Howdy, Stranger!

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

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Interesting betting on Scotland just opened

SystemSystem Posts: 11,694
edited April 2015 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Interesting betting on Scotland just opened

I am selling the turnout which just looks far too high. I can’t decide on the LAB/SNP seats yet because a lot could happen but I do believe LAB’s losses have been maxed out

Read the full story here


«1345

Comments

  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,349
    edited April 2015
    With you on turnout. There will be a referendum effect but high 60s is the max.

    Out leafleting in Blairgowrie this morning. The local tories think they are in with a chance against Pete Wishart. Amazing what people can talk themselves into.

    Good lord did I really get a first?
  • Options
    Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 25,496
    DavidL said:

    With you on turnout. There will be a referendum effect but high 60s is the max.

    Out leafleting in Blairgowrie this morning. The local tories think they are in with a chance against Pete Wishart. Amazing what people can talk themselves into.

    Good lord did I really get a first?

    And in style too -with a full post!
  • Options
    I agree that turnout is a sell (ditto UKIP)

    I closed out my SNP position last night.
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,610
    Definitely selling turnout.
  • Options
    ItwasriggedItwasrigged Posts: 154
    Turn out looks way to high. The opinion polls I have looked at in greater detail are predicting a turn out of just 65%, way down on the Referendum. I get the sense from talking to folk this morning that they are way less enthused about GE than they were about the Referendum. That is on both sides. I think that 65% wont be far off the mark unless something happens to change that. The length of this GE campaign is only going to turn folk off I reckon.
  • Options
    Danny565Danny565 Posts: 8,091
    DavidL said:

    With you on turnout. There will be a referendum effect but high 60s is the max.

    Out leafleting in Blairgowrie this morning. The local tories think they are in with a chance against Pete Wishart. Amazing what people can talk themselves into.

    Good lord did I really get a first?

    Do you expect the SNP increase to be proportionally much less in the seats they already hold since they all were heavy "No" areas (aside from Dundee East?)
  • Options
    SMukeshSMukesh Posts: 1,650
    I don`t know how this works and I don`t bet these days.

    (I also don`t live in Scotland) I think Lab seats will be between 10-20 and it`s likely to be in the high teens atleast IMO.
  • Options
    Moses_Moses_ Posts: 4,865
    Telegraph getting absolutely slaughtered in the comments

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/SNP/11515276/Revealed-Full-text-of-Nicola-Sturgeon-memo.html#disqus_thread


    Here's a flavour......


    Let's get this right.

    Nicola Sturgeon denies it.

    Fiona Hyslop denies it.

    The French Ambassador denies it.

    The French Consul General denies it.

    The person who wrote the memo doesn't believe it.

    Great story, chief.
  • Options
    QuincelQuincel Posts: 3,949
    Sell LDs, I'd think? They seem pretty damn likely to win 0-2 seats, can't see them holding 3 personally.

    Let's say the probabilities are (being generous to the LDs):

    0 Seats - 10%
    1 Seat - 30%
    2 Seats - 40%
    3 Seats - 10%
    4 Seats - 10%
    (5+ Seats - 0%)

    Then the Expected Value is +0.4 Units, and that's with a generous reading of the LDs chances.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,926
    Sell the turnout, maybe buy the Tories as coming through the chaos in a couple of seats in the Borders or Edinburgh.

    Wouldn't touch any of the others with a bargepole, too much going on in Scotland and the result could be anything from 10-40 to 40-10 between Lab and SNP

    But then what would I know, I had money on Liverpool at Arsenal.
  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    Tory seats seems higher than I'd have expected. Are the Tories considerably more likely to actually gain seats than to lose the one they already have?

    I'd have thought in Scotland we'd see a spread of something like 0.8-1.2
  • Options
    SMukeshSMukesh Posts: 1,650
    The next debate has more value now as it`s likely to see a face-off between Sturgeon and Miliband for those valuable Scottish seats.
  • Options

    Tory seats seems higher than I'd have expected. Are the Tories considerably more likely to actually gain seats than to lose the one they already have?

    I'd have thought in Scotland we'd see a spread of something like 0.8-1.2

    I can see plausible scenarios where the Tories end up Zero seats, I also can foresee them getting 3 seats.
  • Options
    AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    edited April 2015
    2010 Scotland turnout: 63.8%
    2010 Scotland (subsample) YouGov 10/10 certain to vote figure: 74%

    Smells like a sell, sell, sell
  • Options
    Danny565Danny565 Posts: 8,091
    I feel like the polls the next couple of days are going to be crucial. After the frenzy of the past week, surely anyone who there's any slight chance of voting will now be aware an election is coming up? So if the Tories re going to gain a decisive lead purely by virtue of people focussing on who they want as PM, it should be showing up in the polls by now.
  • Options
    AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    The interesting market would be Scotland Turnout vs UK turnout.
  • Options
    A week in a hospital bed. Apologies for absence. Turnout really is the key to the whole election, not just in Scotland. For most people the choice isn't between X and Y, it's between X and the sofa.
  • Options

    A week in a hospital bed. Apologies for absence. Turnout really is the key to the whole election, not just in Scotland. For most people the choice isn't between X and Y, it's between X and the sofa.

    A few PBers and their families have been in wars recently, all OK I hope now?
  • Options
    nigel4englandnigel4england Posts: 4,800
    Danny565 said:

    I feel like the polls the next couple of days are going to be crucial. After the frenzy of the past week, surely anyone who there's any slight chance of voting will now be aware an election is coming up? So if the Tories re going to gain a decisive lead purely by virtue of people focussing on who they want as PM, it should be showing up in the polls by now.

    Personally I wouldn't even trust the exit polls, people are very reluctant to admit they support UKIP for professional reasons, and Farage didn't help the other night.

    As a Kipper I would be happy with 10% of the vote but I genuinely feel it could be quite a bit more than that.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,926
    McBride - if this minute isn't fake then Nicola is in big trouble - for denying it.

    https://twitter.com/DPMcBride/status/584101639218454528
  • Options
    SMukeshSMukesh Posts: 1,650
    Anyone thinks Tracey Crouch`s love life is likely to affect the result in Aylesford?Personally I don`t.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/conservative/11515477/Conservative-candidates-four-way-love-split-adds-to-voter-confusion.html
  • Options
    TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    Cons look like a buy.
  • Options
    Danny565 said:

    I feel like the polls the next couple of days are going to be crucial. After the frenzy of the past week, surely anyone who there's any slight chance of voting will now be aware an election is coming up? So if the Tories re going to gain a decisive lead purely by virtue of people focussing on who they want as PM, it should be showing up in the polls by now.

    I'd hang fire for a couple of weeks, when we should get the big phone pollsters, ICM & Ipsos Mori.

    I think Ipsos Mori will be the key one with the their methodology, to compare all those giving a VI and the difference between those 10/10 to vote VI.
  • Options
    oldpoliticsoldpolitics Posts: 455
    Speaking of Spin markets the other value bet (I've had a nibble, DYOR) is the size of the smallest winning margin, where I'm selling at 33. Recent elections have been there or lower, and with more multi-party marginals and (with SNP and UKIP) more marginals full stop this time, I'd expect at least one real squeaker.
  • Options
    GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 20,848
    Opinium, YouGov and maybe one or two more polls tonight?
  • Options

    A week in a hospital bed. Apologies for absence. Turnout really is the key to the whole election, not just in Scotland. For most people the choice isn't between X and Y, it's between X and the sofa.

    A few PBers and their families have been in wars recently, all OK I hope now?
    Many thanks, TSE. Not yet, but it will be - unless I do something stupid, which is very possible.

    I have dodgy blood. But you all knew that anyway...

  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    Sandpit said:

    McBride - if this minute isn't fake then Nicola is in big trouble - for denying it.

    https://twitter.com/DPMcBride/status/584101639218454528

    The minute may well exist but not represent what was said.

    It is hard to see Sturgeon being caught out as a liar. What evidence would be required for that?
  • Options
    According to Sporting Index:

    The Speaker's seat will count to their affiliated party's result (i.e John Bercow as Conservative).

    If Bercow is not re-elected Speaker by the Commons -presumably he is entitled to sit on whichever side of the House he chooses?
  • Options

    Speaking of Spin markets the other value bet (I've had a nibble, DYOR) is the size of the smallest winning margin, where I'm selling at 33. Recent elections have been there or lower, and with more multi-party marginals and (with SNP and UKIP) more marginals full stop this time, I'd expect at least one real squeaker.

    There was one last time. As it was in Northern Ireland, only the Irish listened to the squeaks.

  • Options
    OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 32,029

    Speaking of Spin markets the other value bet (I've had a nibble, DYOR) is the size of the smallest winning margin, where I'm selling at 33. Recent elections have been there or lower, and with more multi-party marginals and (with SNP and UKIP) more marginals full stop this time, I'd expect at least one real squeaker.

    Would that include N Ireland?
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,349
    Danny565 said:

    DavidL said:

    With you on turnout. There will be a referendum effect but high 60s is the max.

    Out leafleting in Blairgowrie this morning. The local tories think they are in with a chance against Pete Wishart. Amazing what people can talk themselves into.

    Good lord did I really get a first?

    Do you expect the SNP increase to be proportionally much less in the seats they already hold since they all were heavy "No" areas (aside from Dundee East?)
    Yes but it will still increase. Wishart had about 3.4K lead the last time. Probably double in my estimate. The tories have a much better candidate this time, a local and respected councillor from Perth and they are well organised. All these factors will reduce the swing but the SNP are still riding high.
  • Options
    FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,052
    Danny565 said:

    I feel like the polls the next couple of days are going to be crucial. After the frenzy of the past week, surely anyone who there's any slight chance of voting will now be aware an election is coming up? So if the Tories re going to gain a decisive lead purely by virtue of people focussing on who they want as PM, it should be showing up in the polls by now.

    They might matter for morale and momentum but let's remember that it's Easter weekend. People will be on holiday. The polls seem to vary at the moment depending on the time of the week!
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,349
    This may just be ignorance on my part but how do you sell 0? Options for both UKIP and Green.
  • Options
    DavidL said:

    This may just be ignorance on my part but how do you sell 0? Options for both UKIP and Green.

    You go via the mid price, of 0.25 seats for both.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,926
    edited April 2015

    Sandpit said:

    McBride - if this minute isn't fake then Nicola is in big trouble - for denying it.

    https://twitter.com/DPMcBride/status/584101639218454528

    The minute may well exist but not represent what was said.

    It is hard to see Sturgeon being caught out as a liar. What evidence would be required for that?
    I find McBride's commentary on this to be quite enlightening - this is exactly the sort of dirty stuff he used to do so "well" (unless you were on the receiving end!).

    http://damianpmcbride.tumblr.com/post/115470278209/the-truth-will-out-or-will-it

    He reckons that these minutes are dry and verbatim, the more that is correct the less likely there is to be a glaring error compared to what actually happened at the meeting (which no-one seems to deny actually happened).

    Reading between the lines he says that Nicola is denying because it suits her, and the CS and the French are unlikely to intervene during the election campaign- unless of course the Telegraph is holding back something for tomorrow? If they have an audio recording then she could be cooked bread.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,349
    edited April 2015
    I think the SNP figure is probably pretty much spot on and I see very little value in it. The Lib Dems are almost certainly a sell but the upside is very modest since they will probably have 2.

    What is Seatspotting?
  • Options
    OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 32,029

    Danny565 said:

    I feel like the polls the next couple of days are going to be crucial. After the frenzy of the past week, surely anyone who there's any slight chance of voting will now be aware an election is coming up? So if the Tories re going to gain a decisive lead purely by virtue of people focussing on who they want as PM, it should be showing up in the polls by now.

    They might matter for morale and momentum but let's remember that it's Easter weekend. People will be on holiday. The polls seem to vary at the moment depending on the time of the week!
    I expect we shall see a surge in activity towards and after next weekend.
  • Options
    DavidL said:

    I think the SNP figure is probably pretty much spot on and I see very little value in it. The Lib Dems are almost certainly a sell but the upside is very modest since they will probably have 2.

    What is Seatspotting?

    An SNP Seat Rush Market:

    Points are awarded on the following basis for the number of seats won by the SNP in the May 7th General Election:

    0-19 seats = 0 pts,
    20-24 seats = 5 pts,
    25-29 seats = 10 pts,
    30-34 seats = 15 pts,
    35-39 seats = 20 pts,
    40-44 seats = 30 pts,
    45-49 seats = 40 pts,
    50-54 seats = 60 pts,
    55-58 seats = 80 pts,
    All 59 seats = 100 pts.
  • Options
    DavidL said:

    I think the SNP figure is probably pretty much spot on and I see very little value in it. The Lib Dems are almost certainly a sell but the upside is very modest since they will probably have 2.

    What is Seatspotting?

    A mug's bet.

    Sell turnover - low risk and probable winner.
  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    The Scottish turnout looks like the clearest of sells to me.
  • Options

    DavidL said:

    I think the SNP figure is probably pretty much spot on and I see very little value in it. The Lib Dems are almost certainly a sell but the upside is very modest since they will probably have 2.

    What is Seatspotting?

    A mug's bet.

    Sell turnover - low risk and probable winner.
    Any Grand National Tips?
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,349

    DavidL said:

    I think the SNP figure is probably pretty much spot on and I see very little value in it. The Lib Dems are almost certainly a sell but the upside is very modest since they will probably have 2.

    What is Seatspotting?

    An SNP Seat Rush Market:

    Points are awarded on the following basis for the number of seats won by the SNP in the May 7th General Election:

    0-19 seats = 0 pts,
    20-24 seats = 5 pts,
    25-29 seats = 10 pts,
    30-34 seats = 15 pts,
    35-39 seats = 20 pts,
    40-44 seats = 30 pts,
    45-49 seats = 40 pts,
    50-54 seats = 60 pts,
    55-58 seats = 80 pts,
    All 59 seats = 100 pts.
    Thanks. Enjoying the game?
  • Options
    HurstLlamaHurstLlama Posts: 9,098

    Danny565 said:

    I feel like the polls the next couple of days are going to be crucial. After the frenzy of the past week, surely anyone who there's any slight chance of voting will now be aware an election is coming up? So if the Tories re going to gain a decisive lead purely by virtue of people focussing on who they want as PM, it should be showing up in the polls by now.

    Personally I wouldn't even trust the exit polls, people are very reluctant to admit they support UKIP for professional reasons, and Farage didn't help the other night.

    As a Kipper I would be happy with 10% of the vote but I genuinely feel it could be quite a bit more than that.
    I think about 12% is a reasonable estimate, it may be more but I would be surprised if it were much less. The more interesting and more important question is the distribution of the votes. That there would be a return to the major parties, especially the Conservative Party, has always been known and accepted but where will the vote stay solid? It needs to hold up in those seats in which the party has a chance of winning and, for the future, in the Northern Cities where second places now will offer a launch pad for 2020. My worry is that the vote will hold in constituencies like mine with its 15K Conservative majority, where voting UKIP is a safe protest but not where it can matter.

    I have said before that I think UKIP will have done really well if it gets 6 seats but three or less would be a big disappointment.
  • Options
    oldpoliticsoldpolitics Posts: 455

    Speaking of Spin markets the other value bet (I've had a nibble, DYOR) is the size of the smallest winning margin, where I'm selling at 33. Recent elections have been there or lower, and with more multi-party marginals and (with SNP and UKIP) more marginals full stop this time, I'd expect at least one real squeaker.

    Would that include N Ireland?
    It appears to, the rubric at the top of the page lists the total number of seats and specifies inclusion of NI.
  • Options
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    I think the SNP figure is probably pretty much spot on and I see very little value in it. The Lib Dems are almost certainly a sell but the upside is very modest since they will probably have 2.

    What is Seatspotting?

    An SNP Seat Rush Market:

    Points are awarded on the following basis for the number of seats won by the SNP in the May 7th General Election:

    0-19 seats = 0 pts,
    20-24 seats = 5 pts,
    25-29 seats = 10 pts,
    30-34 seats = 15 pts,
    35-39 seats = 20 pts,
    40-44 seats = 30 pts,
    45-49 seats = 40 pts,
    50-54 seats = 60 pts,
    55-58 seats = 80 pts,
    All 59 seats = 100 pts.
    Thanks. Enjoying the game?
    Yeah, loving the Sharks v Crusaders match.

    Rugby Union, Test Cricket and Hockey are my sports.
  • Options
    SMukeshSMukesh Posts: 1,650
    Interesting the note reveals the tension between the First Minister and Alec Salmond who is behaving as an extra-constitutional First Minister and Nicola Sturgeon hasn`t denied that she talked about him to the French ambassador.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,926

    According to Sporting Index:

    The Speaker's seat will count to their affiliated party's result (i.e John Bercow as Conservative).

    If Bercow is not re-elected Speaker by the Commons -presumably he is entitled to sit on whichever side of the House he chooses?

    Any elected MP can sit wherever he or she likes. Whatever one may think of Carswell he had the somewhat unusual decency to re-submit himself to his constituency on crossing the floor.

    Traditionally a Speaker steps down and is immediately kicked up to the Lords, but one could well imagine a dethroned Bercow hanging around with the reds to cause as much trouble as possible in a very hung Parliament, given the formality of a Tory win in a Buckingham by-election.
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,532
    edited April 2015
    Doesn't send the Arsenal player off for a second yellow card when he gives a penalty, but sends off Can.

    Christ, our defence on Wednesday against Blackburn Rovers will include, Kolo the Clown and Dejan Lovren
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,349

    Doesn't send the Arsenal player off for a second yellow card when he gives a penalty, but sends of Can.

    Christ, our defence on Wednesday against Blackburn Rovers will include, Kolo the Clown and Dejan Lovren

    I thought you had given up football?
  • Options
    DavidL said:

    Doesn't send the Arsenal player off for a second yellow card when he gives a penalty, but sends of Can.

    Christ, our defence on Wednesday against Blackburn Rovers will include, Kolo the Clown and Dejan Lovren

    I thought you had given up football?
    I have, but as a Liverpool fan working in Manchester, you have to keep up with football for the inevitable insults at work.

    Though, I'm on sabbatical till the end of May, so I can give up on the football for the rest of the season.
  • Options
    OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 32,029
    SMukesh said:

    Interesting the note reveals the tension between the First Minister and Alec Salmond who is behaving as an extra-constitutional First Minister and Nicola Sturgeon hasn`t denied that she talked about him to the French ambassador.

    Well, I for one suspect the note is true, using the comments about Salmond as evidence, but I also suspect that what Ms Sturgeon was saying was that she finds it easier to talk with the (normally) polite and urbane David Cameron, rather than the somewhat geeky Ed M.
  • Options

    DavidL said:

    I think the SNP figure is probably pretty much spot on and I see very little value in it. The Lib Dems are almost certainly a sell but the upside is very modest since they will probably have 2.

    What is Seatspotting?

    A mug's bet.

    Sell turnover - low risk and probable winner.
    Any Grand National Tips?

    DavidL said:

    I think the SNP figure is probably pretty much spot on and I see very little value in it. The Lib Dems are almost certainly a sell but the upside is very modest since they will probably have 2.

    What is Seatspotting?

    A mug's bet.

    Sell turnover - low risk and probable winner.
    Any Grand National Tips?
    Not yet. Working on it....but avoid McCoy's mount. It's a decent horse but the price is absurd.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,926

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    I think the SNP figure is probably pretty much spot on and I see very little value in it. The Lib Dems are almost certainly a sell but the upside is very modest since they will probably have 2.

    What is Seatspotting?

    An SNP Seat Rush Market:

    Points are awarded on the following basis for the number of seats won by the SNP in the May 7th General Election:

    0-19 seats = 0 pts,
    20-24 seats = 5 pts,
    25-29 seats = 10 pts,
    30-34 seats = 15 pts,
    35-39 seats = 20 pts,
    40-44 seats = 30 pts,
    45-49 seats = 40 pts,
    50-54 seats = 60 pts,
    55-58 seats = 80 pts,
    All 59 seats = 100 pts.
    Thanks. Enjoying the game?
    Yeah, loving the Sharks v Crusaders match.

    Rugby Union, Test Cricket and Hockey are my sports.
    LOL!

    Looks like the Crusaders have had the best of the first half. Bath and Northampton in action later, once sufficient sorrows drowned!
  • Options
    anotherDaveanotherDave Posts: 6,746

    Danny565 said:

    I feel like the polls the next couple of days are going to be crucial. After the frenzy of the past week, surely anyone who there's any slight chance of voting will now be aware an election is coming up? So if the Tories re going to gain a decisive lead purely by virtue of people focussing on who they want as PM, it should be showing up in the polls by now.

    Personally I wouldn't even trust the exit polls, people are very reluctant to admit they support UKIP for professional reasons, and Farage didn't help the other night.

    As a Kipper I would be happy with 10% of the vote but I genuinely feel it could be quite a bit more than that.
    That there would be a return to the major parties, especially the Conservative Party, has always been known and accepted but where will the vote stay solid?
    I think it's possible that the Con/Lab votes will fall rather than increase during the election campaign.

    The ComRes favourability numbers for the big two are:
    Lab +29% / -45%
    Con +28% / -46%

    http://comres.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/IoS-SM-Political-Poll-March-2015-6572.pdf

    If people don't think either party is going to win a majority then there's no reason for their soft supporters to make a Lab/Con forced choice. They can pick one of the minor parties that they feel more aligned to instead.
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,532
    edited April 2015

    DavidL said:

    I think the SNP figure is probably pretty much spot on and I see very little value in it. The Lib Dems are almost certainly a sell but the upside is very modest since they will probably have 2.

    What is Seatspotting?

    A mug's bet.

    Sell turnover - low risk and probable winner.
    Any Grand National Tips?

    DavidL said:

    I think the SNP figure is probably pretty much spot on and I see very little value in it. The Lib Dems are almost certainly a sell but the upside is very modest since they will probably have 2.

    What is Seatspotting?

    A mug's bet.

    Sell turnover - low risk and probable winner.
    Any Grand National Tips?
    Not yet. Working on it....but avoid McCoy's mount. It's a decent horse but the price is absurd.
    Cheers, my horse racing betting is generally based on tips from PBers augmented by me backing the most amusingly named horses.
  • Options
    steve_garnersteve_garner Posts: 1,019
    Last week OGH trailed a poll taken after a debate where the previous polls had a blue lead. The poll was the YouGov in the Sunday Times that showed Labour with a 4% lead. What price a repeat with Opinium showing a post debate Labour lead?
  • Options
    chestnutchestnut Posts: 7,341
    Danny565 said:

    I feel like the polls the next couple of days are going to be crucial.

    It's Easter and a long bank holiday weekend.

    The polls should be treated with considerable caution because usual contact patterns will be disrupted.
  • Options
    AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    McBride - if this minute isn't fake then Nicola is in big trouble - for denying it.

    https://twitter.com/DPMcBride/status/584101639218454528

    The minute may well exist but not represent what was said.

    It is hard to see Sturgeon being caught out as a liar. What evidence would be required for that?
    I find McBride's commentary on this to be quite enlightening - this is exactly the sort of dirty stuff he used to do so "well" (unless you were on the receiving end!).

    http://damianpmcbride.tumblr.com/post/115470278209/the-truth-will-out-or-will-it

    He reckons that these minutes are dry and verbatim, the more that is correct the less likely there is to be a glaring error compared to what actually happened at the meeting (which no-one seems to deny actually happened).

    Reading between the lines he says that Nicola is denying because it suits her, and the CS and the French are unlikely to intervene during the election campaign- unless of course the Telegraph is holding back something for tomorrow? If they have an audio recording then she could be cooked bread.
    The radical alternative is that she didn't actually say it.
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,610
    Alistair said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    McBride - if this minute isn't fake then Nicola is in big trouble - for denying it.

    https://twitter.com/DPMcBride/status/584101639218454528

    The minute may well exist but not represent what was said.

    It is hard to see Sturgeon being caught out as a liar. What evidence would be required for that?
    I find McBride's commentary on this to be quite enlightening - this is exactly the sort of dirty stuff he used to do so "well" (unless you were on the receiving end!).

    http://damianpmcbride.tumblr.com/post/115470278209/the-truth-will-out-or-will-it

    He reckons that these minutes are dry and verbatim, the more that is correct the less likely there is to be a glaring error compared to what actually happened at the meeting (which no-one seems to deny actually happened).

    Reading between the lines he says that Nicola is denying because it suits her, and the CS and the French are unlikely to intervene during the election campaign- unless of course the Telegraph is holding back something for tomorrow? If they have an audio recording then she could be cooked bread.
    The radical alternative is that she didn't actually say it.
    This is McBride we're talking about, he exists to create FUD about parties other than Labour. Anything he says is poison.
  • Options
    shadsyshadsy Posts: 289
    I've bought size of any majority at 3.5. So, to make any money, I need one party to get at least 327 seats.

    Not very likely, obviously, but if either party has made the sort of breakthrough to get them that far, getting to 340 or above probably isn't that much more improbable and the downside isn't big, as it can't go negative.

    The odd SPIN rule to count Bercow as a Tory also helps this bet a tiny bit.
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    Alistair said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    McBride - if this minute isn't fake then Nicola is in big trouble - for denying it.

    https://twitter.com/DPMcBride/status/584101639218454528

    The minute may well exist but not represent what was said.

    It is hard to see Sturgeon being caught out as a liar. What evidence would be required for that?
    I find McBride's commentary on this to be quite enlightening - this is exactly the sort of dirty stuff he used to do so "well" (unless you were on the receiving end!).

    http://damianpmcbride.tumblr.com/post/115470278209/the-truth-will-out-or-will-it

    He reckons that these minutes are dry and verbatim, the more that is correct the less likely there is to be a glaring error compared to what actually happened at the meeting (which no-one seems to deny actually happened).

    Reading between the lines he says that Nicola is denying because it suits her, and the CS and the French are unlikely to intervene during the election campaign- unless of course the Telegraph is holding back something for tomorrow? If they have an audio recording then she could be cooked bread.
    The radical alternative is that she didn't actually say it.
    I think she probably did not, at least the way it was reported.

    Near impossible to prove though.
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,783
    Alistair said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    McBride - if this minute isn't fake then Nicola is in big trouble - for denying it.

    https://twitter.com/DPMcBride/status/584101639218454528

    The minute may well exist but not represent what was said.

    It is hard to see Sturgeon being caught out as a liar. What evidence would be required for that?
    I find McBride's commentary on this to be quite enlightening - this is exactly the sort of dirty stuff he used to do so "well" (unless you were on the receiving end!).

    http://damianpmcbride.tumblr.com/post/115470278209/the-truth-will-out-or-will-it

    He reckons that these minutes are dry and verbatim, the more that is correct the less likely there is to be a glaring error compared to what actually happened at the meeting (which no-one seems to deny actually happened).

    Reading between the lines he says that Nicola is denying because it suits her, and the CS and the French are unlikely to intervene during the election campaign- unless of course the Telegraph is holding back something for tomorrow? If they have an audio recording then she could be cooked bread.
    The radical alternative is that she didn't actually say it.
    Or that in a rushed conversation said something which could be interpreted as it has been - although as is clear from the note's author, that sounds unlikely for several reasons (professionalism and preference).

    I doubt this damages Sturgeon - 'Ed's not up to it' is barely controversial and 'I'd prefer Cameron as PM' so unlikely it can be considered either fiendishly machiavellian or a simple misunderstanding.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,349
    Alistair said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    McBride - if this minute isn't fake then Nicola is in big trouble - for denying it.

    https://twitter.com/DPMcBride/status/584101639218454528

    The minute may well exist but not represent what was said.

    It is hard to see Sturgeon being caught out as a liar. What evidence would be required for that?
    I find McBride's commentary on this to be quite enlightening - this is exactly the sort of dirty stuff he used to do so "well" (unless you were on the receiving end!).

    http://damianpmcbride.tumblr.com/post/115470278209/the-truth-will-out-or-will-it

    He reckons that these minutes are dry and verbatim, the more that is correct the less likely there is to be a glaring error compared to what actually happened at the meeting (which no-one seems to deny actually happened).

    Reading between the lines he says that Nicola is denying because it suits her, and the CS and the French are unlikely to intervene during the election campaign- unless of course the Telegraph is holding back something for tomorrow? If they have an audio recording then she could be cooked bread.
    The radical alternative is that she didn't actually say it.
    There are 2 things about this memo; firstly is the content true and secondly was it said?

    The answer to the first question is clearly yes. There is no question that it will be easier for the SNP to maintain their dominant position at Holyrood next year if they can contrive fights with a Tory led government. The object of the SNP is to drive a wedge between the rUK and the Scots. Having a Labour government with a number of Scottish Ministers will not achieve that. And there is little doubt that Salmond is going to be a nuisance who needs to appreciate and learn that the torch has passed on.

    The second question is whether it was said. This strikes me as vanishingly unlikely. It is the sort of thing you might say to your very closest allies in private. To make such comments to a foreign diplomat you are meeting for the first time would be so far as beyond indiscrete as to be almost unimaginable. Especially when you know civil servants are listening in.

    Which does raise the further question of what is going on?
  • Options
    Peter_the_PunterPeter_the_Punter Posts: 13,324
    edited April 2015
    This French farce looks pretty inconsequential to me, but if it does have legs, the 2.98 Labour Most Seats becomes exceptional value.

    I've taken precautions.
  • Options
    void
  • Options

    This French farce looks pretty inconsequential to me, but if it does have legs, the 2.98 Labour Most Seats becomes exceptional value.

    I've taken precautions.

    And the Lab Majority at 42!
  • Options
    SMukeshSMukesh Posts: 1,650
    DavidL said:

    Alistair said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    McBride - if this minute isn't fake then Nicola is in big trouble - for denying it.

    https://twitter.com/DPMcBride/status/584101639218454528

    The minute may well exist but not represent what was said.

    It is hard to see Sturgeon being caught out as a liar. What evidence would be required for that?
    I find McBride's commentary on this to be quite enlightening - this is exactly the sort of dirty stuff he used to do so "well" (unless you were on the receiving end!).

    http://damianpmcbride.tumblr.com/post/115470278209/the-truth-will-out-or-will-it

    He reckons that these minutes are dry and verbatim, the more that is correct the less likely there is to be a glaring error compared to what actually happened at the meeting (which no-one seems to deny actually happened).

    Reading between the lines he says that Nicola is denying because it suits her, and the CS and the French are unlikely to intervene during the election campaign- unless of course the Telegraph is holding back something for tomorrow? If they have an audio recording then she could be cooked bread.
    The radical alternative is that she didn't actually say it.
    There are 2 things about this memo; firstly is the content true and secondly was it said?

    The answer to the first question is clearly yes. There is no question that it will be easier for the SNP to maintain their dominant position at Holyrood next year if they can contrive fights with a Tory led government. The object of the SNP is to drive a wedge between the rUK and the Scots. Having a Labour government with a number of Scottish Ministers will not achieve that. And there is little doubt that Salmond is going to be a nuisance who needs to appreciate and learn that the torch has passed on.

    The second question is whether it was said. This strikes me as vanishingly unlikely. It is the sort of thing you might say to your very closest allies in private. To make such comments to a foreign diplomat you are meeting for the first time would be so far as beyond indiscrete as to be almost unimaginable. Especially when you know civil servants are listening in.

    Which does raise the further question of what is going on?
    I don`t know ofcourse but you would be surprised what is said when a glass of whisky is involved.
  • Options
    marke09marke09 Posts: 926
    could the comments have been made but were suppose to be "off the record"
  • Options
    SMukeshSMukesh Posts: 1,650
    Judging from the crowds in Miliband`s Warrington rally,Esther Mcvey is a goner.
  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340

    This French farce looks pretty inconsequential to me, but if it does have legs, the 2.98 Labour Most Seats becomes exceptional value.

    I've taken precautions.

    And the Lab Majority at 42!
    I took a decent chunk of Lab Majority at 44. It's a silly price, even for someone like me who has been touting a hung Parliament since 2010, and I have been buying NOM heavily for months.

    I have a hole for Conservative Majority, but I'm not going to be lying awake at night worrying about that right now.
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    SMukesh said:

    DavidL said:

    Alistair said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    McBride - if this minute isn't fake then Nicola is in big trouble - for denying it.

    https://twitter.com/DPMcBride/status/584101639218454528

    The minute may well exist but not represent what was said.

    It is hard to see Sturgeon being caught out as a liar. What evidence would be required for that?
    I find McBride's commentary on this to be quite enlightening - this is exactly the sort of dirty stuff he used to do so "well" (unless you were on the receiving end!).

    http://damianpmcbride.tumblr.com/post/115470278209/the-truth-will-out-or-will-it

    He reckons that these minutes are dry and verbatim, the more that is correct the less likely there is to be a glaring error compared to what actually happened at the meeting (which no-one seems to deny actually happened).

    Reading between the lines he says that Nicola is denying because it suits her, and the CS and the French are unlikely to intervene during the election campaign- unless of course the Telegraph is holding back something for tomorrow? If they have an audio recording then she could be cooked bread.
    The radical alternative is that she didn't actually say it.
    There are 2 things about this memo; firstly is the content true and secondly was it said?

    The answer to the first question is clearly yes. There is no question that it will be easier for the SNP to maintain their dominant position at Holyrood next year if they can contrive fights with a Tory led government. The object of the SNP is to drive a wedge between the rUK and the Scots. Having a Labour government with a number of Scottish Ministers will not achieve that. And there is little doubt that Salmond is going to be a nuisance who needs to appreciate and learn that the torch has passed on.

    The second question is whether it was said. This strikes me as vanishingly unlikely. It is the sort of thing you might say to your very closest allies in private. To make such comments to a foreign diplomat you are meeting for the first time would be so far as beyond indiscrete as to be almost unimaginable. Especially when you know civil servants are listening in.

    Which does raise the further question of what is going on?
    I don`t know ofcourse but you would be surprised what is said when a glass of whisky is involved.
    I cannot see Sturgeon as a boozer.

    I agree with DavidL. Even if true it would be stupidly indiscrete, and Sturgeon is not stupid.
  • Options
    IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966

    This French farce looks pretty inconsequential to me, but if it does have legs, the 2.98 Labour Most Seats becomes exceptional value.

    I've taken precautions.

    Unless it turns out to be a Labour wheeze in which case presumably the opposite is true ?

    In reality it is going to be deniable for any party, if the document has been meddled with, whoever did it is unlikely to be more than a sympathiser who will be disowned with alacrity.

    If on the other hand the document hasn't been meddled with, and was just "garbled account of a routine meeting" in which person A used an unfortunately turn of phrase to describe something innocuous, which person B misunderstood and relayed the wrong interpretation to person C, who wrote it down, then no one comes out of it with much credit, and lots of people will look rather foolish for having made a lot of piss and wind over a transcription error.
  • Options
    antifrank said:

    This French farce looks pretty inconsequential to me, but if it does have legs, the 2.98 Labour Most Seats becomes exceptional value.

    I've taken precautions.

    And the Lab Majority at 42!
    I took a decent chunk of Lab Majority at 44. It's a silly price, even for someone like me who has been touting a hung Parliament since 2010, and I have been buying NOM heavily for months.

    I have a hole for Conservative Majority, but I'm not going to be lying awake at night worrying about that right now.
    I thought it was silly when the price was 16. I've been topping up as when I can.

    Considering we've not had a Tory majority opinion poll since 2011, and we've had many Lab majority polls since then, there's a huge rick on the market, whether by accident or design.
  • Options
    scotslassscotslass Posts: 912
    SMukesh Posts: 2:28PM

    OldKingCole Posts 2:33PM

    You guys take the biscuit. The memo reveals nothing since it is third hand tripe probably not even from the FCO!

    Sturgeon hasn't denied talking about Salmond because no-body has asked her and that is because it is another piece of the jig saw which tells you it is nonsence. If she really didn't know what Salmond intended to do at Westminster why on earth would she confide that to the French Ambassador!

    The memo is ridiculous and the story is who wrote it and who leaked it.

    Meanwhile, on social media evryone with an onze of sence is putting as much distance as possible between themselves and the story. Except you guys of course!
  • Options
    SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,941
    O/T - It's notable how little traction Farage's HIV debate comments got. Normally, UKIP can rely on friendly papers such as the Mail, Express, Sun and Telegraph to pick up on such comments and run with them. But not this time. Their focus is firmly on the Tories and attacking Ed. It'll be interesting to see how UKIP copes without its usually supportive press follow-ups.
  • Options
    Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 25,496

    O/T - It's notable how little traction Farage's HIV debate comments got. Normally, UKIP can rely on friendly papers such as the Mail, Express, Sun and Telegraph to pick up on such comments and run with them. But not this time. Their focus is firmly on the Tories and attacking Ed. It'll be interesting to see how UKIP copes without its usually supportive press follow-ups.

    Spoof post?
  • Options
    @Indigo

    It would be nice to think Labour were up to contriving and executing such a convoluted wheeze, but my money is on a cock-up.

    Cock-ups are, in my experience, far more common than conspiracies.
  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340

    antifrank said:

    This French farce looks pretty inconsequential to me, but if it does have legs, the 2.98 Labour Most Seats becomes exceptional value.

    I've taken precautions.

    And the Lab Majority at 42!
    I took a decent chunk of Lab Majority at 44. It's a silly price, even for someone like me who has been touting a hung Parliament since 2010, and I have been buying NOM heavily for months.

    I have a hole for Conservative Majority, but I'm not going to be lying awake at night worrying about that right now.
    I thought it was silly when the price was 16. I've been topping up as when I can.

    Considering we've not had a Tory majority opinion poll since 2011, and we've had many Lab majority polls since then, there's a huge rick on the market, whether by accident or design.
    If Labour are ahead in a few polls over Easter, as I expect in the holiday week, there ought to be an immediate trading opportunity.
  • Options
    GeoffMGeoffM Posts: 6,071

    O/T - It's notable how little traction Farage's HIV debate comments got. Normally, UKIP can rely on friendly papers such as the Mail, Express, Sun and Telegraph to pick up on such comments and run with them. But not this time. Their focus is firmly on the Tories and attacking Ed. It'll be interesting to see how UKIP copes without its usually supportive press follow-ups.

    They would have got a lot more attention if they had been untrue.
    The fact that they were accurate meant that there was no mileage in it for the anti-UKIP media.
  • Options
    antifrank said:

    antifrank said:

    This French farce looks pretty inconsequential to me, but if it does have legs, the 2.98 Labour Most Seats becomes exceptional value.

    I've taken precautions.

    And the Lab Majority at 42!
    I took a decent chunk of Lab Majority at 44. It's a silly price, even for someone like me who has been touting a hung Parliament since 2010, and I have been buying NOM heavily for months.

    I have a hole for Conservative Majority, but I'm not going to be lying awake at night worrying about that right now.
    I thought it was silly when the price was 16. I've been topping up as when I can.

    Considering we've not had a Tory majority opinion poll since 2011, and we've had many Lab majority polls since then, there's a huge rick on the market, whether by accident or design.
    If Labour are ahead in a few polls over Easter, as I expect in the holiday week, there ought to be an immediate trading opportunity.
    My other thinking behind that is one of the benefits of having so many polls is that it increases the chances of more outliers than in previous elections which makes trading out even more fun.
  • Options
    MP_SEMP_SE Posts: 3,642
    edited April 2015

    O/T - It's notable how little traction Farage's HIV debate comments got. Normally, UKIP can rely on friendly papers such as the Mail, Express, Sun and Telegraph to pick up on such comments and run with them. But not this time. Their focus is firmly on the Tories and attacking Ed. It'll be interesting to see how UKIP copes without its usually supportive press follow-ups.

    The Mail have picked up on it and have supported his comments. I think they have wrote several articles on it in fact. Buzzfeed and Guido Fawkes have as well.
  • Options
    OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 32,029
    scotslass said:

    SMukesh Posts: 2:28PM

    OldKingCole Posts 2:33PM

    You guys take the biscuit. The memo reveals nothing since it is third hand tripe probably not even from the FCO!

    Sturgeon hasn't denied talking about Salmond because no-body has asked her and that is because it is another piece of the jig saw which tells you it is nonsence. If she really didn't know what Salmond intended to do at Westminster why on earth would she confide that to the French Ambassador!

    The memo is ridiculous and the story is who wrote it and who leaked it.

    Meanwhile, on social media evryone with an onze of sence is putting as much distance as possible between themselves and the story. Except you guys of course!

    The Auld Alliance again?
  • Options
    MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/general-election-2015/11515630/Muslim-group-with-links-to-extremists-boasts-of-influencing-election.html

    A group suspected of being a front for Islamic extremists claims it can control as many as 30 seats in the general election and boasts of acting a "kingmaker"

    Thats nice!
  • Options
    SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,941
    scotslass said:

    SMukesh Posts: 2:28PM

    OldKingCole Posts 2:33PM

    You guys take the biscuit. The memo reveals nothing since it is third hand tripe probably not even from the FCO!

    Sturgeon hasn't denied talking about Salmond because no-body has asked her and that is because it is another piece of the jig saw which tells you it is nonsence. If she really didn't know what Salmond intended to do at Westminster why on earth would she confide that to the French Ambassador!

    The memo is ridiculous and the story is who wrote it and who leaked it.

    Meanwhile, on social media evryone with an onze of sence is putting as much distance as possible between themselves and the story. Except you guys of course!

    It is the case the SNP would prefer a Tory government, as that is a quicker route to IndyRef 2. But nationalist party wants separation as soon as possible is not much of a story.

  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,532
    edited April 2015
    @OpiniumResearch: Opinium/Observer post #leadersdabate poll out later including leader approval ratings and who came out tops in the 7 way debate #GE2015
  • Options
    surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    edited April 2015
    The choice of words by the French Embassy is intriguing. The statement said that the French Ambassador and Nicola Sturgeon "did not discuss their political preferences"

    Nobody has suggested that the Ambassador revealed her own preferences.

    We are only discussing Sturgeon's political preferences. So shouldn't the statement have said:

    the French Ambassador and Nicola Sturgeon "did not discuss her political preferences"

    Why "their" ?
  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    Well that wasn't worth getting excited about.
  • Options
    OmniumOmnium Posts: 9,796
    Who's she suggesting conducts this enquiry? Which public body is she saying has broken some rules?
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,285
    edited April 2015
  • Options
    All the leaders achieved positive marks for how they performed in the seven-way debate, with the Green party’s Natalie Bennett coming closest to a negative mark – 24% said she was out of her depth and 29% said the Ukip leader, Nigel Farage, did badly.

    Ed Miliband has enjoyed a particularly significant boost to his personal polling, however. The Labour leader has seen a six-point rise on last week, up from -21% to -15% (29% approve, 44% disapprove) with his net rating among Labour voters rising from +53% to +59%.

    David Cameron’s approval rating is largely unchanged at +1% overall; both approval an disapproval have seen a one point rise.

    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/apr/04/general-election-2015-tories-labour-neck-and-neck-opinium-observer-poll
  • Options
    JohnOJohnO Posts: 4,215
    antifrank said:

    Well that wasn't worth getting excited about.

    Together with the 'hols' factor, that's a minor relief for us blue lovelies...seems to signal absolutely no change...but still early days.
  • Options
    OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 32,029
    MikeK said:

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/general-election-2015/11515630/Muslim-group-with-links-to-extremists-boasts-of-influencing-election.html

    A group suspected of being a front for Islamic extremists claims it can control as many as 30 seats in the general election and boasts of acting a "kingmaker"

    Thats nice!

    I’d make suggestions about about which ones, but as one or two people in such seats are notoriously litigious ........
  • Options
    felixfelix Posts: 15,124
    Just like Survation yeserday - no real change.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,285
    edited April 2015



    Ed Miliband has enjoyed a particularly significant boost to his personal polling, however. The Labour leader has seen a six-point rise on last week, up from -21% to -15% (29% approve, 44% disapprove) with his net rating among Labour voters rising from +53% to +59%.

    l

    I wonder, is that what is really driving Ed Miliband improvement in approval numbers? i.e People who would have voted Labour anyway saying he isn't crap anymore and hence no real VI poll boost?

    And vice versa, Tories have given Cameorn the massive thumbs up, like a North Korean asked about Kim Jong Un, for basically the past 5 years.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,997
    Good afternoon, everyone.

    Mr. Smithson, not a spread-bettor[sp], but that did jump out at me as well.
  • Options
    felixfelix Posts: 15,124
    surbiton said:

    The choice of words by the French Embassy is intriguing. The statement said that the French Ambassador and Nicola Sturgeon "did not discuss their political preferences"

    Nobody has suggested that the Ambassador revealed her own preferences.

    We are only discussing Sturgeon's political preferences. So shouldn't the statement have said:

    the French Ambassador and Nicola Sturgeon "did not discuss her political preferences"

    Why "their" ?

    Wow Sherlock you could be onto something there -run with it :)
This discussion has been closed.