politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » LAB regains YouGov lead and Newsnight index has gap down to

System

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » LAB regains YouGov lead and Newsnight index has gap down to 2 seats

After last night level pegging LAB lead by one: CON 35%, LAB 36%, LD 7%, UKIP 12%, GRN 5%

Read the full story here

Scrapheap_as_was

Duncan Bannatyne, a Dragon, has signed the letter from 100 business leaders. I was sure he was a Labour man????

Am i confused?

RobD

Second!

kle4

Each party on around 280 would be fun, but I do think the Tories have more than 2 more would be better - they need more of a seat advantage to make more options viable for them afterwards.

Would be a bit of an anti-climax if Lab staged a recovery in Scotland now - even a few percentage points here and there saves many of their seats, and the sheer massive scale of the SNP surge was the only thing preventing a Labour plurality, or possibly even a majority.

Scott_P

Scrapheap_as_was said:

Duncan Bannatyne, a Dragon, has signed the letter from 100 business leaders. I was sure he was a Labour man????

Am i confused?

5 former Labour backer have signed the letter

Scrapheap_as_was

i think this thread might need a link to the telegraph front page ere long.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/11507586/General-Election-2015-Labour-threatens-Britains-recovery-say-100-business-chiefs.html

MP_SE

I suppose Labour could get Bill Somebody to come out in support of them for the GE.

Scott_P

@faisalislam: Some big names on here: “@Telegraph: Labour threatens recovery - 100 biz leaders write to @Telegraph #businessletter http://t.co/JX8NZ4iBSU

FrancisUrquhart

Scott_P said:

Scrapheap_as_was said:

Duncan Bannatyne, a Dragon, has signed the letter from 100 business leaders. I was sure he was a Labour man????

Am i confused?

5 former Labour backer have signed the letter

I presume Bill Somebody is still a supporter :-)

SimonStClare

Scrapheap_as_was said:

Duncan Bannatyne, a Dragon, has signed the letter from 100 business leaders. I was sure he was a Labour man????

Am i confused?

Didn't Duncan Bannatyne also slam Ed's 'offensive' mansion tax proposals?

TheScreamingEagles

Portugal have lost 2 nil at home, to the Cape Verde Islands.

compouter2

SimonStClare said:

Scrapheap_as_was said:

Duncan Bannatyne, a Dragon, has signed the letter from 100 business leaders. I was sure he was a Labour man????

Am i confused?

Didn't Duncan Bannatyne also slam Ed's 'offensive' mansion tax proposals?

Somone has been scouring Wiki ;-)

MaxPB

Scrapheap_as_was said:

Duncan Bannatyne, a Dragon, has signed the letter from 100 business leaders. I was sure he was a Labour man????

Am i confused?

Yes, I think he donated to Labour when Gordon Brown was leader.

Itwasrigged

ComRes in excluding Falkirk were being disingenuous, a seat where the SNP might be expected to give Labour a hiding now. There is a word to sum them up - sleekit!

FrancisUrquhart

compouter2 said:

SimonStClare said:

Scrapheap_as_was said:

Duncan Bannatyne, a Dragon, has signed the letter from 100 business leaders. I was sure he was a Labour man????

Am i confused?

Didn't Duncan Bannatyne also slam Ed's 'offensive' mansion tax proposals?

Somone has been scouring Wiki ;-)

You?

HYUFD

TimT (previous thread) The GOP can end funding, the Democrats would just start it up again next time they get in if it is not repealed

SimonStClare

TheScreamingEagles said:

Portugal have lost 2 nil at home, to the Cape Verde Islands.

Cape Verde population 5ooK – Portugal, 10 million plus. - the underdog wonith

FrancisUrquhart

SeanT said:

Evan Davies is a c*nt.

Now that definitely isn't news....He really is a crap host of Newsnight.

another_richard

SeanT said:

Evan Davies is a c*nt.

Why ?

MaxPB

FPT:

Pulpstar said:

My London contact reckons Ilford North and Enfield Southgate are stronger chances than Finchley and Battersea.

I wouldn't be surprised to see David Burrowes lose in Enfield Southgate. My dad said for the first time ever they had Tories on his road delivering leaflets and knocking on doors. Plus I don't think he is very popular locally. The only thing that may save him is how dire the candidates from Labour, Lib Dems and UKIP are. Still I think the Tories may lose it with a larger than average swing, they are clearly worried if they are going down a road with 4 bedroom semi detached houses knocking on doors.

Flightpath

35 marshalling its reserves. Will the charge of the Gallant 100 prevent the red cossacks from carrying off 36 into captivity?
Barbs to the left of them invective to the right of them; into the headlines of death rode the Gallant 100.

Scrapheap_as_was

Tory Treasury retweeted

Faisal Islam‏@faisalislam·2m2 minutes ago
... And it's not just the usual Conservative business backers peers etc...eg CEO of prudential Tidjane Thiam. Few ex labour backers etc.

SimonStClare

compouter2 said:

SimonStClare said:

Scrapheap_as_was said:

Duncan Bannatyne, a Dragon, has signed the letter from 100 business leaders. I was sure he was a Labour man????

Am i confused?

Didn't Duncan Bannatyne also slam Ed's 'offensive' mansion tax proposals?

Somone has been scouring Wiki ;-)

Nope.

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/dragon-duncan-bannatyne-slams-labours-5401016

Danny565

God forbid Chuka Umunna ever becomes Labour leader.

FrancisUrquhart

Nobody of any importance signed the "Labour threatens Britain recovery", so thats ok :-)

https://twitter.com/suttonnick/status/583019323922452481

MTimT

FPT @kle4 In the US, it would be impossible to imagine the restaurant sector surviving without zero hour contracts. Even for most professionals, 'at will' contracts are the norm. This is not quite a zero hour contract, which makes no guarantees as to hours worked, the employee only working when needed, but it achieves much the same thing for professionals. Under an at will contract, the employer can dismiss the employee without cause at any time.

As stated, the theory is that this encourages hiring earlier in an economic up-turn as if things do not work out, the employer is not saddled with the employee indefinitely. In practice, if the company does well, it is little different from any other non-Union contract.

AlastairMeeks

The Sun and Mirror front pages are more likely to shift votes than the Telgraph's.

FrancisUrquhart

MTimT said:

FPT @kle4 In the US, it would be impossible to imagine the restaurant sector surviving without zero hour contracts. Even for most professionals, 'at will' contracts are the norm. This is not quite a zero hour contract, which makes no guarantees as to hours worked, the employee only working when needed, but it achieves much the same thing for professionals. Under an at will contract, the employer can dismiss the employee without cause at any time.

As stated, the theory is that this encourages hiring earlier in an economic up-turn as if things do not work out, the employer is not saddled with the employee indefinitely. In practice, if the company does well, it is little different from any other non-Union contract.

This whole "zero hours" thing being new is just bollocks anyway. It is basically just a new name for agency work and not just minimum wage jobs.

Most supply teachers are on "zero hours contracts" i.e they work for agency and get / take whatever hours are going. How would this survive under such a ban? No school can know which teacher is going to be sick and when, and therefore no professional agency can guarantee how many hours each week.

Most office temping is via agency work as well. Again, what office knows when their front desk is going to go off sick?

Unless Labour's ban is going to be nonsense and all that has to happen is the contract states minimum hours of paid hours and you can put down 1 or some such nonsense.

EPG

MTimT said:

FPT @kle4 In the US, it would be impossible to imagine the restaurant sector surviving without zero hour contracts. Even for most professionals, 'at will' contracts are the norm. This is not quite a zero hour contract, which makes no guarantees as to hours worked, the employee only working when needed, but it achieves much the same thing for professionals. Under an at will contract, the employer can dismiss the employee without cause at any time.

As stated, the theory is that this encourages hiring earlier in an economic up-turn as if things do not work out, the employer is not saddled with the employee indefinitely. In practice, if the company does well, it is little different from any other non-Union contract.

Would there really be no restaurants if restaurant staff contracts were normal?

DavidL

I very much doubt that this letter will have any direct impact, it will look like a bunch of fat cats who support the Tories, quelle surprise.

But the anti business narrative of Labour is a throw back to the early 80s or even the 70s. Blair would never have allowed such a narrative to become so entrenched. I expect the Tory's already strong lead on the economy to improve with the media carrying such stories. Will this make a difference? It just might.

kle4

SeanT said:

Evan Davies is a st*r.

I'm being taken on a rollercoaster with these posts.

Saltire

Mike sorry but the SNP are up 1 with the Newnight index. The rest of the changes are:
CON -3
LAB +1

OTHERS +3

With no change for UKIP, Libdems or Greens. No idea where the extra 3 others are going to come from (18 are NI obviously with Respect on 1)
Note last night they only had a total of 648 seats!

Scrapheap_as_was

SeanT said:

Evan Davies is a st*r.

what on earth is going on?

TGOHF

FrancisUrquhart said:

SeanT said:

Evan Davies is a c*nt.

Now that definitely isn't news....He really is a crap host of Newsnight.

Never look at his ears - one you see how big they are they can never be unseen.

Sandpit

Scrapheap_as_was said:

i think this thread might need a link to the telegraph front page ere long.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/11507586/General-Election-2015-Labour-threatens-Britains-recovery-say-100-business-chiefs.html

With that front page does there not seem to be a serious change in narrative since the start of the 'campaign proper'? I wonder if Ed's demonisation of the press and support for Leveson is not coming back to haunt him when he needs them most?
Assuming that the undersigned of the Telegraph letter all gave their permission for their words to be used, of course ;-)

MTimT

HYUFD said:

TimT (previous thread) The GOP can end funding, the Democrats would just start it up again next time they get in if it is not repealed

No, it would not work like that. What would the 12 million people on Obamacare do for medical insurance in the meantime? How would the insurance companies make money? No, if that happened, a new deal would be worked out which would achieve more of the positives of Obamacare for less of the cost and less of the nasty bits. A law that 5 years after enactment is still disliked by 60% of the voting population (and that number is due to go up once fines start being meted out to those who do not have compliant insurance and yet others have subsidies clawed back this Spring) is not going to be resurrected after 4 or 8 years effectively off the books.

GeoffM

another_richard said:

SeanT said:

Evan Davies is a c*nt.

Why ?

I'm shocked that anyone needs to ask.

MaxPB

Danny565 said:

God forbid Chuka Umunna ever becomes Labour leader.

He always comes across as such a smarmy and greasy see you next Tuesday. He will turn more people off Labour than will get on the train. Labour need to elect a woman after the election. It's a shame there is such a dearth of female Labour talent.

Danny565

DavidL said:

I very much doubt that this letter will have any direct impact, it will look like a bunch of fat cats who support the Tories, quelle surprise.

But the anti business narrative of Labour is a throw back to the early 80s or even the 70s. Blair would never have allowed such a narrative to become so entrenched. I expect the Tory's already strong lead on the economy to improve with the media carrying such stories. Will this make a difference? It just might.

This is more revisionism about what Blair actually stood for, though (to be fair, the "Blairites" themselves have also joined in with that revisionism). I remember Blair in opposition saying that footballers got paid too much and that businesses had a responsibility to pay their employees decently, while Brown talked about taking money from the "undeserved rich".

All of that is just as leftwing, if not more so, than anything Miliband has said; the only difference is that the super-rich and big businesses are more unreasonable and nauseatingly self-entitled than they were 20 years ago.

FrancisUrquhart

SeanT said:

That was actually a brilliant and subtle evisceration of Chuka Umunna, who ended up promising 70 BILLION of savings in Whatever, then admitted he meant millions. lol

Was he honestly trying to argue Labour are credible on the deficit by talking about 70 MILLION of savings?.....next they will be talking about how if everybody looks down the back of the sofa, if we all put the pennies we find together we can eliminate the deficit.

TheScreamingEagles

In the Sun, Dave and George have an interview, in which they say

We’ll freeze income tax, VAT and NI for five years

MaxPB

Danny565 said:

DavidL said:

I very much doubt that this letter will have any direct impact, it will look like a bunch of fat cats who support the Tories, quelle surprise.

But the anti business narrative of Labour is a throw back to the early 80s or even the 70s. Blair would never have allowed such a narrative to become so entrenched. I expect the Tory's already strong lead on the economy to improve with the media carrying such stories. Will this make a difference? It just might.

This is more revisionism about what Blair actually stood for, though (to be fair, the "Blairites" themselves have also joined in with that revisionism). I remember Blair in opposition saying that footballers got paid too much and that businesses had a responsibility to pay their employees decently, while Brown talked about taking money from the "undeserved rich".

All of that is just as leftwing, if not more so, than anything Miliband has said; the only difference is that the super-rich and big businesses are more unreasonable and nauseatingly self-entitled than they were 20 years ago.

And Mandy talking about people getting filthy rich?

MTimT

EPG said:

MTimT said:

FPT @kle4 In the US, it would be impossible to imagine the restaurant sector surviving without zero hour contracts. Even for most professionals, 'at will' contracts are the norm. This is not quite a zero hour contract, which makes no guarantees as to hours worked, the employee only working when needed, but it achieves much the same thing for professionals. Under an at will contract, the employer can dismiss the employee without cause at any time.

As stated, the theory is that this encourages hiring earlier in an economic up-turn as if things do not work out, the employer is not saddled with the employee indefinitely. In practice, if the company does well, it is little different from any other non-Union contract.

Would there really be no restaurants if restaurant staff contracts were normal?

Of course not. But there would be far fewer, service would be much worse (as there would be fewer servers per restaurant with no surge capacity for weekends and busy times) and prices would be higher.

You are correct, I should have added "in its current form" after 'surviving'.

kle4

I cannot say I've found any Chuka Ummuna performance I've seen especially impressive, though I'll grant I mainly stick to reading about rather than viewing politics, so it's a limited pool. But he seems to have that style many newer politicians have adopted, I presume in response to pushy interviewers (some with big egos themselves), of always acting as though every question is an imposition, and why is their time being wasted with such silliness. Maybe the previous generations were the same, but it just seems more noticable with the Ummunas and Powells and Schapps and the like, as though they are taking their pre-emptive defensive tactics too far and appearing (to me at any rate) always overly dismissive and haughty.

compouter2

A paper read by millionares showing millionaires backing the party of millionaires......will be one way it will be spun.

foxinsoxuk

MaxPB said:

Danny565 said:

God forbid Chuka Umunna ever becomes Labour leader.

He always comes across as such a smarmy and greasy see you next Tuesday. He will turn more people off Labour than will get on the train. Labour need to elect a woman after the election. It's a shame there is such a dearth of female Labour talent.

Liz Kendall!

Danny565

MaxPB said:

Danny565 said:

DavidL said:

I very much doubt that this letter will have any direct impact, it will look like a bunch of fat cats who support the Tories, quelle surprise.

But the anti business narrative of Labour is a throw back to the early 80s or even the 70s. Blair would never have allowed such a narrative to become so entrenched. I expect the Tory's already strong lead on the economy to improve with the media carrying such stories. Will this make a difference? It just might.

This is more revisionism about what Blair actually stood for, though (to be fair, the "Blairites" themselves have also joined in with that revisionism). I remember Blair in opposition saying that footballers got paid too much and that businesses had a responsibility to pay their employees decently, while Brown talked about taking money from the "undeserved rich".

All of that is just as leftwing, if not more so, than anything Miliband has said; the only difference is that the super-rich and big businesses are more unreasonable and nauseatingly self-entitled than they were 20 years ago.

And Mandy talking about people getting filthy rich?

That was after they got into government, though. The rhetoric in opposition was just as left-wing as anything Miliband has said.

MarqueeMark

Yay to the Newsnight Balloon Man!

EPG

22 = 18 Irishmen and women + 2 Plaid + 1 Speaker + 1 Carpetbagger I presume?

DavidL

Danny565 said:

DavidL said:

I very much doubt that this letter will have any direct impact, it will look like a bunch of fat cats who support the Tories, quelle surprise.

But the anti business narrative of Labour is a throw back to the early 80s or even the 70s. Blair would never have allowed such a narrative to become so entrenched. I expect the Tory's already strong lead on the economy to improve with the media carrying such stories. Will this make a difference? It just might.

This is more revisionism about what Blair actually stood for, though (to be fair, the "Blairites" themselves have also joined in with that revisionism). I remember Blair in opposition saying that footballers got paid too much and that businesses had a responsibility to pay their employees decently, while Brown talked about taking money from the "undeserved rich".

All of that is just as leftwing, if not more so, than anything Miliband has said; the only difference is that the super-rich and big businesses are more unreasonable and nauseatingly self-entitled than they were 20 years ago.

Do you not remember Brown's prawn cocktail offensive? They worked really hard to persuade business that they understood business and the importance of making money.

Miliband seems to me utterly indifferent to the need for this country to make a living. He is entirely about how the cake should be divided. It is a mistake and will make some hesitate when they might have been open to a more balanced platform.

another_richard

MaxPB said:

FPT:

Pulpstar said:

My London contact reckons Ilford North and Enfield Southgate are stronger chances than Finchley and Battersea.

I wouldn't be surprised to see David Burrowes lose in Enfield Southgate. My dad said for the first time ever they had Tories on his road delivering leaflets and knocking on doors. Plus I don't think he is very popular locally. The only thing that may save him is how dire the candidates from Labour, Lib Dems and UKIP are. Still I think the Tories may lose it with a larger than average swing, they are clearly worried if they are going down a road with 4 bedroom semi detached houses knocking on doors.

Labour led in Southgate constituency in last year's local elections.

I'm not sure but I don't think they did so before their victories in 1997 and 2001.

Sunil_Prasannan

YouGov is the Gold Standard!!!

kle4

compouter2 said:

A paper read by millionares showing millionaires backing the party of millionaires......will be one way it will be spun.

Yes indeed. It really feels, and maybe this is unfair, as though it's just one of the expected happenings in the campaign, just going through the motions. More surprising would have been its lack, and subsequent inability to spin the above line to the same degree.

Flightpath

MaxPB said:

Danny565 said:

God forbid Chuka Umunna ever becomes Labour leader.

He always comes across as such a smarmy and greasy see you next Tuesday. He will turn more people off Labour than will get on the train. Labour need to elect a woman after the election. It's a shame there is such a dearth of female Labour talent.

I've just had to look up what you said there and I'm shocked I tell you shocked... that I didn't know. And I was brought up in a nunnery!!!

Scrapheap_as_was

Labour list writer confirms what we PB Tories know.... don't put it on the thread though..

Conor Pope‏@Conorpope·7m7 minutes ago
I realise this falls into an Unpopular Twitter Opinion, but I'm afraid this is very bad for Labour

EPG

MTimT said:

EPG said:

MTimT said:

FPT @kle4 In the US, it would be impossible to imagine the restaurant sector surviving without zero hour contracts. Even for most professionals, 'at will' contracts are the norm. This is not quite a zero hour contract, which makes no guarantees as to hours worked, the employee only working when needed, but it achieves much the same thing for professionals. Under an at will contract, the employer can dismiss the employee without cause at any time.

As stated, the theory is that this encourages hiring earlier in an economic up-turn as if things do not work out, the employer is not saddled with the employee indefinitely. In practice, if the company does well, it is little different from any other non-Union contract.

Would there really be no restaurants if restaurant staff contracts were normal?

Of course not. But there would be far fewer, service would be much worse (as there would be fewer servers per restaurant with no surge capacity for weekends and busy times) and prices would be higher.

You are correct, I should have added "in its current form" after 'surviving'.

Basically like a crap members' club, in other words.

Sandpit

kle4 said:

I cannot say I've found any Chuka Ummuna performance I've seen especially impressive, though I'll grant I mainly stick to reading about rather than viewing politics, so it's a limited pool. But he seems to have that style many newer politicians have adopted, I presume in response to pushy interviewers (some with big egos themselves), of always acting as though every question is an imposition, and why is their time being wasted with such silliness. Maybe the previous generations were the same, but it just seems more noticable with the Ummunas and Powells and Schapps and the like, as though they are taking their pre-emptive defensive tactics too far and appearing (to me at any rate) always overly dismissive and haughty.

An empty suit with a private education and a law degree?

Saltire

EPG said:

22 = 18 Irishmen and women + 2 Plaid + 1 Speaker + 1 Carpetbagger I presume?

Doh! Forgot about Plaid. Maybe the beeb did too last night hence the gain of 3 tonight :-)

Flightpath

MTimT said:

HYUFD said:

TimT (previous thread) The GOP can end funding, the Democrats would just start it up again next time they get in if it is not repealed

No, it would not work like that. What would the 12 million people on Obamacare do for medical insurance in the meantime? How would the insurance companies make money? No, if that happened, a new deal would be worked out which would achieve more of the positives of Obamacare for less of the cost and less of the nasty bits. A law that 5 years after enactment is still disliked by 60% of the voting population (and that number is due to go up once fines start being meted out to those who do not have compliant insurance and yet others have subsidies clawed back this Spring) is not going to be resurrected after 4 or 8 years effectively off the books.

And to bring it back they would have to take money off medicare and medicaid all over again .

MTimT

EPG said:

MTimT said:

EPG said:

MTimT said:

FPT @kle4 In the US, it would be impossible to imagine the restaurant sector surviving without zero hour contracts. Even for most professionals, 'at will' contracts are the norm. This is not quite a zero hour contract, which makes no guarantees as to hours worked, the employee only working when needed, but it achieves much the same thing for professionals. Under an at will contract, the employer can dismiss the employee without cause at any time.

As stated, the theory is that this encourages hiring earlier in an economic up-turn as if things do not work out, the employer is not saddled with the employee indefinitely. In practice, if the company does well, it is little different from any other non-Union contract.

Would there really be no restaurants if restaurant staff contracts were normal?

Of course not. But there would be far fewer, service would be much worse (as there would be fewer servers per restaurant with no surge capacity for weekends and busy times) and prices would be higher.

You are correct, I should have added "in its current form" after 'surviving'.

Basically like a crap members' club, in other words.

LOL

HYUFD

In the modern media age image is hugely important and Umunna has an effective image and is a moderniser while able to appeal to all wings of the party, the average swing voter will not care less what figures he initially misspoke on newsnight tonight in 5 years time, if Cameron is re-elected Umunna remains highly likely to win the 2020 election in my view, by which time Osborne should have produced a surplus anyway so Labour will not need to make the savings they would now

Ave_it

Saltire said:

EPG said:

22 = 18 Irishmen and women + 2 Plaid + 1 Speaker + 1 Carpetbagger I presume?

Doh! Forgot about Plaid. Maybe the beeb did too last night hence the gain of 3 tonight :-)

Easily done!

Thanks for coming Leanne!!

RepublicanTory

antifrank said:

The Sun and Mirror front pages are more likely to shift votes than the Telgraph's.

plenty of Kippers read the telegraph.

+ I suspect many of the Telegraph readership is lukewarm to Cameron so anything that gets them to actually vote and vote Tory will be gratefully received by team Cameron.

HYUFD

MaxPB If Milband fails to win it will be Umunna v Cooper v Burnham in a Labour version of Obama v Clinton v Edwards with a similar tight margin, but with Umunna eking out a win

compouter2

kle4 said:

compouter2 said:

A paper read by millionares showing millionaires backing the party of millionaires......will be one way it will be spun.

Yes indeed. It really feels, and maybe this is unfair, as though it's just one of the expected happenings in the campaign, just going through the motions. More surprising would have been its lack, and subsequent inability to spin the above line to the same degree.

A pridictable 300 doctors/nurses/GP's saying if the Tory Party get's in then it will be the end of the NHS letter going to The Guardian/Observer between now and the election.

HYUFD

TimT Presumably the insurance companies would charge them more for insurance and they would have to pay and the Democrats would blame the GOP! In any case as Obamacare was virtually identical to Romneycare I doubt any rehashed alternative would look much different

Flightpath

Sandpit said:

Scrapheap_as_was said:

i think this thread might need a link to the telegraph front page ere long.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/11507586/General-Election-2015-Labour-threatens-Britains-recovery-say-100-business-chiefs.html

With that front page does there not seem to be a serious change in narrative since the start of the 'campaign proper'? I wonder if Ed's demonisation of the press and support for Leveson is not coming back to haunt him when he needs them most?
Assuming that the undersigned of the Telegraph letter all gave their permission for their words to be used, of course ;-)

Its no surprise its given the treatment it has but the letter was drafted and signed all the same no matter which page its on. I do not buy the Telegraph these days but having said that, I am actually charged with going down the road to get one tomorrow, so I will sadly be adding to the marketing people's joy.

John_N

With pollsters such as 'Election Forecast' predicting with 90% confidence (!) that UKIP will get between 0 and 1 seats, I feel awfully like punting on the UKIP seat price being in excess of 1 at Friday lunchtime. Farage-gasm? I mean seriously, what do many voters think is a big issue and who is likely to win the debate on immigration? What's the best place to punt on UKIP winning more than 1 seat, looking to cash out on Friday?

TGOHF

compouter2 said:

A paper read by millionares showing millionaires backing the party of millionaires......will be one way it will be spun.

Labour says never listen to people that are successful - we want failure like France ?

Scrapheap_as_was

How Labour lost the business vote

The letter from business leaders in support of George Osborne marks a new low for Ed Miliband

In his biography, Mr Blair recounts the "crucial" moment Labour "lost business" in the run up to the General Election as when the Tories procured a letter from 30 chief executives who opposed to a rise in national insurance.

"I knew the game was up," he said. "I phoned Peter [Mandelson] and asked if we had any. 'No,' he said, 'they won't come out for us'.

"Labour's case in 2010 was that the Tories would put the recovery at risk. If 30 chief executives, employing thousands of people in companies worth billions of pounds, say it's Labour that put the economy at risk, who does the voter believe.

"Answer: the chief executives. Once you lose them, you lose more than a few votes. You lose your economic credibility. And a sprinkling of academic economists, however distinguished, won't make up the difference."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/ed-miliband/11507756/How-Labour-lost-the-business-vote.html

FrancisUrquhart

The next 007 should be a WOMAN, says Ed Miliband

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3020146/The-007-WOMAN-says-Ed-Miliband-tips-former-Bond-girl-Rosamund-Pike-iconic-role.html

After this, banning zero hours contracts and generally abusing business seems perfectly rational.

compouter2

TGOHF said:

compouter2 said:

A paper read by millionares showing millionaires backing the party of millionaires......will be one way it will be spun.

Labour says never listen to people that are successful - we want failure like France ?

That headline, if it is read by either will firm up the core vote for both parties, in reality. One mans business person is another mans fatcat.

RepublicanTory

DavidL said:

I very much doubt that this letter will have any direct impact, it will look like a bunch of fat cats who support the Tories, quelle surprise.

But the anti business narrative of Labour is a throw back to the early 80s or even the 70s. Blair would never have allowed such a narrative to become so entrenched. I expect the Tory's already strong lead on the economy to improve with the media carrying such stories. Will this make a difference? It just might.

Most people are no fans of big business
BUT
They employ a lot of people:

If in doubt
Hold tight to Nurse.

Being anti business may be "popular" on one level, we all like to see the Boss fall on his face.
But we all need a job to pay the bills so our feelings will be tempered by reality.

HYUFD

kle4 Of course in the fifties interviewers treated senior politicians almost like demi-gods

Flightpath

MaxPB said:

Scrapheap_as_was said:

Duncan Bannatyne, a Dragon, has signed the letter from 100 business leaders. I was sure he was a Labour man????

Am i confused?

Yes, I think he donated to Labour when Gordon Brown was leader.

'Here goes the last of the Bannatynes'

roserees64

This letter from the business leaders will have quite an impact, a negative one.

Charles

antifrank said:

The Sun and Mirror front pages are more likely to shift votes than the Telgraph's.

I look at the phones and WTF?! He must be very charming...

HYUFD

Sandpit Like Labour's most electorally successful leader ever you mean? Not to mention one B Obama

MTimT

HYUFD said:

TimT Presumably the insurance companies would charge them more for insurance and they would have to pay and the Democrats would blame the GOP! In any case as Obamacare was virtually identical to Romneycare I doubt any rehashed alternative would look much different

The insurance companies can't charge those on ObamaCare more, precisely because those are the people who could not afford healthcare before.

Try finding anyone in the GOP who would defend RomneyCare at the national level these days ... They don't exist. The best they will say is that it is fine for States to go their own way.

Personally, I am out of kilter with the GOP on the correct approach on this one, but I doubt that a GOP-led fix to ObamaCare would look much like ObamaCare at all.

Scrapheap_as_was

Would these big names at some of our biggest firms have come out in such large numbers if they thought Ed was going to be pM?

Sunil_Prasannan

It's April in under one hour! There should be a "Super-ELBOW" for all polls with fieldwork end-dates during March due in the next 48 hours, assuming there are a couple of late stragglers with fieldwork ending today or yesterday.

Pulpstar

Scrapheap_as_was said:

Would these big names at some of our biggest firms have come out in such large numbers if they thought Ed was going to be pM?

QTWTAIY

AlastairMeeks

Charles said:

antifrank said:

The Sun and Mirror front pages are more likely to shift votes than the Telgraph's.

I look at the phones and WTF?! He must be very charming...

And the average Sun reader's reaction will be "cut off his... benefits"

FrancisUrquhart

Bonds' next car...if Ed was making the decision...

http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2015/2/10/1423586655336/5877d556-5a69-4200-a2b5-f5568aec4af7-620x322.png

kle4

roserees64 said:

This letter from the business leaders will have quite an impact, a negative one.

No it won't. Labour cannot have it both ways on this I feel; if its something everyone already knows to be true - that is, rich businessmen on the whole are more likely to support the Tories - as they will be arguing, then I cannot see it having much of an impact at all, as it is priced in.

HYUFD said:

kle4 Of course in the fifties interviewers treated senior politicians almost like demi-gods

Is that true or a joke? I cannot be sure.

Danny565

DavidL said:

Danny565 said:

DavidL said:

I very much doubt that this letter will have any direct impact, it will look like a bunch of fat cats who support the Tories, quelle surprise.

But the anti business narrative of Labour is a throw back to the early 80s or even the 70s. Blair would never have allowed such a narrative to become so entrenched. I expect the Tory's already strong lead on the economy to improve with the media carrying such stories. Will this make a difference? It just might.

This is more revisionism about what Blair actually stood for, though (to be fair, the "Blairites" themselves have also joined in with that revisionism). I remember Blair in opposition saying that footballers got paid too much and that businesses had a responsibility to pay their employees decently, while Brown talked about taking money from the "undeserved rich".

All of that is just as leftwing, if not more so, than anything Miliband has said; the only difference is that the super-rich and big businesses are more unreasonable and nauseatingly self-entitled than they were 20 years ago.

Do you not remember Brown's prawn cocktail offensive? They worked really hard to persuade business that they understood business and the importance of making money.

Miliband seems to me utterly indifferent to the need for this country to make a living. He is entirely about how the cake should be divided. It is a mistake and will make some hesitate when they might have been open to a more balanced platform.

But I just can't see how Labour's incredibly mild "interventionist" policies are going to stop the country making a living.

I freely admit to having no business experience myself, but biased though I may be, I find it hard to believe these multi-millionaire magnates living their 5-star lifestyles when they claim they would be unable to pay higher taxes and to paytheir employees decent wages (on proper, fixed contracts), while still generating the healthy profits which as you rightly say the country needs.

FrancisUrquhart

Another good headline for Ed...

https://twitter.com/suttonnick/status/583028594710052864

GIN1138

It's easy to dismiss as millionaires trying to look after their own interests, but I think the Telegraph letter is a pretty big blow to Labour actually...

Ave_it

Sunil_Prasannan said:

It's April in under one hour! There should be a "Super-ELBOW" for all polls with fieldwork end-dates during March due in the next 48 hours, assuming there are a couple of late stragglers with fieldwork ending today or yesterday.

Will CON be ahead in every poll in April?!

FrancisUrquhart

Iain Martin
‏@iainmartin1
Can understand Labour scepticism of letter from 100 business leaders. Point is, 15 years ago New Labour used to arrange this stuff.

Flightpath

HYUFD said:

kle4 Of course in the fifties interviewers treated senior politicians almost like demi-gods

Yes but no one was watching, Mr Plumly Chumley MP, and I knew my place anyway. Happier times even if I wuz poor an ad rickets. Ows a feller suppos't'work out ow t' vote this time?

Iss dooin me ed in Kat 'onest, innit?

HYUFD

kle4 Interesting snippets of an Eden press conference from 1955 below lots of 'wondering if you might tell us Sir etc'
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kq-_Bpl6Oy8

Sunil_Prasannan

FrancisUrquhart said:

The next 007 should be a WOMAN, says Ed Miliband

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3020146/The-007-WOMAN-says-Ed-Miliband-tips-former-Bond-girl-Rosamund-Pike-iconic-role.html

After this, banning zero hours contracts and generally abusing business seems perfectly rational.

"The next Tory leader should be a woman" - some commentator in 1975

Danny565

RepublicanTory said:

DavidL said:

I very much doubt that this letter will have any direct impact, it will look like a bunch of fat cats who support the Tories, quelle surprise.

But the anti business narrative of Labour is a throw back to the early 80s or even the 70s. Blair would never have allowed such a narrative to become so entrenched. I expect the Tory's already strong lead on the economy to improve with the media carrying such stories. Will this make a difference? It just might.

Most people are no fans of big business
BUT
They employ a lot of people:

If in doubt
Hold tight to Nurse.

Being anti business may be "popular" on one level, we all like to see the Boss fall on his face.
But we all need a job to pay the bills so our feelings will be tempered by reality.

Absolutely, if people truly believed that Labour's policies would result in job losses, it would be negative on the party.

But the question is whether the public believes these people are being sincere when they say Labour will cause job losses, or whether they think it's just about how much they line their own pockets.

John_N

Following up to my own post here, but Sporting Index are offering a UKIP seat spread of 5.5-7.5 which has surely got to be higher on Friday. Considering it...

John_N said:

What's the best place to punt on UKIP winning more than 1 seat, looking to cash out on Friday?

RepublicanTory

Danny565 said:

DavidL said:

Danny565 said:

DavidL said:

I very much doubt that this letter will have any direct impact, it will look like a bunch of fat cats who support the Tories, quelle surprise.

But the anti business narrative of Labour is a throw back to the early 80s or even the 70s. Blair would never have allowed such a narrative to become so entrenched. I expect the Tory's already strong lead on the economy to improve with the media carrying such stories. Will this make a difference? It just might.

This is more revisionism about what Blair actually stood for, though (to be fair, the "Blairites" themselves have also joined in with that revisionism). I remember Blair in opposition saying that footballers got paid too much and that businesses had a responsibility to pay their employees decently, while Brown talked about taking money from the "undeserved rich".

All of that is just as leftwing, if not more so, than anything Miliband has said; the only difference is that the super-rich and big businesses are more unreasonable and nauseatingly self-entitled than they were 20 years ago.

Do you not remember Brown's prawn cocktail offensive? They worked really hard to persuade business that they understood business and the importance of making money.

Miliband seems to me utterly indifferent to the need for this country to make a living. He is entirely about how the cake should be divided. It is a mistake and will make some hesitate when they might have been open to a more balanced platform.

But I just can't see how Labour's incredibly mild "interventionist" policies are going to stop the country making a living.

I freely admit to having no business experience myself, but biased though I may be, I find it hard to believe these multi-millionaire magnates living their 5-star lifestyles when they claim they would be unable to pay higher taxes and to paytheir employees decent wages (on proper, fixed contracts), while still generating the healthy profits which as you rightly say the country needs.

It isnt about Multi-millionaire magnates

It is about starting businesses and building businesses.

Small businesses are some of the most important customers of big business-hence the concern by the "magnates"

Scott_P

@BBCNewsnight: WATCH: Chuka Umunna refuses to spell out Labour's spending cuts http://t.co/vdiSblCjZU

kle4

The next 007 should be woman, honestly. I thought everyone was agreed Idris Elba should be the next Bond, as reason demands.

Night all.

RepublicanTory

FrancisUrquhart said:

Iain Martin
‏@iainmartin1
Can understand Labour scepticism of letter from 100 business leaders. Point is, 15 years ago New Labour used to arrange this stuff.

which is why it matters

GeoffM

HYUFD said:

kle4 Of course in the fifties interviewers treated senior politicians almost like demi-gods

kle4 said:

Is that true or a joke? I cannot be sure.

HYUFD is, I think, referring to some of the more sycophantic "and what else would you like to share with a grateful nation" early attempts at political interviewing.

philiph

You have to admit 36 is a good score for Labour.

As one of those who has predicted a Labour score that is +/- 2% from the 2010 disaster, this creep back to mid 30s is a shock.

The Tory score seems to have finally escaped the gravitational pull of the low 30s to float up to mid 30s.

Ed is a real problem, he has an uncanny knack of finding truly stupid solutions. I assume they are unplanned and knee jerk to focus group or media issues.