Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The most important result on May 7th
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The most important result on May 7th
Whilst it might be accurate to say every constituency result on May the 7th was important, the result in Rochester & Strood might be the one that has most impact in this parliament. Anything that helps, to borrow LBJ’s maxim, about keeping the Eurosceptics inside the tent pissing out, rather than outside pissing in, is good for the Tories, Cameron and the continued life of this …
0
Comments
Edit: I think you are overthinking it somewhat. And it's not as if Reckless has been absent from the airwaves since he lost.
The most important result on May 7th - Amusingly entertaining yes. Important? not so much.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10590725
Why is it that he gets on so well with Nigel?
Perhaps it was just a factor of a much higher turnout in GE2015 over the by-election?
The crunch point will come when Cameron announces that his deal is sufficient and that the Government and Conservative party are going to campaign for In. For a section of the party this will be seen as some sort of betrayal and a failure to put the country first. Keeping them in the tent at that point will be a real challenge.
The failure of UKIP to become a Westminster force will of course help as will the continuing incoherence in the leadership and the obvious tension between their one MP and Farage. Coming under his banner is looking very unattractive at the moment. But this is not rational. It is viscerally emotional and to do with their perception of their identity and nationality. It will be a difficult and dangerous time requiring more tact from Cameron than he generally showed in dealing with his back benchers in the last Parliament.
Balls, for all his faults, has an intellectual coherence and heft that is very obviously absent amongst the current contenders. Even him being in the Commons would probably have undermined Yvette's campaign as she would be seen to be under his shadow. The loss of that single seat has changed the history and direction of travel in the Labour party. Whether that is for good or ill only time will tell.
but ....
It could swing the other way. If would-be defectors think joining UKIP is a daft idea, the next drastic action they might try is to bring down Cameron [depending how things go].
Indeed, it was Labour’s Portillo moment, perhaps even more so. A single result that perfectly encapsulated the devastating performance of Ed’s party at GE2015. - Tweedle dee lost his Tweedle dum that night, the second biggest media face of Labour and a shadow chancellor no less.
A dreadful blow to moral IMHO.
I think this kind of report demonstrates how difficult Cameron's path is. There is a lot wrong with the EU, not just a small amount. Changing it will be very difficult, especially when the EZ is so distracted with Greece. Although there are numerous advantages to staying in there are numerous disadvantages too which this report highlights in a measured way.
As I have said before I am not one of those who feels this at an identity level. In my judgement I will remain British whether we are in the EU or not. But it is a finely balanced equation. It really would not take much for the referendum to get a lot closer than it looks at the moment. Cameron being obviously rebuffed on some area of reform will change the mood music. Certainly, if they pay any attention to the weight of their contributors below the line, the Telegraph is likely to argue for out.
Who would join UKIP knowing their fate would be to either lose their seat or be treated in such a way? The only people who might consider it are those who are planning to stand down in 2020 anyway.
Prior to the by election Lord A conducted a poll that found Reckless winning the by election but losing the seat at the general election to the fragrant Ms Tolhurst.
It is home to the world's smallest flightless bird, the Inaccessible Island rail. And several million seabirds.
I'm not sure two years would be long enough....
"That's a bit of revisionist history there."
I can only speak for myself. I could have lived with a Labour government but the prospect of a zombie Labour administration controlled from Scotland did worry me more.
But I could vote Ukip secure in the knowledge that it would make no difference overall.
There's a hill on the island named after the school. Mind you, there's also one called where-the-pig-fell-off.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/633016?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents
He is the Viz character Spoilt Bastard made flesh.
*sighs*
But everyone on here should know by now that I hold more respect and fondness for Farage than I do Apple.
It is truly a terrible company.
1. What is a British business?
2. What does directly export mean?
3. What percentage of British businesses export to anywhere?
4. How big - in terms of employment and tax payments - are the companies that do directly export to the EU?
5. How many companies export indirectly to the EU by, for example, supplying other companies that do export directly?
6. How many foreign companies export directly to the EU from the UK?
7. How many companies from other EU member states invest in, pay tax in and employ people in the UK?
And so on.
I have no idea about the answers, but that 5% figure looks very suspicious to me and gives every impression of being highly partial. Those of us who have no strong leaning either way on In or Out will need to keep our wits about us as both sides hurl highly questionable figures at us over the coming months.
Nevertheless, I did think that it demonstrated that when "business" says it is in favour of being in the EU it means almost exclusively big business for whom the burden of regulation is manageable and indeed a benefit because it means they only have one set of regulations, no matter how cumbersome, across a far wider spectrum of their business.
In the notes (guidelines which come with the tax return) it says:
"If you received... income from from a deceased's estate... you must fill in a full tax return".
Although, now I read it back, that *might* be read as some sort of ongoing income, like rent from property, rather than a one-off sum.
Whilst not quite living up to its Enid Blyton-esque name, Inaccessible Island is pretty damn impenetrable. There is a stony beach, beyond which is an almost solid wall of flax plants. Thankfully, the Inaccessible Island rail runs around the base of the these plants and can be seen, with some patience. That it looks like a cat-produced fur-ball with a bill is beside the point. It is one of the most difficult birds in the world to see. Just purely down to logisitcs.
To get to Inaccesible Island, you first need to collect your guide from Tristan da Cunha. Landing - even in small boats - is a challenge, the combination of winds and tides into the small harbour meaning at least a third of ships never manage to get ashore on Tristan in their allotted 3 days. That you are pretty much equidistant between South America and Africa mean not many people can be arsed to make a second attempt....
It's a great way to win over undecideds and swing voters in general. To proudly proclaim that if you have ever voted Tory, you are essentially vile and fundamentally disgusting.
I thought maybe no-one else might have pointed this out, that while your core tribal vote will love it, to everyone else its a big FU. But, a quick google search. I wonder if they went canvassing in them.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/may/10/kissed-shy-tory-polls-labour-left-stop-demonising
My own damned fault, although I maintain that it's poorly worded.
All I need to worry about now is that when I came online to find out more the computer took a bloody age to wake up. And the supreme futility of human endeavour. But at least the tax return nonsense is sorted.
I expect a slow but steady increase in Labour voters for a while because ...
(1) No one could be as bad as Ed. If they elect Liz Kendall (they won't), that increase will be larger. Only if Corbyn gets in will they go down.
(2) Honeymoons always wear off.
(3) They will garner a lot of IN votes while it's in the news.
(4) Austerity is never popular.
(5) The succession to Cameron may not be smooth.
But don't worry, Mr Eagles, I'm usually wrong. However, I think Farage is getting too big for his boots - so perhaps I'm wrong there too.
In the five hours you are passed around from one person who doesn't know the answer to a basic question to another such person, maybe you could engage them in the topic of "what do YOU define as "help"......"
That being said, anyone who thinks that sales of good and services to the EU would be somehow destroyed by leaving the EU is clearly living in cloud cuckoo land. We would almost certainly enter into a free trade agreement with the EU after leaving, although the exact nature of this would need to be negotiated.
I am involved in five businesses. Three would be largely unaffected by leaving the EU (from a trade perspective): one is basically domestic only, while two are business-to-business companies, who sell internationally, and whether they are selling to the US or Italy is largely irrelevent. One would benefit - largely from the resolution of VAT-mess - although the actual impact would be quite minor. One would lose quite significantly, because we would no longer be a part of the single EU financial services passport.
The original owner must live for 7 years after giving the gift. If they don’t their estate or the person who received it will have to pay Inheritance Tax on it.
The amount due is reduced on a sliding scale if the gift was given away between 3 and 7 years before the person died.
When the person who received the gift pays Inheritance Tax
Anyone who received a gift from the deceased in the 7 years before they died may have to pay Inheritance Tax if the deceased gave away gifts worth more than £325,000 in that time.
HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) will tell the person that received the gift if they have to pay Inheritance Tax.
https://www.gov.uk/inheritance-tax/gifts#1
A bigger disincentive to potential Conservative defections is Nigel Farage's ridiculous unresignation. UKIP seemed like they were on the cusp of becoming a proper political party, with a new generation of more serious politicians waiting in the wings. Unfortunately for them, Farage has put his own personal ambition above the interest of the party, and the party looks like it will be his personal fiefdom for a long time. I think UKIP will probably continue to climb in the polls, but they've put off a lot of more middle income sympathisers. Judging by recent polling numbers on Brexit, it is also harming the eurosceptic cause.
http://newstonoone.blogspot.co.uk/2015/06/the-long-view-comparing-1992-and-2015.html
Everything about this so called debate is sound and fury signalling nothing. Except that is that Farage and his cronies want to keep their nice little earner going strong. In so doing he has gone as bonkers as Brown.
Seriously, though, it's very useful knowing that a straight answer can be had here.
Speaking of which, my post-race analysis is up here:
http://enormo-haddock.blogspot.co.uk/2015/06/austria-post-race-analysis.html
And my PS4 Witcher 3 review is here:
http://thaddeusthesixth.blogspot.co.uk/2015/06/review-witcher-3-ps4.html
As so often, in politics, your strengths are your weaknesses and vice versa. Population shifts from Labour to Conservative areas have worked against the Conservatives in the past, by improving the efficiency of the Labour vote. But, now they're working in favour of the Conservatives by creating new constituencies.
There are huge differences in both cost and the amount of legislation we have to abide by. I know you hate it being pointed out but I will continue to do so every time you write this garbage.
Agree Agent Carswell is likely to leave UKIP, and will presumably then sit as an independent. It would rather blow the gaff if the Tories let him back in.
That Cameron - he's a piece of work. Destroys the LDs, destroys UKIP, may well destroy Labour.
EdStone, Milifandom, starring Russell Brand, Alan Partridge, the Hobbit, title song sung by Charlotte Church.
It's projecting as just one big, student union, comedy protest gig populated by loaded luvvies.
They really are in a terrible, terrible mess.
Wales could lose up to 10 seats on this boundary change which would affect Labour's Valley's stronghold.
As some parts of larger cities regenerate - will there be more opportunities for the Cons - at the same time as some of the better off also go to the suburbs. So could there be some Cons inner and outer parts with a more Labour ring in the poorer and ethnic areas?
Also do you think that the business ethnics will be more Cons supporting whilst the Muslims will follow Labour?
Whether Reckless got elected or not was pretty much immaterial. What Tory MPs would have been looking at was how much of a threat UKIP was in their own seats and how much pressure therefore they would have to put on their own party leadership to be more aggressive in their dealings with the EU over renegotiation.
On this score UKIP failed utterly. By failing to take a single seat from the Tories - irrespective of the fate of Reckless - they showed Tory MPs that they can simply ignore the threat from UKIP as a factor in their decision making process about how much to pressurise Cameron over the renegotiation.
Obviously there are still plenty of Tory MPs who thankfully are willing to stand up and be counted on principle as Eurosceptics but those who were only ever 'soft sceptics' and were only really concerned about their own survival at elections can look at and disregard the UKIP threat as it stands.
That is where UKIP failed and that is why, to be honest, they serve no further purpose in their current incarnation.
I know Rochester very well and Reckless was by all accounts a very good MP. I can only surmise that those claiming otherwise are doing it for political reasons. Whether Tolhurst is better or worse remains to be seen.
Not a v common issue.
So in the field of so-called celebrity, some protesters are less equal than others!!"