Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » By accident or design, the election’s got a debate series t
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » By accident or design, the election’s got a debate series that could work
In a little over nine months’ time, the US presidential hopefuls will be campaigning hard in the then snow-bound small rural state of Iowa, the first in a long process of state-wide elections that will ultimately determine the two parties’ nominations.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
I hope he can traverse the channel between these Symplegades but I have serious doubts that he will prove to be UKIP's Jason.
The Tories are furious that the corporation failed to report in clear terms that David Cameron had beaten Ed Miliband in the first debate.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/general-election-2015/11500709/BBC-under-fire-for-failing-to-declare-David-Cameron-as-winner-of-Battle-for-Number-10.html
Not as bad when they said Boris only just won, when his victory was the same size as Obama's, which they described as obviously as wiping the floor.
Is there evidence for this? It strikes me as a myth. I also don't see how they made it harder for the leaders to be held to account in other ways - there were only 3 of the things, leaving a great deal of time for other methods, if they had too much influence it was down to laziness not because it was inevitable the debates had too much impact.
It seems to me that people will always find something they felt had too much impact if they believe it negatively impacted things. A vow, a poll, a debate series, but actually calculating how much impact it had seems harder to pin down. Could have been a lot of flash for not much substance after all.
Miliband, on the otherhand is the extreme- he looks like he cares too much, but he also looks energised and enthusiastic- hell yeah- but also exacerbates his oddness. The public connected to Miliband in a much more profound way, at times laughing at him, at times clapping- but Miliband's passion got through to the public in a way Cameron didn't.
24 hours later, I am inclined to say that Miliband wants this more, it shows, and the British public like a trier, particularly one fighting against the odds.
As pointed out when Obama won by the same margin in debates, BBC weren't shy to say so.
It is clear he sees the job akin to a chief exec / manager, and he delegates duties off the ministers, and likes his weekends off. The question is, is that a successful approach. I actually don't mind it, in the same way as when Blair got it in the neck for going on holiday, I thought it was a perfectly sensible thing to do.
That been said, when you go for the job interview, normally a good idea to have done your prep.
Not sure passion for wanting to be PM while looking a weird while doing it, is necessary good thing. Nobody would doubt that Gordon Brown's entire life was about becoming a successful PM, every decision he was making for all those years in government were focused upon when he became PM, etc....what it came across as a mad man.
Thatcher, again, nobody doubt she was passionate.
The interesting thing will be how the various campaigns will be perceived by those who have yet to fully commit to one party, or disengage completely and not vote.
Very few on PB can do much more than guess, with various levels of accuracy.
Yes, we have a hard time considering each others viewpoints, without the alien concept of "not being totally obsessed" being added.
He has to make Cameron to be the villain of the story not Miliband, because the anti-Miliband candidate is Cameron and he will get the votes if people get scared of Miliband.
UKIP's rise has been thanks to the perception, for the most part, of it being the most effective opposition to the government.
On who Farage should go after the most, surely he has to go for Cameron, not only to shore up that part of his support that hates Cameron, but because he'll have another opportunity to go after Ed directly in any case.
I would say all this nonsense Ed purposes is just attempting to be populist and he wont really do it in government, but I fear he really does believe all this guff about things like resetting markets, stopping predator capitalism, etc.
That thought struck me the other night as well, but it might just have been an an off night.
I remember one of the critics of the 2010 debates said that the winner was determined by their position.
Clegg was on the left on the first debate.
Cameron was on the left in the second debate.
Brown was on the left in the third debate.
I'd much rather a delegator than someone like Brown who wanted to control everything- phoning his ministers at six in the morning and harassing them. I didn't like Brown because he wanted to be PM so much. It put me off him.
All 7
Cam-mili-Clegg-Farage
Cam-mili
If Farage is in the centre then we will look like he's the host of a quiz show.
I can imagine the opening lines now: "Welcome to Who Wants To Be Prime Minister, on my left we have the corrupt Westminster elite and on my right we have the loony eco-nationalists, let us begin the show with our first question"
It was also a blatantly false argument, trying to suggest if someone did have style they could not also have substance, given they certainly would not make that argument if their chosen guy had a better style.
Can you remember a single government policy that UKIP supported?
It's a recipe for success - I feel the leaders trip up when they actually start interacting with one another, or attempt to actually explain something important to the public. Important things are things people have opinions on, so at least some people won't like what you have to say. Avoid at all costs I say.
Night all.
Some of the expressed views above are less sincere than others - who knows which though.
It's not even just that. Any setting of an arbitrary 'cap' on profits, whether 5% or 50% is daft because it undermines the very purpose of introducing private sector competition into the public sector. Either you believe in the profit motive or you don't. The moment you 'cap' the potential profit you basically remove the profit motive - the constant search for efficiency and innovation for the purposes of making money - and just create a public sector model that is 5% (or 50%) more expensive. In which case you might as well revert to a full public sector, zero profit model. A contract where the profit is capped will drive no efficiency or innovation because there is no incentive to do so.
Introducing private sector competition is supposed to create a virtuous circle. A competitive market will produce the best value to the tax-payer at the time of initial tender. Over the course of a fixed price contract one would expect the profit margins for the tenderer to grow but these gains will then be banked by the public sector when the contract is retendered. (Of course an even more sensible approach is to build assumptions of efficiency gains into the contract so that a proportion of those gains are banked through the course of the contract).
Goodnight.
The vast majority (not all) of businesses would not operate on a 5% profit margin.
The vast majority (not all) of businesses would not operate on a 5% profit margin.
It depends on the level of risk involved in the contract, and the extent of competition in the market. However one wonders what he would do if interest rates actually rose to formerly "normal levels"! A 5% profit margin isn't much good when you can earn the same amount risk free in the bank!
The vast majority (not all) of businesses would not operate on a 5% profit margin.
But he has faced the reality of government, he was a minister for a year and a cabinet minister for two years. He must know he is talking nonsense. Government cant be that much of a bubble, he would have been at the very top of decision making. How could he act as if he's just walked out of a PPE from Oxford, with no other experience?
The same with Balls. You may like him, you may not, but he does understand and know his stuff. So when he is telling you something that is quite obviously a load of horlicks, he isnt doing it out of his ignorance, hes doing it out of ours.
Quite funny you should bring that up. A few days ago at a local party campaign launch i got chatting to a gentleman who had just finished some property redevelopment. We were talking about the investment incomes and interest rates. He was talking about how much harder it is to make money when interest rates are 15%. That alone would entirely remove any yield.
The vast majority (not all) of businesses would not operate on a 5% profit margin.
Which 'profit' are we looking at though
PAT, PBT, Op Profit, Gross Profit ?
Markup or margin ?
What sort of overhead absorption is being used ?
How are the costs of the job calculated ?
Salary recharge to overhead ?
Management fees of parent companies ?
Take a prudent view on costs with relation to possible contingencies in the project(s) ?
Cost plus accounting, capital investment needed for the project - is that included in the profit figure ?
Good few ways for companies to make this "5%" rule work for them.
The four girls, along with a fifth girl who is home-schooled, have been made wards of court and had their passports removed.
The school was revealed after reporters argued it was in the public interest.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-32091822
Well that's a shock.
Should be randomized imo.
http://www.conservativehome.com/video/2015/03/the-song-that-cameron-recited-to-yesterdays-tv-audience-during-an-advert-break.html
"Absolutely not."
Well there's a shock. Could have not done The Internationale or something instead?
I can only imagine what Boris would have done...Gangnam Style?
What is the maximum a pension provider under the "auto-enrolment" scheme can earn ?
This was introduced by the present government and I support it.
So, why did they not leave it to market forces ? Do they not understand business ?
The worrying extremist links to lawyer of jihadi schoolgirl's father: Solicitor says Muslims shouldn't co-operate with police and that Lee Rigby killer was 'created' by security services
Akunjee has previously said Muslims should not co-operate with the police
He posted a sickening cartoon on Facebook after the Charlie Hebdo attack
He once asked in an internet rant: ‘Does she [Home Secretary Theresa May] have Nazi blood in her veins?’
Lawyer also said security services 'created' Lee Rigby killer Adebolajo
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3015409/Lawyer-jihadi-schoolgirl-s-father-worrying-links-extremists-Solicitor-says-Muslims-shouldn-t-operate-police-Lee-Rigby-killer-created-security-services.html
So we have father's attending extremist rallies, we have a lawyer with an interesting history and of course mates with the CAGE nutters, 4 more girls from the same school banned by the courts from travelling abroad, what else is to come?
It is the smallest of small worlds...
I'm waiting for Portillo's series on trains and Bradshaw.
I'm also starting watching every Top Gear episode on DVD as a memorial.
First time poster, so hi everyone.
10,000 seconds
Where I think he has to be careful is to not be too incredulous when the others are talking rubbish. During the Clegg debates I thought he struggled to just let Clegg hang himself. He also needs to have a clear line on public spending and welfare.
There is something quite grotesque about the Mail's guilt by association. If if wasn't that Mail readers are so thick and prejudiced they'd realize that most of those implicated in their story are at least three people removed from the person whose character they are trying to assassinate.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3015409/Lawyer-jihadi-schoolgirl-s-father-worrying-links-extremists-Solicitor-says-Muslims-shouldn-t-operate-police-Lee-Rigby-killer-created-security-services.html
However getting things into proportion, clearly the main event of today comes at 9am with the latest ARSE. How long until Broxtowe moves from TCTC to probable Tory hold.
Wouldn't want to be out canvassing today. It is absolutely pishing down up here in Easter Ross.
"That's pretty ludicrous from the Tory party. Who 'won' is very much in the eye of the beholder and the idea that the BBC should proclaim a winner is frankly daft."
Yes. That's very true. Rather a silly complaint from one of our less cerebral MP's
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/general-election-2015/11500709/BBC-under-fire-for-failing-to-declare-David-Cameron-as-winner-of-Battle-for-Number-10.html
I'm maybe one of the few posters here who's seen lots of multi-party debates (up to 10 party leaders at a time, in Denmark). Rule 1 is that you don't waste your limited time going for anyone in particular. It's not a zero-sum game like a two-person debate, because if A discredits B then everyone but B benefits. What you try to do is push a USP, which is what viewers are looking for as they try to single out one from another, and make some generalised criticism of everyone else - they're all the establishment unlike fearless outsider you, or most of them aren't being serious and honest, or the like.
On the whole, the format helps promote positive debate, because the pressing USP need trumps everything else. They are quite intriguing affairs, and I'd predict that there will be a perceived winner, quite likely an outsider as the media like to promote surprises.
Stephen Fisher is clearly ahead of the curve having substantially tweaked his methodology this week. I also see Martin Baxter is no longer awarding half the Highland seats to UKIP though I do concede Douglas Carswell is almost certain to hold Clacton, which for some reason Baxter is no longer predicting.
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/881a98cc-d3ca-11e4-99bd-00144feab7de.html#ixzz3VfAk8cLn
Losing one editor is not considered careless in the newspaper industry. Losing five within a decade is, especially at Britain’s most establishment title. In recent times the Telegraph has appeared to be in a permanent state of revolution. It has brought in digital gurus only to sideline them months later. It has culled some of its best journalists, the men and occasionally women who had formed its conservative backbone. On top of this, it is facing the biggest threat to its credibility in living memory.
retention rate by party defending seat.
CON 100%
SNP 100%
LAB 60%
INDY 50^
UKIP 0%
RES G 0%
Cameron was very professional, the audience and Burley were very respectful and deferential to his position.
It felt like many of those meetings you have to attend, and the boss of the organisation is there.
The attendees rarely say what they really want to.
Paxman initially broke that consensus, and it reminded me of that uncomfortable silence, when someone challenges the boss, and everyone else , looks at their feet.
Cameron seemed at first , to be shocked by how hard he went in from the get go.
In contrast Milliband was challenged harder and rightly so,as he has yet not done the job.
Unlike Wilson and Heath in 74, which seems to be a similar election in it closeness at least.
However I believe this helped him deal with Paxman, and showed the wider audience , he is certainly better than many would have you believe.
It may do Plaid some good with her Welsh target audience. There may well be increased support in Anglophone Wales as the alternative to LD and Labour.
It may be worth betting on the upside of the three PC seats.
Re: Farage. – Not entirely convinced it is an ‘either or’ decision to focus on just Labour or the Tories, I’d have thought as Farage has made UKIP the anti-establishment party with their ‘LibLabCon’ mantra, then it would be more beneficial to continue in the same vein.
Blame all three for all UK's problems and project himself as the alternative, that sort of thing.
"Very interesting statistic for Council By-elections in March"
That might be interesting to the village folk in Easterross but to us city folks with more enquiring minds it tells us very little. You haven't even indicated how many by elections are included in your survey
It's about differentials, innit? Specifically, Farage and Sturgeon have enough to gain by annihilating ed that they can afford the hypothetical leakage from Lab to the Greens or Plaid which will result from eviscerating him.
In a way, ed is where he wants to be - well placed to demonstrate to the nation how 'ard he is actually is by defeating Farage and Sturgeon. But it isn't the limited-downside walkover he was angling for. I bet he's thinking he should have been more careful what he wished for.
http://www.libdems.org.uk/broken
If Miliband had got the better of the debate then the BBC would have put it front and centre on every page and broadcast and they would still be reminding people now and up to the election. It's not about a declaration for Cameron it's the comparison of what they would have done for Milliband.
........but of course you already know that.