Mr. Observer, a legitimate perspective, as is the view that if the Scots vote SNP overwhelmingly at Holyrood next year they're voting for another referendum.
It's almost as if the current constitutional set-up is deranged and unsustainable.
If the SNP 'lose' [ie don't get an overall majority] in 2016 then the tide may recede. But if they win, one suspects it could be quite otherwise.
The UK is one country. The Scots decided they wanted it to remain that way. I am afraid they do not get the chance to change their minds for a while. Of course, that does not mean we do not need a new constitutional settlement. Perhaps a very well hung Parliament is the best way to get that as all parties will have to talk.
Keep repeating the mantra to yourself.
In 2016 a Referendum will be on the SNP Manifesto and 50% of Scotland will vote them into every FPTP seat with a further 12% backing the Greens on the list giving 16 seats to back up hte SNP Majority,.
The Union is over and no amount of BBC Scotland claiming "oh the SNP can't have another Referendum" nonsense will stop it.
Ummm hasn't Sturgeon ruled out a another referendum 'on the current basis'.
She specifically stated that "public opinion" could lead to another Referendum. 48% of Scotland wanting a referendum within 5 years and 50% wanting Independence is a good enough reason to put it on the Manifesto.
Aged 10 me and two friends waited at the gates of Old Trafford for an hour to get Benaud's autograph. When he finally came out and we went up to him with our autograph books flapping he said 'bugger of sonny' and walked onto his coach.
Scotland has given up on Labour. Why flog a dead horse?
For the obvious reason they will pareto themselves out of existence, like the Tories.
Scotland clearly sees itself as a distinct political entity. With independence off the table, at some stage politics will return to the day-to-day. When it does, what may happen is that new parties will develop. For example, SNP social democrats will have to decide whether separation really is their primary objective when there is so much devolved power (with a lot more to come) and so much that can be done within the UK. Likewise, the centre right may decide that it needs a rejig. The Tories get 500,000 votes in Scotland. If they were no longer called the Tories, but were a distinctly Scottish party they may well get many more. These parties would then align with other UK parties in the Commons. It's what happens elsewhere in Europe. We will catch up.
With 50% of Scots desperate to hold another Referendum and dissolve the United Kingdom, the idea politics will "return to normal" any time soon is risible.
Just face it, the UK is a dead parrot.
We'll see. Obviously, there are fundamentalists such as yourself. But it may well be others in Scotland are a little more pragmatic. What matters to them is not creating an international frontier, but securing the best possible life for themselves, their families and their communities. Very soon the Scottish parliament will have many more powers and will be setting tax rates and spending the money that comes in. The SNP can continue to focus on building that border, or they can focus on governing.
Labour have a bit of a decison to make. To give up on Scotland, or to try to claw back there, but devoting resources which might be better in use in England.
Not easy fighting a war on two fronts.
http://www.ukelect.co.uk/20150408ForecastUK/UKGains.html shows precisely where they should focus resources - the M69 onto the M1 from Coventry (Obviously not Coventry itself ) through to Leeds and then take the M62 into the Northwest !
One of the characters in Journey to Altmortis is called Roger the Goat [not based on you, of course].
One recalls a certain Roger the Cabin Boy, does one not?
Swallows and Amazons features Salty Seaman, Able Seaman Titty, and Roger the Ship's Boy.
First and third were in fact Captain nPugwash were they not, if I might perhaps differ - but there was a Roger in Swallows and Amazons, yes. I was just thinking that a friend of mine discovered that modern children found it impossible to keep a straight face when he read S&A out loud to them and Titty and Roger came up - though they did settle down after a while ...
Dair In 1993 the Quebec nationalists won 49% at the Canadian general election, in 1995 Yes won 49% in the Quebec referendum and lost, an SNP majority does not equate to a majority for independence as 2011 and 2014 showed. Indeed latest yougov polls show No would still win a rerun referendum, Sturgeon will not hold another for now unless sure of victory from the polls
Yes, so the SNP know that waiting 15 years is a BAD idea. They will hold the Second Referendum in 2018/19 with huge popular support and a very strong likelihood of a Yes vote.
Unionists know this, which is why they are trying to do everything they can to prevent a democratic choice for Scotland. It won't work. The mechanism is in place to ensure it will not work.
Scotland has given up on Labour. Why flog a dead horse?
For the obvious reason they will pareto themselves out of existence, like the Tories.
Scotland clearly sees itself as a distinct political entity. With independence off the table, at some stage politics will return to the day-to-day. When it does, what may happen is that new parties will develop. For example, SNP social democrats will have to decide whether separation really is their primary objective when there is so much devolved power (with a lot more to come) and so much that can be done within the UK. Likewise, the centre right may decide that it needs a rejig. The Tories get 500,000 votes in Scotland. If they were no longer called the Tories, but were a distinctly Scottish party they may well get many more. These parties would then align with other UK parties in the Commons. It's what happens elsewhere in Europe. We will catch up.
With 50% of Scots desperate to hold another Referendum and dissolve the United Kingdom, the idea politics will "return to normal" any time soon is risible.
Just face it, the UK is a dead parrot.
Jeeez, it was only 6 months ago you had only 45% and you lost....
Opinion polls are not referendums.
You lost, you lost, you lost.....get that into your thick skulls for a least a while.
The great thing about democracy is you can ask the same question again and again until you get the answer you like, if you don't like it you better start campaigning for the break up of UK democracy.
Mr. Observer, a legitimate perspective, as is the view that if the Scots vote SNP overwhelmingly at Holyrood next year they're voting for another referendum.
It's almost as if the current constitutional set-up is deranged and unsustainable.
If the SNP 'lose' [ie don't get an overall majority] in 2016 then the tide may recede. But if they win, one suspects it could be quite otherwise.
The UK is one country. The Scots decided they wanted it to remain that way. I am afraid they do not get the chance to change their minds for a while. Of course, that does not mean we do not need a new constitutional settlement. Perhaps a very well hung Parliament is the best way to get that as all parties will have to talk.
Keep repeating the mantra to yourself.
In 2016 a Referendum will be on the SNP Manifesto and 50% of Scotland will vote them into every FPTP seat with a further 12% backing the Greens on the list giving 16 seats to back up hte SNP Majority,.
The Union is over and no amount of BBC Scotland claiming "oh the SNP can't have another Referendum" nonsense will stop it.
The SNP has agreed that issues relating to the UK constitution are reserved to the UK government. The Scots have just voted to remain in the UK. In a once in a lifetime/generation referendum.
LOL, wasting your time SO. The Nats have decreed it so it'as the truth; like oil at $110 per barrel.
Mr. Jessop, in a few years you'll be able to take your offspring with you. Can't you take a short holiday now and then to indulge your perambulating proclivities?
I'd like to, but Mrs J's very busy at work. She hasn't even had a chance to take him back to Turkey to meet his grandparents yet, and he's nine months old. So I'm left with pushing the pram for a couple of hours around the village.
Occasionally I stretch a paper map of the Pennines or a lovely bit of coast on the floor and dream of all the walks I could do. Only to have the little 'un start ripping and eating the map. One day I'll get tragically lost because he removed the vital section of the route ...
Mr. Observer, a legitimate perspective, as is the view that if the Scots vote SNP overwhelmingly at Holyrood next year they're voting for another referendum.
It's almost as if the current constitutional set-up is deranged and unsustainable.
If the SNP 'lose' [ie don't get an overall majority] in 2016 then the tide may recede. But if they win, one suspects it could be quite otherwise.
The UK is one country. The Scots decided they wanted it to remain that way. I am afraid they do not get the chance to change their minds for a while. Of course, that does not mean we do not need a new constitutional settlement. Perhaps a very well hung Parliament is the best way to get that as all parties will have to talk.
Keep repeating the mantra to yourself.
In 2016 a Referendum will be on the SNP Manifesto and 50% of Scotland will vote them into every FPTP seat with a further 12% backing the Greens on the list giving 16 seats to back up hte SNP Majority,.
The Union is over and no amount of BBC Scotland claiming "oh the SNP can't have another Referendum" nonsense will stop it.
The SNP has agreed that issues relating to the UK constitution are reserved to the UK government. The Scots have just voted to remain in the UK. In a once in a lifetime/generation referendum.
But some of us have already been waiting a lifetime! That's used up!
There is, in seriousness, no specific timescale (and there should not under the same UK constitution, which forbids an administration to tie its successors).
Mr. Observer, a legitimate perspective, as is the view that if the Scots vote SNP overwhelmingly at Holyrood next year they're voting for another referendum.
It's almost as if the current constitutional set-up is deranged and unsustainable.
If the SNP 'lose' [ie don't get an overall majority] in 2016 then the tide may recede. But if they win, one suspects it could be quite otherwise.
The UK is one country. The Scots decided they wanted it to remain that way. I am afraid they do not get the chance to change their minds for a while. Of course, that does not mean we do not need a new constitutional settlement. Perhaps a very well hung Parliament is the best way to get that as all parties will have to talk.
Keep repeating the mantra to yourself.
In 2016 a Referendum will be on the SNP Manifesto and 50% of Scotland will vote them into every FPTP seat with a further 12% backing the Greens on the list giving 16 seats to back up hte SNP Majority,.
The Union is over and no amount of BBC Scotland claiming "oh the SNP can't have another Referendum" nonsense will stop it.
The SNP has agreed that issues relating to the UK constitution are reserved to the UK government. The Scots have just voted to remain in the UK. In a once in a lifetime/generation referendum.
Keep clinging to semantics.
Keep repeating your mantra.
All through the Second Referendum campaign keep saying it to youself. When Yes is recorded in September 2018, keep saying it. Over and over, repeat it to youself.
Scotland has given up on Labour. Why flog a dead horse?
For the obvious reason they will pareto themselves out of existence, like the Tories.
Scotland clearly sees itself as a distinct political entity. With independence off the table, at some stage politics will return to the day-to-day. When it does, what may happen is that new parties will develop. For example, SNP social democrats will have to decide whether separation really is their primary objective when there is so much devolved power (with a lot more to come) and so much that can be done within the UK. Likewise, the centre right may decide that it needs a rejig. The Tories get 500,000 votes in Scotland. If they were no longer called the Tories, but were a distinctly Scottish party they may well get many more. These parties would then align with other UK parties in the Commons. It's what happens elsewhere in Europe. We will catch up.
With 50% of Scots desperate to hold another Referendum and dissolve the United Kingdom, the idea politics will "return to normal" any time soon is risible.
Just face it, the UK is a dead parrot.
Jeeez, it was only 6 months ago you had only 45% and you lost....
Opinion polls are not referendums.
You lost, you lost, you lost.....get that into your thick skulls for a least a while.
The great thing about democracy is you can ask the same question again and again until you get the answer you like....
With the amount of power the SNP are about to potentially wield in the next Westminster parliament, the Scots may indeed decide we are "Better Together".
The political challenge is keeping all their enthusiastic new members and supporters on board until they have the opportunity to win over the extra wedge of support they need to win independence.
The elephant in the room is the economic challenge, however; that of keeping the price of oil at $250 a barrel for ever, so Scotland doesn't turn instantly into Greece. It's not looking good.
Mr. Observer, a legitimate perspective, as is the view that if the Scots vote SNP overwhelmingly at Holyrood next year they're voting for another referendum.
It's almost as if the current constitutional set-up is deranged and unsustainable.
If the SNP 'lose' [ie don't get an overall majority] in 2016 then the tide may recede. But if they win, one suspects it could be quite otherwise.
The UK is one country. The Scots decided they wanted it to remain that way. I am afraid they do not get the chance to change their minds for a while. Of course, that does not mean we do not need a new constitutional settlement. Perhaps a very well hung Parliament is the best way to get that as all parties will have to talk.
Keep repeating the mantra to yourself.
In 2016 a Referendum will be on the SNP Manifesto and 50% of Scotland will vote them into every FPTP seat with a further 12% backing the Greens on the list giving 16 seats to back up hte SNP Majority,.
The Union is over and no amount of BBC Scotland claiming "oh the SNP can't have another Referendum" nonsense will stop it.
The SNP has agreed that issues relating to the UK constitution are reserved to the UK government. The Scots have just voted to remain in the UK. In a once in a lifetime/generation referendum.
LOL, wasting your time SO. The Nats have decreed it so it'as the truth; like oil at $110 per barrel.
I know. They can't get their heads round the fact that voting to stay in the UK means voting to stay in the UK and accepting the British constitution, which is owned by all the UK's citizens, not just the ones living in Scotland who want separation. Strange. That's fundamentalism for you, I guess.
Mr. Observer, a legitimate perspective, as is the view that if the Scots vote SNP overwhelmingly at Holyrood next year they're voting for another referendum.
It's almost as if the current constitutional set-up is deranged and unsustainable.
If the SNP 'lose' [ie don't get an overall majority] in 2016 then the tide may recede. But if they win, one suspects it could be quite otherwise.
The UK is one country. The Scots decided they wanted it to remain that way. I am afraid they do not get the chance to change their minds for a while. Of course, that does not mean we do not need a new constitutional settlement. Perhaps a very well hung Parliament is the best way to get that as all parties will have to talk.
Keep repeating the mantra to yourself.
In 2016 a Referendum will be on the SNP Manifesto and 50% of Scotland will vote them into every FPTP seat with a further 12% backing the Greens on the list giving 16 seats to back up hte SNP Majority,.
The Union is over and no amount of BBC Scotland claiming "oh the SNP can't have another Referendum" nonsense will stop it.
The SNP has agreed that issues relating to the UK constitution are reserved to the UK government. The Scots have just voted to remain in the UK. In a once in a lifetime/generation referendum.
Keep clinging to semantics.
Keep repeating your mantra.
All through the Second Referendum campaign keep saying it to youself. When Yes is recorded in September 2018, keep saying it. Over and over, repeat it to youself.
The way the two main parties are offering ever more lavish bribes for our votes is quite thrilling.
When they get to a long week-end at the Cipriani in Venice I might weaken.
Don't sell yourself too cheap, Roger. I'm holding out for a trip on the Orient Express to Venice, a stay at the Cipriani and a few free tickets to the opera at Verona.
Scotland has given up on Labour. Why flog a dead horse?
For the obvious reason they will pareto themselves out of existence, like the Tories.
Scotland clearly sees itself as a distinct political entity. With independence off the table, at some stage politics will return to the day-to-day. When it does, what may happen is that new parties will develop. For example, SNP social democrats will have to decide whether separation really is their primary objective when there is so much devolved power (with a lot more to come) and so much that can be done within the UK. Likewise, the centre right may decide that it needs a rejig. The Tories get 500,000 votes in Scotland. If they were no longer called the Tories, but were a distinctly Scottish party they may well get many more. These parties would then align with other UK parties in the Commons. It's what happens elsewhere in Europe. We will catch up.
With 50% of Scots desperate to hold another Referendum and dissolve the United Kingdom, the idea politics will "return to normal" any time soon is risible.
Just face it, the UK is a dead parrot.
Jeeez, it was only 6 months ago you had only 45% and you lost....
Opinion polls are not referendums.
You lost, you lost, you lost.....get that into your thick skulls for a least a while.
The great thing about democracy is you can ask the same question again and again until you get the answer you like....
Works for the EU....
You think if the the EU out people get 45% in a referendum they are going to shut up about it?
Judging the government's record on the basis of its own rhetoric, the "march of the makers" and the ludicrous quantity of hi-vis and hard-hat photo opportunities, and it's unfortunate that I have to report that the record is decidedly lacklustre. The five years of Coalition government have seen very little progress in manufacturing, progress which is now petering out as the Pound strengthens against the Euro.
It compares very badly to the experience of recovery from recession under Kenneth Clarke as Chancellor in the mid-1990s, and represents little (if any) change from the poor performance under the previous Labour government.
"Mr. Roger, some usernames can be horrendously misleading."
Indeed. When I was working in Istanbul with with a girl called 'Maetap' she helpfully told me I could call her 'Moonshine' which was the English meaning of her name.
She then asked what 'Roger' means? I explained that in English names don't have meanings."Roger is just Roger"
She then looked in her dictionary and asked "What means 'copulation'?"
I remember a delightful receptionist at a top Bangkok hotel - no seedy joint this - whose brass name-tag informed all that she was Supaporn....
I used to have a Singaporean colleague called Fanny Pong and a Turkish colleague called Arman Mustafa Kunt.
The way the two main parties are offering ever more lavish bribes for our votes is quite thrilling.
When they get to a long week-end at the Cipriani in Venice I might weaken.
Don't sell yourself too cheap, Roger. I'm holding out for a trip on the Orient Express to Venice, a stay at the Cipriani and a few free tickets to the opera at Verona.
I'm holding out for an all expenses paid week at Roger's chateau, Larks tongues in Aspic for supper and a free rein of the Yquem in his extensive cellar.
With the amount of power the SNP are about to potentially wield in the next Westminster parliament, the Scots may indeed decide we are "Better Together".
Stephen Fisher has the Tories winning 289 seats (last week 300 seats), compared with Labour on 266 seats (258 last week). The Tory lead has therefore almost halved from 42 seats last week to 23 seats now.
I've been mulling over what Ed M could do to shore up his core vote at minimal cost and I think I've lit on a winner.
All new cars to be delivered with one envy vandal key scratch along the paintwork per £20,000 of new retail price.
So the new Ford Focus your neighbour buys that you envy would be delivered with one key scratch in the paint, your other bastard neighbour's Golf GTI that you envy would be delivered with two key scratches in it, and that rich git you envy in the semi-detached 3-bed mansion who's just bought a Mercedes SL would take delivery of it with no fewer than five vandal scratches already in it.
This delivers for Labour supporters in several ways:
- the state does something (scratches nicer cars than yours) that you really ought to do yourself; - fairness: if you can't have a nice new car, nobody else should have one either; - equality: all car companies now essentially manufacture second-hand cars; - the Tories.
And it would raise money for our NHS - every scratch would be a compulsory option at £500 plus VAT, so one new Golf GTI would pay for 1,000 nurses in Scotland.
It's a winner.
I do like your idea of a "compulsory option". Very New Labour!
Mr. Observer, a legitimate perspective, as is the view that if the Scots vote SNP overwhelmingly at Holyrood next year they're voting for another referendum.
It's almost as if the current constitutional set-up is deranged and unsustainable.
If the SNP 'lose' [ie don't get an overall majority] in 2016 then the tide may recede. But if they win, one suspects it could be quite otherwise.
The UK is one country. The Scots decided they wanted it to remain that way. I am afraid they do not get the chance to change their minds for a while. Of course, that does not mean we do not need a new constitutional settlement. Perhaps a very well hung Parliament is the best way to get that as all parties will have to talk.
Keep repeating the mantra to yourself.
In 2016 a Referendum will be on the SNP Manifesto and 50% of Scotland will vote them into every FPTP seat with a further 12% backing the Greens on the list giving 16 seats to back up hte SNP Majority,.
The Union is over and no amount of BBC Scotland claiming "oh the SNP can't have another Referendum" nonsense will stop it.
The SNP has agreed that issues relating to the UK constitution are reserved to the UK government. The Scots have just voted to remain in the UK. In a once in a lifetime/generation referendum.
LOL, wasting your time SO. The Nats have decreed it so it'as the truth; like oil at $110 per barrel.
I know. They can't get their heads round the fact that voting to stay in the UK means voting to stay in the UK and accepting the British constitution, which is owned by all the UK's citizens, not just the ones living in Scotland who want separation. Strange. That's fundamentalism for you, I guess.
Indeed.
In fact we should be thanking Alex and Nicola. Previously the Union was based on one of those aristocratic stitch ups popular a few centuries back. Now it's the exprerssed democratic will of the Scottish people with a clear mandate.
Judging the government's record on the basis of its own rhetoric, the "march of the makers" and the ludicrous quantity of hi-vis and hard-hat photo opportunities, and it's unfortunate that I have to report that the record is decidedly lacklustre. The five years of Coalition government have seen very little progress in manufacturing, progress which is now petering out as the Pound strengthens against the Euro.
It compares very badly to the experience of recovery from recession under Kenneth Clarke as Chancellor in the mid-1990s, and represents little (if any) change from the poor performance under the previous Labour government.
The UKs deficit in manufactures is increasingly structural. Until HMG decide to get BIS to do something about it then we will simply suck in imports. Osborne and Cable have done little to address the problem, Balls will do even less.
Judging the government's record on the basis of its own rhetoric, the "march of the makers" and the ludicrous quantity of hi-vis and hard-hat photo opportunities, and it's unfortunate that I have to report that the record is decidedly lacklustre. The five years of Coalition government have seen very little progress in manufacturing, progress which is now petering out as the Pound strengthens against the Euro.
It compares very badly to the experience of recovery from recession under Kenneth Clarke as Chancellor in the mid-1990s, and represents little (if any) change from the poor performance under the previous Labour government.
Every cloud has a silver lining. The pound is set to get alot weaker after the GE. A minority government of either flavour is not good. EICIPM is double plus not good. Exporters will be pleased! Maybe we'll buy less imports. Maybe Gatwick oil will save the day!
"Mr. Roger, some usernames can be horrendously misleading."
Indeed. When I was working in Istanbul with with a girl called 'Maetap' she helpfully told me I could call her 'Moonshine' which was the English meaning of her name.
She then asked what 'Roger' means? I explained that in English names don't have meanings."Roger is just Roger"
She then looked in her dictionary and asked "What means 'copulation'?"
I remember a delightful receptionist at a top Bangkok hotel - no seedy joint this - whose brass name-tag informed all that she was Supaporn....
I used to have a Singaporean colleague called Fanny Pong and a Turkish colleague called Arman Mustafa Kunt.
Midlands Today used to display a child's picture whilst doing the weather forecast. According to someone who used to work there, one night the weather forecaster forgot the name of the child, and hurriedly asked the name.
They told her a joke name, and she ended up saying: "And tonight's picture is from Mustapha Big'un" live on air.
There was an inquiry, people were reprimanded, and the tapes of the event were erased. But only after copies were made. ;-)
Interesting quote from Labour Uncut which pretty much sums up Scottish Labour : - And it was reset partly because that the Scottish Labour party was found to be far more of an empty shell than anyone had ever realised. It was, like a Downing Street source noted at the time, like the Russian army in the first World War; “Superficially it was impressive but the reality was it wasn’t there in numbers or in fighting energy”.
Meanwhile Lynton Yates of UKIP continues to have car related publicity (no doubt you will all remember his suggestion that people on benefits should be banned from driving)
Interesting quote from Labour Uncut which pretty much sums up Scottish Labour : - And it was reset partly because that the Scottish Labour party was found to be far more of an empty shell than anyone had ever realised. It was, like a Downing Street source noted at the time, like the Russian army in the first World War; “Superficially it was impressive but the reality was it wasn’t there in numbers or in fighting energy”.
There is no doubt that Labour deserves everything it will get in Scotland.
Stephen Fisher has the Tories winning 289 seats (last week 300 seats), compared with Labour on 266 seats (258 last week). The Tory lead has therefore almost halved from 42 seats last week to 23 seats now.
Ed is Prime Minister on 266 seats according to his forecast.
The political challenge is keeping all their enthusiastic new members and supporters on board until they have the opportunity to win over the extra wedge of support they need to win independence.
The elephant in the room is the economic challenge, however; that of keeping the price of oil at $250 a barrel for ever, so Scotland doesn't turn instantly into Greece. It's not looking good.
The DUP have a 35% probability of being critical to the Gov't according to his model, due to being able to demand pork from either Labour or Tories.
SNP 33% due to only being prepared to work with Labour.
Obviously the SNP wouldn't be on 44% (My best guess) if they were going to work with the Tories, but it does give a party with only 8 or 9 seats enourmous potential power !
Nigel Dodds will be well happy if hits the dartboard.
Someone should ask Lady Sylvia Hermon what she'd do if it comes down to her vote. Although it's unlikely, it's bang in the middle of the scenarios at the moment.
There is a large body of voters who really think it is the role of the state to support their every need, and the needs of anyone else who cannot take responsibility for their own lives and live within their means, regardless of the cost, as it can all be funded by "the rich" (and not them).
The seething sentiment of the many economic illiterates in the audience to the QT debate on "non-doms" was very illuminating.
Watching QT in the run-up to an election scares me more than watching the dissembling politicans. They worry me more than PM Miliband worries me.
Agree 100%. It's really depressing to see the general population being mainly statists.
91% of people in the Mirror poll on non-Doms expressed a definite view - only 9% "did not know". Yet surely people are in fact generally so ill-informed as to not be capable of holding a coherent view and that the correct figures should really be reversed. I know I do not understand the issue or any likely future effects of a change in the law sufficiently to be able to give an opinion.
The knee-jerk antagonism to anyone who is rich or successful (unless a "celebrity" or footballer) is very unpleasant and worrying.
As a point of order @antifrank I don't think that @calum m posted the 125/1 odds on 0-5 SLab seats until after it had been cut and I had posted about getting 40/1 on it.
I first tipped the William Hill SLAB markets as soon as they opened in early December. I then flagged each time the odds were cut. The most significant cut came the day before the Survation in late December - I posted as soon as I spotted it:
"Just spotted that William Hill have slashed their SLAB GE 2015 odds e.g. 0-5 seats down from 125/1 to 66/1 and 11-15 down from 20/1 to 10/1."
Judging the government's record on the basis of its own rhetoric, the "march of the makers" and the ludicrous quantity of hi-vis and hard-hat photo opportunities, and it's unfortunate that I have to report that the record is decidedly lacklustre. The five years of Coalition government have seen very little progress in manufacturing, progress which is now petering out as the Pound strengthens against the Euro.
It compares very badly to the experience of recovery from recession under Kenneth Clarke as Chancellor in the mid-1990s, and represents little (if any) change from the poor performance under the previous Labour government.
The UKs deficit in manufactures is increasingly structural. Until HMG decide to get BIS to do something about it then we will simply suck in imports. Osborne and Cable have done little to address the problem, Balls will do even less.
The key driver of the US manufacturing recovery was cheap energy. Fix that and the economics look a lot more attractive for manufacturers
"Mr. Roger, some usernames can be horrendously misleading."
Indeed. When I was working in Istanbul with with a girl called 'Maetap' she helpfully told me I could call her 'Moonshine' which was the English meaning of her name.
She then asked what 'Roger' means? I explained that in English names don't have meanings."Roger is just Roger"
She then looked in her dictionary and asked "What means 'copulation'?"
I remember a delightful receptionist at a top Bangkok hotel - no seedy joint this - whose brass name-tag informed all that she was Supaporn....
I used to have a Singaporean colleague called Fanny Pong and a Turkish colleague called Arman Mustafa Kunt.
Midlands Today used to display a child's picture whilst doing the weather forecast. According to someone who used to work there, one night the weather forecaster forgot the name of the child, and hurriedly asked the name.
They told her a joke name, and she ended up saying: "And tonight's picture is from Mustapha Big'un" live on air.
There was an inquiry, people were reprimanded, and the tapes of the event were erased. But only after copies were made. ;-)
Allegedly.
One of our Outpatient Nurses puts a set of notes out for a handsome young Doctor with the patient details of 'William Harrymee" on April fools day.
The doctor calls the name out in the waiting area, then she pounces on him saying "Of course I will darling! I thought you would never ask!"
Always goes down well with the crowd! But probably a breach of harrassment code.
Another reason to dislike him. I'd love to be walking in Scotland, the lucky git. ;-)
(I haven't done a 'proper' walk for over a year now. I'm really suffering from withdrawal symptoms.)
Ed Miliband won't be walking around Scotland.
One absolute certainty of an Ed Miliband visit to Scotland is that he will never go near the public (he tried once it did not go well). All Labour events in Scotland are held in closed spaces with invited guests. Scottish Labout do not do "the public".
I'm trying to work out why Ed's Sikh visit was a no-press affair.
As a point of order @antifrank I don't think that @calum m posted the 125/1 odds on 0-5 SLab seats until after it had been cut and I had posted about getting 40/1 on it.
I first tipped the William Hill SLAB markets as soon as they opened in early December. I then flagged each time the odds were cut. The most significant cut came the day before the Survation in late December - I posted as soon as I spotted it:
"Just spotted that William Hill have slashed their SLAB GE 2015 odds e.g. 0-5 seats down from 125/1 to 66/1 and 11-15 down from 20/1 to 10/1."
Mr. Jessop, in a few years you'll be able to take your offspring with you. Can't you take a short holiday now and then to indulge your perambulating proclivities?
I'd like to, but Mrs J's very busy at work. She hasn't even had a chance to take him back to Turkey to meet his grandparents yet, and he's nine months old. So I'm left with pushing the pram for a couple of hours around the village.
Occasionally I stretch a paper map of the Pennines or a lovely bit of coast on the floor and dream of all the walks I could do. Only to have the little 'un start ripping and eating the map. One day I'll get tragically lost because he removed the vital section of the route ...
When my daughter was still little I would take her on walks across Dartmoor with one of the backpack child carriers. She also had a full-body waterproof suit so that she was happy to snooze as I enjoyed wandering past Tors in the drizzle.
(The libel case related to the allegation that the BBC terminated the series because of the suggestive names. So long as you don't make that claim you should be fine)
Mr. Jessop, in a few years you'll be able to take your offspring with you. Can't you take a short holiday now and then to indulge your perambulating proclivities?
I'd like to, but Mrs J's very busy at work. She hasn't even had a chance to take him back to Turkey to meet his grandparents yet, and he's nine months old. So I'm left with pushing the pram for a couple of hours around the village.
Occasionally I stretch a paper map of the Pennines or a lovely bit of coast on the floor and dream of all the walks I could do. Only to have the little 'un start ripping and eating the map. One day I'll get tragically lost because he removed the vital section of the route ...
When my daughter was still little I would take her on walks across Dartmoor with one of the backpack child carriers. She also had a full-body waterproof suit so that she was happy to snooze as I enjoyed wandering past Tors in the drizzle.
We've got a carrier, and it's great, but the main problem is that we live in Cambridge and the nearest great scenery is a good few hours' drive away.
Although I do love the walk from Cambridge to Ely along the Cam and Great Ouse.
The DUP have a 35% probability of being critical to the Gov't according to his model, due to being able to demand pork from either Labour or Tories.
SNP 33% due to only being prepared to work with Labour.
Obviously the SNP wouldn't be on 44% (My best guess) if they were going to work with the Tories, but it does give a party with only 8 or 9 seats enourmous potential power !
Nigel Dodds will be well happy if hits the dartboard.
Instinctively those stats feel wrong. It's a very narrow window where the DUP would be able to wield any influence, where as there is a huge patio window for the SNP to climb through.
There is a large body of voters who really think it is the role of the state to support their every need, and the needs of anyone else who cannot take responsibility for their own lives and live within their means, regardless of the cost, as it can all be funded by "the rich" (and not them).
The seething sentiment of the many economic illiterates in the audience to the QT debate on "non-doms" was very illuminating.
Watching QT in the run-up to an election scares me more than watching the dissembling politicans. They worry me more than PM Miliband worries me.
Agree 100%. It's really depressing to see the general population being mainly statists.
The knee-jerk antagonism to anyone who is rich or successful (unless a "celebrity" or footballer) is very unpleasant and worrying.
It's a core failing of democracies. We live in 'rob Peter to pay Paul' welfare states. Paul has more votes than Peter. So democracies have a natural tendency towards statist, spendy, lefty bankruptopia. Some have got there already (Greece, Venezuela, Argentina, etc). Some are well on the way (Italy, Japan, France, etc). The occasional Reagan or Thatcher is I'm afraid not the norm. I don't know if there is a cure. If voters can help themselves to other people's money they'll run out of it sooner or later. Looks like we're going to go a bit sooner on current polling.
Maybe we need a written constitution which imposes limits on deficits, debt, the size of the state. In any event, it seems unlikely there are many votes in sensible, prudent, responsible stewardship of the state and its finances. All very depressing indeed.
The DUP have a 35% probability of being critical to the Gov't according to his model, due to being able to demand pork from either Labour or Tories.
SNP 33% due to only being prepared to work with Labour.
Obviously the SNP wouldn't be on 44% (My best guess) if they were going to work with the Tories, but it does give a party with only 8 or 9 seats enourmous potential power !
Nigel Dodds will be well happy if hits the dartboard.
Instinctively those stats feel wrong. It's a very narrow window where the DUP would be able to wield any influence, where as there is a huge patio window for the SNP to climb through.
Instinct and probability are two different beasts.
One of the characters in Journey to Altmortis is called Roger the Goat [not based on you, of course].
One recalls a certain Roger the Cabin Boy, does one not?
Along with Master Bates and Seaman Staines, Roger the Cabin Boy was an urban myth. IIRC The Guardian was successfully sued for publishing this Captain Pugwash myth as being fact.
I've come across another election forecasting website - http://electionsetc.com/ - set up by an Oxford politics professor.
They're currently predicting 34% Con, 32% Lab for votes and for seats: 289 Con, 266 Lab, 49 SNP, 22 Lib Dem.
They've also got estimated probabilities for the various possible outcomes on this data: 10% Con majority, 13% Con + Lib Dem majority, 14 % Con + Lib Dem + DUP majority, 6% Con largest party but Lab + SNP majority, etc
Do people think these predictions look reasonable, given the current polls?
There is a large body of voters who really think it is the role of the state to support their every need, and the needs of anyone else who cannot take responsibility for their own lives and live within their means, regardless of the cost, as it can all be funded by "the rich" (and not them).
The seething sentiment of the many economic illiterates in the audience to the QT debate on "non-doms" was very illuminating.
Watching QT in the run-up to an election scares me more than watching the dissembling politicans. They worry me more than PM Miliband worries me.
Agree 100%. It's really depressing to see the general population being mainly statists.
The knee-jerk antagonism to anyone who is rich or successful (unless a "celebrity" or footballer) is very unpleasant and worrying.
It's a core failing of democracies. We live in 'rob Peter to pay Paul' welfare states. Paul has more votes than Peter. So democracies have a natural tendency towards statist, spendy, lefty bankruptopia. Some have got there already (Greece, Venezuela, Argentina, etc). Some are well on the way (Italy, Japan, France, etc). The occasional Reagan or Thatcher is I'm afraid not the norm. I don't know if there is a cure. If voters can help themselves to other people's money they'll run out of it sooner or later. Looks like we're going to go a bit sooner on current polling.
Maybe we need a written constitution which imposes limits on deficits, debt, the size of the state. In any event, it seems unlikely there are many votes in sensible, prudent, responsible stewardship of the state and its finances. All very depressing indeed.
Well said. Perhaps our crashes haven't been painful enough - having said that the Greeks don't seem to be reacting in a positive way - just more denial.
Mr. Jessop, in a few years you'll be able to take your offspring with you. Can't you take a short holiday now and then to indulge your perambulating proclivities?
I'd like to, but Mrs J's very busy at work. She hasn't even had a chance to take him back to Turkey to meet his grandparents yet, and he's nine months old. So I'm left with pushing the pram for a couple of hours around the village.
Occasionally I stretch a paper map of the Pennines or a lovely bit of coast on the floor and dream of all the walks I could do. Only to have the little 'un start ripping and eating the map. One day I'll get tragically lost because he removed the vital section of the route ...
When my daughter was still little I would take her on walks across Dartmoor with one of the backpack child carriers. She also had a full-body waterproof suit so that she was happy to snooze as I enjoyed wandering past Tors in the drizzle.
We've got a carrier, and it's great, but the main problem is that we live in Cambridge and the nearest great scenery is a good few hours' drive away.
Although I do love the walk from Cambridge to Ely along the Cam and Great Ouse.
It's also a beautiful experience to canoe from Cambridge to Ely, or it was in 1961 (!)
I've come across another election forecasting website - http://electionsetc.com/ - set up by an Oxford politics professor.
They're currently predicting 34% Con, 32% Lab for votes and for seats: 289 Con, 266 Lab, 49 SNP, 22 Lib Dem.
They've also got estimated probabilities for the various possible outcomes on this data: 10% Con majority, 13% Con + Lib Dem majority, 14 % Con + Lib Dem + DUP majority, 6% Con largest party but Lab + SNP majority, etc
Do people think these predictions look reasonable, given the current polls?
Yes.
I'm using his probability breakdowns for identifying value.
Judging the government's record on the basis of its own rhetoric, the "march of the makers" and the ludicrous quantity of hi-vis and hard-hat photo opportunities, and it's unfortunate that I have to report that the record is decidedly lacklustre. The five years of Coalition government have seen very little progress in manufacturing, progress which is now petering out as the Pound strengthens against the Euro.
It compares very badly to the experience of recovery from recession under Kenneth Clarke as Chancellor in the mid-1990s, and represents little (if any) change from the poor performance under the previous Labour government.
The UKs deficit in manufactures is increasingly structural. Until HMG decide to get BIS to do something about it then we will simply suck in imports. Osborne and Cable have done little to address the problem, Balls will do even less.
The key driver of the US manufacturing recovery was cheap energy. Fix that and the economics look a lot more attractive for manufacturers
People (on here) keep telling me that energy in the UK is cheaper than in other European countries because of the success of our liberalised energy market. Yet countries like Germany and Spain are out-competing us in manufacturing. It's a bigger problem than energy costs.
Though I don't have any answers I know enough to have no confidence that the politicians do either.
Judging the government's record on the basis of its own rhetoric, the "march of the makers" and the ludicrous quantity of hi-vis and hard-hat photo opportunities, and it's unfortunate that I have to report that the record is decidedly lacklustre. The five years of Coalition government have seen very little progress in manufacturing, progress which is now petering out as the Pound strengthens against the Euro.
It compares very badly to the experience of recovery from recession under Kenneth Clarke as Chancellor in the mid-1990s, and represents little (if any) change from the poor performance under the previous Labour government.
The UKs deficit in manufactures is increasingly structural. Until HMG decide to get BIS to do something about it then we will simply suck in imports. Osborne and Cable have done little to address the problem, Balls will do even less.
The key driver of the US manufacturing recovery was cheap energy. Fix that and the economics look a lot more attractive for manufacturers
we could have cheaper energy tomorrow if our fkwit politicians didn't keep shoving levies on manufacturing so that work moves and places like China open more coal fired power stations.
However it;s more than just energy, there are whole sectors where we have allowed our production to close down. A lot of what we import is mid tech products made in mid to high cost countries. It;s why Osborne's focus on exports is just nonsense, he should be focusing on import substitution.
One of the characters in Journey to Altmortis is called Roger the Goat [not based on you, of course].
One recalls a certain Roger the Cabin Boy, does one not?
Along with Master Bates and Seaman Staines, Roger the Cabin Boy was an urban myth. IIRC The Guardian was successfully sued for publishing this Captain Pugwash myth as being fact.
Mr. Jessop, in a few years you'll be able to take your offspring with you. Can't you take a short holiday now and then to indulge your perambulating proclivities?
I'd like to, but Mrs J's very busy at work. She hasn't even had a chance to take him back to Turkey to meet his grandparents yet, and he's nine months old. So I'm left with pushing the pram for a couple of hours around the village.
Occasionally I stretch a paper map of the Pennines or a lovely bit of coast on the floor and dream of all the walks I could do. Only to have the little 'un start ripping and eating the map. One day I'll get tragically lost because he removed the vital section of the route ...
When my daughter was still little I would take her on walks across Dartmoor with one of the backpack child carriers. She also had a full-body waterproof suit so that she was happy to snooze as I enjoyed wandering past Tors in the drizzle.
We've got a carrier, and it's great, but the main problem is that we live in Cambridge and the nearest great scenery is a good few hours' drive away.
Although I do love the walk from Cambridge to Ely along the Cam and Great Ouse.
It's also a beautiful experience to canoe from Cambridge to Ely.
I've never done that, sadly. But I guess you'll know what "Five miles from anywhere no hurry" means. ;-)
Meanwhile YouGov also have a new Scottish poll, conducted after the first Scottish leaders debate and straddling the second one. Westminster voting intentions there are CON 18%(+2), LAB 25%(-4), LDEM 4%(+1), SNP 49%(+3). As ever, only one poll, but it looks as if any debate impact in Scotland has helped the SNP. Certainly, with only a month to go it shows no sign whatsoever of the SNP lead fading.
The above from UK Pollling Report, which has managed to feature this mornings YouGov Scottish poll in its headlines. It seems an act of supreme ingratitude or at least ungallant Mike that you somehow have not managed to squeeze it into your headlines given the amount of money you won from Ms Sturgeon's performance in the debate. I suppose this has nothing to do with your collapsing theory that Murphy is doing anything for Labour in Scotland except sending them further down the stanks.
Mr. Jessop, in a few years you'll be able to take your offspring with you. Can't you take a short holiday now and then to indulge your perambulating proclivities?
I'd like to, but Mrs J's very busy at work. She hasn't even had a chance to take him back to Turkey to meet his grandparents yet, and he's nine months old. So I'm left with pushing the pram for a couple of hours around the village.
Occasionally I stretch a paper map of the Pennines or a lovely bit of coast on the floor and dream of all the walks I could do. Only to have the little 'un start ripping and eating the map. One day I'll get tragically lost because he removed the vital section of the route ...
When my daughter was still little I would take her on walks across Dartmoor with one of the backpack child carriers. She also had a full-body waterproof suit so that she was happy to snooze as I enjoyed wandering past Tors in the drizzle.
We've got a carrier, and it's great, but the main problem is that we live in Cambridge and the nearest great scenery is a good few hours' drive away.
Although I do love the walk from Cambridge to Ely along the Cam and Great Ouse.
It's also a beautiful experience to canoe from Cambridge to Ely.
I've never done that, sadly. But I guess you'll know what "Five miles from anywhere no hurry" means. ;-)
With two of you in the canoe something like 3mph is feasible, with very little fuss, in no current, and faster with. You can go all day. We did many times in the Canadian wilderness (Quetico). But it helps to develop terrific specialised calluses on one's palms. And, yes, all long walks are hugely relaxing too.
Estimates of 1st quarter GDP growth are being revised down, with potential implications for the election campaign, as they will be announced with about two weeks to go:
"Alan Clarke, UK economist at Scotia Bank, said the weak state of the economy would prove embarrassing for the coalition going into the election.
“Unless we get big revisions to these data, or a massive jump in services output in February and March, then GDP growth of just 0.4% quarter on quarter is looking like the most likely outcome.
“This is not going to make pleasant reading for the coalition government in the final days of the election campaign,” he said."
It might also provoke a "cling to nurse for fear or worse" response, and some people will argue that anything that puts the economy front and centre in the campaign is good for the Conservatives, but it at least represents a known unknown to come.
With the amount of power the SNP are about to potentially wield in the next Westminster parliament, the Scots may indeed decide we are "Better Together".
A barrel of pork. That we should become Judas.
That would make a change
O would, ere I had seen the day That Treason thus could sell us, My auld grey head had lien in clay, Wi' Bruce and loyal Wallace! But pith and power, till my last hour, I'll mak this declaration; We're bought and sold for English gold- Such a parcel of rogues in a nation!
More 2010 Lib Dem voters than 2010 Labour voters in the weighted sample. Er, what?
I'm the first to criticise the model of 'unspinning' polls which worked out so well (ahem) in the US Presidential election, but that is odd. I guess you can't weight correctly for everything as changing one weighting messes up another.
For a bit of fun I've taken the crossbreaks for 2010 major parties, assumed a constant rate for others/non-voters, and reweighted it to the actual 2010 outcome (not quite right of course as people age so the 2015 electorate won't be the same as the 2010 one - maybe if you bump off 5 years of pensioners and add on the 12-17 cohort the Lib Dems would have been closer in 2010.
Anyway it doesn't make a massive difference. Reweighted outcome Labour 34, Conservative 30.5, Lib Dem 7, UKIP 16, Green 6.
Yes, I know, something of which I've long been critical. They also revised the party ID targets that they weight to not too long ago.
If such a weighting results in more people in their weighted sample declaring that they voted for the Lib Dems in 2010 than Labour then it's a warning sign in my view. It also helps to explain why they produce a relatively high score of 6% for the Greens.
Yes, I know, something of which I've long been critical. They also revised the party ID targets that they weight to not too long ago.
If such a weighting results in more people in their weighted sample declaring that they voted for the Lib Dems in 2010 than Labour then it's a warning sign in my view. It also helps to explain why they produce a relatively high score of 6% for the Greens.
The 'Party ID' weights they use for Con/Lab/LD are almost identical to the numbers YouGov produced yesterday for their
"The kind of society it wants is broadly the kind of society I want"
SeanT Cf the history of New York City in the 60s-80s. The people kept voting themselves benefits and lefty welfare until the City went bankrupt. Then they suddenly swang hard right, because they literally had no choice. Same with the UK and Thatcher.
It seems to be a natural pendulum effect, intrinsic to democracy. The time cycles vary, though, and there is a lot of ruin in a nation.
In this light you can see why the Chinese/Singaporean model is increasingly popular worldwide. Fuck the people, to hell with wélfare, let the technocrats and autocrats decide.
Detroit, California, Quebec, the Winter of Discontent and many many more examples of elected lefty ruin. What interests me (as a rational human being who'd rather we collectively found a way of smoothing this cycle or damping the swings) is to understand why the fuck people vote for ruin. I think the answer must be in cognitive disconnect. Right now it is clear a large and probably winning chunk of the UK electorate simply don't care if we do serious damage to the economy, to jobs, to energy prices, to interest rates, to the national finances - just as long as those nasty rich people can get what's coming to them. It's certainly this gallery that Red Ed playing to (with much success). Inequality matters more to many than aggregate success. "I'm not sharing the success - so fuck you sunshine'. A ruinous but fair and understandable view. And, on reflection, it is a core failing of the coalition not to have dealt better with the cliquey, corporatist, chummy, rent-seeking-at-the-top of British society in both private and public sectors. We certainly need the voting masses to get a smack upside the head with a big cluebat. I'd start with privatising the BBC!
There is a large body of voters who really think it is the role of the state to support their every need, and the needs of anyone else who cannot take responsibility for their own lives and live within their means, regardless of the cost, as it can all be funded by "the rich" (and not them).
The seething sentiment of the many economic illiterates in the audience to the QT debate on "non-doms" was very illuminating.
Watching QT in the run-up to an election scares me more than watching the dissembling politicans. They worry me more than PM Miliband worries me.
Agree 100%. It's really depressing to see the general population being mainly statists.
The knee-jerk antagonism to anyone who is rich or successful (unless a "celebrity" or footballer) is very unpleasant and worrying.
It's a core failing of democracies. We live in 'rob Peter to pay Paul' welfare states. Paul has more votes than Peter. So democracies have a natural tendency towards statist, spendy, lefty bankruptopia. Some have got there already (Greece, Venezuela, Argentina, etc). Some are well on the way (Italy, Japan, France, etc). The occasional Reagan or Thatcher is I'm afraid not the norm. I don't know if there is a cure. If voters can help themselves to other people's money they'll run out of it sooner or later. Looks like we're going to go a bit sooner on current polling.
Maybe we need a written constitution which imposes limits on deficits, debt, the size of the state. In any event, it seems unlikely there are many votes in sensible, prudent, responsible stewardship of the state and its finances. All very depressing indeed.
Yes, I know, something of which I've long been critical. They also revised the party ID targets that they weight to not too long ago.
If such a weighting results in more people in their weighted sample declaring that they voted for the Lib Dems in 2010 than Labour then it's a warning sign in my view. It also helps to explain why they produce a relatively high score of 6% for the Greens.
Which parties is it under/overstating.
They seem to have done a complete 180 on their UKIP weighting tbh.
There is a large body of voters who really think it is the role of the state to support their every need, and the needs of anyone else who cannot take responsibility for their own lives and live within their means, regardless of the cost, as it can all be funded by "the rich" (and not them).
The seething sentiment of the many economic illiterates in the audience to the QT debate on "non-doms" was very illuminating.
Watching QT in the run-up to an election scares me more than watching the dissembling politicans. They worry me more than PM Miliband worries me.
Agree 100%. It's really depressing to see the general population being mainly statists.
The knee-jerk antagonism to anyone who is rich or successful (unless a "celebrity" or footballer) is very unpleasant and worrying.
It's a core failing of democracies. We live in 'rob Peter to pay Paul' welfare states. Paul has more votes than Peter. So democracies have a natural tendency towards statist, spendy, lefty bankruptopia. Some have got there already (Greece, Venezuela, Argentina, etc). Some are well on the way (Italy, Japan, France, etc). The occasional Reagan or Thatcher is I'm afraid not the norm. I don't know if there is a cure. If voters can help themselves to other people's money they'll run out of it sooner or later. Looks like we're going to go a bit sooner on current polling.
Maybe we need a written constitution which imposes limits on deficits, debt, the size of the state. In any event, it seems unlikely there are many votes in sensible, prudent, responsible stewardship of the state and its finances. All very depressing indeed.
Limit the franchise further than we do now.
The Simon Reeves program Carribean visited Venezuela (was shown a couple of weeks ago). Utter utter chaos. He said it was the worst run country he had ever visited, and this despite $100's billion of oil wealth.
With the discovery of oil in the South East, 20 years of Red Ed and maybe we can be just like them :-) Although, I can see Ed giving into the Eco-nutters and banning new oil extraction (conventional or via fracking).
Estimates of 1st quarter GDP growth are being revised down, with potential implications for the election campaign, as they will be announced with about two weeks to go:
"Alan Clarke, UK economist at Scotia Bank, said the weak state of the economy would prove embarrassing for the coalition going into the election.
“Unless we get big revisions to these data, or a massive jump in services output in February and March, then GDP growth of just 0.4% quarter on quarter is looking like the most likely outcome.
“This is not going to make pleasant reading for the coalition government in the final days of the election campaign,” he said."
It might also provoke a "cling to nurse for fear or worse" response, and some people will argue that anything that puts the economy front and centre in the campaign is good for the Conservatives, but it at least represents a known unknown to come.
The economy is booming. Look at the number of people at Aintree yesterday. Ignore what these people say just look at the real world.
Comments
Don't most people speak to you like that though?
http://www.snopes.com/radiotv/tv/pugwash.asp
Unionists know this, which is why they are trying to do everything they can to prevent a democratic choice for Scotland. It won't work. The mechanism is in place to ensure it will not work.
The Union is dead.
Occasionally I stretch a paper map of the Pennines or a lovely bit of coast on the floor and dream of all the walks I could do. Only to have the little 'un start ripping and eating the map. One day I'll get tragically lost because he removed the vital section of the route ...
There is, in seriousness, no specific timescale (and there should not under the same UK constitution, which forbids an administration to tie its successors).
"Very funny.
Although since we are laughing about names... I do love Archibald Clarke Kerr's letter to Reggie Pembroke...
http://www.lettersofnote.com/2009/10/we-all-feel-like-that-now-and-then.html"
Antifrank once posted that. It's VERY funny!!
Keep repeating your mantra.
All through the Second Referendum campaign keep saying it to youself. When Yes is recorded in September 2018, keep saying it. Over and over, repeat it to youself.
It means nothing.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-32234567
It sounds ridiculous on the face of it. Have there been comparable investigations into treating in the past, and how seriously is it taken?
It compares very badly to the experience of recovery from recession under Kenneth Clarke as Chancellor in the mid-1990s, and represents little (if any) change from the poor performance under the previous Labour government.
LOL !
The Tory lead has therefore almost halved from 42 seats last week to 23 seats now.
https://twitter.com/NCPoliticsUK/status/586453414843846657
In fact we should be thanking Alex and Nicola. Previously the Union was based on one of those aristocratic stitch ups popular a few centuries back. Now it's the exprerssed democratic will of the Scottish people with a clear mandate.
Simon Pia's idiotic claims that "the SNP are still re-running the Referendum" pretty much sums up why Labour are losing so badly.
They told her a joke name, and she ended up saying: "And tonight's picture is from Mustapha Big'un" live on air.
There was an inquiry, people were reprimanded, and the tapes of the event were erased. But only after copies were made. ;-)
Allegedly.
The Tories finally unveil some actual announcements... my worry that they are in campaign terms a busted flush has abated. For now.
And it was reset partly because that the Scottish Labour party was found to be far more of an empty shell than anyone had ever realised. It was, like a Downing Street source noted at the time, like the Russian army in the first World War; “Superficially it was impressive but the reality was it wasn’t there in numbers or in fighting energy”.
http://www.loughboroughecho.net/news/local-news/ukip-candidate-apologises-parking-disabled-9013561
Could he and Nigel take over the vacant Topgear slot...
5 across, 5 down on this school year book
http://bit.ly/1uCgCAB
No really. Look at it
OH How we'd laugh.
but, every little helps.
The DUP have a 35% probability of being critical to the Gov't according to his model, due to being able to demand pork from either Labour or Tories.
SNP 33% due to only being prepared to work with Labour.
Obviously the SNP wouldn't be on 44% (My best guess) if they were going to work with the Tories, but it does give a party with only 8 or 9 seats enourmous potential power !
Nigel Dodds will be well happy if hits the dartboard.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=afRE3RwLwaE
91% of people in the Mirror poll on non-Doms expressed a definite view - only 9% "did not know". Yet surely people are in fact generally so ill-informed as to not be capable of holding a coherent view and that the correct figures should really be reversed. I know I do not understand the issue or any likely future effects of a change in the law sufficiently to be able to give an opinion.
The knee-jerk antagonism to anyone who is rich or successful (unless a "celebrity" or footballer) is very unpleasant and worrying.
"Just spotted that William Hill have slashed their SLAB GE 2015 odds e.g. 0-5 seats down from 125/1 to 66/1 and 11-15 down from 20/1 to 10/1."
The doctor calls the name out in the waiting area, then she pounces on him saying "Of course I will darling! I thought you would never ask!"
Always goes down well with the crowd! But probably a breach of harrassment code.
Fear of upsetting non-Sikhs? Respect for Sikhs?
The characters you mention simply did not exist. Sorry.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Captain_Pugwash#Libel_case_regarding_double_entendres
Please enlighten the unwary
Doesn't stop it being a good story...
(The libel case related to the allegation that the BBC terminated the series because of the suggestive names. So long as you don't make that claim you should be fine)
Although I do love the walk from Cambridge to Ely along the Cam and Great Ouse.
How brilliant...
Maybe we need a written constitution which imposes limits on deficits, debt, the size of the state. In any event, it seems unlikely there are many votes in sensible, prudent, responsible stewardship of the state and its finances. All very depressing indeed.
They're currently predicting 34% Con, 32% Lab for votes and for seats: 289 Con, 266 Lab, 49 SNP, 22 Lib Dem.
They've also got estimated probabilities for the various possible outcomes on this data: 10% Con majority, 13% Con + Lib Dem majority, 14 % Con + Lib Dem + DUP majority, 6% Con largest party but Lab + SNP majority, etc
Do people think these predictions look reasonable, given the current polls?
I'm using his probability breakdowns for identifying value.
Though I don't have any answers I know enough to have no confidence that the politicians do either.
However it;s more than just energy, there are whole sectors where we have allowed our production to close down. A lot of what we import is mid tech products made in mid to high cost countries. It;s why Osborne's focus on exports is just nonsense, he should be focusing on import substitution.
The above from UK Pollling Report, which has managed to feature this mornings YouGov Scottish poll in its headlines. It seems an act of supreme ingratitude or at least ungallant Mike that you somehow have not managed to squeeze it into your headlines given the amount of money you won from Ms Sturgeon's performance in the debate. I suppose this has nothing to do with your collapsing theory that Murphy is doing anything for Labour in Scotland except sending them further down the stanks.
Also Election Forecast yields the following
Con largest: 0.55
Lab largest: 0.45
Lab with with no possible two party coalition 0.05
Con with no possible two party coalition 0.24
Con allies are LD, DUP;
Lab allies are SNP, LD.
I use allies in the loosest sense of the word.
But given what we know about SDLP, PC, UKIP and quite frankly the DUP - I'd suggest Lab PM is
0.45 - 0.05 + 0.24 = 0.64 according to their model.
http://www.populus.co.uk/Our-Methodology/Polling/
p.12
http://www.populus.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/10-04-2015_BPC.pdf
"Alan Clarke, UK economist at Scotia Bank, said the weak state of the economy would prove embarrassing for the coalition going into the election.
“Unless we get big revisions to these data, or a massive jump in services output in February and March, then GDP growth of just 0.4% quarter on quarter is looking like the most likely outcome.
“This is not going to make pleasant reading for the coalition government in the final days of the election campaign,” he said."
It might also provoke a "cling to nurse for fear or worse" response, and some people will argue that anything that puts the economy front and centre in the campaign is good for the Conservatives, but it at least represents a known unknown to come.
Staggering.
Springtime for Farage and Sturgeon, Winter for Cameron and Clegg.
For a bit of fun I've taken the crossbreaks for 2010 major parties, assumed a constant rate for others/non-voters, and reweighted it to the actual 2010 outcome (not quite right of course as people age so the 2015 electorate won't be the same as the 2010 one - maybe if you bump off 5 years of pensioners and add on the 12-17 cohort the Lib Dems would have been closer in 2010.
Anyway it doesn't make a massive difference. Reweighted outcome Labour 34, Conservative 30.5, Lib Dem 7, UKIP 16, Green 6.
If such a weighting results in more people in their weighted sample declaring that they voted for the Lib Dems in 2010 than Labour then it's a warning sign in my view. It also helps to explain why they produce a relatively high score of 6% for the Greens.
"The kind of society it wants is broadly the kind of society I want"
question.
p.3
https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/3wwffeujmb/YG-Archive-Pol-Sun-results-090415.pdf
Cf the history of New York City in the 60s-80s. The people kept voting themselves benefits and lefty welfare until the City went bankrupt. Then they suddenly swang hard right, because they literally had no choice. Same with the UK and Thatcher.
It seems to be a natural pendulum effect, intrinsic to democracy. The time cycles vary, though, and there is a lot of ruin in a nation.
In this light you can see why the Chinese/Singaporean model is increasingly popular worldwide. Fuck the people, to hell with wélfare, let the technocrats and autocrats decide.
Detroit, California, Quebec, the Winter of Discontent and many many more examples of elected lefty ruin. What interests me (as a rational human being who'd rather we collectively found a way of smoothing this cycle or damping the swings) is to understand why the fuck people vote for ruin. I think the answer must be in cognitive disconnect. Right now it is clear a large and probably winning chunk of the UK electorate simply don't care if we do serious damage to the economy, to jobs, to energy prices, to interest rates, to the national finances - just as long as those nasty rich people can get what's coming to them. It's certainly this gallery that Red Ed playing to (with much success). Inequality matters more to many than aggregate success. "I'm not sharing the success - so fuck you sunshine'. A ruinous but fair and understandable view. And, on reflection, it is a core failing of the coalition not to have dealt better with the cliquey, corporatist, chummy, rent-seeking-at-the-top of British society in both private and public sectors. We certainly need the voting masses to get a smack upside the head with a big cluebat. I'd start with privatising the BBC!
They seem to have done a complete 180 on their UKIP weighting tbh.
With the discovery of oil in the South East, 20 years of Red Ed and maybe we can be just like them :-) Although, I can see Ed giving into the Eco-nutters and banning new oil extraction (conventional or via fracking).