Labour.
How long before his mate Vince joins him ?
If that happens here then, unless it's an anti-Balls effect, it'll be a bad night for Labour.
AGAIN
Nigel Farage (@Nigel_Farage)
10/03/2015 10:40
I warned last year of an EU Army. Nick Clegg said this was a "dangerous fantasy". Who was right? youtube.com/watch?v=G2Iyol…
As a Hannanite Conservative I am not planning to vote kipper, but on balance I think they have been a good thing, as it has forced Dave to take a stronger position on the EU that he otherwise would, before UKIP he felt complacent about ignoring the eurosceptics, now he can't. who knows, he might find a backbone on the issue soon. I still don't think he feels it (or very much tbh) viscerally, its just politics.
The IHRC, one should remember, is a registered British charity.
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2015/03/the-islamophobe-of-the-year-event-reached-a-new-low-this-year/
Maybe the Charities Commission should start doing some digging into the IHRC.....
These seats were: Kingswood, Pendle, Vale of Glamorgan and Harlow. However, events have rather overtaken this list, because the Labour collapse in Scotland changes all the numbers.
I think Hendon, Lincoln, North Warwickshire and Carlisle are seats to watch. Tories hold them all and Dave is going nowhere. Pbers may not like her but the rather combative attitude of Anna Soubry does her no harm in my opinion. She is alleged to have said what most voters appear to think, namely that Ed is a sanctimonious c**t. No doubt he will propose a law to outlaw such suggestions.
Glad to see Hammond having a go at apologists for murderers today.
It should properly be named the Islamic Theocracy Commission.
More depressing than this entirely predictable but rancid gesture are those morally vacuous twits who have sent it messages of congratulation. The list can be found here - http://hurryupharry.org/2015/03/10/just-a-short-post-on-the-islamic-human-rights-commission/.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2015/mar/10/philip-hammonds-speech-defending-mi5-and-mi6-politics-live-blog#block-54fec890e4b0511e8bf1a3de
High Peak 8/13
Loughborough 4/6
Wirral West 4/5
Nuneaton 7/5
Dewsbury 9/4
Immediate immigration controls for all Greek EU passport holders, if they follow through on that threat. Increased border checks would piss off a lot of tourists too. Fun, fun, fun.
They have to say that, and keep saying that, - right up to the last minute before they announce it.
We saw this with ERM.....
note the question order. They ask approval of local MP *before* asking how people will vote
+publication bias. They have done 100 polls. MoE is +/-5%. Random error gives some good results. They publish those
Amazing that you know this, given that the negotiations haven't started.
Not possible for the same reason we can't reduce immigration from our EU partners.
The EU treaties all are written with the assumption that everyone in it are fellow travellers playing by the rules. There is no article that allows expulsion of a member, and no article that allows curtailment of the fundamental freedoms, especially of movement.
Rather naive in a touching sort of way.
Cage, an advocacy group for those "impacted by the War on Terror", has said MI5 played a role in the radicalisation of Emwazi.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-31809453
So Cage are just an advocacy group, not even controversial, no? How can you write such bollocks. Legitimizing a group that have no rights to be considered legitimate group.
And their insistence on calling terrorists "militants", because of some spurious nonsense about no official definition of exactly what a terrorist is.
We are in familiar territory for anyone over the age of about 50, with Russia’s behaviour a stark reminder that it has the potential to pose the single greatest threat to our security.
A very close look at the charitable status of the IHRC, for instance, is needed. Given that sharia law has been deemed by the ECHR to be incompatible with the European Convention I find it hard to see how it can properly be described as a charity.
It will be interesting to see the Labour reaction. I do worry that they lack the willingness to take the tough decisions needed to really challenge the ideology of extremism and terrorism, even if they are clear on being against it.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/11266917/Poland-will-block-bid-to-slash-EU-migrant-benefits-minister-warns.html as has she
http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/550791/Angela-Merkel-rejects-Cameron-s-attempts-curb-benefit-tourism
Con 25.5 1.4 (SD)
Lab 26.3 1.4
LD 5.2 0.8
UKIP 13.2 0.8
Yougov "Last 10 weighted"
Con 27.4 1.2
Lab 27 1
LD 5.7 0.8
UKIP 11.6 1
The lower SD of the weighted Yougovs gives an indication it is correct for Con/Lab so "crossover" does seem to have taken place.
UKIP have upside potential, but the effect is broadly neutral on Lab/Con battle imo.
'It is no good for people to say they are not Muslims, that is what they call themselves."
Remember we weren't even allowed to hear Jerry Adams voice.
It isn't rocket science, as one of my best friends (who is a Muslim explained), there are not insignificant group of people who want to the world to return to the 7th Century with a world that is ruled by a totally literal interpretation of the Koran. This is totally incompatible with the world and especially the western world. The Old and New Testaments has lots of similar stuff, but virtually nobody wants to live their life according to every single word of it.
To be honest, and I don't want to be rude, I take your predictions with a bit of a pinch of salt given your exuberant forecasts for Tory performance in Scotland in GE2010. The flipside of that was the way you gave up all hope just a few weeks out from the indyref, whilst DavidL was out fighting and campaigning every day. You were all negativity in your posts on here.
I'm sure I'm not the only Conservative who was disappointed in you. I'm afraid I now heavily discount your analysis.
Con most seats 1/2 (think that's in a touch from yesterday) lab 13/8
Con maj 9/2, Lab maj 14/1
http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/550791/Angela-Merkel-rejects-Cameron-s-attempts-curb-benefit-tourism So, let's get this straight, when you start a negotiation you give up before the start and simply accept the other side's indications of the opening position as final?
In any case Angela Merkel hasn't said what you think she has said. It may well be that changing the treaties is not the best way of restricting benefits for EU migrants. The EU has a very distinguished record of finding creative ways of getting round problems like that. From your own link:
She insisted she wanted to keep Britain in the EU and would work to find a compromise to meet British concerns about welfare tourism.
“Where there’s a will, there’s a way,” she said.