Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » What we need is for individual pollsters to produce results

24567

Comments

  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,637
    Penultimate BJESUS

    LAB 2 seats lower than previous BJESUS low Tories 1 below previous BJESUS high LD equal BJESUS low Others 4 higher than previous high.

    Since BJESUS started CON/LD stayed remarkably flat LAB/SNP is responsible for virtually all change in BJESUS

    Every BJESUS has predicted EICIPM. We will see next week if that was right/wrong.

    28.4.15 LAB 288 (292) CON 272(271) LD 29(31) UKIP 2(2) Others 59(54) (Ed is crap is PM)
    Last weeks BJESUS in brackets
    BJESUS (Big John Election Service Uniform Swing) BJESUS (Big John Election Service Uniform Swing)
    Using current polling adjusted for 8 days left to go factor and using UKPR standard swingometer
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 56,923
    timmo said:
    It was amusing how inaccurate Iain Dale's predictions were.

    Danny Alexander "Dead Cert LibDem Hold" ho ho ho
  • FalseFlagFalseFlag Posts: 1,801
    Patrick said:

    DavidL said:

    Patrick said:

    Scott_P said:

    @toadmeister: If @Ed_Miliband really is seeking a celebrity endorsement from @RustyRockets, he must be absolutely desperate
    twitter.com/ElisaMisu/status/592795306225459203

    What on earth can Miliband hope to gain from meeting a gimp like Russell Brand? I think I know. He's an utter loon - but a loon who's able to put his finger on something that detects quite well the various issues that get lefties wound up. Ed's general weakness is that he's very good at sensing where issues lie and what people worry about - just mindbogglingly shite at deciding what the right policy response should be. Brand will help him deepen his sensing strength - but also exacerbate his policy weakness.
    How can you say that? The next Labour government is going to preside over a new housing construction boom.

    Oh. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/constructionandproperty/11565524/Housebuilders-hit-by-Ed-Milibands-rent-control-plans.html
    Oh dear. Someone quipped over the weekend that there are two great ways to destroy a city - bombing and rent controls. Ed prefers the latter!

    Joking apart - the housing issue and the worries / problems of 'generation rent' are a very real issue that all parties shy away from. The 1000 pound throbbing gorilla in the corner is our insane planning laws. The problem of supply and demand can never be resolved until supply is liberalised. We have a huge, huge demand for housing and a gajillion builders / developers ready to build. The problem is that the state has decided to place very very severe restrictions on the supply. We need a 'brave' politician (in the Sir Humphrey sense) to make it very very much easier to obtain planning permission. This would of course collapse the value of land banks and housing. So bad for oldies and existing property owners but great for those who are currently excluded from the property ladder.
    I don't want any new housing built, no demand from me., I like my environment as it is. Disgraceful what the coalition has done with planning laws, surely driven by campaign contributions by developers.

    Prefer to see demand tackled by taxing away foreign investor demand and enforcing immigration laws. All those 'luxury' flats are driven by foreign investors not locals desiring modest houses.
  • FalseFlagFalseFlag Posts: 1,801

    Patrick said:

    DavidL said:

    Patrick said:

    Scott_P said:

    @toadmeister: If @Ed_Miliband really is seeking a celebrity endorsement from @RustyRockets, he must be absolutely desperate
    twitter.com/ElisaMisu/status/592795306225459203

    What on earth can Miliband hope to gain from meeting a gimp like Russell Brand? I think I know. He's an utter loon - but a loon who's able to put his finger on something that detects quite well the various issues that get lefties wound up. Ed's general weakness is that he's very good at sensing where issues lie and what people worry about - just mindbogglingly shite at deciding what the right policy response should be. Brand will help him deepen his sensing strength - but also exacerbate his policy weakness.
    How can you say that? The next Labour government is going to preside over a new housing construction boom.

    Oh. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/constructionandproperty/11565524/Housebuilders-hit-by-Ed-Milibands-rent-control-plans.html
    Oh dear. Someone quipped over the weekend that there are two great ways to destroy a city - bombing and rent controls. Ed prefers the latter!

    Joking apart - the housing issue and the worries / problems of 'generation rent' are a very real issue that all parties shy away from. The 1000 pound throbbing gorilla in the corner is our insane planning laws. The problem of supply and demand can never be resolved until supply is liberalised. We have a huge, huge demand for housing and a gajillion builders / developers ready to build. The problem is that the state has decided to place very very severe restrictions on the supply. We need a 'brave' politician (in the Sir Humphrey sense) to make it very very much easier to obtain planning permission. This would of course collapse the value of land banks and housing. So bad for oldies and existing property owners but great for those who are currently excluded from the property ladder.
    Planning laws are a problem, but not one of the major ones. A big problem is the sort of homes we culturally want: generally the 'ideal' for many people is a detached house with nice garden (preferably front and back), and a garage with two or three parking space outside. Such houses swallow up available land.

    Sadly the nightmarish developments built in the 1960s and 1970s hurt the public image of high-rise housing. This is improving, but too slowly. If you want people to live anywhere near the centre of any city, it has to be high-rise. But we should not repeat the mistakes of the past.

    We should also get over this obsession with tractor-statting house build numbers, and instead concentrate on building communities.
    Favellas and shanty towns are the future.
  • rcs1000 said:
    You can say that again! Dale rates Danny Alexander's Inverness seat as being "a dead cert hold for the LiDems. The bookies on the other hand will give you odds of 7/1 against him holding onto it and 1/6 on an SNP gain.
    This was the first of the LibDems seats in his list of predicted results ...... needless to say I didn't get any further.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,706
    timmo said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Pulpstar said:

    DavidL said:

    JackW said:

    DavidL said:

    AndyJS said:
    Charlie looks terrible in that photograph. Its a real shame. The party admitting that he is in trouble in his seat doesn't exactly help either.

    Curious that Moore's seat does not seem to be one of those getting the additional resources. Maybe just didn't fit with the narrative to announce it.
    This Guardian piece is broadly in line with reports I'm receiving, albeit not quite so rosy for the yellow peril but certainly better than the raw Scottish polling would suggest.

    Moore's seat hasn't received extra resources because it was already in the top tier.

    I still think they will be left with no Scottish seats south of Inverness. I have been saying this for months and I have not seen anything in the polling indicating otherwise.
    line.
    I think Thurso will hold on. And maybe Charlie although that seems less likely now. Carmichael is safe. After that I really struggle.
    If Carmichael does crawl from the wreckage, is he worth a punt at around 20/1 for next LibDem leader?
    I would say not. Firstly, he is not very good. Secondly, the Lib Dem party is going to be a lot more English after these elections. The Scottish lib Dems are going to lose about 90% of their seats and all of their old grandees who have dominated the party for so long.

    If overall losses are just over 50% the complexion of the party will have changed. It seems to me that the Lib Dems are going to lose most of their Celtic connections with major losses in the south west as well. What remains will choose one of their own.
    What is interesting for the LibDems now is how the expectations part of the news management has kicked in already. By saying they will get top whack 35 seats if they then get only 25 it isnt that horrendous,whereas if you look at where they have come from it really is horrendous.
    You are right. Even worse will be the loss of third party status to the SNP. The Lib Dems have really struggled to be heard in this election. It is a shadow of things to come. 2010 and the Cleggasm seems a far away country.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 56,923

    Patrick said:

    Patrick said:

    DavidL said:

    Patrick said:

    Scott_P said:

    @toadmeister: If @Ed_Miliband really is seeking a celebrity endorsement from @RustyRockets, he must be absolutely desperate
    twitter.com/ElisaMisu/status/592795306225459203

    What on earth can Miliband hope to gain from meeting a gimp like Russell Brand? I think I know. He's an utter loon - but a loon who's able to put his finger on something that detects quite well the various issues that get lefties wound up. Ed's general weakness is that he's very good at sensing where issues lie and what people worry about - just mindbogglingly shite at deciding what the right policy response should be. Brand will help him deepen his sensing strength - but also exacerbate his policy weakness.
    How can you say that? The next Labour government is going to preside over a new housing construction boom.

    Oh. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/constructionandproperty/11565524/Housebuilders-hit-by-Ed-Milibands-rent-control-plans.html
    Oh dear. Someone quipped over the weekend that there are two great ways to destroy a city - bombing and rent controls. Ed prefers the latter!

    [snipped for length]
    Short of sticking up skyscrapers in Hyde Park, how would that work in central London?

    One actual gorilla is subsidies for landlords, aka housing benefits.
    As Antifrank pointed out recently, London has 3 dimensions and we only really use two of them. For such a large city London has an amazingly low population density. If there is such huge demand for affordable flats in London then let's build upwards. We allow any number of huge skyscrpaers for business - just look at how the London skyline has changed in recent years. Allowing the same for residential property would be a sensible thing IMHO.
    As rcs1000 says, we are seeing more of this, though generally aimed at the affluent buyer. In the past, tower blocks have been associated with social problems. But as to population density, London already has the highest in Britain, and it would be higher still were it not for our parks.
    It's still pretty low compared to most other cities of its stature.

    The density of Islington, which is the highest in the UK, is 13,886 per square kilometer.

    Manhattan, even though a huge amount of the space is offices and Central Park takes up the entire centre of the island, is 25,846/km2.

    Kwun Tong in Hong King is 57,120/km2.

    If the UK had the same density of Kwun Tong the entire population would fit in a square of 20 miles by 20 miles.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340

    Patrick said:

    Patrick said:

    DavidL said:

    Patrick said:

    Scott_P said:

    @toadmeister: If @Ed_Miliband really is seeking a celebrity endorsement from @RustyRockets, he must be absolutely desperate
    twitter.com/ElisaMisu/status/592795306225459203

    What on earth can Miliband hope to gain from meeting a gimp like Russell Brand? I think I know. He's an utter loon - but a loon who's able to put his finger on something that detects quite well the various issues that get lefties wound up. Ed's general weakness is that he's very good at sensing where issues lie and what people worry about - just mindbogglingly shite at deciding what the right policy response should be. Brand will help him deepen his sensing strength - but also exacerbate his policy weakness.
    How can you say that? The next Labour government is going to preside over a new housing construction boom.

    Oh. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/constructionandproperty/11565524/Housebuilders-hit-by-Ed-Milibands-rent-control-plans.html
    Oh dear. Someone quipped over the weekend that there are two great ways to destroy a city - bombing and rent controls. Ed prefers the latter!

    [snipped for length]
    Short of sticking up skyscrapers in Hyde Park, how would that work in central London?

    One actual gorilla is subsidies for landlords, aka housing benefits.
    As Antifrank pointed out recently, London has 3 dimensions and we only really use two of them. For such a large city London has an amazingly low population density. If there is such huge demand for affordable flats in London then let's build upwards. We allow any number of huge skyscrpaers for business - just look at how the London skyline has changed in recent years. Allowing the same for residential property would be a sensible thing IMHO.
    As rcs1000 says, we are seeing more of this, though generally aimed at the affluent buyer. In the past, tower blocks have been associated with social problems. But as to population density, London already has the highest in Britain, and it would be higher still were it not for our parks.
    A visual representation of London's density of population (or lack):

    http://files.lsecities.net/files/2011/11/2011_chw_2050_01.gif
  • timmotimmo Posts: 1,469
    O/T In other news we could be on the verge of a major diplomatic off between Australia and Indonesia in around 9 hours when it is believed the Bali 9 will be executed including 2 Australians.
    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/bali-nine-executions-live-updates-as-australia-tries-to-save-two-convicts-from-firing-squad-10206252.html
  • PongPong Posts: 4,693

    DavidL said:

    Pulpstar said:

    DavidL said:

    JackW said:

    DavidL said:

    AndyJS said:

    LDs upbeat about their chances in Scotland:

    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/apr/27/lib-dems-ramp-up-scottish-campaign-after-polling-data-boost

    "The private polling data and canvassing returns suggest the party is in the lead in several constituencies including East Dunbartonshire, being defended by Jo Swinson, and West Aberdeenshire and Kincardine, which is held by Sir Robert Smith.

    At least five more seats where the Lib Dems are fighting to overturn an SNP lead, including Edinburgh West, Argyll & Bute and Inverness, could be held because of an upsurge in tactical voting by pro-UK party supporters, the party believes.

    The Lib Dems also expect to hold Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross, which is the most northerly seat on the UK mainland and being defended by John Thurso, as well as Orkney and Shetland just to the north, one of the party’s safest, held by Alistair Carmichael, the Scotland secretary."

    Charlie looks terrible in that photograph. Its a real shame. The party admitting that he is in trouble in his seat doesn't exactly help either.

    Curious that Moore's seat does not seem to be one of those getting the additional resources. Maybe just didn't fit with the narrative to announce it.
    This Guardian piece is broadly in line with reports I'm receiving, albeit not quite so rosy for the yellow peril but certainly better than the raw Scottish polling would suggest.

    Moore's seat hasn't received extra resources because it was already in the top tier.

    I still think they will be left with no Scottish seats south of Inverness. I have been saying this for months and I have not seen anything in the polling indicating otherwise.
    @Dair of this parish did mention that he thought Thurso has the only genuine personal vote in Scottish politics so perhaps not out the question. I'll be very surprised to collect the slightly larger profit I have on the Lib Dems there, mind. Mike Crockhart of Edinburgh West is intriguingly poised on the models too, a touch of tactical voting could see him over the line.
    I think Thurso will hold on. And maybe Charlie although that seems less likely now. Carmichael is safe. After that I really struggle.
    If Carmichael does crawl from the wreckage, is he worth a punt at around 20/1 for next LibDem leader?
    I'm on him at 20/1. He has previously said he doesn't want the job, though.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 77,891
    rcs1000 said:
    TAUNTON DEANE
    Jeremy Browne
    Maj: 3,993 over the Conservatives
    Prediction: POSSIBLE CONSERVATIVE GAIN – 50/50
    Boundary changes last time increased Browne’s majority from just over 500. I don’t know how popular he is locally. Seen as a very good minister it was a shock when he was sacked by Clegg. Might he stand down? I’d say this was a 50/50 call.

    GORDON
    Sir Malcolm Bruce (retiring – Christine Jardine selected
    Maj: 6,748 over the SNP
    Prediction: 100% LIBDEM HOLD

    NORTH EAST FIFE
    Sir Menzies Campbell (retiring)
    Maj: 9.348
    Prediction: LIBDEM HOLD
    The Conservatives will be targeting this seat but it’s a remote hope for them. The new LibDem candidate may suffer a dent in their majority but unless Ming Campbell’s personal vote is more than the norm, this seat should stay Liberal Democrat.

    EDINBURGH WEST
    Michael Crockart
    Maj: 3,803
    Prediction: PROBABLE LIBDEM HOLD
    This seat went LibDem in 1997 and although the LibDem majority plummeted by 10,000 last time it is difficult to see them losing. Prior to 1997 it was a Tory seat but last time Labour beat the Tories into second place. A Labour victory is not impossible to imagine, but still rather unlikely.

    BERMONDSEY & OLD SOUTHWARK
    Simon Hughes
    Maj: 8,530
    Prediction: DEAD CERT LIBDEM HOLD
    No comment needed.

    ROSS, SKYE AND LOCHABER
    Charles Kennedy
    Maj: 13,070
    Prediction: DEAD CERT LIBDEM HOLD
    Out on his own, and despite an invisible presence in this Parliament, there would need to be a miracle to shift Charles Kennedy.

    EASTBOURNE
    Stephen Lloyd
    Maj: 3.435
    Prediction: PROBABLE CONSERVATIVE GAIN
    Won in 2010 from Nigel Wateson, Steohen Lloyd may hang on, but I’d expect the Labour vote to at least double at the expense of the LibDems, so yet again, a lot depends on how many votes the Tories lose to UKIP.

    WEST ABERDEENSHIRE & KINCARDINE
    Sir Robert Smith
    Maj: 3.684
    Prediction: PROBABLE LIBDEM HOLD
    Although the LibDem majority was halved last time, it’s difficult to see anything other than another victory for Sir Robert Smith.

    EAST DUNBARTONSHIRE
    Jo Swinson
    Maj: 2,184
    Prediction: LABOUR GAIN
    Jo Swinson is popular but all the political portents are against her. She will be a major loss to the LibDems.

    BRADFORD EAST
    David Ward
    Maj: 365
    Prediction: DEAD CERT LABOUR GAIN
    One of the nastier LibDem MPs, few will shed tears at his demise.

    CEREDIGION
    Mark Williams
    Maj: 8,324
    Prediction: DEAD CERT LIBDEM HOLD

    BRISTOL WEST
    Stephen Williams
    Maj: 11.336
    Prediction: DEAD CERT LIBDEM HOLD
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 56,923
    FalseFlag said:

    Patrick said:

    DavidL said:

    Patrick said:

    Scott_P said:

    @toadmeister: If @Ed_Miliband really is seeking a celebrity endorsement from @RustyRockets, he must be absolutely desperate
    twitter.com/ElisaMisu/status/592795306225459203

    What on earth can Miliband hope to gain from meeting a gimp like Russell Brand? I think I know. He's an utter loon - but a loon who's able to put his finger on something that detects quite well the various issues that get lefties wound up. Ed's general weakness is that he's very good at sensing where issues lie and what people worry about - just mindbogglingly shite at deciding what the right policy response should be. Brand will help him deepen his sensing strength - but also exacerbate his policy weakness.
    How can you say that? The next Labour government is going to preside over a new housing construction boom.

    Oh. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/constructionandproperty/11565524/Housebuilders-hit-by-Ed-Milibands-rent-control-plans.html
    Oh dear. Someone quipped over the weekend that there are two great ways to destroy a city - bombing and rent controls. Ed prefers the latter!

    Joking apart - the housing issue and the worries / problems of 'generation rent' are a very real issue that all parties shy away from. The 1000 pound throbbing gorilla in the corner is our insane planning laws. The problem of supply and demand can never be resolved until supply is liberalised. We have a huge, huge demand for housing and a gajillion builders / developers ready to build. The problem is that the state has decided to place very very severe restrictions on the supply. We need a 'brave' politician (in the Sir Humphrey sense) to make it very very much easier to obtain planning permission. This would of course collapse the value of land banks and housing. So bad for oldies and existing property owners but great for those who are currently excluded from the property ladder.
    I don't want any new housing built, no demand from me., I like my environment as it is. Disgraceful what the coalition has done with planning laws, surely driven by campaign contributions by developers.

    Prefer to see demand tackled by taxing away foreign investor demand and enforcing immigration laws. All those 'luxury' flats are driven by foreign investors not locals desiring modest houses.
    Yes: all our problems can be solved by taking away the freedom of people to build houses.

    Unspoofable.
  • SlackbladderSlackbladder Posts: 9,767
    rcs1000 said:

    Patrick said:

    Patrick said:

    DavidL said:

    Patrick said:

    Scott_P said:

    @toadmeister: If @Ed_Miliband really is seeking a celebrity endorsement from @RustyRockets, he must be absolutely desperate
    twitter.com/ElisaMisu/status/592795306225459203

    .
    How can you say that? The next Labour government is going to preside over a new housing construction boom.

    Oh. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/constructionandproperty/11565524/Housebuilders-hit-by-Ed-Milibands-rent-control-plans.html
    Oh dear. Someone quipped over the weekend that there are two great ways to destroy a city - bombing and rent controls. Ed prefers the latter!

    [snipped for length]
    Short of sticking up skyscrapers in Hyde Park, how would that work in central London?

    One actual gorilla is subsidies for landlords, aka housing benefits.
    As Antifrank pointed out recently, London has 3 dimensions and we only really use two of them. For such a large city London has an amazingly low population density. If there is such huge demand for affordable flats in London then let's build upwards. We allow any number of huge skyscrpaers for business - just look at how the London skyline has changed in recent years. Allowing the same for residential property would be a sensible thing IMHO.
    As rcs1000 says, we are seeing more of this, though generally aimed at the affluent buyer. In the past, tower blocks have been associated with social problems. But as to population density, London already has the highest in Britain, and it would be higher still were it not for our parks.
    It's still pretty low compared to most other cities of its stature.

    The density of Islington, which is the highest in the UK, is 13,886 per square kilometer.

    Manhattan, even though a huge amount of the space is offices and Central Park takes up the entire centre of the island, is 25,846/km2.

    Kwun Tong in Hong King is 57,120/km2.

    If the UK had the same density of Kwun Tong the entire population would fit in a square of 20 miles by 20 miles.
    Thats maybe not a good thing though is it. We 'could' of course have a much higher population density. Wether its wanted or desireable is another matter.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 77,891
    If you've followed Iain Dale with those tips errm... best of luck !

    He's even managed to get some Lib Dem possible holds in the loss column.
  • antifrank said:

    Patrick said:

    Patrick said:

    DavidL said:

    Patrick said:

    Scott_P said:

    @toadmeister: If @Ed_Miliband really is seeking a celebrity endorsement from @RustyRockets, he must be absolutely desperate
    twitter.com/ElisaMisu/status/592795306225459203

    What on earth can Miliband hope to gain from meeting a gimp like Russell Brand? I think I know. He's an utter loon - but a loon who's able to put his finger on something that detects quite well the various issues that get lefties wound up. Ed's general weakness is that he's very good at sensing where issues lie and what people worry about - just mindbogglingly shite at deciding what the right policy response should be. Brand will help him deepen his sensing strength - but also exacerbate his policy weakness.
    How can you say that? The next Labour government is going to preside over a new housing construction boom.

    Oh. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/constructionandproperty/11565524/Housebuilders-hit-by-Ed-Milibands-rent-control-plans.html
    Oh dear. Someone quipped over the weekend that there are two great ways to destroy a city - bombing and rent controls. Ed prefers the latter!

    [snipped for length]
    Short of sticking up skyscrapers in Hyde Park, how would that work in central London?

    One actual gorilla is subsidies for landlords, aka housing benefits.
    As Antifrank pointed out recently, London has 3 dimensions and we only really use two of them. For such a large city London has an amazingly low population density. If there is such huge demand for affordable flats in London then let's build upwards. We allow any number of huge skyscrpaers for business - just look at how the London skyline has changed in recent years. Allowing the same for residential property would be a sensible thing IMHO.
    As rcs1000 says, we are seeing more of this, though generally aimed at the affluent buyer. In the past, tower blocks have been associated with social problems. But as to population density, London already has the highest in Britain, and it would be higher still were it not for our parks.
    A visual representation of London's density of population (or lack):

    http://files.lsecities.net/files/2011/11/2011_chw_2050_01.gif
    That's a fscinating graphic! Thanks. Conforms just how relatively low rise London is. In fact the whole of the UK is still well over 90% green fields. Even outside the Green Belt. We do actually have alot of land to build on. We just choose not to.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787

    Since BJESUS started CON/LD stayed remarkably flat LAB/SNP is responsible for virtually all change in BJESUS

    Every BJESUS has predicted EICIPM. We will see next week if that was right/wrong.

    Wrong .... and then some .... :smile:

  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 56,923
    edited April 2015
    Pulpstar said:

    If you've followed Iain Dale with those tips errm... best of luck !

    He's even managed to get some Lib Dem possible holds in the loss column.

    Yes, it's monumentally poor forecasting.

    They should hold Ceridgion, mind, although I'm on PC at 3-1.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 56,923

    rcs1000 said:

    Patrick said:

    Patrick said:

    DavidL said:

    Patrick said:

    Scott_P said:

    @toadmeister: If @Ed_Miliband really is seeking a celebrity endorsement from @RustyRockets, he must be absolutely desperate
    twitter.com/ElisaMisu/status/592795306225459203

    .
    How can you say that? The next Labour government is going to preside over a new housing construction boom.

    Oh. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/constructionandproperty/11565524/Housebuilders-hit-by-Ed-Milibands-rent-control-plans.html
    Oh dear. Someone quipped over the weekend that there are two great ways to destroy a city - bombing and rent controls. Ed prefers the latter!

    [snipped for length]
    Short of sticking up skyscrapers in Hyde Park, how would that work in central London?

    One actual gorilla is subsidies for landlords, aka housing benefits.
    As Antifrank pointed out recently, London has 3 dimensions and we only really use two of them. For such a large city London has an amazingly low population density. If there is such huge demand for affordable flats in London then let's build upwards. We allow any number of huge skyscrpaers for business - just look at how the London skyline has changed in recent years. Allowing the same for residential property would be a sensible thing IMHO.
    As rcs1000 says, we are seeing more of this, though generally aimed at the affluent buyer. In the past, tower blocks have been associated with social problems. But as to population density, London already has the highest in Britain, and it would be higher still were it not for our parks.
    It's still pretty low compared to most other cities of its stature.

    The density of Islington, which is the highest in the UK, is 13,886 per square kilometer.

    Manhattan, even though a huge amount of the space is offices and Central Park takes up the entire centre of the island, is 25,846/km2.

    Kwun Tong in Hong King is 57,120/km2.

    If the UK had the same density of Kwun Tong the entire population would fit in a square of 20 miles by 20 miles.
    Thats maybe not a good thing though is it. We 'could' of course have a much higher population density. Wether its wanted or desireable is another matter.
    I'm just making a comparison :-)
  • I post this purely for the sake of completeness

    CAN YOU GUESS WHO OUR PAGE 3 GIRLS ARE VOTING FOR? TAKE OUR REVEALING QUIZ TO FIND OUT…

    http://bit.ly/1z8zf0S
  • I've long been of the opinion that we will see the vote share of around 36CON 32LAB and that will translate to something like 280CON 265LAB - give or take 5 seats depending on the LD/SNP totals.

    Pretty much gives neither party an easy route to govern.

    I think there remains the possibility of a 1% swing either way (more likely to the blues given the momentum and SNP situation)

    I also think the tories could still spook another 1% from the blue kipper contingent if they press hard on UKIP votes translating into a LAB gov.

    Turnout, voter apathy and the re-registration process are the unknown factors and could still impact massively.
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    As Farage pointed out in the BBC debate vs assorted student lefties

    John Rentoul (@JohnRentoul)
    27/04/2015 21:32
    Rumour that Labour's 7th pledge will be to repeal the law of supply and demand. pic.twitter.com/tNlaZwqXX6
  • SlackbladderSlackbladder Posts: 9,767
    Patrick said:

    antifrank said:

    Patrick said:

    Patrick said:

    DavidL said:

    Patrick said:

    Scott_P said:

    @toadmeister: If @Ed_Miliband really is seeking a celebrity endorsement from @RustyRockets, he must be absolutely desperate
    twitter.com/ElisaMisu/status/592795306225459203

    What on earth can Miliband hope to gain from meeting a gimp like Russell Brand? I think I know. He's an utter loon - but a loon who's able to put his finger on something that detects quite well the various issues that get lefties wound up. Ed's general weakness is that he's very good at sensing where issues lie and what people worry about - just mindbogglingly shite at deciding what the right policy response should be. Brand will help him deepen his sensing strength - but also exacerbate his policy weakness.
    How can you say that? The next Labour government is going to preside over a new housing construction boom.

    Oh. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/constructionandproperty/11565524/Housebuilders-hit-by-Ed-Milibands-rent-control-plans.html
    Oh dear. Someone quipped over the weekend that there are two great ways to destroy a city - bombing and rent controls. Ed prefers the latter!

    [snipped for length]
    Short of sticking up skyscrapers in Hyde Park, how would that work in central London?

    One actual gorilla is subsidies for landlords, aka housing benefits.
    As Antifrank pointed out recently, London has 3 dimensions and we only really use two of them. For such a large city London has an amazingly low population density. If there is such huge demand for affordable flats in London then let's build upwards. We allow any number of huge skyscrpaers for business - just look at how the London skyline has changed in recent years. Allowing the same for residential property would be a sensible thing IMHO.
    As rcs1000 says, we are seeing more of this, though generally aimed at the affluent buyer. In the past, tower blocks have been associated with social problems. But as to population density, London already has the highest in Britain, and it would be higher still were it not for our parks.
    A visual representation of London's density of population (or lack):

    http://files.lsecities.net/files/2011/11/2011_chw_2050_01.gif
    That's a fscinating graphic! Thanks. Conforms just how relatively low rise London is. In fact the whole of the UK is still well over 90% green fields. Even outside the Green Belt. We do actually have alot of land to build on. We just choose not to.
    i'm not sure that saying London should be more like Mexico city or Sao Paulo is a great arguement.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    rcs1000 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    If you've followed Iain Dale with those tips errm... best of luck !

    He's even managed to get some Lib Dem possible holds in the loss column.

    Yes, it's monumentally poor forecasting.

    They should how Ceridgion, mind, although I'm on PC at 3-1.
    There is forecasting and then there is my ARSE.

  • YBarddCwscYBarddCwsc Posts: 7,172
    rcs1000 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    If you've followed Iain Dale with those tips errm... best of luck !

    He's even managed to get some Lib Dem possible holds in the loss column.

    Yes, it's monumentally poor forecasting.

    They should hold Ceridgion, mind, although I'm on PC at 3-1.
    I think the LibDems will hold Ceredigion, with a sharply reduced majority.

    The Labour and Plaid Cymru candidates both emerged damaged from their rather unseemly spat over Tippex and English settlers.
  • Quite some change in Stephen Fisher's latest forecast this morning, compared with his corresponding seat allocations just last Friday:

    Con 291 (+5 compared with 24 April), Lab 258 (-5), LibDems 25 (-1), SNP 53 (+2), Others 25 (-1)
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    Latest ARSE with added APLOMB 2015 General Election & "JackW Dozen" Projection Countdown :

    22 minutes 22 seconds
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,637
    JackW said:

    Since BJESUS started CON/LD stayed remarkably flat LAB/SNP is responsible for virtually all change in BJESUS

    Every BJESUS has predicted EICIPM. We will see next week if that was right/wrong.

    Wrong .... and then some .... :smile:

    As I say we will see whether EICIPM or EMWNBPM is the outcome in 9 days time.

    Betfair has the former as slight favorite but looks like being close thanks to SLP collapse.

    I see ARSE has SNP less than 40 seats LAB circa 240 seats I cant see how that would be possible myself but we will see.
  • FinancierFinancier Posts: 3,916
    Millsy said:

    Gadfly said:

    Telephone polls vs YouGov polls since 01 January 2015.

    Simple, Free Image and File Hosting at MediaFire

    Simple, Free Image and File Hosting at MediaFire

    Yeah the polls are anything but constant, it depends which polls you choose to believe
    @Gadfly

    Please could you insert a vertical line on the YG polls which shows the date of methodology change as this would be most helpful.
  • SlackbladderSlackbladder Posts: 9,767
    edited April 2015

    Quite some change in Stephen Fisher's latest forecast this morning, compared with his corresponding seat allocations just last Friday:

    Con 291 (+5 compared with 24 April), Lab 258 (-5), LibDems 25 (-1), SNP 53 (+2), Others 25 (-1)

    Con+Lib 316
    Lab+SNP 311

    That would be entertaining.....
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,401

    Patrick said:

    DavidL said:

    Patrick said:

    Scott_P said:

    @toadmeister: If @Ed_Miliband really is seeking a celebrity endorsement from @RustyRockets, he must be absolutely desperate
    twitter.com/ElisaMisu/status/592795306225459203

    What on earth can Miliband hope to gain from meeting a gimp like Russell Brand? I think I know. He's an utter loon - but a loon who's able to put his finger on something that detects quite well the various issues that get lefties wound up. Ed's general weakness is that he's very good at sensing where issues lie and what people worry about - just mindbogglingly shite at deciding what the right policy response should be. Brand will help him deepen his sensing strength - but also exacerbate his policy weakness.
    How can you say that? The next Labour government is going to preside over a new housing construction boom.

    Oh. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/constructionandproperty/11565524/Housebuilders-hit-by-Ed-Milibands-rent-control-plans.html
    Oh dear. Someone quipped over the weekend that there are two great ways to destroy a city - bombing and rent controls. Ed prefers the latter!

    snip .
    Planning laws are a problem, but not one of the major ones. A big problem is the sort of homes we culturally want: generally the 'ideal' for many people is a detached house with nice garden (preferably front and back), and a garage with two or three parking space outside. Such houses swallow up available land.

    Sadly the nightmarish developments built in the 1960s and 1970s hurt the public image of high-rise housing. This is improving, but too slowly. If you want people to live anywhere near the centre of any city, it has to be high-rise. But we should not repeat the mistakes of the past.

    We should also get over this obsession with tractor-statting house build numbers, and instead concentrate on building communities.
    The rent control and bombing wasn't a quip. It is a genuine conclusion from a Swedish economist, Assar Lindbeck. Ed M claimed at the weekend that he had read his book.

    http://www.adamsmith.org/blog/planning-transport/only-bombing-would-be-worse-than-rent-control/
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787

    Quite some change in Stephen Fisher's latest forecast this morning, compared with his corresponding seat allocations just last Friday:

    Con 291 (+5 compared with 24 April), Lab 258 (-5), LibDems 25 (-1), SNP 53 (+2), Others 25 (-1)

    Quite some change in Stephen Fisher's latest forecast this morning, compared with his corresponding seat allocations just last Friday:

    Con 291 (+5 compared with 24 April), Lab 258 (-5), LibDems 25 (-1), SNP 53 (+2), Others 25 (-1)

    Yet another "forecaster" trending toward a close association with my ARSE.

  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 41,798
    edited April 2015
    On topic, why wouldn't the normal outlier rules apply to an out-of-character poll from a single pollster? The last notable case would be 'that' Yougov poll before the indy referendum; afaicr the actual result was much closer to the average of Yougov polls over those 2-3 months.

    Still, we got a nice, shiny Vow out of it, nationalism killed stone dead yet again.
  • SlackbladderSlackbladder Posts: 9,767
    Can someone tell me why on earth Miliband is courting Russell Brand?
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    Roger said:
    Bizarre. That's one of the rare occasions when using a scantily clad woman in an advert is entirely justifiable. Have we really reached the point when encouraging people to buy a product to be fitter is offensive?
  • Can someone tell me why on earth Miliband is courting Russell Brand?

    To get his endorsement.

    The Lab voters who have switched to the Greens might come back after that endorsement
  • FalseFlagFalseFlag Posts: 1,801
    Patrick said:

    antifrank said:

    Patrick said:

    Patrick said:

    DavidL said:

    Patrick said:

    Scott_P said:

    @toadmeister: If @Ed_Miliband really is seeking a celebrity endorsement from @RustyRockets, he must be absolutely desperate
    twitter.com/ElisaMisu/status/592795306225459203

    What on earth can Miliband hope to gain from meeting a gimp like Russell Brand? I think I know. He's an utter loon - but a loon who's able to put his finger on something that detects quite well the various issues that get lefties wound up. Ed's general weakness is that he's very good at sensing where issues lie and what people worry about - just mindbogglingly shite at deciding what the right policy response should be. Brand will help him deepen his sensing strength - but also exacerbate his policy weakness.
    How can you say that? The next Labour government is going to preside over a new housing construction boom.

    Oh. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/constructionandproperty/11565524/Housebuilders-hit-by-Ed-Milibands-rent-control-plans.html
    Oh dear. Someone quipped over the weekend that there are two great ways to destroy a city - bombing and rent controls. Ed prefers the latter!

    [snipped for length]
    Short of sticking up skyscrapers in Hyde Park, how would that work in central London?

    One actual gorilla is subsidies for landlords, aka housing benefits.
    As Antifrank pointed out recently, London has 3 dimensions and we only really use two of them. For such a large city London has an amazingly low population density. If there is such huge demand for affordable flats in London then let's build upwards. We allow any number of huge skyscrpaers for business - just look at how the London skyline has changed in recent years. Allowing the same for residential property would be a sensible thing IMHO.
    As rcs1000 says, we are seeing more of this, though generally aimed at the affluent buyer. In the past, tower blocks have been associated with social problems. But as to population density, London already has the highest in Britain, and it would be higher still were it not for our parks.
    A visual representation of London's density of population (or lack):

    http://files.lsecities.net/files/2011/11/2011_chw_2050_01.gif
    That's a fscinating graphic! Thanks. Conforms just how relatively low rise London is. In fact the whole of the UK is still well over 90% green fields. Even outside the Green Belt. We do actually have alot of land to build on. We just choose not to.
    We like low rise and we like green fields.
  • JackW said:

    Quite some change in Stephen Fisher's latest forecast this morning, compared with his corresponding seat allocations just last Friday:

    Con 291 (+5 compared with 24 April), Lab 258 (-5), LibDems 25 (-1), SNP 53 (+2), Others 25 (-1)

    Quite some change in Stephen Fisher's latest forecast this morning, compared with his corresponding seat allocations just last Friday:

    Con 291 (+5 compared with 24 April), Lab 258 (-5), LibDems 25 (-1), SNP 53 (+2), Others 25 (-1)

    Yet another "forecaster" trending toward a close association with my ARSE.

    You may say that Jack, but we wait with bated breath!
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340

    Patrick said:

    DavidL said:

    Patrick said:

    Scott_P said:

    @toadmeister: If @Ed_Miliband really is seeking a celebrity endorsement from @RustyRockets, he must be absolutely desperate
    twitter.com/ElisaMisu/status/592795306225459203

    What on earth can Miliband hope to gain from meeting a gimp like Russell Brand? I think I know. He's an utter loon - but a loon who's able to put his finger on something that detects quite well the various issues that get lefties wound up. Ed's general weakness is that he's very good at sensing where issues lie and what people worry about - just mindbogglingly shite at deciding what the right policy response should be. Brand will help him deepen his sensing strength - but also exacerbate his policy weakness.
    How can you say that? The next Labour government is going to preside over a new housing construction boom.

    Oh. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/constructionandproperty/11565524/Housebuilders-hit-by-Ed-Milibands-rent-control-plans.html
    Oh dear. Someone quipped over the weekend that there are two great ways to destroy a city - bombing and rent controls. Ed prefers the latter!

    snip .
    Planning laws are a problem, but not one of the major ones. A big problem is the sort of homes we culturally want: generally the 'ideal' for many people is a detached house with nice garden (preferably front and back), and a garage with two or three parking space outside. Such houses swallow up available land.

    Sadly the nightmarish developments built in the 1960s and 1970s hurt the public image of high-rise housing. This is improving, but too slowly. If you want people to live anywhere near the centre of any city, it has to be high-rise. But we should not repeat the mistakes of the past.

    We should also get over this obsession with tractor-statting house build numbers, and instead concentrate on building communities.
    The rent control and bombing wasn't a quip. It is a genuine conclusion from a Swedish economist, Assar Lindbeck. Ed M claimed at the weekend that he had read his book.

    http://www.adamsmith.org/blog/planning-transport/only-bombing-would-be-worse-than-rent-control/
    Lisbon and Porto are great cities, but the baleful effects of rent controls on the centres of both cities is sadly abundantly clear.

  • FalseFlagFalseFlag Posts: 1,801
    rcs1000 said:

    FalseFlag said:

    Patrick said:

    DavidL said:

    Patrick said:

    Scott_P said:

    @toadmeister: If @Ed_Miliband really is seeking a celebrity endorsement from @RustyRockets, he must be absolutely desperate
    twitter.com/ElisaMisu/status/592795306225459203

    What on earth can Miliband hope to gain from meeting a gimp like Russell Brand? I think I know. He's an utter loon - but a loon who's able to put his finger on something that detects quite well the various issues that get lefties wound up. Ed's general weakness is that he's very good at sensing where issues lie and what people worry about - just mindbogglingly shite at deciding what the right policy response should be. Brand will help him deepen his sensing strength - but also exacerbate his policy weakness.
    How can you say that? The next Labour government is going to preside over a new housing construction boom.

    Oh. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/constructionandproperty/11565524/Housebuilders-hit-by-Ed-Milibands-rent-control-plans.html
    Oh dear. Someone quipped over the weekend that there are two great ways to destroy a city - bombing and rent controls. Ed prefers the latter!

    Joking apart - the housing issue and the worries / problems of 'generation rent' are a very real issue that all parties shy away from. The 1000 pound throbbing gorilla in the corner is our insane planning laws. The problem of supply and demand can never be resolved until supply is liberalised. We have a huge, huge demand for housing and a gajillion builders / developers ready to build. The problem is that the state has decided to place very very severe restrictions on the supply. We need a 'brave' politician (in the Sir Humphrey sense) to make it very very much easier to obtain planning permission. This would of course collapse the value of land banks and housing. So bad for oldies and existing property owners but great for those who are currently excluded from the property ladder.
    I don't want any new housing built, no demand from me., I like my environment as it is. Disgraceful what the coalition has done with planning laws, surely driven by campaign contributions by developers.

    Prefer to see demand tackled by taxing away foreign investor demand and enforcing immigration laws. All those 'luxury' flats are driven by foreign investors not locals desiring modest houses.
    Yes: all our problems can be solved by taking away the freedom of people to build houses.

    Unspoofable.
    Favellas and shanty towns are one solution.
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    Russell wants tips on how to pull Ms Flanders?

    Can someone tell me why on earth Miliband is courting Russell Brand?

  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787

    JackW said:

    Since BJESUS started CON/LD stayed remarkably flat LAB/SNP is responsible for virtually all change in BJESUS

    Every BJESUS has predicted EICIPM. We will see next week if that was right/wrong.

    Wrong .... and then some .... :smile:

    As I say we will see whether EICIPM or EMWNBPM is the outcome in 9 days time.

    Betfair has the former as slight favorite but looks like being close thanks to SLP collapse.

    I see ARSE has SNP less than 40 seats LAB circa 240 seats I cant see how that would be possible myself but we will see.
    I regret to advise you old thing that you are simply faltering in the wake of my ARSE.

    Like many others before you who fall by the wayside as the tide from my ARSE overwhelms them in a torrent of forecasting brilliance that will not allow even a pale and wretchedly lacklustre imitation to share even a scrap of the limelight and acclaim.

  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787

    JackW said:

    Quite some change in Stephen Fisher's latest forecast this morning, compared with his corresponding seat allocations just last Friday:

    Con 291 (+5 compared with 24 April), Lab 258 (-5), LibDems 25 (-1), SNP 53 (+2), Others 25 (-1)

    Quite some change in Stephen Fisher's latest forecast this morning, compared with his corresponding seat allocations just last Friday:

    Con 291 (+5 compared with 24 April), Lab 258 (-5), LibDems 25 (-1), SNP 53 (+2), Others 25 (-1)

    Yet another "forecaster" trending toward a close association with my ARSE.

    You may say that Jack, but we wait with bated breath!
    I'd rather your breath wasn't overly close to my ARSE. :smile:

  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 56,923
    FalseFlag said:

    Favellas and shanty towns are one solution.

    Clearly, allowing people to build property on land they own is going to create shanty towns and favellas.

    Obviously.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 56,923
    Allegedly, Victoria Ayling, asked the following question during a local debate:

    "What happens when the renewable energy runs out?"
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 42,205
    FalseFlag said:

    Favellas and shanty towns are the future.

    Ah, so you've been to Bar Hill. ;-)
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    rcs1000 said:

    Allegedly, Victoria Ayling, asked the following question during a local debate:

    "What happens when the renewable energy runs out?"

    Chortle .... :smiley:

  • SlackbladderSlackbladder Posts: 9,767

    Can someone tell me why on earth Miliband is courting Russell Brand?

    To get his endorsement.

    The Lab voters who have switched to the Greens might come back after that endorsement
    Really?/ He's even more of an idiot than I thought.
  • philiphphiliph Posts: 4,704
    edited April 2015

    Can someone tell me why on earth Miliband is courting Russell Brand?

    Is that the 'I wouldn't vote Russell Brand?'

    I wonder if he will promote little Eddy Weddy and his little Bookie Wookie at the same time. I know I'm not in the target demographic, but the word tosser comes to mind. Apply as you see fit.

    Very few posters or stickers here in North Herts, the LibDem and Con ones normally on display are absent. The most obvious (and only one I remember seeing) is a Green Party banner, located in a very desirable mansion tax eligible location.
  • One faith based ideology lacking no scientific basis gets the backing of another?

    *Innocent Face*
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    FalseFlag said:

    Patrick said:

    DavidL said:

    Patrick said:

    Scott_P said:

    @toadmeister: If @Ed_Miliband really is seeking a celebrity endorsement from @RustyRockets, he must be absolutely desperate
    twitter.com/ElisaMisu/status/592795306225459203

    What on earth can Miliband hope to gain from meeting a gimp like Russell Brand? I think I know. He's an utter loon - but a loon who's able to put his finger on something that detects quite well the various issues that get lefties wound up. Ed's general weakness is that he's very good at sensing where issues lie and what people worry about - just mindbogglingly shite at deciding what the right policy response should be. Brand will help him deepen his sensing strength - but also exacerbate his policy weakness.
    How can you say that? The next Labour government is going to preside over a new housing construction boom.

    Oh. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/constructionandproperty/11565524/Housebuilders-hit-by-Ed-Milibands-rent-control-plans.html
    Oh dear. Someone quipped over the weekend that there are two great ways to destroy a city - bombing and rent controls. Ed prefers the latter!

    Joking apart - the housing issue and the worries / problems of 'generation rent' are a very real issue that all parties shy away from. The 1000 pound throbbing gorilla in the corner is our insane planning laws. The problem of supply and demand can never be resolved until supply is liberalised. We have a huge, huge demand for housing and a gajillion builders / developers ready to build. The problem is that the state has decided to place very very severe restrictions on the supply. We need a 'brave' politician (in the Sir Humphrey sense) to make it very very much easier to obtain planning permission. This would of course collapse the value of land banks and housing. So bad for oldies and existing property owners but great for those who are currently excluded from the property ladder.
    I don't want any new housing built, no demand from me., I like my environment as it is. Disgraceful what the coalition has done with planning laws, surely driven by campaign contributions by developers.

    Prefer to see demand tackled by taxing away foreign investor demand and enforcing immigration laws. All those 'luxury' flats are driven by foreign investors not locals desiring modest houses.
    A Dacha in the Birch Forest, and the Steppe stretching into the distance is all rather beautiful. I can see why you want to keep it that way.

  • GadflyGadfly Posts: 1,191
    edited April 2015
    Financier said:

    Millsy said:

    Gadfly said:

    Telephone polls vs YouGov polls since 01 January 2015.

    Simple, Free Image and File Hosting at MediaFire

    Simple, Free Image and File Hosting at MediaFire

    Yeah the polls are anything but constant, it depends which polls you choose to believe
    @Gadfly

    Please could you insert a vertical line on the YG polls which shows the date of methodology change as this would be most helpful.
    No problem. Click to enlarge...

    Simple, Free Image and File Hosting at MediaFire
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,700
    Mr. Antifrank, not familiar with the advert, but some people will bitch about anything. Being offended is very fashionable.
  • Can someone tell me why on earth Miliband is courting Russell Brand?

    To get his endorsement.

    The Lab voters who have switched to the Greens might come back after that endorsement
    Really?/ He's even more of an idiot than I thought.
    Every vote counts.
  • FalseFlagFalseFlag Posts: 1,801
    edited April 2015
    rcs1000 said:

    FalseFlag said:

    Favellas and shanty towns are one solution.

    Clearly, allowing people to build property on land they own is going to create shanty towns and favellas.

    Obviously.
    Beds in sheds. Thankfully Slough council etc. acted in the public interest and cracked down on that trend, supposedly.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2052051/Suburban-slumdogs-Scores-desperate-migrants-crammed-shanty-town-sheds-garages-ruthless-landlords-No-Mumbai--London.html
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,700
    Mr. Eagles, God's a hypocrite. The burning bush clearly contributed to carbon emissions.
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118

    Can someone tell me why on earth Miliband is courting Russell Brand?

    Can only speak as I have found from people I know in here Essex...

    Girls swoon over him and think he is v clever
    Men think he is a total prick

    But he prob could help with the female lefty vote a la yesterday's thread
  • GDP numbers due in 31 minutes!
  • Mr. Eagles, God's a hypocrite. The burning bush clearly contributed to carbon emissions.

    You can bet some people blamed the Great Flood on global warming.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    BREAKING WIND NEWS **** BREAKING WIND NEWS **** BREAKING WIND NEWS ****

    The breaking news is that WIND is reporting to the JNN the contents of the latest ARSE with added APLOMB 2015 General Election and "JackW Dozen" Projections. (Changes From 25th April Projection) :

    Con 305 (+1) .. Lab 246 (-3) .. LibDem 30 (NC) .. SNP 42 (+2) .. PC 3 .. NI 18 .. UKIP 3 .. Respect 1 .. Green 1 .. Ind 0 .. Speaker 1

    Conservatives 21 seats short of a majority

    Turnout Projection .. 67.5% (NC)
    ......................................................................................

    "JackW Dozen" - 13 seats that will shape the General Election result :

    Bury North - Con Hold
    Pudsey - Likely Con Hold
    Broxtowe - Likely Lab Gain
    Warwickshire North - TCTC
    Cambridge - LibDem Hold
    Ipswich - Con Hold
    Watford - TCTC
    Croydon Central - Con Hold
    Enfield North - Likely Lab Gain
    Cornwall North - TCTC
    Great Yarmouth - Con Hold
    Vale of Glamorgan - Con Hold
    Ochil and South Perthshire - SNP Gain

    Changes From 25 Apr - No Change.

    TCTC - Too Close To Call - Less than 500 votes
    Likely Hold/Gain - 500 - 2500 votes
    Gain/Hold - Over 2500
    .......................................................................................

    ARSE is sponsored by Auchentennach Fine Pies (Est 1745)

    WIND - Whimsical Independent News Division
    JNN - Jacobite News Network
    ARSE - Anonymous Random Selection of Electors
    APLOMB - Auchentennach Pies Leading Outsales Mainland Britain
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    rcs1000 said:

    Allegedly, Victoria Ayling, asked the following question during a local debate:

    "What happens when the renewable energy runs out?"

    I forecast third last week. Glad to see Ashcroft is in line with that.

    On another point. As London becomes less English, I suspect that both European and non EU migrants are less obsessed with houses as opposed to apartments. There may not be the objection to building up that yhere once was, particularly if good quality. Not many keen gardners out there in the next generation either.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    JackW said:

    BREAKING WIND NEWS **** BREAKING WIND NEWS **** BREAKING WIND NEWS ****

    The breaking news is that WIND is reporting to the JNN the contents of the latest ARSE with added APLOMB 2015 General Election and "JackW Dozen" Projections. (Changes From 25th April Projection) :

    Con 305 (+1) .. Lab 246 (-3) .. LibDem 30 (NC) .. SNP 42 (+2) .. PC 3 .. NI 18 .. UKIP 3 .. Respect 1 .. Green 1 .. Ind 0 .. Speaker 1

    Conservatives 21 seats short of a majority

    EICWNBPM
  • SlackbladderSlackbladder Posts: 9,767
    philiph said:

    Can someone tell me why on earth Miliband is courting Russell Brand?

    Is that the 'I wouldn't vote Russell Brand?'

    I wonder if he will promote little Eddy Weddy and his little Bookie Wookie at the same time. I know I'm not in the target demographic, but the word tosser comes to mind. Apply as you see fit.

    Very few posters or stickers here in North Herts, the LibDem and Con ones normally on display are absent. The most obvious (and only one I remember seeing) is a Green Party banner, located in a very desirable mansion tax eligible location.
    The GE as a whole just seems very very low-key I feel. 5 years agao it was all Cleggasm and the debates, whereas this time.....
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 56,923
    FalseFlag said:

    rcs1000 said:

    FalseFlag said:

    Favellas and shanty towns are one solution.

    Clearly, allowing people to build property on land they own is going to create shanty towns and favellas.

    Obviously.
    Beds in sheds. Thankfully Slough council etc. acted in the public interest and cracked down on that trend, supposedly.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2052051/Suburban-slumdogs-Scores-desperate-migrants-crammed-shanty-town-sheds-garages-ruthless-landlords-No-Mumbai--London.html
    Willing buyer. Willing seller.

    But hey, you know best.
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,300
    Why is Ed Balls trending today?

  • nigel4englandnigel4england Posts: 4,800
    isam said:

    Can someone tell me why on earth Miliband is courting Russell Brand?

    Can only speak as I have found from people I know in here Essex...

    Girls swoon over him and think he is v clever
    Men think he is a total prick

    But he prob could help with the female lefty vote a la yesterday's thread
    My youngest worked with him on a film, she had never met him before and he insisted on a cup of tea and a chat before the scene was filmed. She said he was a total gentleman, she had been told by the make up girls to ignore all the stories about him as he is a nice bloke to work with, my daughter liked him as a person.

    Me, I think he's a total prick.
  • anotherDaveanotherDave Posts: 6,746
    USA - Hilary
    "...a disturbing pattern of foreign contributions and enormous speaking fees for Bill Clinton that appear to be timed to coincide with preferential actions the State Department took while Mrs. Clinton was secretary of state."

    Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/417519/are-democratic-insiders-starting-panic-about-hillary-john-fund
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548

    Mr. Eagles, God's a hypocrite. The burning bush clearly contributed to carbon emissions.

    Not sure about that. The bush burned but was not consumed, and was a renewable resource in the first place.

    @Jack

    That 7 from Shadsy on Lab under 250 is looking good...
  • FalseFlagFalseFlag Posts: 1,801
    edited April 2015
    Those hated Public green areas preserved for the enjoyment of the general populace are also fair game.
    http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/residents-anger-after-group-of-immigrants-build-filthy-shanty-town-in-north-london-park-9768850.html
    Progress.
  • richardDoddrichardDodd Posts: 5,472
    ....and where is Ed Balls ..seems to have vanished..
  • FinancierFinancier Posts: 3,916

    Can someone tell me why on earth Miliband is courting Russell Brand?

    He 'represents' the Yoof in EdM's mind, an area where Ed is completely out of his depth.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,700
    Mr. Foxinsox, perpetual burning = perpetual emissions!
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,344

    ....and where is Ed Balls ..seems to have vanished..

    As does Vince Cable!
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 42,753

    A key issue is the definition of affordable housing. In London, it often seems to mean "not quite as much as full market rate but loads more than most people can pay".

    It's a percentage of current market rates. So in, say, Bolton Gardens, it would be several million quid for a one-bed flat, while in Bolton, it would be a bit less.
  • FalseFlagFalseFlag Posts: 1,801

    USA - Hilary
    "...a disturbing pattern of foreign contributions and enormous speaking fees for Bill Clinton that appear to be timed to coincide with preferential actions the State Department took while Mrs. Clinton was secretary of state."

    Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/417519/are-democratic-insiders-starting-panic-about-hillary-john-fund

    Looks like Holder and Obama are making law and order an election issue, real vote loser for the Dems. It's like Dinkins but on a national scale.
  • SMukeshSMukesh Posts: 1,743
    Great Yarmouth doesn't look safe on those numbers.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787

    Mr. Eagles, God's a hypocrite. The burning bush clearly contributed to carbon emissions.

    @Jack

    That 7 from Shadsy on Lab under 250 is looking good...
    The margins are very tight for under 250, with numerous TCTC seats, but the value is there.

  • philiphphiliph Posts: 4,704

    philiph said:

    Can someone tell me why on earth Miliband is courting Russell Brand?

    Is that the 'I wouldn't vote Russell Brand?'

    I wonder if he will promote little Eddy Weddy and his little Bookie Wookie at the same time. I know I'm not in the target demographic, but the word tosser comes to mind. Apply as you see fit.

    Very few posters or stickers here in North Herts, the LibDem and Con ones normally on display are absent. The most obvious (and only one I remember seeing) is a Green Party banner, located in a very desirable mansion tax eligible location.
    The GE as a whole just seems very very low-key I feel. 5 years agao it was all Cleggasm and the debates, whereas this time.....
    Post election there will be an interesting debate to have over the role and effect of the debates in the 2010 and 2015 campaigns.

    I get the impression that some parties were assuming that the debates would be dominant as they were in 2010, and had an election plan based on that. The low key impact of the debates has thrown the plans of some into confusion. The LibDems in particular, I think fall into this category.

    I suspect the debates were never going to be as important as in 2010 because they were not 'New', we have had them before so the exciting lustre was already dimmed even if they had followed a similar format to 2010.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787

    ....and where is Ed Balls ..seems to have vanished..

    Hope over expectation I fear.

  • The big question now is will the SNP issue have the same impact as the Falklands crisis did which turned the votes to Margaret Thatcher and the conservatives enabling them to win the General Election
  • FinancierFinancier Posts: 3,916
    Was invited to a coming-of-age celebration (a lady had turned 40, so perhaps it was a commiseration) at a local hostelry last might.

    Among the ~60 people, there was a wide range of political loyalties and quite a lively discussion. Those in favour of wish-lists collapsed under the avalanche of "how will you do it/pay for it" questions, but the consensus of the vast majority was 'don't rock the boat' and 'steady as she goes'. Even non-supporters and critics thought the coalition had done a reasonable and fair job under the circumstances of a peacetime coalition and unforseen events.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,344
    edited April 2015
    FalseFlag said:

    Patrick said:

    antifrank said:

    Patrick said:

    Patrick said:

    DavidL said:

    Patrick said:

    Scott_P said:

    @toadmeister: If @Ed_Miliband really is seeking a celebrity endorsement from @RustyRockets, he must be absolutely desperate
    twitter.com/ElisaMisu/status/592795306225459203



    How can you say that? The next Labour government is going to preside over a new housing construction boom.

    Oh. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/constructionandproperty/11565524/Housebuilders-hit-by-Ed-Milibands-rent-control-plans.html
    Oh dear. Someone quipped over the weekend that there are two great ways to destroy a city - bombing and rent controls. Ed prefers the latter!

    [snipped for length]
    Short of sticking up skyscrapers in Hyde Park, how would that work in central London?

    One actual gorilla is subsidies for landlords, aka housing benefits.
    As Antifrank pointed out recently, London has 3 dimensions and we only really use two of them. For such a large city London has an amazingly low population density. If there is such huge demand for affordable flats in London then let's build upwards. We allow any number of huge skyscrpaers for business - just look at how the London skyline has changed in recent years. Allowing the same for residential property would be a sensible thing IMHO.
    As rcs1000 says, we are seeing more of this, though generally aimed at the affluent buyer. In the past, tower blocks have been associated with social problems. But as to population density, London already has the highest in Britain, and it would be higher still were it not for our parks.
    A visual representation of London's density of population (or lack):

    http://files.lsecities.net/files/2011/11/2011_chw_2050_01.gif
    That's a fscinating graphic! Thanks. Conforms just how relatively low rise London is. In fact the whole of the UK is still well over 90% green fields. Even outside the Green Belt. We do actually have alot of land to build on. We just choose not to.
    We like low rise and we like green fields.
    Wasn’t it quite common to rent up to WWII? Or even, since the middle classes did it, usual!

    Sorry ... made a bog of posting.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,209

    DavidL said:

    Pulpstar said:

    DavidL said:

    JackW said:

    DavidL said:

    AndyJS said:

    LDs upbeat about their chances in Scotland:

    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/apr/27/lib-dems-ramp-up-scottish-campaign-after-polling-data-boost

    "The private polling data and canvassing returns suggest the party is in the lead in several constituencies including East Dunbartonshire, being defended by Jo Swinson, and West Aberdeenshire and Kincardine, which is held by Sir Robert Smith.

    At least five more seats where the Lib Dems are fighting to overturn an SNP lead, including Edinburgh West, Argyll & Bute and Inverness, could be held because of an upsurge in tactical voting by pro-UK party supporters, the party believes.

    The Lib Dems also expect to hold Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross, which is the most northerly seat on the UK mainland and being defended by John Thurso, as well as Orkney and Shetland just to the north, one of the party’s safest, held by Alistair Carmichael, the Scotland secretary."

    Charlie looks terrible in that photograph. Its a real shame. The party admitting that he is in trouble in his seat doesn't exactly help either.

    Curious that Moore's seat does not seem to be one of those getting the additional resources. Maybe just didn't fit with the narrative to announce it.
    This Guardian piece is broadly in line with reports I'm receiving, albeit not quite so rosy for the yellow peril but certainly better than the raw Scottish polling would suggest.

    Moore's seat hasn't received extra resources because it was already in the top tier.

    I still think they will be left with no Scottish seats south of Inverness. I have been saying this for months and I have not seen anything in the polling indicating otherwise.
    @Dair of this parish did mention that he thought Thurso has the only genuine personal vote in Scottish politics so perhaps not out the question. I'll be very surprised to collect the slightly larger profit I have on the Lib Dems there, mind. Mike Crockhart of Edinburgh West is intriguingly poised on the models too, a touch of tactical voting could see him over the line.
    I think Thurso will hold on. And maybe Charlie although that seems less likely now. Carmichael is safe. After that I really struggle.
    If Carmichael does crawl from the wreckage, is he worth a punt at around 20/1 for next LibDem leader?
    God help them if that useless thick halfwitted buffoon is their only hope
  • Gadfly - Can I tweet your graphic please?
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,344
    Wasn’t it quite common to rent up to WWII? Or even, since the middle classes did it, usual!
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    I'm having an early lunch today and included in the small party is a source with knowledge of Watford constituency.

    I shall endeavour to pump the source for 100% proof information whilst pumping said source with sauce .... 13.5% proof.
  • Tony_MTony_M Posts: 70

    For the first time ever Dorset will have a top flight football team next year. How many of the proper counties on their proper boundaries have not had one? Cornwall, Shropshire, Worcestershire, Herefordshire, Cheshire, Huntingdonshire, Cambridgeshire and Somerset spring to mind (Devon if Plymouth have never made it). There must be a few others. Would Sunderland once have been in County Durham?

    None down here in Kent, Southam....
  • IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966
    rcs1000 said:

    FalseFlag said:

    rcs1000 said:

    FalseFlag said:

    Favellas and shanty towns are one solution.

    Clearly, allowing people to build property on land they own is going to create shanty towns and favellas.

    Obviously.
    Beds in sheds. Thankfully Slough council etc. acted in the public interest and cracked down on that trend, supposedly.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2052051/Suburban-slumdogs-Scores-desperate-migrants-crammed-shanty-town-sheds-garages-ruthless-landlords-No-Mumbai--London.html
    Willing buyer. Willing seller.

    But hey, you know best.
    The same would be true of a crack deal, not sure we should be supporting it though.
  • GadflyGadfly Posts: 1,191

    Gadfly - Can I tweet your graphic please?

    Of course!
  • Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,039
    JackW said:

    BREAKING WIND NEWS **** BREAKING WIND NEWS **** BREAKING WIND NEWS ****

    The breaking news is that WIND is reporting to the JNN the contents of the latest ARSE with added APLOMB 2015 General Election and "JackW Dozen" Projections. (Changes From 25th April Projection) :

    Con 305 (+1) .. Lab 246 (-3) .. LibDem 30 (NC) .. SNP 42 (+2) .. PC 3 .. NI 18 .. UKIP 3 .. Respect 1 .. Green 1 .. Ind 0 .. Speaker 1

    I see the ARSE is slowly converging on my competition predictions. Just shift a few of the yellow peril over to the yellower peril and you'll nearly be there, Jack.
  • Gadfly said:

    Gadfly - Can I tweet your graphic please?

    Of course!
    Thank you.
  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143
    dr_spyn said:

    Why is Ed Balls trending today?

    Ed Balls Day
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786
    antifrank said:

    Roger said:
    Bizarre. That's one of the rare occasions when using a scantily clad woman in an advert is entirely justifiable. Have we really reached the point when encouraging people to buy a product to be fitter is offensive?
    Disagree with you here. It's got nothing to do with encouraging fitness and everything to do with objectification and figure fascism. The company know this and are using the image specifically to provoke, and thereby garner publicity and sales.
    There is no reason or need to look like that, or look like the male version of the poster to go to the beach. You're beach ready when you put your trunks or bikini on, regardless of your shape.
    Still, long live the patriarchy and everything.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    Roger said:
    I find that advert very odd. I'm sure it's been photoshopped or something, but the expression on the model's face is just weird.
  • Patrick said:

    DavidL said:

    Patrick said:

    Scott_P said:

    @toadmeister: If @Ed_Miliband really is seeking a celebrity endorsement from @RustyRockets, he must be absolutely desperate
    twitter.com/ElisaMisu/status/592795306225459203

    What on earth can Miliband hope to gain from meeting a gimp like Russell Brand? I think I know. He's an utter loon - but a loon who's able to put his finger on something that detects quite well the various issues that get lefties wound up. Ed's general weakness is that he's very good at sensing where issues lie and what people worry about - just mindbogglingly shite at deciding what the right policy response should be. Brand will help him deepen his sensing strength - but also exacerbate his policy weakness.
    How can you say that? The next Labour government is going to preside over a new housing construction boom.

    Oh. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/constructionandproperty/11565524/Housebuilders-hit-by-Ed-Milibands-rent-control-plans.html
    Oh dear. Someone quipped over the weekend that there are two great ways to destroy a city - bombing and rent controls. Ed prefers the latter!

    Joking apart - the housing issue and the worries / problems of 'generation rent' are a very real issue that all parties shy away from. The 1000 pound throbbing gorilla in the corner is our insane planning laws. The problem of supply and demand can never be resolved until supply is liberalised. We have a huge, huge demand for housing and a gajillion builders / developers ready to build. The problem is that the state has decided to place very very severe restrictions on the supply. We need a 'brave' politician (in the Sir Humphrey sense) to make it very very much easier to obtain planning permission. This would of course collapse the value of land banks and housing. So bad for oldies and existing property owners but great for those who are currently excluded from the property ladder.
    UK planning regulations and consent procedures are based on an unstated assumption that the population is static or growing only slowly; therefore, there has always been room and a need to consider the impact of building before allowing housebuilders to just plough ahead.

    If you add 7 million to the population in 15 years then something's not fit for purpose, but it might not be your planning system, necessarily.

  • SlackbladderSlackbladder Posts: 9,767
    Tony_M said:

    For the first time ever Dorset will have a top flight football team next year. How many of the proper counties on their proper boundaries have not had one? Cornwall, Shropshire, Worcestershire, Herefordshire, Cheshire, Huntingdonshire, Cambridgeshire and Somerset spring to mind (Devon if Plymouth have never made it). There must be a few others. Would Sunderland once have been in County Durham?

    None down here in Kent, Southam....
    Gloucestershire, Sussex, Surrey?
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,344
    Tony_M said:

    For the first time ever Dorset will have a top flight football team next year. How many of the proper counties on their proper boundaries have not had one? Cornwall, Shropshire, Worcestershire, Herefordshire, Cheshire, Huntingdonshire, Cambridgeshire and Somerset spring to mind (Devon if Plymouth have never made it). There must be a few others. Would Sunderland once have been in County Durham?

    None down here in Kent, Southam....
    Charlton Athletic? On the old boundaries?

    Don’t think Surrey has either, although is Crystal Palace’s ground in what was once Surrey?
This discussion has been closed.