Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The latest state of play in the battle to become LAB leader
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The latest state of play in the battle to become LAB leader
Guido tally of MP declarations for LAB leadership now has Yvette ahead of Burnham
http://t.co/YUOSqBh0ux pic.twitter.com/hUbOBrfDHv
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Mind you I said the same about the Lab majority price a few months ago.
Burnham 2.12
Kendall 2.7
Cooper 7.2
Creagh 48
Matched: £333,861
https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/#/politics/market/1.103946886
Been away for 24 hrs so not read the comments, but looking back at the polls, what is remarkable is that Messina knew the polls were rubbish, Labour thought the Tories were screwed by the ground game (see IOS) but then we now know Labour were hiding the truth from their own supporters, whilst it would be fair to say that some .... cough cough) who had no access to polling data, knew deep down that something was very wrong.
How the hell did Labour and the Tories know what was what but the polling companies were reporting something completely different???
https://twitter.com/andrewpolitics/status/604029382915723264
"The other side of the story". The BBC trying to imply Douglas Carswell was "asking for it". He was clearly shaken up from the experience so to include him in the tweet is quite thoughtless.
Wasn't sure what to make of it at first but quite enjoying it now.
Old Bexley and Sidcup #2: Khan
Jowell 32
Khan 22
Lammy 8
Abbott 4
Thomas 1
Wolmar 2
Almost halfway stage.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-32919460
(according to the map!)
Great click bait headline or greatest click bait headline?
Or, to put it another way, the markets were over-confident that they had it right, and were underestimating the uncertainty. At least in the case of the GE there was polling evidence to support the market view. There's no such evidence (apart from one voodoo LabourList poll) in the Lab leader market.
That show 'Lie to Me' I just couldn't take seriously - it's all about a behavioural expert being able to pick up on verbal and visual cues that people cannot control to spot when they are lying...except it's a tv show, so obviously people can fake those cues (they zoom in on them and stuff), so mentally i cannot accept it.
2020 is shaping up to be a critically important election in the south west. Three different progressive parties will all be jockeying to become front runner on the left side of local politics. The Lib Dems have the history in the area but look shot. Labour have the national profile but locally have been disorganised for years. The Greens are the new kids on the block and have enthusiasm, a growing vote share but no track record.
UKIP's performance is an essential component also. If the None Of The Above vote deserts them, the Lib Dems and the Greens in particular will be hoping to profit. Equally, if UKIP prosper, the resolution of the battle on the left may be left in doubt for another five years.
I have no idea which of the three is likely to prevail. In the absence of incumbency to help them in sufficient seats, it's hard to see the Lib Dems pulling it off. Anyway, the Conservatives can reasonably hope that 2020 will deliver almost all of the seats in the south west to them again.
http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/s_to_u/sentencing_manual/death_by_dangerous_driving/
But if you mean why the guidelines are what they are... I'd agree it is rather low.
I'm sure someone else will understand the differences more than I, but naively I would have thought a conviction of manslaughter would be appropriate in a case like this, and I think manslaughter generally carries longer sentences than causing death by dangerous driving.
There are plenty of working class people in the West Country. A Kendallite party would win votes there, not at all sure that Burnham or Cooper would.
Although I'm not sure how that helps Labour any in the short or medium term at least. They only hold a few seats now, and won't even be in contention for most of the rest in the SW, and without any recent history in the area either, so what good does replacing the LDs as second place do them, other than the general help of cementing the end of the LDs as a force forever (rather than say 10-20 years) and so reducing the LD impact in more Lab friendly areas in a very loose sense by limiting their national impact?
If the LDs can manage to revive they definitely won't be siding with the Tories, and even now they seem to have the better chance down here (unlike most of England outside the cities, they actually held on to second in a fair few SW seats, even if they did drop to 3rd and 4th in plenty even down here), so it might be better for Lab if the LDs did recover in this region, as I cannot see them breaking through in any meaningful way.
If you don't agree you're racist.
'Liz Kendall is a leader that I and many Liberal Democrats could support' - Opinion piece from a Lib Dem voter.
Liz Kendall's mum was an LD Councillor. I suspect that on many policies Liz is closer to the LDs than she is to Unite. Liz is too ambitious to be a LibDem, which is surely part of how she came to bd Labour.
Good night all.
They lost the election because the young were too bored to vote and the old too scared of the SNP into voting Tory in droves.
Labour needs a leader that knows how to get rid of the SNP or at least ban the SNP from coalitions or propping governments for ransom.
If the SNP is removed as a threat either electorally or by law then the old will not be so scared into voting Tory the next time.
Basically the SNP is a type of militant tendency that needs to be confronted and thrown out.
I think the score so far is Ali 40-60, Blatter 150-170.
The African associations are solidly pro-Blatter and they have 56 out of the 209 associations in FIFA.
Goodnight.
At the end of the day, the money flowing into FIFA from sponsorship deals can very quickly be diverted into a replacement body set up by those who wish to promote football rather than their own interests. When key footballing nations walk away from Blatter and his cronies and set up New FIFA, will the money follow the key European and South American countries? Of course it will.
Blatter's days are numbered. It will be a matter of whether he spends some of those days awaiting trial...
It's almost as if they haven't had any SNP members before.... oh wait. Idiots.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/eureferendum/11636916/France-accuses-David-Cameron-of-trying-to-dismantle-European-Union.html Clearly some new usage of the word "fair" to which I hadn't previously been exposed.
Meanwhile I still think he should have got life. When people do that I see the car as a weapon, death is very likely and the weapon is no different to a gun or a knife. Sadly this scumbag with good behaviour could be out and carrying on with his life just in time to vote in person at the local polling station in the EU referendum.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-32925582
If Volker Trier was in the pay of Nigel Farage, he couldn't have come up with a more useful interview for Better off Out. What sort of idiot says that (1) a foreign country should not listen to its people and (2) that if it asks for something it should be ignored?
Friends in the Labour party I have spoken to are still largely in a state of shock from the catastrophe in Scotland and the GE generally. Even those active in the party admit they know very little about either Liz Kendall or Mary Creagh. Burnham is generally thought to be a bit dull and Cooper lacking in personality. None of those I have spoken to think any of the choices is going to help them much north of the border.
Liz Kendall is generating some good publicity and favourable comment but her main attraction is undoubtedly that she is something fresh and new. Whether that will be enough to overcome name recognition issues is harder to say. Given the nature of the electorate I think this is a very hard one to call and I would respect Henry's comments about Cooper's organisation.
Agree that the sentence is too lenient, but it's consistent with sentencing for fatal driving offences in general. There have been some cases recently involving cyclists.
I do though, agree with Mr OblitusSumMe; driving offences resulting in fatalities seem to attract disproportionatly low sentences
Let's look dispassionately at Scotland. The SNP may, or may not, sustain this level of performance, and they may, or may not, take Scotland independent. However, if they dip from this level - which seems likely, because no political party can sustain such hegemony indefinitely in a democratic system - it is, the way the system is set up, just as likely to benefit the Conservatives as Labour. Let's be generous and assume Labour take 10 seats in Scotland next time. On a uniform swing replicated across Scotland, which as we all know is such a good guide to elections(!) if Labour take 10 the Tories would take around 7 Scottish seats and the Liberal Democrats around 5. So that would leave Labour a whole three to the good ahead of their main rivals.
The next election will be won and lost in England. It will not be in London and the big conurbations, where Labour already have a strong presence and can't increase their number of seats by much more. It will not be in the south, where the Tories have strengthened their grip to an extent undreamed of since 1983. It will be therefore won and lost in the semi-rural Midlands and North, where people who do not have large incomes and have no innate hostility to the NHS but at the same time want to get on in life will be voting on the basis of the party best placed to run the economy - to secure their jobs/businesses.
Therefore, if Labour have any sense, they will pick somebody who can appeal to that group, who understands it and can talk to them (rather than at them, as Labour have been doing for 10 years).
Small problem - of the four candidates so far declared, not one of them is capable of doing so. Mary Creagh is an idiot. Yvette Cooper is patronising. Andrew Burnham is tainted (and not exactly inspiring even if he wasn't). Liz Kendall would be the closest thing Labour have to such a figure, but I simply don't think she carries the intellectual guns to face whichever leader the Tories select to replace Cameron.
So what's Labour's answer? They already seem to have decided it, unofficially - a caretaker for three years to sort out some of the damage done by Miliband's disorganization and complacency, then find a proper candidate when they know who the next PM will be.
Betting opportunities - Dan Jarvis still looks worth a shot to be Labour leader before the next election. The other to keep an eye on in case Labour go for a Howard-style coronation under this scenario might still be Jon Cruddas.
Then why did I get leaflets from the British government explaining why we were better together? Is it because they didn't explicitly say "Vote No"?
Since the economic arguments were pretty clear-cut anyway, except apparently to Alex Salmond, I think they could probably have got away with that one. The EU campaign would probably be similar in that respect, even without this clause.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3101508/It-ll-huge-Donald-Trump-reportedly-set-June-16-presidential-announcement-Trump-Tower-New-York-City.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m-vEDQRJRSA
It will never be a good election result, but if the republicans nominate him it will be a historic result.
Because they are lying cheating toerags.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/may/28/welsh-labour-identity-polls
Given that Leighton Andrews was forced to resign for abuse of power, then had to be brought back because all other senior Labour figures were abusing their power even more (google Alun Davies farm payments to see what I mean) and he is personally responsible for the disastrous collapse of the WElsh HE sector, the fact he is now promoting his model as one for the UK Labour party to follow means we should be very glad that Labour lost!
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2002_Winter_Olympic_bid_scandal
http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/business-32925350
That Andrew Sinclair tweet is a disgrace. It reminds me of when Sky's Tom Parmenter[sp] 'interviewed' three looters the day after they were robbing shops in London.
And his self-righteous 'it's freedom of speech': freedom of speech doesn't include the right to violently attack someone and then get a lovely interview on the state broadcaster.
A blanket refusal to negotiate terms with a partner who wants to amend a contractual relationship is a very very high risk strategy.
It gives him time to finish his contract in New York, re-enter the Commons without undue haste and perhaps even do a loyal stint in the Shadow Cabinet before being prevailed upon to take over the leadership "for the good of the Party".
Whether it could ever pan out as smoothly as his supporters would hope is open to question, but it's the only reason that makes sense to me for electing an interim leader now, rather than simply choosing their best candidate for 2020 straight away.
By opposing renegotiation, he is arguing that the remainder of the EU can remain on current terms (which are really good for German industry). Britain should be voting on current terms, which is much in agreement with what the BOOers say.
They must have been disappointed that 45% of voters were also immune to the strength of their overstated arguments.
Fortunately, Angela Merkel is not likely to be so foolish as to reject such ideas out of hand. But it does rather sum up the difficulty Britain and the EU have relating to each other - Europe simply doesn't get that by virtue of being an island, we have had a different pattern of development and therefore a different outlook from them. As a result, they seem to often resort to childish abuse more appropriate to a jilted boyfriend than reasoned discussion between equal partners.