Categories
Options
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The 2001 LAB incumbency experience: Can CON expect somethin
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The 2001 LAB incumbency experience: Can CON expect something similar 3 weeks tomorrow?
Labour returned to power in May 1997 and four years and one month later Tony Blair went to the country to renew his mandate. The outcome was never really in doubt and on the day, as the official record shows above, LAB won on a reduced vote share. Yet this hardly mattered in terms of seats
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
But...if solar really gets cheap (think giant of rolls of PV sheet you can just buy at B&Q and plug in to a standard unit in your junction box - plus a battery) then Africa becomes alot less necessary too.
I think the transformative technologies in energy are going to be:
1. Batteries. Alot of progress in getting closer to being able to store renewable generation and removing the problem of its intermittency. Greatly improved storage. Greatly improved recharge times. At scale - not just mobile phones!
2. Super cheap, easy and effective PV. Nearly every inch of roof space in the world is covered and feeds the batteries. Maybe road surfaces. It's everywhere. It's happening now - we're experiencing a sort of Moore's Law of PV cost effectiveness already.
3. Electric cars. This depends alot on 1 above, and 2 to some extent. But when we're there then truly capable and very quickly rechargeable cars will destroy the internal combustion engine business model.
4. Smart and local grids / generation. Your house has a battery that covers all your needs for days without needing a recharge. PV sheets on the roof (see 2 above) can pretty much top it up most of the time. The car in your garage acts as a sort of back-up. Buildings, houses, streets can connect to each other smartly and provide collective back-up.
5. Heat pumps. Almost every property in the UK could meet its hot water and heating needs with a heat pump. Expensive to install but no gas bills thereafter. 5 and 3 together can destroy the fossil fuel business model.
6. Small scale and non-pressurised water nuclear power. Could take alot of the cost and risk out of powergen. Fusion would be the Holy Grail and solve mankind's energy worries for millenia - but the way we do fission is pretty screwed up now and could be ALOT more cost effective, safer and lower risk.
It won't happen overnight but I believe we are the beginning of a journey towards a world of smart and cheap electricity that displaces a big chunk of fossil fuel energy.
The consensus on here will not tolerate anyone advising the Tories might not win., or are a bad value bet.
Richard Nabavi, a good guy that I have met and like, and I think, unusually for Tories on this site (Tissue price & Casino Royale excepted), knows his stuff betting wise, wrote a lengthy analysis on why the Tories would win Rochester by election, with the conclusion that they would win by between 3-10% I think. The praise lavished on him for this analysis was fulsome... he had said what they wanted to hear
I disagreed, said Reckless would win easily, and was ridiculed
Reckless won easily. People talked about something else
UKIP without 1950s attitudes to race and sexuality would be like spaghetti bolognese without pasta. I genuinely cannot see how UKIP could get rid of these attitudes and have anything left. It would be like making tea without tea leaves. Can anyone else?
To be fair, something similar might happen for the Tories this time with the UKIP effect, so the end result might be the same.
"We've already got 100 gains in the bag"
He might have been related to Sion Simon.
Clearly the Brown leadership was an issue but the critical factors that undermined the Labour case were the poor numbers and the hostile attitude of too many Labour figures and their cack handed approach to the talks.
If the numbers had been better, probably another 25 seats or so and a more consensual approach achieved then the Brown leadership wouldn't have been nearly so troublesome. The prospect of power has an almighty healing quality with any seemingly insurmountable difficulties.
Still, please, think as you will and make this happen. The sooner the better.
"Britain runs a massive trade deficit with the EU (but a surplus with the rest of the world)."
http://www.cps.org.uk/publications/reports/britain-and-the-eu-a-solution/
So the UK is competitive in the global market place.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2015-32311736
Conversely, as Laws says, had the Tories clocked up even a further 7 seats at Labour's expense then a LD-Lab deal would never have been a runner. The LDs would not have been in a strong negotiating position.
Labour did really well to hang onto 258 seats last time and, in fact, I was astonished they did. I expected the Tories do to much better in London, Scotland and Birmingham.
You don't stop needing to buy the stuff you currently buy from Europe by leaving the EU. All you do is increase the price paid. A catastrophe for an economy already a second rate trading nation and destined to be destroyed by an EU exit.
Hope you didn't stake too much there.
Dear metropolitan media: places exist outside London and the big northern cities.
'Bye bye subsidised nurses for Northern Britain'
It's a redundant argument because it's a choice which is not on offer to almost every single voter.
Thursday or Friday it is.
The last ComRes/Daily Mail poll was a week today, so maybe we might get a ComRes poll tonight?
My fav post from that thread What was the winning margin again?
ComRes, I have no idea when that is out. It a joint poll between ITV News and the Mail.
There are many counter-factual consequentials but I don't think that's one of them.
unspoofable.
Make sure you have some cover on both Lib-Lab and Con-Lib coalition.
That is all
The Populus poll also found that Nicola Sturgeon of the Scottish nationalists had been the most impressive party leader so far in the election campaign, according to those polled between April 10 and 12.
Some 38 per cent of voters thought she had performed better than expected against only 12 per cent who said she had failed to meet expectations.
Ms Sturgeon was widely seen to have come across well in the televised debate between seven party leaders.
Ed Miliband, the Labour leader, also outperformed with 29 per cent thinking he had done better than anticipated against 23 per cent for worse. Mr Cameron came in at 21:23, Nigel Farage at 19:24 and Nick Clegg at 16:23.
Almost two-thirds of those polled thought the government needed to eliminate the deficit over the next five years, in line with varying commitments by the three main parties.
Among those, 39 per cent think spending cuts should be prioritised while 2 per cent opt for tax increases.
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/8112935e-e2ca-11e4-bf4b-00144feab7de.html?siteedition=uk#axzz3XNbLPuTA
http://www.iea.org.uk/blog/abolish-the-cap-let-food-prices-tumble
It would also have been Ireland's problem which, personally, I think the UK would have benefitted greatly from having no part of.
Lol - let it go, get a life ... are the obvious phrases that spring to mind. the world has moved on.
It matters not that UKIP and the LibDems are not in contention in any particular constituency, what matters to him is that voters in the constituencies that he holds realise that they can do something to stop the SNP or UKIP being involved in government.
London
Scotland (Oil over $90 or so)
England Ex London
Scotland (Oil sub $90)
UK
rUK Ex Scotland
Wales
N Ireland.
The ones who really do want to turn the UK into 1950s Mississippi; who hanker for the good old days of "no blacks or Irish"; and who think the only suitable place in a manifesto for a black face is on the page about stopping international aid - they're all in UKIP.
Good.
Of the options available to Westminster, partition was probably the worst possibly choice and this is why the effects of partition still harm the UK (and Ireland) today.
Obviously we can only speculate on how such a problem would have been best solved. Personally, the most viable solution would probably have been to revive the Scottish Home Rule bill and tack Ulster on to Scotland. Might even have resulted in a stable Federal UK.
Bilateral trade balances are never particularly useful in themselves. If country (a) produces 1m cars, but no steel, and country (b) produces steel but no cars, and country (c) produces wheat for all then all countries can have zero net trade balances, but country (a) can have a massive imbalance with country (b), as it imports the steel for 1m cars, but only exports - say - 500k cars back.
I think you have to look at the whole picture - which is that we run a trade deficit, as we have done for the majority of the period since 1945 - and ask why?
Firstly, we - as a country -have substantial overseas investments, and these pay us money in the form of interest payments and dividends. This income then gets spent on imports. Countries with substantial income from overseas - which is particularly the UK and the US - tend to run trade deficits.
Secondly, we have been a haven for foreign capital. As money has come in to buy up property, and the like, that creates excess liquidity sloshing around the UK. Liquidity that ends up in imports.
Finally, outside of automotive where we are third in Europe, and some service industries, we don't actually make that much "stuff". If you look at manufactured products per person you get the following statistics: At 10% of GDP, we have the lowest share of manufacturing of any major industrialised country.
NB Betway do have a very poor prior reputation, but they have moved into the mainstream more recently. I'd withdraw any winnings fairly promptly...
Nowadays, four of the Six Counties have Catholic majorities, only Antrim and Down now have Protestant majorities.
I just don't think it stands up to basic arithmetic. All he can do is take seats off the Tories and maybe a few Labourites. Doesn't change the impact of the SNP.
The only thing that could stop the SNP holding power (as things look today) would be for the Tories to wipe the Liberals out. Every other outcome points to Lab/SNP agreement regardless of Liberal performance.
Currently I'm thinking Lib-Lab coalition with SNP tacit support.
Miliband may get the Libs in house even if he is over the line with the SNP alone...
LOL you think more Scots is the solution ? Why not do it now ?
Both of us were right.. Survation did have UKIP too high and the Cons too low.. actually no! I was wrong the winning margin was 7.3% #mybad
As an aside, abolishing the CAP would clearly be a good thing. It's not the government's job to subsidise any particular industry, particularly when the consequences of that action increase the cost of food to consumers.
This is the Tory candidate for Upper Bann absolutely burning Ed Miliband in person
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ZU81D6wZvw
How long is it before Sinn Fein have captured all of Northern Ireland, demographics must be on their side long term.
It's mostly Labour who support sectarian politics.
Joining the EU redirected a lot of UK import business to EU members. Leaving the EU would strengthen the option of buying from non-EU members.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=18&v=7yHNcckE3oE
Is there any civilised life outside the M25? ;-)
I very much doubt we'd have a lower tariff on goods imported from outside the EU - much as I would prefer a straight "zero".
So I'll go 110-120k
Edit: with a saver on 18-22k
BTW, updating for last night's YG, part-ELBOW for the week so far gives a Lab lead of 0.7%!
The consensus on here will not tolerate anyone advising the Tories might not win., or are a bad value bet.
Richard Nabavi, a good guy that I have met and like, and I think, unusually for Tories on this site (Tissue price & Casino Royale excepted), knows his stuff betting wise, wrote a lengthy analysis on why the Tories would win Rochester by election, with the conclusion that they would win by between 3-10% I think. The praise lavished on him for this analysis was fulsome... he had said what they wanted to hear
I disagreed, said Reckless would win easily, and was ridiculed
Reckless won easily. People talked about something else
I was about one and half points too optimistic (on the Tory side) in the contest for the winning margin for Reckless.
That made me a helluva lot closer than most of the Kippers.
I am saying the Kippers will poll nine point something in the General. On that basis Reckless is not an MP (and neither is anyone except Carswell).
My entry in the pb.com election game was for one Kipper MP. Seeing nothing to change my mind on that.
Maybe if the english seats were less gerrymandered Cameron would be in with a chance to win.
Oh the irony Ulster the epitome of representative politics !
Although I really hope that you are right, and I am wrong. :-)
(2) Whether it was a ridiculously stupid choice or not, the alternative was an all-out three-cornered fight in which Ireland would have become a failed state and many thousands more people would have been killed. So it looked like a reasonable option at the time. It was also Ireland that agreed to keep partition as it was in exchange for a write-off of its debts (admittedly after the Boundary Commission had said it would not remove Tyrone and Fermanagh to the Free State as the Irish had hoped).
(3) The 'Cahtolicisation' [sic] of Ireland would have happened anyway, because there were not enough protestants in Northern Ireland to alter the inertia of the 90% practicing CAtholics in the south. So things like the Mother and Child controversy would still have happened. Whether the IFS government would have treated the Protestants as badly as they feared is another question (and seems unlikely) but to suggest it would have made a difference to the cultural or political development of Ireland from that point of view is wrong.
That made me a helluva lot closer than most of the Kippers.
I am saying the Kippers will poll nine point something in the General. On that basis Reckless is not an MP (and neither is anyone except Carswell).
My entry in the pb.com election game was for one Kipper MP. Seeing nothing to change my mind on that.
Guessing games without betting odds or money staked don't really interest me
I was speaking to a guy that owned an Import-Export company the other day, and he told me that the free market inside the EU was nowhere near as free as people often thought. He claimed that a lot of big companies use contract law to get round differential pricing, meaning arbitrage was not possible, and that the EU authorities turned a blind eye to big French and German players. I thought it was interesting, but not sure what the political solution is.