Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » For those who think that political betting markets are pred

SystemSystem Posts: 12,290
edited March 2015 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » For those who think that political betting markets are predictive check out what happened in 2010

As we all remember LAB came out with 258 seats so those punters who placed spread bets on Gordon Brown’s party on election day five years ago did very nicely indeed. A £50 buy bet on LAB with SPIN on the morning of the 2010 general election would have been at a level 39 seats below what happened. So the profit would have been 39 times £50. Not bad.

Read the full story here


«134

Comments

  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,281
    First!
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,232

    First!

    Argh!
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,232
    Spreadbetting is a very dangerous game....
  • RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737
    I see the government did a lot better than expected...
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,341
    Yep, the Lib Dems were a sell - just like this time.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    Wonderful sunrise this morning. :smile:
  • At long last Nate Silver is starting to take an interest in the U.K. GE, where his highly-esteemed 538.com is linking up with Chris Hanretty's electionforecast.co.uk which currently has the Tories comfortably ahead on 290 seats with Labour on 275 seats and the LibDems winning only a miserable 24 seats.
    IIRC, back in 2010 it was Stephen Fisher's model which triumphed with a near perfect prediction of the result. Curiously very little attention is being paid on PB.com to his forecasting this time around, compared say with the polling results produced by the largely untried and untested relative new boy on the block, Lord Ashcroft. It has to be said however that the full scale of the SNP's surge has only very recently reflected in his model's seat projections, the latest update of which should appear later this morning.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    Latest ARSE with added APLOMB 2015 General Election & "JackW Dozen" Projection Countdown :

    1600 minutes
  • How long before someone comes up with a picture of the Miliband's doubtless luxurious principal kitchen?
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787

    At long last Nate Silver is starting to take an interest in the U.K. GE, where his highly-esteemed 538.com is linking up with Chris Hanretty's electionforecast.co.uk which currently has the Tories comfortably ahead on 290 seats with Labour on 275 seats and the LibDems winning only a miserable 24 seats.
    IIRC, back in 2010 it was Stephen Fisher's model which triumphed with a near perfect prediction of the result. Curiously very little attention is being paid on PB.com to his forecasting this time around, compared say with the polling results produced by the largely untried and untested relative new boy on the block, Lord Ashcroft. It has to be said however that the full scale of the SNP's surge has only very recently reflected in his model's seat projections, the latest update of which should appear later this morning.

    I agree.

    Far more attention, praise and honours should be heaped upon those with a proven general election track record both here and across the pond, whoever these Scottish nobles and PB TOTY might be.

    :innocent:

  • Here's the link to the intro piece by Nate Silver confifming 538.com's coverage of the British GE, involving an interview with a colleague:
    http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/uk-election-forecast/
    As will be seen from the piece, the good people of Skegness are set to be graced by a visit by the aforesaid Nathaniel.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,350
    Yes, its a fair point. When I first came to PB as a lurker several years ago it was because I thought that the markets and shrewder investors were more likely to have an inside track on what was really happening than the MSM or the polls. This was based on a full time organiser who had come to Dundee to help with a potential by election who seemed (or claimed) to make serious money in by elections etc using internal information. From what I have learned on here since I wonder who was taking the bets but that is another story.

    What I discovered, of course, is that whilst there are undoubtedly some shrewdies who can and do make money on political betting their input is swamped by well off tories voting with their hearts rather than their heads having convinced themselves that all reasonable people must think like them.

    But the chat has been good.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    Here's the link to the intro piece by Nate Silver confifming 538.com's coverage of the British GE, involving an interview with a colleague:
    http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/uk-election-forecast/
    As will be seen from the piece, the good people of Skegness are set to be graced by a visit by the aforesaid Nathaniel.

    I thought he tried already in 2010 and got it woefully wrong?
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 61,446
    To be fair, the Tory seat spreads weren't too far off.

    What that tells me is the (rarely mentioned) truth that Labour actually did very well in GE2010, given the hopeless position they were in, and fought a very strong rearguard action.

    Impressive when you consider they "should" have lost a further 40 seats. ~20 or so to the Lib Dem surge that never was, yes, but also another 20 to the Tories.
  • GadflyGadfly Posts: 1,199
    Moving average chart of the 100 most recent YouGov polls. Click to enlarge...

    Simple, Free Image and File Hosting at MediaFire
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,350
    Charles said:

    Here's the link to the intro piece by Nate Silver confifming 538.com's coverage of the British GE, involving an interview with a colleague:
    http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/uk-election-forecast/
    As will be seen from the piece, the good people of Skegness are set to be graced by a visit by the aforesaid Nathaniel.

    I thought he tried already in 2010 and got it woefully wrong?
    Yes he did and the reason, IIRC, was that his modelling was dependent on good quality and regular local polling such as is available for House seats etc in the US and which was just not available here. Whether Lord A's polling is good quality and frequent enough in marginal seats to fill that data gap remains to be seen. I suspect the frequency will still be an issue.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    DavidL said:

    Charles said:

    Here's the link to the intro piece by Nate Silver confifming 538.com's coverage of the British GE, involving an interview with a colleague:
    http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/uk-election-forecast/
    As will be seen from the piece, the good people of Skegness are set to be graced by a visit by the aforesaid Nathaniel.

    I thought he tried already in 2010 and got it woefully wrong?
    Yes he did and the reason, IIRC, was that his modelling was dependent on good quality and regular local polling such as is available for House seats etc in the US and which was just not available here. Whether Lord A's polling is good quality and frequent enough in marginal seats to fill that data gap remains to be seen. I suspect the frequency will still be an issue.
    Not to mention the quality!

    I think Lord A has made a fundamental error in using different polling companies for each set of polls. While I appreciate they are only data gathering for him, and the methodology and analytical approach are uniquely his, it does seem to introduce a potentially uncontrolled element of volatility into the numbers.
  • chestnutchestnut Posts: 7,341
    Weren't the Lib Dems marvellous pre-election poll ratings largely built on the backs of the under 35s who subsequently didn't turn up?

    Who are that group polling for now?
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,350

    To be fair, the Tory seat spreads weren't too far off.

    What that tells me is the (rarely mentioned) truth that Labour actually did very well in GE2010, given the hopeless position they were in, and fought a very strong rearguard action.

    Impressive when you consider they "should" have lost a further 40 seats. ~20 or so to the Lib Dem surge that never was, yes, but also another 20 to the Tories.

    Rightly or wrongly I ascribe that to Mandleson who organised a very effective campaign and persuaded huge numbers of public sector workers in particular that they would be getting their P45s by the end of the week if the Tories got in and their pensions would probably be cancelled for good measure. He scared a lot of people and somehow got away with never spelling out what Labour would do instead.

    One of the many things that makes me wonder about Ed is how far Mandleson is off the reservation this time. He seems to get ruder about Ed every time he speaks which is becoming increasingly frequently.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,350
    Charles said:

    DavidL said:

    Charles said:

    Here's the link to the intro piece by Nate Silver confifming 538.com's coverage of the British GE, involving an interview with a colleague:
    http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/uk-election-forecast/
    As will be seen from the piece, the good people of Skegness are set to be graced by a visit by the aforesaid Nathaniel.

    I thought he tried already in 2010 and got it woefully wrong?
    Yes he did and the reason, IIRC, was that his modelling was dependent on good quality and regular local polling such as is available for House seats etc in the US and which was just not available here. Whether Lord A's polling is good quality and frequent enough in marginal seats to fill that data gap remains to be seen. I suspect the frequency will still be an issue.
    Not to mention the quality!

    I think Lord A has made a fundamental error in using different polling companies for each set of polls. While I appreciate they are only data gathering for him, and the methodology and analytical approach are uniquely his, it does seem to introduce a potentially uncontrolled element of volatility into the numbers.
    I agree that consistency of data would have been a sensible starting point. Otherwise we will just have to wait and see I suppose.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    DavidL said:

    Yes, its a fair point. When I first came to PB as a lurker several years ago it was because I thought that the markets and shrewder investors were more likely to have an inside track on what was really happening than the MSM or the polls. This was based on a full time organiser who had come to Dundee to help with a potential by election who seemed (or claimed) to make serious money in by elections etc using internal information. From what I have learned on here since I wonder who was taking the bets but that is another story.

    What I discovered, of course, is that whilst there are undoubtedly some shrewdies who can and do make money on political betting their input is swamped by well off tories voting with their hearts rather than their heads having convinced themselves that all reasonable people must think like them.

    But the chat has been good.

    Is it a systemic error in favour of the Tories? Are there other pieces of evidence other than the 2010 GE?

    I think that elections with over 100 seats changing hands are pretty rare, that there is a lot of inertia in the system. Political landslides are pretty infrequent, though a Scottish one is on the cards.

    I am not a spread better myself, I do not like the idea of (near) unlimited liability, so my bets ave been on the seat bands. It looks to me that all of the parties have the value on the down side, so not sure who is going to be the winner!
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    DavidL said:

    Charles said:

    DavidL said:

    Charles said:

    Here's the link to the intro piece by Nate Silver confifming 538.com's coverage of the British GE, involving an interview with a colleague:
    http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/uk-election-forecast/
    As will be seen from the piece, the good people of Skegness are set to be graced by a visit by the aforesaid Nathaniel.

    I thought he tried already in 2010 and got it woefully wrong?
    Yes he did and the reason, IIRC, was that his modelling was dependent on good quality and regular local polling such as is available for House seats etc in the US and which was just not available here. Whether Lord A's polling is good quality and frequent enough in marginal seats to fill that data gap remains to be seen. I suspect the frequency will still be an issue.
    Not to mention the quality!

    I think Lord A has made a fundamental error in using different polling companies for each set of polls. While I appreciate they are only data gathering for him, and the methodology and analytical approach are uniquely his, it does seem to introduce a potentially uncontrolled element of volatility into the numbers.
    I agree that consistency of data would have been a sensible starting point. Otherwise we will just have to wait and see I suppose.
    The competition probably saved him a few shekels though
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,350

    DavidL said:

    Yes, its a fair point. When I first came to PB as a lurker several years ago it was because I thought that the markets and shrewder investors were more likely to have an inside track on what was really happening than the MSM or the polls. This was based on a full time organiser who had come to Dundee to help with a potential by election who seemed (or claimed) to make serious money in by elections etc using internal information. From what I have learned on here since I wonder who was taking the bets but that is another story.

    What I discovered, of course, is that whilst there are undoubtedly some shrewdies who can and do make money on political betting their input is swamped by well off tories voting with their hearts rather than their heads having convinced themselves that all reasonable people must think like them.

    But the chat has been good.

    Is it a systemic error in favour of the Tories? Are there other pieces of evidence other than the 2010 GE?

    I think that elections with over 100 seats changing hands are pretty rare, that there is a lot of inertia in the system. Political landslides are pretty infrequent, though a Scottish one is on the cards.

    I am not a spread better myself, I do not like the idea of (near) unlimited liability, so my bets ave been on the seat bands. It looks to me that all of the parties have the value on the down side, so not sure who is going to be the winner!
    I suspect that it is a systemic error although I have not done a detailed analysis. I think the markets are seriously out of step with Tory prospects this time too but Rod may prove to be right yet.

    I think we also tend to see a similar effect in the States where more money gets put on the Republicans than is strictly rational. I have noticed some of the smarter operators on here like OGH and antifrank seem to think there are opportunities in swimming against the tide where weight of money is distorting the underlying reality.
  • chestnutchestnut Posts: 7,341
    Something from the daily YG:

    The LD Don't Knows/Refusals are down to 14%.

    That's the lowest I can recall seeing in that column and for every LD switcher going to Labour, there are two moving into a different column.

  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 34,011
    chestnut said:

    Weren't the Lib Dems marvellous pre-election poll ratings largely built on the backs of the under 35s who subsequently didn't turn up?

    Who are that group polling for now?

    Anyone 25 or so in 2010 is now a thirty-something. With five years experience of austerity just as they were getting their homes together.
    Similarly a bright-eyed 20 year old student in 2010 is now a 25 year old post grad with a lower living standard than their older siblings.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,350
    Charles said:

    DavidL said:

    Charles said:

    DavidL said:

    Charles said:

    Here's the link to the intro piece by Nate Silver confifming 538.com's coverage of the British GE, involving an interview with a colleague:
    http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/uk-election-forecast/
    As will be seen from the piece, the good people of Skegness are set to be graced by a visit by the aforesaid Nathaniel.

    I thought he tried already in 2010 and got it woefully wrong?
    Yes he did and the reason, IIRC, was that his modelling was dependent on good quality and regular local polling such as is available for House seats etc in the US and which was just not available here. Whether Lord A's polling is good quality and frequent enough in marginal seats to fill that data gap remains to be seen. I suspect the frequency will still be an issue.
    Not to mention the quality!

    I think Lord A has made a fundamental error in using different polling companies for each set of polls. While I appreciate they are only data gathering for him, and the methodology and analytical approach are uniquely his, it does seem to introduce a potentially uncontrolled element of volatility into the numbers.
    I agree that consistency of data would have been a sensible starting point. Otherwise we will just have to wait and see I suppose.
    The competition probably saved him a few shekels though
    Yes, the cost has probably curtailed the ambitions to some extent even for Lord A. OGH is right that whatever reservations there are about quality this is a richer data set than we have ever had before and we should be grateful.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 53,353
    DavidL said:

    To be fair, the Tory seat spreads weren't too far off.

    What that tells me is the (rarely mentioned) truth that Labour actually did very well in GE2010, given the hopeless position they were in, and fought a very strong rearguard action.

    Impressive when you consider they "should" have lost a further 40 seats. ~20 or so to the Lib Dem surge that never was, yes, but also another 20 to the Tories.

    Rightly or wrongly I ascribe that to Mandleson who organised a very effective campaign and persuaded huge numbers of public sector workers in particular that they would be getting their P45s by the end of the week if the Tories got in and their pensions would probably be cancelled for good measure. He scared a lot of people and somehow got away with never spelling out what Labour would do instead.
    It is that same fear factor which worked so well for them in 2010 that will work so badly against an Ed Miliband-led Labour in 2015. The economy is moving along nicely. Those P45's never materialised in the threatened millions. All of Labour's calls on the economy since 2010 have been doom-mongering. And Ed, the tax-avoiding millionaire living in a mansion, has the albatross of hypocrisy hung around his neck every time he tries to open up an attack line.

    Labour 2015. Why would you take the risk?

  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    edited March 2015
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Yes, its a fair point. When I first came to PB as a lurker several years ago it was because I thought that the markets and shrewder investors were more likely to have an inside track on what was really happening than the MSM or the polls. This was based on a full time organiser who had come to Dundee to help with a potential by election who seemed (or claimed) to make serious money in by elections etc using internal information. From what I have learned on here since I wonder who was taking the bets but that is another story.

    What I discovered, of course, is that whilst there are undoubtedly some shrewdies who can and do make money on political betting their input is swamped by well off tories voting with their hearts rather than their heads having convinced themselves that all reasonable people must think like them.

    But the chat has been good.

    Is it a systemic error in favour of the Tories? Are there other pieces of evidence other than the 2010 GE?

    I think that elections with over 100 seats changing hands are pretty rare, that there is a lot of inertia in the system. Political landslides are pretty infrequent, though a Scottish one is on the cards.

    I am not a spread better myself, I do not like the idea of (near) unlimited liability, so my bets ave been on the seat bands. It looks to me that all of the parties have the value on the down side, so not sure who is going to be the winner!
    I suspect that it is a systemic error although I have not done a detailed analysis. I think the markets are seriously out of step with Tory prospects this time too but Rod may prove to be right yet.

    I think we also tend to see a similar effect in the States where more money gets put on the Republicans than is strictly rational. I have noticed some of the smarter operators on here like OGH and antifrank seem to think there are opportunities in swimming against the tide where weight of money is distorting the underlying reality.
    I do share your suspicion, but if so we should see the effect of Tory over betting in other markets. Arguably we did in the indyref, at the odds for NO did seem more certain than the polls.

    The situation may be affected by UKIP overbetting too. I struggle to find decent odds on even unlikely gains, and have profitably bet against the UKIP surgers on a number of by elections and also the Euro-bands.

    I agree too on the Mandelson effect in 2010. Mandelson was a great manipulator of the dark arts. Definitely a Slytherin. The current team are not in the same league.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633

    DavidL said:

    To be fair, the Tory seat spreads weren't too far off.

    What that tells me is the (rarely mentioned) truth that Labour actually did very well in GE2010, given the hopeless position they were in, and fought a very strong rearguard action.

    Impressive when you consider they "should" have lost a further 40 seats. ~20 or so to the Lib Dem surge that never was, yes, but also another 20 to the Tories.

    Rightly or wrongly I ascribe that to Mandleson who organised a very effective campaign and persuaded huge numbers of public sector workers in particular that they would be getting their P45s by the end of the week if the Tories got in and their pensions would probably be cancelled for good measure. He scared a lot of people and somehow got away with never spelling out what Labour would do instead.
    It is that same fear factor which worked so well for them in 2010 that will work so badly against an Ed Miliband-led Labour in 2015. The economy is moving along nicely. Those P45's never materialised in the threatened millions. All of Labour's calls on the economy since 2010 have been doom-mongering. And Ed, the tax-avoiding millionaire living in a mansion, has the albatross of hypocrisy hung around his neck every time he tries to open up an attack line.

    Labour 2015. Why would you take the risk?

    Also a lot less public sector workers now than then..
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,350
    edited March 2015

    DavidL said:

    To be fair, the Tory seat spreads weren't too far off.

    What that tells me is the (rarely mentioned) truth that Labour actually did very well in GE2010, given the hopeless position they were in, and fought a very strong rearguard action.

    Impressive when you consider they "should" have lost a further 40 seats. ~20 or so to the Lib Dem surge that never was, yes, but also another 20 to the Tories.

    Rightly or wrongly I ascribe that to Mandleson who organised a very effective campaign and persuaded huge numbers of public sector workers in particular that they would be getting their P45s by the end of the week if the Tories got in and their pensions would probably be cancelled for good measure. He scared a lot of people and somehow got away with never spelling out what Labour would do instead.
    It is that same fear factor which worked so well for them in 2010 that will work so badly against an Ed Miliband-led Labour in 2015. The economy is moving along nicely. Those P45's never materialised in the threatened millions. All of Labour's calls on the economy since 2010 have been doom-mongering. And Ed, the tax-avoiding millionaire living in a mansion, has the albatross of hypocrisy hung around his neck every time he tries to open up an attack line.

    Labour 2015. Why would you take the risk?

    I completely agree Mark. In 97 Blair and Brown went on their prawn cocktail (those were the days) offensive and spent huge amounts of time persuading business and the markets that everything was going to be fine and safe in their hands. This was driven by the Kinnock experience of course.

    This time around we have a Labour leader who genuinely believes that legislation is the best way to fix prices, who talks about predators in vague and threatening terms and who promises to fund every daft promise he can think of by Bankers bonus and mansion taxes.

    No wonder Mandelson is in despair. No wonder Balls is making sly jibes at his leader. This is Kinnock without John Smith. It is a huge leap in the dark.
  • Past performance is not an indicator of future returns.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    Wheel out the wife..

    @TheSunNewspaper: Gimme 5 more! We chat to Sam Cam, for our Comic Relief special: http://t.co/fU4lVzd18U #RND2015 http://t.co/OtBtOZE7PN
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 44,224
    Off-topic:

    For anyone who has joint interest in the worlds of F1 and contract law, then the current situation with Giedo van der Garde will seem hilarious. Take millions from three people for two positions, and not have the money to pay the get-out clauses ...
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,350

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Yes, its a fair point. When I first came to PB as a lurker several years ago it was because I thought that the markets and shrewder investors were more likely to have an inside track on what was really happening than the MSM or the polls. This was based on a full time organiser who had come to Dundee to help with a potential by election who seemed (or claimed) to make serious money in by elections etc using internal information. From what I have learned on here since I wonder who was taking the bets but that is another story.

    What I discovered, of course, is that whilst there are undoubtedly some shrewdies who can and do make money on political betting their input is swamped by well off tories voting with their hearts rather than their heads having convinced themselves that all reasonable people must think like them.

    But the chat has been good.

    Is it a systemic error in favour of the Tories? Are there other pieces of evidence other than the 2010 GE?

    I think that elections with over 100 seats changing hands are pretty rare, that there is a lot of inertia in the system. Political landslides are pretty infrequent, though a Scottish one is on the cards.

    I am not a spread better myself, I do not like the idea of (near) unlimited liability, so my bets ave been on the seat bands. It looks to me that all of the parties have the value on the down side, so not sure who is going to be the winner!
    I suspect that it is a systemic error although I have not done a detailed analysis. I think the markets are seriously out of step with Tory prospects this time too but Rod may prove to be right yet.

    I think we also tend to see a similar effect in the States where more money gets put on the Republicans than is strictly rational. I have noticed some of the smarter operators on here like OGH and antifrank seem to think there are opportunities in swimming against the tide where weight of money is distorting the underlying reality.
    I do share your suspicion, but if so we should see the effect of Tory over betting in other markets. Arguably we did in the indyref, at the odds for NO did seem more certain than the polls.

    The situation may be affected by UKIP overbetting too. I struggle to find decent odds on even unlikely gains, and have profitably bet against the UKIP surgers on a number of by elections and also the Euro-bands.

    I agree too on the Mandelson effect in 2010. Mandelson was a great manipulator of the dark arts. Definitely a Slytherin. The current team are not in the same league.
    I think we did see a similar effect in the Scottish Referendum. The markets were seriously over confident and in reality it was a damn near run thing as the Duke might have said.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,350

    Past performance is not an indicator of future returns.

    You still hurting about your annuity punt?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 53,353
    TGOHF said:

    DavidL said:

    To be fair, the Tory seat spreads weren't too far off.

    What that tells me is the (rarely mentioned) truth that Labour actually did very well in GE2010, given the hopeless position they were in, and fought a very strong rearguard action.

    Impressive when you consider they "should" have lost a further 40 seats. ~20 or so to the Lib Dem surge that never was, yes, but also another 20 to the Tories.

    Rightly or wrongly I ascribe that to Mandleson who organised a very effective campaign and persuaded huge numbers of public sector workers in particular that they would be getting their P45s by the end of the week if the Tories got in and their pensions would probably be cancelled for good measure. He scared a lot of people and somehow got away with never spelling out what Labour would do instead.
    It is that same fear factor which worked so well for them in 2010 that will work so badly against an Ed Miliband-led Labour in 2015. The economy is moving along nicely. Those P45's never materialised in the threatened millions. All of Labour's calls on the economy since 2010 have been doom-mongering. And Ed, the tax-avoiding millionaire living in a mansion, has the albatross of hypocrisy hung around his neck every time he tries to open up an attack line.

    Labour 2015. Why would you take the risk?

    Also a lot less public sector workers now than then..
    Another five years of that process - probably accelerated - is why this is not a good election for Labour to lose.
  • It seems that the Spread-betting firms' GE seats prices are converging with the models, such as Hanretty's http://www.electionforecast.co.uk/. This morning Spreadex has the Tories edging slightly higher on 288 seats with Labour 16 seats behind on 272 seats.
    That said, Populus is more than capable of upsetting this particular applecart with its latest polling results due to be announced over the next few hours.
  • DavidL said:

    Past performance is not an indicator of future returns.

    You still hurting about your annuity punt?
    Au contraire Blackadder.... despite the hit this week and indeed last, still sitting £8k in the black currently. Was £13k at one stage before the majority holder of one decided to flog 10% the capitalist pig!
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,131
    edited March 2015
    Good morning, everyone.

    As expertly tipped* by me, Bottas was top 3 in P1. Backed each way at 17, that's 1/5 the odds for top 3, which is alright.

    After Alonso and Honda conspired to make my bet on him winning in Australia a 0% chance and my super cunning 5 bet on him Not To Be Classified getting made null and void, it's nice to be in the green.

    *Vaguely mentioned. I won't be counting it towards the weekend's results.

    Will have a look at the results of practice and then contemplate putting together a pre-qualifying piece.

    Edited extra bit: bloody hell. Sky have redesigned their F1 site to make it worse and now the official site's done the same. It was so easy to navigate before... I'll get used to it, but it looks dreadful.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,131
    Mr. Jessop, do we know what's going to happen with Sauber?

    It does seem like rank incompetence.
  • FinancierFinancier Posts: 3,916
    R4 Today - Quoting EdM that if PM he would instruct (via OfGem) all energy suppliers to cut their prices.

    Hm: AFAIK, there is no obligation for an energy supplier to supply energy to clients If it is unprofitable for them to continue in business, then they can either export their energy to a client/country who will pay the economic price or shut down plants.

    Also many of the UK's energy suppliers are owned by non-UK companies - would EdM have a duff up with Hollande? (ten 3 minute rounds in the Bois de Boulogne - or just pistols at dawn?)

    Of course EdM could always nationalise the UK energy generation and supply - of course he would have to pay the global price for gas and oil imports - or would he just use a HMG subsidy and so rapidly grow the deficit and debt - and so the interest rate on UK paper would rise and so increasing the deficit and debt even more.

    No matter he did teach economics at Harvard - all theory of course.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 61,446

    chestnut said:

    Weren't the Lib Dems marvellous pre-election poll ratings largely built on the backs of the under 35s who subsequently didn't turn up?

    Who are that group polling for now?

    Anyone 25 or so in 2010 is now a thirty-something. With five years experience of austerity just as they were getting their homes together.
    Similarly a bright-eyed 20 year old student in 2010 is now a 25 year old post grad with a lower living standard than their older siblings.
    I fall into that category; well, I'm a bit older, but not too much. I bought my home in Dec 2009. It has appreciated at least 20%, and my salary more than doubled over that time frame. My industry, major infrastructure projects, is booming - even overheating.

    So I've done very well under this government, as someone who lives in SE England and works in London.

    But I'd be even better off had I graduated and bought my home five years earlier. Similarly, it'd have been much harder for me for buy my home five years later. There does seem to be a trend.

    And I have no idea what you do in the North or Midlands if you haven't been to university and want to get on. I imagine it's very hard indeed.

  • felixfelix Posts: 15,180

    chestnut said:

    Weren't the Lib Dems marvellous pre-election poll ratings largely built on the backs of the under 35s who subsequently didn't turn up?

    Who are that group polling for now?

    Anyone 25 or so in 2010 is now a thirty-something. With five years experience of austerity just as they were getting their homes together.
    Similarly a bright-eyed 20 year old student in 2010 is now a 25 year old post grad with a lower living standard than their older siblings.
    ROFL: 'with 5 years of falling unemployment, rising personal tax allowance, cheap mortgages, stable prices, and now, cheap European holidays' - yep that austerity's really hurting everyone:)
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,131
    Mr. Financier, it's juvenile idiocy.

    "If I were PM all the things would be cheaper, and I'd make it law that everyone had more money, and was happier."

    It's not that far away from the insanity of Scottish Labour's promise to have 1,000 nurses more than the SNP want.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Yes, its a fair point. When I first came to PB as a lurker several years ago it was because I thought that the markets and shrewder investors were more likely to have an inside track on what was really happening than the MSM or the polls. This was based on a full time organiser who had come to Dundee to help with a potential by election who seemed (or claimed) to make serious money in by elections etc using internal information. From what I have learned on here since I wonder who was taking the bets but that is another story.

    What I discovered, of course, is that whilst there are undoubtedly some shrewdies who can and do make money on political betting their input is swamped by well off tories voting with their hearts rather than their heads having convinced themselves that all reasonable people must think like them.

    But the chat has been good.

    Is it a systemic error in favour of the Tories? Are there other pieces of evidence other than the 2010 GE?

    I think that elections with over 100 seats changing hands are pretty rare, that there is a lot of inertia in the system. Political landslides are pretty infrequent, though a Scottish one is on the cards.

    I am not a spread better myself, I do not like the idea of (near) unlimited liability, so my bets ave been on the seat bands. It looks to me that all of the parties have the value on the down side, so not sure who is going to be the winner!
    I suspect that it is a systemic error although I have not done a detailed analysis. I think the markets are seriously out of step with Tory prospects this time too but Rod may prove to be right yet.

    I think we also tend to see a similar effect in the States where more money gets put on the Republicans than is strictly rational. I have noticed some of the smarter operators on here like OGH and antifrank seem to think there are opportunities in swimming against the tide where weight of money is distorting the underlying reality.
    I do share your suspicion, but if so we should see the effect of Tory over betting in other markets. Arguably we did in the indyref, at the odds for NO did seem more certain than the polls.
    Looking back on IndyRef the odds for NO were less certain tan the polls. There's sometimes a tendency to treat "the polls" as a single amorphous lump but they are multiple individual (if noisy) samples,

    Although they were all basically saying the same thing of 48-52 and that was within the MOE for a single poll for every single poll to be saying that put the chance of it actually being 51-49 or better for Yes as incredibly slim. NO should have been 1.05 or less on the exchange not the 1.22 that it was.

    I suppose people weren't fully believing the polls as they were untested.
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,180
    Financier said:

    R4 Today - Quoting EdM that if PM he would instruct (via OfGem) all energy suppliers to cut their prices.

    Hm: AFAIK, there is no obligation for an energy supplier to supply energy to clients If it is unprofitable for them to continue in business, then they can either export their energy to a client/country who will pay the economic price or shut down plants.

    Also many of the UK's energy suppliers are owned by non-UK companies - would EdM have a duff up with Hollande? (ten 3 minute rounds in the Bois de Boulogne - or just pistols at dawn?)

    Of course EdM could always nationalise the UK energy generation and supply - of course he would have to pay the global price for gas and oil imports - or would he just use a HMG subsidy and so rapidly grow the deficit and debt - and so the interest rate on UK paper would rise and so increasing the deficit and debt even more.

    No matter he did teach economics at Harvard - all theory of course.

    They have a controlled energy market in Spain - electricity and gas are both at least 30% more expensive than in the UK. Way to go Ed!
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,131
    BBC coverage of qualifying is just superb. Not only no live TV, there isn't even, it appears, radio coverage. So it's 'radio' through the website or wait for highlights.

    Or watch Sky.
  • VerulamiusVerulamius Posts: 1,554
    I read somewhere that EdM's aim was to move the UK away from liberal anglo saxon economics to a more continental controlling style.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633

    I read somewhere that EdM's aim was to move the UK away from liberal anglo saxon economics to a more continental controlling style.

    Like France .
  • FinancierFinancier Posts: 3,916
    Re: EdM's interviews on BBC3 yesterday.

    Only managed to see one question, when a bright young lady asked him 'would not Labour be in a better position if your brother was the Labour Leader.'

    Never have I seen a man so unprepared for one of the most obvious questions that may arise.
    He jerked back in his chair, opened his eyes in surprise (probably that anyone would dare to ask him that question - or that it had not been moderated out) and started to mumble and waffle.

    Both his lack of ability for quick thinking and his lack of preparedness would leave the UK with a PM that the world (and certainly the EU and Brussels) would laugh at.
  • SlackbladderSlackbladder Posts: 9,788
    what kind of person drinks coffee in their kitchentte/utility room anyway?
  • PongPong Posts: 4,693
    DavidL said:

    Yes, its a fair point. When I first came to PB as a lurker several years ago it was because I thought that the markets and shrewder investors were more likely to have an inside track on what was really happening than the MSM or the polls. This was based on a full time organiser who had come to Dundee to help with a potential by election who seemed (or claimed) to make serious money in by elections etc using internal information. From what I have learned on here since I wonder who was taking the bets but that is another story.

    What I discovered, of course, is that whilst there are undoubtedly some shrewdies who can and do make money on political betting their input is swamped by well off tories voting with their hearts rather than their heads having convinced themselves that all reasonable people must think like them.

    But the chat has been good.

    Lol.

    David, You're one of the shrewdest PB commentators.

    Ironic, eh?
  • QuincelQuincel Posts: 4,042
    felix said:

    chestnut said:

    Weren't the Lib Dems marvellous pre-election poll ratings largely built on the backs of the under 35s who subsequently didn't turn up?

    Who are that group polling for now?

    Anyone 25 or so in 2010 is now a thirty-something. With five years experience of austerity just as they were getting their homes together.
    Similarly a bright-eyed 20 year old student in 2010 is now a 25 year old post grad with a lower living standard than their older siblings.
    ROFL: 'with 5 years of falling unemployment, rising personal tax allowance, cheap mortgages, stable prices, and now, cheap European holidays' - yep that austerity's really hurting everyone:)
    Perhaps you haven't noticed the rapid collapse in home ownership amongst the under 30s, which has if memory served halved in 10 years. A much larger proportion than ever before of the younger generation aren't building up a life at all. That is both new, and worrying.
  • roserees64roserees64 Posts: 251
    Excellent response by Miliband to a wide range of questions on the BBC 3 programme, very impressive indeed and bodes well for the debates.Shame some people saw only one question being answered. Lots of people running scared this morning, headless chickens come to mind.The polls are not pointing to a Tory victory despite the attempts of the Tory media.
    The reality of life in Tory Britain is the only campaign tool that will work for Labour; zero hours, bedroom tax , privatisation, cuts, closure of public services etc. etc.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 58,145
    Charles said:

    Here's the link to the intro piece by Nate Silver confifming 538.com's coverage of the British GE, involving an interview with a colleague:
    http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/uk-election-forecast/
    As will be seen from the piece, the good people of Skegness are set to be graced by a visit by the aforesaid Nathaniel.

    I thought he tried already in 2010 and got it woefully wrong?
    538.com forecast 2010 and got it wildly, completely wrong.

    That said, I think his 24 seat LibDem prediction looks too high. Unless the LibDems crawl back into double digits, in which case it might be right.

  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095

    Excellent response by Miliband to a wide range of questions on the BBC 3 programme, very impressive indeed and bodes well for the debates.Shame some people saw only one question being answered. Lots of people running scared this morning, headless chickens come to mind.The polls are not pointing to a Tory victory despite the attempts of the Tory media.
    The reality of life in Tory Britain is the only campaign tool that will work for Labour; zero hours, bedroom tax , privatisation, cuts, closure of public services etc. etc.

    What you mean is policies of misrepresentation, because Labour have no actual policies apart from taxing people to death.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    Financier said:

    R4 Today - Quoting EdM that if PM he would instruct (via OfGem) all energy suppliers to cut their prices.

    Hm: AFAIK, there is no obligation for an energy supplier to supply energy to clients If it is unprofitable for them to continue in business, then they can either export their energy to a client/country who will pay the economic price or shut down plants.

    Also many of the UK's energy suppliers are owned by non-UK companies - would EdM have a duff up with Hollande? (ten 3 minute rounds in the Bois de Boulogne - or just pistols at dawn?)

    Of course EdM could always nationalise the UK energy generation and supply - of course he would have to pay the global price for gas and oil imports - or would he just use a HMG subsidy and so rapidly grow the deficit and debt - and so the interest rate on UK paper would rise and so increasing the deficit and debt even more.

    No matter he did teach economics at Harvard - all theory of course.

    Wasn't he just a post grad who gave a couple of lectures and marked some papers?

    Not quite up there with IDS muddling up "in" and "at" in relationship to Perugia, but definitely deliberately misleading
  • SlackbladderSlackbladder Posts: 9,788

    Excellent response by Miliband to a wide range of questions on the BBC 3 programme, very impressive indeed and bodes well for the debates.Shame some people saw only one question being answered. Lots of people running scared this morning, headless chickens come to mind.The polls are not pointing to a Tory victory despite the attempts of the Tory media.
    The reality of life in Tory Britain is the only campaign tool that will work for Labour; zero hours, bedroom tax , privatisation, cuts, closure of public services etc. etc.

    someone got the daily memo this morning I see.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    Financier said:

    R4 Today - Quoting EdM that if PM he would instruct (via OfGem) all energy suppliers to cut their prices.

    Hm: AFAIK, there is no obligation for an energy supplier to supply energy to clients If it is unprofitable for them to continue in business, then they can either export their energy to a client/country who will pay the economic price or shut down plants.

    Also many of the UK's energy suppliers are owned by non-UK companies - would EdM have a duff up with Hollande? (ten 3 minute rounds in the Bois de Boulogne - or just pistols at dawn?)

    Of course EdM could always nationalise the UK energy generation and supply - of course he would have to pay the global price for gas and oil imports - or would he just use a HMG subsidy and so rapidly grow the deficit and debt - and so the interest rate on UK paper would rise and so increasing the deficit and debt even more.

    No matter he did teach economics at Harvard - all theory of course.

    Wasn't he just a post grad who gave a couple of lectures and marked some papers?

    Not quite up there with IDS muddling up "in" and "at" in relationship to Perugia, but definitely deliberately misleading
  • FalseFlagFalseFlag Posts: 1,801
    Charles said:

    Here's the link to the intro piece by Nate Silver confifming 538.com's coverage of the British GE, involving an interview with a colleague:
    http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/uk-election-forecast/
    As will be seen from the piece, the good people of Skegness are set to be graced by a visit by the aforesaid Nathaniel.

    I thought he tried already in 2010 and got it woefully wrong?
    Yes. He also called the 2012 Presidential wrong, underestimated the Democrats by a few points. Of course his system was simply weighting all the polls out there. For the mathematically illiterate lefty media weighting blows their mind, hence the hype.

    I would put more store by anyone on here.
  • SimonStClareSimonStClare Posts: 7,976

    what kind of person drinks coffee in their kitchentte/utility room anyway?

    A members of the Labour aristocracy, who is attempting not to portray themselves as every bit as privileged as the Tories might like to give it a try...!

    2 kitchen Miliband...never more than 20 feet from a bacon sandwich!
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    edited March 2015
    The first thing I noticed was that it was so spartan - it clearly isn't used much. Nothing on the counter top. Who has an extra double oven in another room bar an aspiring MasterChef contestant?

    what kind of person drinks coffee in their kitchentte/utility room anyway?

  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    Well, Lucy got her man on the front pages of the papers. Again.

    This campaign is going to be legend
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,131
    F1: McLaren looking ropier than a bondage enthusiast.
  • FinancierFinancier Posts: 3,916
    edited March 2015
    Charles said:

    Financier said:

    R4 Today - Quoting EdM that if PM he would instruct (via OfGem) all energy suppliers to cut their prices.

    Hm: AFAIK, there is no obligation for an energy supplier to supply energy to clients If it is unprofitable for them to continue in business, then they can either export their energy to a client/country who will pay the economic price or shut down plants.

    Also many of the UK's energy suppliers are owned by non-UK companies - would EdM have a duff up with Hollande? (ten 3 minute rounds in the Bois de Boulogne - or just pistols at dawn?)

    Of course EdM could always nationalise the UK energy generation and supply - of course he would have to pay the global price for gas and oil imports - or would he just use a HMG subsidy and so rapidly grow the deficit and debt - and so the interest rate on UK paper would rise and so increasing the deficit and debt even more.

    No matter he did teach economics at Harvard - all theory of course.

    Wasn't he just a post grad who gave a couple of lectures and marked some papers?

    Not quite up there with IDS muddling up "in" and "at" in relationship to Perugia, but definitely deliberately misleading
    According to Wiki:

    "On 25 July 2002, it was announced that Miliband would take a 12-month unpaid sabbatical from the Treasury to be a visiting scholar at the Centre for European Studies of Harvard University for two semesters.[22] He spent his time at Harvard teaching economics,[23] and stayed there after September 2003 for an additional semester teaching a course titled "What's Left? The Politics of Social Justice"

    He was after my time there, but found that Harvard did teach a lot of theoretical theory.
  • SMukeshSMukesh Posts: 1,759
    The Tories had a 10 point lead over Labour in England in 2010.As a rule of thumb,they are unlikely to be close to anywhere that lead this time around.Statistically this means they will start losing seats in England to Labour.I suspect Labour will do relatively well in the Northern and Metropolitan areas and Tories relatively well in SE and the shires like they always do.Are Tories able to pick off seats from the Libs in the SW might be a key question?
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    Nothing beats Derek Draper and in/at Berkley. That was epic. order-order.com/2009/03/26/what-the-bbc-wouldnt-let-guido-broadcast/
    Charles said:

    Financier said:

    R4 Today - Quoting EdM that if PM he would instruct (via OfGem) all energy suppliers to cut their prices.

    Hm: AFAIK, there is no obligation for an energy supplier to supply energy to clients If it is unprofitable for them to continue in business, then they can either export their energy to a client/country who will pay the economic price or shut down plants.

    Also many of the UK's energy suppliers are owned by non-UK companies - would EdM have a duff up with Hollande? (ten 3 minute rounds in the Bois de Boulogne - or just pistols at dawn?)

    Of course EdM could always nationalise the UK energy generation and supply - of course he would have to pay the global price for gas and oil imports - or would he just use a HMG subsidy and so rapidly grow the deficit and debt - and so the interest rate on UK paper would rise and so increasing the deficit and debt even more.

    No matter he did teach economics at Harvard - all theory of course.

    Wasn't he just a post grad who gave a couple of lectures and marked some papers?

    Not quite up there with IDS muddling up "in" and "at" in relationship to Perugia, but definitely deliberately misleading
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @ChrisJones_1: @JohnRentoul If Miliband appoints a kitchen cabinet, there won't be enough space to have sofa government as well.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,131
    Mr. Smukesh, got to consider the impact of Lib Dem collapse and the rise of UKIP as well. It's not a binary choice.
  • Bond_James_BondBond_James_Bond Posts: 1,939
    edited March 2015

    What that tells me is the (rarely mentioned) truth that Labour actually did very well in GE2010, given the hopeless position they were in, and fought a very strong rearguard action.

    Well, they had had 13 years to embed the client state onto benefits. That's going to take decades to turn around, not five years of half-hearted tinkering.

    How long before someone comes up with a picture of the Miliband's doubtless luxurious principal kitchen?
    Surely the reason why Miliband has two kitchens is bleedin' obvious? It's because he's Jewish. Two kitchens are completely normal in observant Jewish homes. You have the meat kitchen and the milk kitchen. If his little non-kitchen isn't a kitchen at all, and is just for making tea (LOL), why does it have a bloody oven in it? Is it to save walking 20 feet to the real kitchen to warm up the latkes? Pffft.

    Where space does not permit two completely separate kitchens, a doctrinally acceptable alternative is then to have a meat end and a milk end of the same kitchen, as far away from each other as can be contrived. I didn't realise this was allowed until I bought a house so configured in NW11; needs must, I suppose. There was one actual kitchen space, but it had an invisible line across the middle and you had a separate sink, dishwasher, oven etc at opposite ends. Two kitchens, in effect, but a very inefficient design layout for most purposes.

    Miliband no doubt does observant when it suits him, and not when it doesn't; almost as though he were a nasty, cynical, unprincipled little weasel, or something.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    Lucky for Labour the kitchen thing is not getting any traction...

    @politicshome: Caroline Flint on BBC News: "I have got one kitchen + I'm very pleased that...we will have the chance to discuss issues of substance".
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,131
    Mr. Bond, not sure I buy that [Miliband being observant, not the two kitchens for observant Jews bit].

    If he were observant, he wouldn't eat bacon sarnies or describe himself as an atheist, surely?

    [Mind you, if he were Jewish in a religious sense that would at least make his comment on being the first Jewish PM make sense. If he *is* an atheist, then he wouldn't be, as the first ethnically Jewish PM was Disraeli].
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    Could the pb Tories identify for me the section of the electorate that has to this point been loyally behind Ed "two kitchens" Miliband but which will now desert him?
  • weejonnieweejonnie Posts: 3,820
    SMukesh said:

    The Tories had a 10 point lead over Labour in England in 2010.As a rule of thumb,they are unlikely to be close to anywhere that lead this time around.Statistically this means they will start losing seats in England to Labour.I suspect Labour will do relatively well in the Northern and Metropolitan areas and Tories relatively well in SE and the shires like they always do.Are Tories able to pick off seats from the Libs in the SW might be a key question?

    The difference between Labour forecasts and labour reality could be the 'ghost voters' that only exist between the letter box and the ballot box. The requirement for individual voting registration may have removed them - which will dampen Labour gains since forecast gains are based on UNS.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,131
    Miss Plato, nice little story. I wonder if McLaren's got a squirrel problem :p

    Mr. Antifrank, it's akin to the debates 'problem' for Cameron. It won't shift opinion much at all, but it does stop the man in question getting the points across that he wants to talk about, and having the piss taken is not helpful.
  • FalseFlagFalseFlag Posts: 1,801
    antifrank said:

    Could the pb Tories identify for me the section of the electorate that has to this point been loyally behind Ed "two kitchens" Miliband but which will now desert him?

    Muslims?
  • IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966

    I read somewhere that EdM's aim was to move the UK away from liberal anglo saxon economics to a more continental controlling style.

    That would be this article

    http://www.economist.com/blogs/blighty/2014/01/labours-economic-plans
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340

    Miss Plato, nice little story. I wonder if McLaren's got a squirrel problem :p

    Mr. Antifrank, it's akin to the debates 'problem' for Cameron. It won't shift opinion much at all, but it does stop the man in question getting the points across that he wants to talk about, and having the piss taken is not helpful.

    It's mildly helpful to UKIP in the north of England, I expect. No good for the Conservatives though.

    I expect that it will pass most people by completely.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 53,353
    edited March 2015

    Excellent response by Miliband to a wide range of questions on the BBC 3 programme, very impressive indeed and bodes well for the debates.Shame some people saw only one question being answered. Lots of people running scared this morning, headless chickens come to mind.The polls are not pointing to a Tory victory despite the attempts of the Tory media.
    The reality of life in Tory Britain is the only campaign tool that will work for Labour; zero hours, bedroom tax , privatisation, cuts, closure of public services etc. etc.

    Do you really believe ANY of that shit?

    What % rate is the Bedroom Tax levied at?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 53,353
    Scott_P said:

    Well, Lucy got her man on the front pages of the papers. Again.

    This campaign is going to be legend

    And yet it all kicked off so well with Hapless Harriet's pink van....
  • glwglw Posts: 10,077
    antifrank said:

    Could the pb Tories identify for me the section of the electorate that has to this point been loyally behind Ed "two kitchens" Miliband but which will now desert him?

    It's another mark against his "I'm an ordinary bloke like you" shtick. Individually they mean little, but they add up to Ed being a phoney.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,131
    Mr. glw, in that regard, Miliband's 'ordinary man' claim is about as convincing as Mr. Eagles' deranged notion that Caesar was a superior military leader to Hannibal.
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 14,207
    Still amusing to see how badly the wheels have fallen off Ed's cunning stunt to appear a man of the people.

    I still haven't got my free owl yet, but looking forward to my second kitchen.

    Have Labour actually tried to salvage this cluster%%%%?
  • eekeek Posts: 28,926

    F1: McLaren looking ropier than a bondage enthusiast.

    I don't think Alonso is going to be in a rush to return...
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 14,207

    Excellent response by Miliband to a wide range of questions on the BBC 3 programme, very impressive indeed and bodes well for the debates.Shame some people saw only one question being answered. Lots of people running scared this morning, headless chickens come to mind.The polls are not pointing to a Tory victory despite the attempts of the Tory media.
    The reality of life in Tory Britain is the only campaign tool that will work for Labour; zero hours, bedroom tax , privatisation, cuts, closure of public services etc. etc.

    Do you really believe ANY of that shit?

    What % rate is the Bedroom Tax levied at?
    More importantly why didn't Ed propose a kitchen tax??
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    glw said:

    antifrank said:

    Could the pb Tories identify for me the section of the electorate that has to this point been loyally behind Ed "two kitchens" Miliband but which will now desert him?

    It's another mark against his "I'm an ordinary bloke like you" shtick. Individually they mean little, but they add up to Ed being a phoney.
    Please identify these people who to this point have believed that Ed Miliband is ordinary. "Nerd" and "weird" would be more recognisable descriptions.
  • On topic
    Interesting that the Lib Dems fell short of the betting expectation than the Conservatives did.
    Since Labour was the beneficiary of both of these shortfalls, was the key problem a failure by the Lib Dems to take Labour seats?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 53,353
    Surely it can't be long before someone at The Sun gets one of those toy drones. The one with a hi-res camera attached. And takes it for a spin down Ed's road. At, ooh, say kitchen-height off the ground?

    No, the OTHER kitchen....
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 53,353
    Floater said:

    Excellent response by Miliband to a wide range of questions on the BBC 3 programme, very impressive indeed and bodes well for the debates.Shame some people saw only one question being answered. Lots of people running scared this morning, headless chickens come to mind.The polls are not pointing to a Tory victory despite the attempts of the Tory media.
    The reality of life in Tory Britain is the only campaign tool that will work for Labour; zero hours, bedroom tax , privatisation, cuts, closure of public services etc. etc.

    Do you really believe ANY of that shit?

    What % rate is the Bedroom Tax levied at?
    More importantly why didn't Ed propose a kitchen tax??
    It's all rolled into the Mansion Tax.

    Two kitchens? Top band....
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,131
    Mr. Antifrank, I think the nerds would dispute that association most vigorously.

    Mr. Eek, is it possible to rush in a 2015 McLaren?
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    SeanT said:

    antifrank said:

    Could the pb Tories identify for me the section of the electorate that has to this point been loyally behind Ed "two kitchens" Miliband but which will now desert him?

    Surprisingly stupid remark.

    The Labour vote is weak. We know that. They are relying on reluctant half hearted prior supporters turning out to vote in May, mainly the White working class. Being reminded that the already-disliked Miliband is just as rich and out of touch as Cameron will not help motivate these people. At all.

    Two Kitchen Ed also hinders Labour's class war. It's hard to attack Tories for being privileged Bullingdonians when it's just been revealed the Labour leader has installed an induction hob for his servants quarters.

    But perhaps, earning £500k yourself, you miss the optics here.

    To most of Britain, Ed's life is a fantasyland of easy London wealth.
    Ed Miliband is no one's idea of a man of the people. This is not news.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,131
    F1: Ladbrokes have a few markets suspended, so the pre-qualifying piece probably won't be up for a little while.
  • FinancierFinancier Posts: 3,916
    antifrank said:

    Could the pb Tories identify for me the section of the electorate that has to this point been loyally behind Ed "two kitchens" Miliband but which will now desert him?

    Seemingly RedLds (already deserting) and any Greeny LABS (not very Green to have two kitchens).
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,872
    SMukesh said:

    The Tories had a 10 point lead over Labour in England in 2010.As a rule of thumb,they are unlikely to be close to anywhere that lead this time around.Statistically this means they will start losing seats in England to Labour.I suspect Labour will do relatively well in the Northern and Metropolitan areas and Tories relatively well in SE and the shires like they always do.Are Tories able to pick off seats from the Libs in the SW might be a key question?

    There are parts of the SE where Labour also needs to do well. I could see them winning Brighton Kempston and Hove easily enough, but I think UKIP has shut them out of Kent and Essex, which narrows the path to victory.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    John Rentoul @JohnRentoul · 30m 30 minutes ago

    EdM knows what it's like not to know where your next meal is coming from.
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    I do adore pithiness first thing! First LOL of the Day.

    Excellent response by Miliband to a wide range of questions on the BBC 3 programme, very impressive indeed and bodes well for the debates.Shame some people saw only one question being answered. Lots of people running scared this morning, headless chickens come to mind.The polls are not pointing to a Tory victory despite the attempts of the Tory media.
    The reality of life in Tory Britain is the only campaign tool that will work for Labour; zero hours, bedroom tax , privatisation, cuts, closure of public services etc. etc.

    Do you really believe ANY of that shit?

    What % rate is the Bedroom Tax levied at?
  • volcanopetevolcanopete Posts: 2,078
    Plato said:

    I do adore pithiness first thing! First LOL of the Day.

    Excellent response by Miliband to a wide range of questions on the BBC 3 programme, very impressive indeed and bodes well for the debates.Shame some people saw only one question being answered. Lots of people running scared this morning, headless chickens come to mind.The polls are not pointing to a Tory victory despite the attempts of the Tory media.
    The reality of life in Tory Britain is the only campaign tool that will work for Labour; zero hours, bedroom tax , privatisation, cuts, closure of public services etc. etc.

    Do you really believe ANY of that shit?

    What % rate is the Bedroom Tax levied at?
    14% for each bedroom.
  • EasterrossEasterross Posts: 1,915
    Morning all, David L if you are still around, are you old enough to remember when we ran Tayside Regional Council?
This discussion has been closed.