Jacqui Smith on Sky News paper review: ludicrous for Cameron to have EU referendum in the first place.
You see, this is where I credit Cameron.
Labour would *never* in a million years have allowed a referendum, or even thought about trusting the people, as is perfectly clear from comments from some of the leading politicians of the New Labour years, and their cheerleaders in the media. Some of whom have even suggested blithely "ignoring" a Leave result.
For all his faults, and he has made me furious during this campaign, Cameron made the pledge and is delivering on the pledge*.
(I'll be generous and gloss over, for now, the other EU pledges in the past he hasn't managed to keep, and how he's trying to ensure the deck is well-stacked this time)
Didn't Cameron make the referendum pledge, when he and everyone else thought that Labour would win the GE last year, and so never expected to be PM?
He made the pledge to get him through a difficult political moment when the Tory right had him over a barrel. Without that there'd be no referendum now. Within Labour the same dynamics don't exist so it's not something a Labour leader would ever be forced into doing.
That's right. It's pure good fortune that we are having this vote. The circumstances under which it would be repeated any time soon are hard to envisage.
Judging by this week's polling, it seems that Obama's visit was not necessarily to Remain's advantage.
It does seem to have pushed the economic case Remain's way even further. If that ends up being the determining issue, then Obama will have helped, even if the polls don't reflect it now.
The back of the queue comment was a mistake. Even some remainers I (still) speak to were offended.
I find it hilarious and depressing that the idea that Leave might be good for the NHS seems to be driving some of the movement. As a claim it is every bit as ridiculous as Osborne's £4,300 and, it appears, every bit as brilliant politics.
Do we just not do serious politics in this country any more? How daft can we go? The race to the bottom is accelerating.
Just to follow up on PtP's comment again, the site has been dominated by the referendum recently, which as the major domestic political event in non-metropolitan England at the moment isn't surprising. It has consequences well beyond June.
But it has crowded out the abundance of other markets to some extent. Not only the US presidential but the coverage given the Scottish election, compared to that given in 2011, is much less. That's unsurprising: there was less going on in 2011 (though we did have a referendum then too).
The thing is, the referendum discussion rarely touches on betting at all.
Which is why I suggested articles dissecting the weightings and samples of polls....
The back of the queue comment was a mistake. Even some remainers I (still) speak to were offended.
I find it hilarious and depressing that the idea that Leave might be good for the NHS seems to be driving some of the movement. As a claim it is every bit as ridiculous as Osborne's £4,300 and, it appears, every bit as brilliant politics.
Do we just not do serious politics in this country any more? How daft can we go? The race to the bottom is accelerating.
You have a point I'm afraid. I had hoped that after the global financial crisis we might get back to more serious politics, away from the extreme spin and vacuousness of the Blair years.
But it seems not.
A key problem, though, is that it is not just the political parties who are doing the spinning and slanting now. We even have supposedly dry and dusty research institutes engaging in it e.g. the OECD yesterday. The culture of spin has become all-pervading.
The back of the queue comment was a mistake. Even some remainers I (still) speak to were offended.
I find it hilarious and depressing that the idea that Leave might be good for the NHS seems to be driving some of the movement. As a claim it is every bit as ridiculous as Osborne's £4,300 and, it appears, every bit as brilliant politics.
Do we just not do serious politics in this country any more? How daft can we go? The race to the bottom is accelerating.
Labour voters are not going to buy the idea the Tory right wants to quit the EU so more can be spent on the NHS. It's simply not credible.
The back of the queue comment was a mistake. Even some remainers I (still) speak to were offended.
I find it hilarious and depressing that the idea that Leave might be good for the NHS seems to be driving some of the movement. As a claim it is every bit as ridiculous as Osborne's £4,300 and, it appears, every bit as brilliant politics.
Do we just not do serious politics in this country any more? How daft can we go? The race to the bottom is accelerating.
Without it, I think that Obama's visit would have been positive for Remain. It sounded like a threat.
I'm a bit mystified by the NHS thing. I can't see Brexit having any impact, one way or the other, on the NHS.
Jacqui Smith on Sky News paper review: ludicrous for Cameron to have EU referendum in the first place.
You see, this is where I credit Cameron.
Labour would *never* in a million years have allowed a referendum, or even thought about trusting the people, as is perfectly clear from comments from some of the leading politicians of the New Labour years, and their cheerleaders in the media. Some of whom have even suggested blithely "ignoring" a Leave result.
For all his faults, and he has made me furious during this campaign, Cameron made the pledge and is delivering on the pledge*.
(I'll be generous and gloss over, for now, the other EU pledges in the past he hasn't managed to keep, and how he's trying to ensure the deck is well-stacked this time)
Didn't Cameron make the referendum pledge, when he and everyone else thought that Labour would win the GE last year, and so never expected to be PM?
No, up until May last year he was still angling for a second coalition with the Lib Dems. He expected 20-30 LDs left rather than eight. The pledge was certainly made in part to kick the can down the road in the last parliament but was made in good faith all the same.
Worth noting that the LDs offered an In/Out referendum in 2005 on the Constitution, so would have found the concept difficult to reject
I think the key thing conceded on an EU referendum during a second coalition would have been for EU citizens resident here to also have the vote.
Perversely it might have helped Cameron a little bit, albeit virtually guaranteeing a Remain victory, because he could campaign a bit more softly for Remain, triangulating himself between Clegg and the Leavers within his own party.
Just to follow up on PtP's comment again, the site has been dominated by the referendum recently, which as the major domestic political event in non-metropolitan England at the moment isn't surprising. It has consequences well beyond June.
But it has crowded out the abundance of other markets to some extent. Not only the US presidential but the coverage given the Scottish election, compared to that given in 2011, is much less. That's unsurprising: there was less going on in 2011 (though we did have a referendum then too).
The thing is, the referendum discussion rarely touches on betting at all.
Which is why I suggested articles dissecting the weightings and samples of polls....
That would be good. For a start a lot of polling uses data about how the person says they voted last time/did they vote etc. Obviously we can't have that in this case.
Other than, "in 1975, when this issue was last subject to a vote, did you vote?" - No, I wasn't born mate :-)
I'm assuming they are looking at how the person says they voted in 2015.
The back of the queue comment was a mistake. Even some remainers I (still) speak to were offended.
I find it hilarious and depressing that the idea that Leave might be good for the NHS seems to be driving some of the movement. As a claim it is every bit as ridiculous as Osborne's £4,300 and, it appears, every bit as brilliant politics.
Do we just not do serious politics in this country any more? How daft can we go? The race to the bottom is accelerating.
Hard to disagree with that. All of the arguments to Leave "Save the NHS" must be one of the weakest.
But it's probably smart politics: there is a referendum to win.
The back of the queue comment was a mistake. Even some remainers I (still) speak to were offended.
I find it hilarious and depressing that the idea that Leave might be good for the NHS seems to be driving some of the movement. As a claim it is every bit as ridiculous as Osborne's £4,300 and, it appears, every bit as brilliant politics.
Do we just not do serious politics in this country any more? How daft can we go? The race to the bottom is accelerating.
Without it, I think that Obama's visit would have been positive for Remain. It sounded like a threat.
I'm a bit mystified by the NHS thing. I can't see Brexit having any impact, one way or the other, on the NHS.
The really big betting opportunity over recent weeks, largely missed or seemingly ignored, not least by the clever PB thread writers has been the extraordinary movement in Donald Trump's odds against him becoming the the GOP nominee for POTUS. Just a few short weeks ago these odds on Betfair were around 1.25 (i.e. 1/4 in old money), then two weeks ago the odds lengthened to around 2.0 (i.e. evens), only to shorten back to 1.25 again over the past few days. So two really big opportunities to have made money on the betting exchange over the course of the past 2 - 3 weeks, which frankly was not really identified and majored upon by PB.com, despite now looking so blindingly obvious with the benefit of that wonderful thing known as hindsight.
Speaking of which, I wonder whether we'll ever see Trump's outright POTUS odds back at the 6.2/6.4 level with Betfair as highlighted by Pulpstar a couple of days ago, which have since shortened to 5.4/5.5 in what was already then and now ever more of a two horse race.
That's very true. There were some useful BTL posts (particularly in the first phase) that I remember but it's not something the site highlighted.
But even after it has become obvious that Trump is all but home and dry we have seen odds as high as 1.3. Which is surely great value. I would think Trump is more certain to be the Gop nominee than Sadiq khan of London. When Leicester City win the premiership maybe some value punters will have more funds to take advantage.
The back of the queue comment was a mistake. Even some remainers I (still) speak to were offended.
I find it hilarious and depressing that the idea that Leave might be good for the NHS seems to be driving some of the movement. As a claim it is every bit as ridiculous as Osborne's £4,300 and, it appears, every bit as brilliant politics.
Do we just not do serious politics in this country any more? How daft can we go? The race to the bottom is accelerating.
Without it, I think that Obama's visit would have been positive for Remain. It sounded like a threat.
I'm a bit mystified by the NHS thing. I can't see Brexit having any impact, one way or the other, on the NHS.
Strangely, Leave now have a lead on "public services".
The back of the queue comment was a mistake. Even some remainers I (still) speak to were offended.
I find it hilarious and depressing that the idea that Leave might be good for the NHS seems to be driving some of the movement. As a claim it is every bit as ridiculous as Osborne's £4,300 and, it appears, every bit as brilliant politics.
Do we just not do serious politics in this country any more? How daft can we go? The race to the bottom is accelerating.
Without it, I think that Obama's visit would have been positive for Remain. It sounded like a threat.
I'm a bit mystified by the NHS thing. I can't see Brexit having any impact, one way or the other, on the NHS.
I guess the NHS thing is related to immigration.
Leave have been campaigning on the message that the mythical £350m a day sent to EU could be spent on the NHS instead. Redwood has done an article with a list of public works etc that could be funded. It's good messaging IMHO for Leave and I expect more on this.
The back of the queue comment was a mistake. Even some remainers I (still) speak to were offended.
I find it hilarious and depressing that the idea that Leave might be good for the NHS seems to be driving some of the movement. As a claim it is every bit as ridiculous as Osborne's £4,300 and, it appears, every bit as brilliant politics.
Do we just not do serious politics in this country any more? How daft can we go? The race to the bottom is accelerating.
Without it, I think that Obama's visit would have been positive for Remain. It sounded like a threat.
I'm a bit mystified by the NHS thing. I can't see Brexit having any impact, one way or the other, on the NHS.
I suspect its personal experience of sitting in GP's waiting rooms or in A&E listening to people speaking foreign languages or struggling to explain at reception (or having a translator with them) what they want.
Its probably a common experience now in working class areas.
The back of the queue comment was a mistake. Even some remainers I (still) speak to were offended.
I find it hilarious and depressing that the idea that Leave might be good for the NHS seems to be driving some of the movement. As a claim it is every bit as ridiculous as Osborne's £4,300 and, it appears, every bit as brilliant politics.
Do we just not do serious politics in this country any more? How daft can we go? The race to the bottom is accelerating.
Without it, I think that Obama's visit would have been positive for Remain. It sounded like a threat.
I'm a bit mystified by the NHS thing. I can't see Brexit having any impact, one way or the other, on the NHS.
I guess the NHS thing is related to immigration.
Leave have been campaigning on the message that the mythical £350m a day sent to EU could be spent on the NHS instead. Redwood has done an article with a list of public works etc that could be funded. It's good messaging IMHO for Leave and I expect more on this.
Well I just wish they'd bring it down to £175m a day - that is justifiable - and it means one hospital every two weeks instead of one a week.
The back of the queue comment was a mistake. Even some remainers I (still) speak to were offended.
I find it hilarious and depressing that the idea that Leave might be good for the NHS seems to be driving some of the movement. As a claim it is every bit as ridiculous as Osborne's £4,300 and, it appears, every bit as brilliant politics.
Do we just not do serious politics in this country any more? How daft can we go? The race to the bottom is accelerating.
I think a combination of TTIP [red herring or not], fewer immigrants taking up capacity and those wavering but attracted to more investment in the NHS are the main group. Leave have taken the national religion and dangled £350m a week in front of the voters. A significant number are taking it with a pince of salt, but still think at least some of it will be allocated.
The back of the queue comment was a mistake. Even some remainers I (still) speak to were offended.
I find it hilarious and depressing that the idea that Leave might be good for the NHS seems to be driving some of the movement. As a claim it is every bit as ridiculous as Osborne's £4,300 and, it appears, every bit as brilliant politics.
Do we just not do serious politics in this country any more? How daft can we go? The race to the bottom is accelerating.
Without it, I think that Obama's visit would have been positive for Remain. It sounded like a threat.
I'm a bit mystified by the NHS thing. I can't see Brexit having any impact, one way or the other, on the NHS.
Strangely, Leave now have a lead on "public services".
The NHS belongs to the valiant staff who work in it as we are constantly reminded by the "save our NHS chants" on the BBC in support of their right to watch football on Saturdays.
The back of the queue comment was a mistake. Even some remainers I (still) speak to were offended.
I find it hilarious and depressing that the idea that Leave might be good for the NHS seems to be driving some of the movement. As a claim it is every bit as ridiculous as Osborne's £4,300 and, it appears, every bit as brilliant politics.
Do we just not do serious politics in this country any more? How daft can we go? The race to the bottom is accelerating.
Labour voters are not going to buy the idea the Tory right wants to quit the EU so more can be spent on the NHS. It's simply not credible.
They don't have to.
All they need it to buy is the idea that will be more money available to spend on the NHS if its wanted.
Next time there's a Labour government the money can then be spent.
The back of the queue comment was a mistake. Even some remainers I (still) speak to were offended.
I find it hilarious and depressing that the idea that Leave might be good for the NHS seems to be driving some of the movement. As a claim it is every bit as ridiculous as Osborne's £4,300 and, it appears, every bit as brilliant politics.
Do we just not do serious politics in this country any more? How daft can we go? The race to the bottom is accelerating.
Without it, I think that Obama's visit would have been positive for Remain. It sounded like a threat.
I'm a bit mystified by the NHS thing. I can't see Brexit having any impact, one way or the other, on the NHS.
I guess the NHS thing is related to immigration.
Leave have been campaigning on the message that the mythical £350m a day sent to EU could be spent on the NHS instead. Redwood has done an article with a list of public works etc that could be funded. It's good messaging IMHO for Leave and I expect more on this.
I'm doubtful that an essentially right-wing campaign will be listened to on that, which is why I suspect it's more to do with the idea that immigrants put too much pressure on the service.
The back of the queue comment was a mistake. Even some remainers I (still) speak to were offended.
I find it hilarious and depressing that the idea that Leave might be good for the NHS seems to be driving some of the movement. As a claim it is every bit as ridiculous as Osborne's £4,300 and, it appears, every bit as brilliant politics.
Do we just not do serious politics in this country any more? How daft can we go? The race to the bottom is accelerating.
Hard to disagree with that. All of the arguments to Leave "Save the NHS" must be one of the weakest.
But it's probably smart politics: there is a referendum to win.
It's got shades of the urgh part of the No2AV campaign that involved spending less money on baby incubators. That was shameless, but apparently worked. IIRC that was a Dan Hodges idea.
The back of the queue comment was a mistake. Even some remainers I (still) speak to were offended.
I find it hilarious and depressing that the idea that Leave might be good for the NHS seems to be driving some of the movement. As a claim it is every bit as ridiculous as Osborne's £4,300 and, it appears, every bit as brilliant politics.
Do we just not do serious politics in this country any more? How daft can we go? The race to the bottom is accelerating.
Without it, I think that Obama's visit would have been positive for Remain. It sounded like a threat.
I'm a bit mystified by the NHS thing. I can't see Brexit having any impact, one way or the other, on the NHS.
I guess the NHS thing is related to immigration.
Leave have been campaigning on the message that the mythical £350m a day sent to EU could be spent on the NHS instead. Redwood has done an article with a list of public works etc that could be funded. It's good messaging IMHO for Leave and I expect more on this.
It would be good messaging - but it's also total and utter nonsense. On leaving the EU there would be a negotiation over which elements of the projects we all use day to day we would continue to fund, from intelligence through to the Single European Sky, Erasmus, Horizon2020 - there are literally hundreds of these. Then you have to take over the functions that we outsourced to the EU, and there is going to regional development funding to replace, and CAP replacement.
So the £350M that's really only half that when you look at the rebate, will end up not being much of a saving at all.
I'm not a great fan of thread commentary about the site rather than about actual politics, but since some are complaining, here's my take:
1) I try to write about what's current. Every thread this year has been dominated below the line by discussion of the referendum. The number of referendum threads I and others write reflects that.
2) I don't write about subjects about which I have no particular insight to make. While I follow the US elections with interest and do bet on them, I have no confidence that I understand the dynamics that shift the relevant electorates. So I'm not going to put up betting tips that are the equivalent of throwing darts at a board. This cycle I have been repeatedly perplexed, particularly by the Republican race. First, I couldn't understand why Donald Trump was being taken remotely seriously, so I bet against him. Then once the primaries started, I couldn't understand the price on Marco Rubio going so short, so I bet against him. Then I couldn't understand why the delegates that Donald Trump was piling up weren't (and aren't) being properly reflected in the prices, so I bet on him. Overall, I've done very nicely this cycle so far - two out of three ain't bad, as Meatloaf sang - but I'm not going to tip things when I don't understand them.
3) @Wanderer's point that few of the referendum threads are betting-related is very fair. That's largely because the markets have been so static. Each of us have a view of the underlying probabilities and I doubt many posters will change their view based on my analysis of them, so a thread on that would not be all that useful. For full disclosure I'm currently a buyer on SPIN of turnout, I've backed the 60-65% band for Remain at 8.2 and my open position on the main event at present is a buy of Leave at 3.7.
4) I'm not going to change my view of the dynamics of the referendum because some bedwetting Leavers feel, like the current generation of students, that they need a safe space. If they are triggered by what I write, I suggest they get therapy. I always seek to include either advice to one side or the other (preferably both) or to give my assessment, with supporting facts and argument, of the implications for the referendum of specific aspects or developments.
5) One of the oddest criticisms is that I write the same piece every time. I have written a lot about the referendum but I have consciously varied the aspects I write about. I've reached the conclusion, sadly, that it's not repetitiousness that such posters dislike but the fact that I never pander to their hopes.
As someone once said, "opinions are like arseholes, everyone has one and everyone thinks everyone else's stinks". So with that in mind I intend to carry on forming opinions from facts rather than the other way around. I'm entirely happy when others do the same and reach different conclusions.
The back of the queue comment was a mistake. Even some remainers I (still) speak to were offended.
I find it hilarious and depressing that the idea that Leave might be good for the NHS seems to be driving some of the movement. As a claim it is every bit as ridiculous as Osborne's £4,300 and, it appears, every bit as brilliant politics.
Do we just not do serious politics in this country any more? How daft can we go? The race to the bottom is accelerating.
Without it, I think that Obama's visit would have been positive for Remain. It sounded like a threat.
I'm a bit mystified by the NHS thing. I can't see Brexit having any impact, one way or the other, on the NHS.
I suspect its personal experience of sitting in GP's waiting rooms or in A&E listening to people speaking foreign languages or struggling to explain at reception (or having a translator with them) what they want.
Its probably a common experience now in working class areas.
Good to see, but so weak. This really is a poor administration.
Actually, it's worse than that. It's a dishonest administration - and that is truly one of the most unforgivable aspects of this whole EU referendum sage, that our own government is more dishonest than even the appalling Vote Leave/Leave EU mob.
The back of the queue comment was a mistake. Even some remainers I (still) speak to were offended.
I find it hilarious and depressing that the idea that Leave might be good for the NHS seems to be driving some of the movement. As a claim it is every bit as ridiculous as Osborne's £4,300 and, it appears, every bit as brilliant politics.
Do we just not do serious politics in this country any more? How daft can we go? The race to the bottom is accelerating.
Without it, I think that Obama's visit would have been positive for Remain. It sounded like a threat.
I'm a bit mystified by the NHS thing. I can't see Brexit having any impact, one way or the other, on the NHS.
I guess the NHS thing is related to immigration.
Leave have been campaigning on the message that the mythical £350m a day sent to EU could be spent on the NHS instead. Redwood has done an article with a list of public works etc that could be funded. It's good messaging IMHO for Leave and I expect more on this.
Well I just wish they'd bring it down to £175m a day - that is justifiable - and it means one hospital every two weeks instead of one a week.
I think it's pretty much a case of messaging - when you try to explain a headline figure, minus rebate this and do-dah that - it makes it messy process before you even get to schoolsnhospitals. Much easier to take the top number and go with it. When Remain complain it's *only* £175m a week, its still a giant number and they're playing with fire.
Good to see, but so weak. This really is a poor administration.
Actually, it's worse than that. It's a dishonest administration - and that is truly one of the most unforgivable aspects of this whole EU referendum sage, that our own government is more dishonest than even the appalling Vote Leave/Leave EU mob.
I'm still WTF that Cameron's desire to win has now descended into pork barrelling with the unions to the tune of £1.7m more money for Remain campaigning. Everyday he plumbs a new low. Who is he? I'm seriously unimpressed.
Good to see Labour's lead confirmed. But on a non-partisan note, I doubt if I'm the only one who has compleely lost track of which polling companies have changed their methodology and (if published) how. Could we have a thread or a linked article that gives an overview? That would also be helpful when we assess how the polls do in the May elections, since we can see whether the companies making drastic changes in assumptions are more accurate than their competitors.
The really big betting opportunity over recent weeks, largely missed or seemingly ignored, not least by the clever PB thread writers has been the extraordinary movement in Donald Trump's odds against him becoming the the GOP nominee for POTUS. Just a few short weeks ago these odds on Betfair were around 1.25 (i.e. 1/4 in old money), then two weeks ago the odds lengthened to around 2.0 (i.e. evens), only to shorten back to 1.25 again over the past few days. So two really big opportunities to have made money on the betting exchange over the course of the past 2 - 3 weeks, which frankly was not really identified and majored upon by PB.com, despite now looking so blindingly obvious with the benefit of that wonderful thing known as hindsight.
Speaking of which, I wonder whether we'll ever see Trump's outright POTUS odds back at the 6.2/6.4 level with Betfair as highlighted by Pulpstar a couple of days ago, which have since shortened to 5.4/5.5 in what was already then and now ever more of a two horse race.
That's very true. There were some useful BTL posts (particularly in the first phase) that I remember but it's not something the site highlighted.
But even after it has become obvious that Trump is all but home and dry we have seen odds as high as 1.3. Which is surely great value. I would think Trump is more certain to be the Gop nominee than Sadiq khan of London. When Leicester City win the premiership maybe some value punters will have more funds to take advantage.
It's an interesting question which of Sadiq or Trump is more certain. I would say Sadiq as he has only a week left for a black swan and without that Zac has no chance. Sadiq is marginally a stronger candidate in a city that leans Labour anyway. It's a done deal.
With Trump I'm concerned about the period between the last primary and the convention. But that's probably irrational. What could wrong?
The back of the queue comment was a mistake. Even some remainers I (still) speak to were offended.
I find it hilarious and depressing that the idea that Leave might be good for the NHS seems to be driving some of the movement. As a claim it is every bit as ridiculous as Osborne's £4,300 and, it appears, every bit as brilliant politics.
Do we just not do serious politics in this country any more? How daft can we go? The race to the bottom is accelerating.
Without it, I think that Obama's visit would have been positive for Remain. It sounded like a threat.
I'm a bit mystified by the NHS thing. I can't see Brexit having any impact, one way or the other, on the NHS.
I suspect its personal experience of sitting in GP's waiting rooms or in A&E listening to people speaking foreign languages or struggling to explain at reception (or having a translator with them) what they want.
Its probably a common experience now in working class areas.
True.
There is also the fairly obvious connection that the NHS is forever claiming that it needs more money, while hundreds of thousands of extra people are being admitted to the country every year. It does not need to be an accurate connection.
I wonder if Cameron's concluded he's gone if Leave win, and a non-Cameroon will succeed him, and will make a bonfire of his standing with the PCP in order to secure a victory.
"PRO-INDEPENDENCE writer Stuart Campbell refuses to backtrack on his twisted claims view despite a court ruling the supporters were blameless and were unlawfully killed."
That's written in a way that makes it sound like people were blaming those that died. I don't think I have ever encountered anyone who thinks that. People can argue until they are blue in the face about crowd dynamics and whether football supporters should be civilized enough not to try and enter an already full part of the stadium, but I think what Mr Campbell is saying is an inconvenient truth.
"Vote Yes to save our NHS" worked a treat for the independence campaign in Scotland. It's completely illogical but it's a way of claiming as yours the issue that is closest to the hearts of voters.
Good to see, but so weak. This really is a poor administration.
Actually, it's worse than that. It's a dishonest administration - and that is truly one of the most unforgivable aspects of this whole EU referendum sage, that our own government is more dishonest than even the appalling Vote Leave/Leave EU mob.
I'm still WTF that Cameron's desire to win has now descended into pork barrelling with the unions to the tune of £1.7m more money for Remain campaigning. Everyday he plumbs a new low. Who is he? I'm seriously unimpressed.
Austerity is like taxes - only for the little people.
I suspect Cameron would be willing to destroy the Conservative party to win his referendum.
He probably thinks that Conservative politicians, members and voters don't deserve him.
Good to see, but so weak. This really is a poor administration.
Actually, it's worse than that. It's a dishonest administration - and that is truly one of the most unforgivable aspects of this whole EU referendum sage, that our own government is more dishonest than even the appalling Vote Leave/Leave EU mob.
I'm still WTF that Cameron's desire to win has now descended into pork barrelling with the unions to the tune of £1.7m more money for Remain campaigning. Everyday he plumbs a new low. Who is he? I'm seriously unimpressed.
I have always taught my kids that its important to be engaged with the political process. But once this referendum is past, I might not continue to be so myself.
I think I'll simply spoil my paper at every opportunity.
Still had snow on the ground when I perambulated with the hound. Clearly, we need to burn more coal to fuel global warming.
That will put more snow on the ground in this country. Look at our latitude compared with snow-bound Canada or Chicago. It is only thanks to the EU-sponsored gulf stream that our climate is so mild. (One reason the early settlers in America were almost wiped out is they expected New England to be scorchio like Spain and Portugal.)
Good to see Labour's lead confirmed. But on a non-partisan note, I doubt if I'm the only one who has compleely lost track of which polling companies have changed their methodology and (if published) how. Could we have a thread or a linked article that gives an overview? That would also be helpful when we assess how the polls do in the May elections, since we can see whether the companies making drastic changes in assumptions are more accurate than their competitors.
Totally irrelevant poll. At the next GE, Labour will be sub 150 seats if the current inept leadership is still in charge.
As a progressive it pains me to say this but that is the reality.
Interesting but depressing. We tend to vote for "good" politicians even though we dislike their lying and hypocrisy. We ignore it as long as it's not too obvious. If you have a patina of competence too (or good PR), you'll get elected.
No doubt, some Labourites are claiming that's why Jezza suffers. Well, it's that and being a loon. He makes a poor job of hiding his lack of enthusiasm for the EU, in an perversely honest way.
Cameron is very good at pretence, almost as good as Blair was, but his boundless enthusiasm for the EU now has exposed his previous pretence at being neutral. Once you begin to revel in your lies, you lose trust. You begin to insult the electorate. I sort of believed he meant his support for the NHS; now I begin to doubt that too.
I wonder if Cameron's concluded he's gone if Leave win, and a non-Cameroon will succeed him, and will make a bonfire of his standing with the PCP in order to secure a victory.
I suspect that is so. Win, and he has a very divided party but a small chance of sorting things out, and a better if slight chance of lasting long enough for a Cameroon to follow him, lose and he's gone now and probably Boris is PM. Like all leaders he will think concessions are worth it to stay in place, as obviously the party and country needs them, so it's not a surprise hell do what it takes to win. It's causing big problems for later, but that's for future Dave to worry about.
Good to see, but so weak. This really is a poor administration.
Actually, it's worse than that. It's a dishonest administration - and that is truly one of the most unforgivable aspects of this whole EU referendum sage, that our own government is more dishonest than even the appalling Vote Leave/Leave EU mob.
I'm still WTF that Cameron's desire to win has now descended into pork barrelling with the unions to the tune of £1.7m more money for Remain campaigning. Everyday he plumbs a new low. Who is he? I'm seriously unimpressed.
Austerity is like taxes - only for the little people.
I suspect Cameron would be willing to destroy the Conservative party to win his referendum.
He probably thinks that Conservative politicians, members and voters don't deserve him.
I have predicted that King Cameron with all his horses and men will not be able to repair the broken pieces that are now the modern Tory Party.
It is not him but having pondered which bad news the Naz Shah story was intended to bury, I did wonder if it was Tory comments on Hillsborough but I doubt CCHQ would cross the road to protect Boris, and the former Sheffield MP has died. What Naz Shah said was inexcusable but it does not explain why the story was blown up now.
Dickson would never have spoken so much sense. Campbell is at least intelligent enough to reside in England whereas Dickson chooses to infest dreary Sweden.
It is not him but having pondered which bad news the Naz Shah story was intended to bury, I did wonder if it was Tory comments on Hillsborough but I doubt CCHQ would cross the road to protect Boris, and the former Sheffield MP has died. What Naz Shah said was inexcusable but it does not explain why the story was blown up now.
Actually on the day the Naz Shah story broke the BBC tried to suppress it, wether on line or on Radio and TV.
The back of the queue comment was a mistake. Even some remainers I (still) speak to were offended.
I find it hilarious and depressing that the idea that Leave might be good for the NHS seems to be driving some of the movement. As a claim it is every bit as ridiculous as Osborne's £4,300 and, it appears, every bit as brilliant politics.
Do we just not do serious politics in this country any more? How daft can we go? The race to the bottom is accelerating.
Without it, I think that Obama's visit would have been positive for Remain. It sounded like a threat.
I'm a bit mystified by the NHS thing. I can't see Brexit having any impact, one way or the other, on the NHS.
You're thinking about it. It's not an argument aimed at people who think about these things.
Press Association has found that no LibDem candidates are standing for nearly 10% of the councils holding elections next week
Is that right, or is it that there is/are no Lib Dem(s) in 10% of the council *seats*?
Either way it sounds iffy. There are only six Lib Dems in Wakefield, for example, so I'd be surprised if their coverage is as high as 90% nationally though it might be; Wakefield has always been a weak area so perhaps I have a locally biased view there. On the other hand, to have zero candidates in a tenth of all council areas seems extraordinary.
It is not him but having pondered which bad news the Naz Shah story was intended to bury, I did wonder if it was Tory comments on Hillsborough but I doubt CCHQ would cross the road to protect Boris, and the former Sheffield MP has died. What Naz Shah said was inexcusable but it does not explain why the story was blown up now.
It's to bury [channels Kinnock vs Militant] a Tory prime minister, a TORY PRIME MINISTER, cutting a deal with the trade unions for a paltry amount of money in a vain attempt to save his own worthless hide.
Good to see, but so weak. This really is a poor administration.
Actually, it's worse than that. It's a dishonest administration - and that is truly one of the most unforgivable aspects of this whole EU referendum sage, that our own government is more dishonest than even the appalling Vote Leave/Leave EU mob.
I'm still WTF that Cameron's desire to win has now descended into pork barrelling with the unions to the tune of £1.7m more money for Remain campaigning. Everyday he plumbs a new low. Who is he? I'm seriously unimpressed.
I have always taught my kids that its important to be engaged with the political process. But once this referendum is past, I might not continue to be so myself.
I think I'll simply spoil my paper at every opportunity.
And it's all so unnecessary too. I'm beginning to empathise with Tories who feel homeless and those who buggered off to UKIP. Things I simply never understood before. I got why Old Labour didn't like New Labour - feeling it personally is another thing all together, it's visceral.
Morning all. Catching up on yesterday, seems to have been rather a busy one to have missed.
MP suspended yet Labour still coming out of it looking bad, the PM doing a deal with unions for pro-EU funding, doctors' strike, polls showing Leave ahead and UKIP on 20 points, Trump and Clinton all but certain... Maybe we should ask Billy Joel to update his song to be about current events
Thank you for the kind words following my contribution on Monday.
It seems to me both LEAVE and REMAIN have a number of awkward questions to answer and instead of dealing with these are playing baseline politics saying primarily what their supporters want to hear and talk about.
REMAIN has still failed to adequately explain Britain's future relationship with the EU. It's not unreasonable, given where we've travelled after 40+ years, to consider where we might be in another ten or twenty. We've also had the usual old "Britain must take the lead in the EU" which has been the mantra since the 1970s.
The problem is as soon as the EU comes up with something it's almost inevitably opposed by Britain which leaves us on the edge and being dragged reluctantly along as a child by its mother - less a position of leadership than petulance with periodic meaningless "flounces" and "tough talking" for domestic consumption while basically going along with almost anything and everything in time.
Where are our ideas for taking the EU forward or is it so often 27 against that we've stopped putting anything forward positive ? Even the Single Market, which was largely a British initiative, has not turned out as its proponents would have liked.
LEAVE has been trying to articulate the future outside the EU with less than convincing results. The variation of options and opinion on the LEAVE campaign has prevented clarity in a number of areas. The point I would make is LEAVE should be about our negotiating position rather than the outcome of the negotiations themselves.
The truth is we will still have an economic and political relationship with the EU even if we leave - Norway and Switzerland have different relationships with the EU and I'm not suggesting they are models for us - and LEAVE needs to be thinking about the "red lines" in any negotiation just as political parties do when forming coalitions.
One such "red line" might be control of our borders but as in any and all negotiations LEAVE has to consider the "must haves" and the "would likes". I suspect we would like continued access to the Single Market but if we must have control of our borders then that might have to be negotiated. Remember, Britain will not be going "naked into the debating chamber" (pace Nye Bevan) - even if you don't consider the EU a democratic body, the weight of the will of the people is considerable and will provide a bargaining position and once the rhetoric of the campaign has finished, the reality is the EU will want to do a deal with Britain which will be, as far as possible, in everyone's interests.
Good to see, but so weak. This really is a poor administration.
Actually, it's worse than that. It's a dishonest administration - and that is truly one of the most unforgivable aspects of this whole EU referendum sage, that our own government is more dishonest than even the appalling Vote Leave/Leave EU mob.
I'm still WTF that Cameron's desire to win has now descended into pork barrelling with the unions to the tune of £1.7m more money for Remain campaigning. Everyday he plumbs a new low. Who is he? I'm seriously unimpressed.
Austerity is like taxes - only for the little people.
I suspect Cameron would be willing to destroy the Conservative party to win his referendum.
He probably thinks that Conservative politicians, members and voters don't deserve him.
I'm reading David Laws' 'Coalition' at the moment. His portrait of Cameron as surprisingly tetchy and prone to panics in the face of unpopularity (to be dealt with quick PR fixes), fits in exactly with what we're seeing.
Good to see, but so weak. This really is a poor administration.
Actually, it's worse than that. It's a dishonest administration - and that is truly one of the most unforgivable aspects of this whole EU referendum sage, that our own government is more dishonest than even the appalling Vote Leave/Leave EU mob.
I'm still WTF that Cameron's desire to win has now descended into pork barrelling with the unions to the tune of £1.7m more money for Remain campaigning. Everyday he plumbs a new low. Who is he? I'm seriously unimpressed.
I have always taught my kids that its important to be engaged with the political process. But once this referendum is past, I might not continue to be so myself.
I think I'll simply spoil my paper at every opportunity.
And it's all so unnecessary too. I'm beginning to empathise with Tories who feel homeless and those who buggered off to UKIP. Things I simply never understood before. I got why Old Labour didn't like New Labour - feeling it personally is another thing all together, it's visceral.
The problem is the lack of a truly Liberal alternative (not a Lib Dem party). Both main parties are largely Statist and Authoritarian (and largely incompetent)
Press Association has found that no LibDem candidates are standing for nearly 10% of the councils holding elections next week
Is that right, or is it that there is/are no Lib Dem(s) in 10% of the council *seats*?
Either way it sounds iffy. There are only six Lib Dems in Wakefield, for example, so I'd be surprised if their coverage is as high as 90% nationally though it might be; Wakefield has always been a weak area so perhaps I have a locally biased view there. On the other hand, to have zero candidates in a tenth of all council areas seems extraordinary.
No Liberal Democrat candidates will be on the ballot paper for nearly one in 10 of the councils holding elections next week, new figures show.
In areas as far apart as Salford in north-west England and Thurrock in the south-east, not a single Lib Dem is standing, forcing party members to choose someone else to support - or not vote at all. Analysis by the Press Association has also found that Ukip is fielding more candidates than the Lib Dems in more than a quarter of the contests.
Responding to the findings, a Lib Dem spokesman said: "Liberal Democrats are immersed in our communities and will stand up for them on the issues that affect their day to day lives. Our membership has grown by over 20,000 since the general election and we will be fighting a strong campaign in May."
Across England as a whole, the Lib Dems have a total of 1,758 candidates compared with Ukip's 1,388. But in 34 of the 124 areas holding elections one week today, Ukip candidates outnumber those for the Lib Dems.
It is not him but having pondered which bad news the Naz Shah story was intended to bury, I did wonder if it was Tory comments on Hillsborough but I doubt CCHQ would cross the road to protect Boris, and the former Sheffield MP has died. What Naz Shah said was inexcusable but it does not explain why the story was blown up now.
I had assumed it was one or both of a) Labour looking a bit united about Europe, so needing to be pushed onto the back foot again to undermine remain and b) a further element in the Sadiq-Luvs-Extremists narrative
The back of the queue comment was a mistake. Even some remainers I (still) speak to were offended.
I find it hilarious and depressing that the idea that Leave might be good for the NHS seems to be driving some of the movement. As a claim it is every bit as ridiculous as Osborne's £4,300 and, it appears, every bit as brilliant politics.
Do we just not do serious politics in this country any more? How daft can we go? The race to the bottom is accelerating.
Hard to disagree with that. All of the arguments to Leave "Save the NHS" must be one of the weakest.
But it's probably smart politics: there is a referendum to win.
It's got shades of the urgh part of the No2AV campaign that involved spending less money on baby incubators. That was shameless, but apparently worked. IIRC that was a Dan Hodges idea.
Was it? My impression was that No2AV won because it morphed into 'stop the Tories', which was an argument that put off (1) Tories, (2) people who believe the system should be 'fair', and (3) floating voters who might not be inherently Tory but believe they should be given a chance once in a while. And that No2AV captured the fair votes mantle with the simple, effective and slightly misleading 'one person, one vote' slogan.
Although the public campaign has had its challenges, on the email front I've had more from VoteLeave - yesterday's examples:
The EU is using YOUR money to keep Africa poor
OECD confirms only way to control migration is to Vote Leave
I suppose the advantage for those on the left is that via the EU they get to dip into their pockets for the 'poor Africans' at least twice and possibly three times:
Once through the taxes that pay for the CAP, again to support all the various charities that try to pick up the pieces and perhaps a third time when desperately poor Africans come to the UK and end up either as asylum seekers or taking low-paid and state-subsidised work.
'Brexiteers' seems to be the phrase of choice amongst pro-Remain organs. I suppose they feel it creates a rakish, unreliable and somewhat comical impression. 'Nigel Farage and the three hundred Brexiteers'. I'm not sure if people give a toss.
It is not him but having pondered which bad news the Naz Shah story was intended to bury, I did wonder if it was Tory comments on Hillsborough but I doubt CCHQ would cross the road to protect Boris, and the former Sheffield MP has died. What Naz Shah said was inexcusable but it does not explain why the story was blown up now.
Actually on the day the Naz Shah story broke the BBC tried to suppress it, wether on line or on Radio and TV.
That was claimed but I saw no evidence for it. Whenever someone says on pb that the BBC is suppressing a story, it is useful to check the other main news sites to see if they have splashed the story. In this case, for instance, I found it on the BBC's site before Sky's. MP no-one's heard of said offensive things several years ago was not at first sight the most compelling story of the day.
“I’ll tell you what happens with impossible promises. You start with far-fetched resolutions. They are then pickled into a rigid dogma, a code, and you go through the years sticking to that, out-dated, mis-placed, irrelevant to the real needs, and you end in the grotesque chaos of a Tory government – a Tory government - hiring trade unions to scuttle round a country handing out Vote Remain pamphlets to its own voters".
The back of the queue comment was a mistake. Even some remainers I (still) speak to were offended.
I find it hilarious and depressing that the idea that Leave might be good for the NHS seems to be driving some of the movement. As a claim it is every bit as ridiculous as Osborne's £4,300 and, it appears, every bit as brilliant politics.
Do we just not do serious politics in this country any more? How daft can we go? The race to the bottom is accelerating.
Hard to disagree with that. All of the arguments to Leave "Save the NHS" must be one of the weakest.
But it's probably smart politics: there is a referendum to win.
It's got shades of the urgh part of the No2AV campaign that involved spending less money on baby incubators. That was shameless, but apparently worked. IIRC that was a Dan Hodges idea.
Was it? My impression was that No2AV won because it morphed into 'stop the Tories', which was an argument that put off (1) Tories, (2) people who believe the system should be 'fair', and (3) floating voters who might not be inherently Tory but believe they should be given a chance once in a while. And that No2AV captured the fair votes mantle with the simple, effective and slightly misleading 'one person, one vote' slogan.
I'm late to the party tonight, but have we done the Cruz/Fiorina discussion?
Well I can tell you that the New York Times found out that Cruz was losing to Trump by double digits in Indiana, hence the desperate attempts of the last few days from the Cruz camp with the Kasich deal and then the Fiorina thing.
The most remarkable feature of Tuesday's results was Cruz's poor performance. It wasn't his heartland by any means but finishing third in most races looks dreadful. I don't know whether there was any 'pact' effect - these were potentially Kasich states and the fact of the pact may have driven some Cruz supporters away (but perhaps to Trump!) - but either way it's killed any momentum he had.
Defeat in Indiana, particularly one that delivered a lot of CDs to Trump, would surely be terminal now.
“I’ll tell you what happens with impossible promises. You start with far-fetched resolutions. They are then pickled into a rigid dogma, a code, and you go through the years sticking to that, out-dated, mis-placed, irrelevant to the real needs, and you end in the grotesque chaos of a Tory government – a Tory government - hiring trade unions to scuttle round a country handing out Vote Remain pamphlets to its own voters".
“I’ll tell you what happens with impossible promises. You start with far-fetched resolutions. They are then pickled into a rigid dogma, a code, and you go through the years sticking to that, out-dated, mis-placed, irrelevant to the real needs, and you end in the grotesque chaos of a Tory government – a Tory government - hiring trade unions to scuttle round a country handing out Vote Remain pamphlets to its own voters".
A convincing argument for why we remain a sovereign nation.
Seems to be a slight simplification, there is also the minor detail of need to disapply about 50,000 EU laws and directives from our domestic legislation and replacing them with equivalents (where desired) that don't contain words like "ECJ" and "The Commission", or reference anything else under the control of the EU.
“I’ll tell you what happens with impossible promises. You start with far-fetched resolutions. They are then pickled into a rigid dogma, a code, and you go through the years sticking to that, out-dated, mis-placed, irrelevant to the real needs, and you end in the grotesque chaos of a Tory government – a Tory government - hiring trade unions to scuttle round a country handing out Vote Remain pamphlets to its own voters".
This campaign has certainly resulted in some strange bed-fellows.
Good to see, but so weak. This really is a poor administration.
Actually, it's worse than that. It's a dishonest administration - and that is truly one of the most unforgivable aspects of this whole EU referendum sage, that our own government is more dishonest than even the appalling Vote Leave/Leave EU mob.
I'm still WTF that Cameron's desire to win has now descended into pork barrelling with the unions to the tune of £1.7m more money for Remain campaigning. Everyday he plumbs a new low. Who is he? I'm seriously unimpressed.
I have always taught my kids that its important to be engaged with the political process. But once this referendum is past, I might not continue to be so myself.
I think I'll simply spoil my paper at every opportunity.
And it's all so unnecessary too. I'm beginning to empathise with Tories who feel homeless and those who buggered off to UKIP. Things I simply never understood before. I got why Old Labour didn't like New Labour - feeling it personally is another thing all together, it's visceral.
The problem is the lack of a truly Liberal alternative (not a Lib Dem party). Both main parties are largely Statist and Authoritarian (and largely incompetent)
I'm searching for a political party that will:
1. Balance the budget but do so in a way that has a reasonable balance between tax rises and spending cuts (I think we're taxed enough apart from the 0.1%) and allocates spending cuts in a fair way too (sorry rich pensioners you need to be in this together with everyone else). 2. Defend our country and our culture. (Yes I am thinking of the EU and of Islam, defence spending, overseas aid and all the rest). 3. Defend free speech. We have proscribed speech right now. Some look for 'safe spaces'. Free speech means free speech - especially the right to offend someone else. 4. Is socially liberal - I'm fine with gays, soft drugs, etc. But doesn't seek to shove PC crap down my neck. 5. Enforce the law. (Rotherham, etc) 6. Put citizens first and the establishment second. Children over teachers, passengers over tube drivers, patients over doctors, customers over unions, etc.
I have no party to vote for these days. It's depressing.
Press Association has found that no LibDem candidates are standing for nearly 10% of the councils holding elections next week
Is that right, or is it that there is/are no Lib Dem(s) in 10% of the council *seats*?
Either way it sounds iffy. There are only six Lib Dems in Wakefield, for example, so I'd be surprised if their coverage is as high as 90% nationally though it might be; Wakefield has always been a weak area so perhaps I have a locally biased view there. On the other hand, to have zero candidates in a tenth of all council areas seems extraordinary.
No Liberal Democrat candidates will be on the ballot paper for nearly one in 10 of the councils holding elections next week, new figures show.
In areas as far apart as Salford in north-west England and Thurrock in the south-east, not a single Lib Dem is standing, forcing party members to choose someone else to support - or not vote at all. Analysis by the Press Association has also found that Ukip is fielding more candidates than the Lib Dems in more than a quarter of the contests.
Responding to the findings, a Lib Dem spokesman said: "Liberal Democrats are immersed in our communities and will stand up for them on the issues that affect their day to day lives. Our membership has grown by over 20,000 since the general election and we will be fighting a strong campaign in May."
Across England as a whole, the Lib Dems have a total of 1,758 candidates compared with Ukip's 1,388. But in 34 of the 124 areas holding elections one week today, Ukip candidates outnumber those for the Lib Dems.
I'm late to the party tonight, but have we done the Cruz/Fiorina discussion?
Well I can tell you that the New York Times found out that Cruz was losing to Trump by double digits in Indiana, hence the desperate attempts of the last few days from the Cruz camp with the Kasich deal and then the Fiorina thing.
The most remarkable feature of Tuesday's results was Cruz's poor performance. It wasn't his heartland by any means but finishing third in most races looks dreadful. I don't know whether there was any 'pact' effect - these were potentially Kasich states and the fact of the pact may have driven some Cruz supporters away (but perhaps to Trump!) - but either way it's killed any momentum he had.
Defeat in Indiana, particularly one that delivered a lot of CDs to Trump, would surely be terminal now.
Oh I agree: and whats more, according to both RCP and Politico, Trump is mopping up most of the remaining delegates in Pennsylvania.
“I’ll tell you what happens with impossible promises. You start with far-fetched resolutions. They are then pickled into a rigid dogma, a code, and you go through the years sticking to that, out-dated, mis-placed, irrelevant to the real needs, and you end in the grotesque chaos of a Tory government – a Tory government - hiring trade unions to scuttle round a country handing out Vote Remain pamphlets to its own voters".
Comments
I find it hilarious and depressing that the idea that Leave might be good for the NHS seems to be driving some of the movement. As a claim it is every bit as ridiculous as Osborne's £4,300 and, it appears, every bit as brilliant politics.
Do we just not do serious politics in this country any more? How daft can we go? The race to the bottom is accelerating.
1 day 1 hour 1 minute 1 second
He made me laugh out loud at one point - saying he considered getting Brexit and Camexit as a buy-one-get-one-free opportunity
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/comment/brexiteers-threaten-labour-more-than-tories-50sj5lcqz
https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/social-affairs/news/74016/government-announces-trade-union-bill-climbdown-after-referendum
Good to see, but so weak. This really is a poor administration.
But it seems not.
A key problem, though, is that it is not just the political parties who are doing the spinning and slanting now. We even have supposedly dry and dusty research institutes engaging in it e.g. the OECD yesterday. The culture of spin has become all-pervading.
Trump 49 .. Cruz 28 .. Kasich 19
Clinton 47 .. Sanders 43
http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/polls/yougov-economist-24390
I'm a bit mystified by the NHS thing. I can't see Brexit having any impact, one way or the other, on the NHS.
Perversely it might have helped Cameron a little bit, albeit virtually guaranteeing a Remain victory, because he could campaign a bit more softly for Remain, triangulating himself between Clegg and the Leavers within his own party.
Other than, "in 1975, when this issue was last subject to a vote, did you vote?" - No, I wasn't born mate :-)
I'm assuming they are looking at how the person says they voted in 2015.
But it's probably smart politics: there is a referendum to win.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/election_2010/8649012.stm
Still had snow on the ground when I perambulated with the hound. Clearly, we need to burn more coal to fuel global warming.
Its probably a common experience now in working class areas.
All they need it to buy is the idea that will be more money available to spend on the NHS if its wanted.
Next time there's a Labour government the money can then be spent.
So the £350M that's really only half that when you look at the rebate, will end up not being much of a saving at all.
Brexit is just about cost neutral.
1) I try to write about what's current. Every thread this year has been dominated below the line by discussion of the referendum. The number of referendum threads I and others write reflects that.
2) I don't write about subjects about which I have no particular insight to make. While I follow the US elections with interest and do bet on them, I have no confidence that I understand the dynamics that shift the relevant electorates. So I'm not going to put up betting tips that are the equivalent of throwing darts at a board. This cycle I have been repeatedly perplexed, particularly by the Republican race. First, I couldn't understand why Donald Trump was being taken remotely seriously, so I bet against him. Then once the primaries started, I couldn't understand the price on Marco Rubio going so short, so I bet against him. Then I couldn't understand why the delegates that Donald Trump was piling up weren't (and aren't) being properly reflected in the prices, so I bet on him. Overall, I've done very nicely this cycle so far - two out of three ain't bad, as Meatloaf sang - but I'm not going to tip things when I don't understand them.
3) @Wanderer's point that few of the referendum threads are betting-related is very fair. That's largely because the markets have been so static. Each of us have a view of the underlying probabilities and I doubt many posters will change their view based on my analysis of them, so a thread on that would not be all that useful. For full disclosure I'm currently a buyer on SPIN of turnout, I've backed the 60-65% band for Remain at 8.2 and my open position on the main event at present is a buy of Leave at 3.7.
4) I'm not going to change my view of the dynamics of the referendum because some bedwetting Leavers feel, like the current generation of students, that they need a safe space. If they are triggered by what I write, I suggest they get therapy. I always seek to include either advice to one side or the other (preferably both) or to give my assessment, with supporting facts and argument, of the implications for the referendum of specific aspects or developments.
5) One of the oddest criticisms is that I write the same piece every time. I have written a lot about the referendum but I have consciously varied the aspects I write about. I've reached the conclusion, sadly, that it's not repetitiousness that such posters dislike but the fact that I never pander to their hopes.
As someone once said, "opinions are like arseholes, everyone has one and everyone thinks everyone else's stinks". So with that in mind I intend to carry on forming opinions from facts rather than the other way around. I'm entirely happy when others do the same and reach different conclusions.
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/uk-world-news/wings-over-scotland-blogger-slammed-7845782#MZ0QhKEPe2F6Io0I.97
With Trump I'm concerned about the period between the last primary and the convention. But that's probably irrational. What could wrong?
https://twitter.com/AFP/status/725588360970936320
There is also the fairly obvious connection that the NHS is forever claiming that it needs more money, while hundreds of thousands of extra people are being admitted to the country every year. It does not need to be an accurate connection.
"PRO-INDEPENDENCE writer Stuart Campbell refuses to backtrack on his twisted claims view despite a court ruling the supporters were blameless and were unlawfully killed."
That's written in a way that makes it sound like people were blaming those that died. I don't think I have ever encountered anyone who thinks that. People can argue until they are blue in the face about crowd dynamics and whether football supporters should be civilized enough not to try and enter an already full part of the stadium, but I think what Mr Campbell is saying is an inconvenient truth.
I suspect Cameron would be willing to destroy the Conservative party to win his referendum.
He probably thinks that Conservative politicians, members and voters don't deserve him.
I think I'll simply spoil my paper at every opportunity.
As a progressive it pains me to say this but that is the reality.
Any campaign with him on board I would back heavily.
They purport to represent the workers but the reality is that they are largely a public sector pressure group.
Private sector trade union membership is minimal.
No doubt, some Labourites are claiming that's why Jezza suffers. Well, it's that and being a loon. He makes a poor job of hiding his lack of enthusiasm for the EU, in an perversely honest way.
Cameron is very good at pretence, almost as good as Blair was, but his boundless enthusiasm for the EU now has exposed his previous pretence at being neutral. Once you begin to revel in your lies, you lose trust. You begin to insult the electorate. I sort of believed he meant his support for the NHS; now I begin to doubt that too.
The EU is using YOUR money to keep Africa poor
OECD confirms only way to control migration is to Vote Leave
Either way it sounds iffy. There are only six Lib Dems in Wakefield, for example, so I'd be surprised if their coverage is as high as 90% nationally though it might be; Wakefield has always been a weak area so perhaps I have a locally biased view there. On the other hand, to have zero candidates in a tenth of all council areas seems extraordinary.
MP suspended yet Labour still coming out of it looking bad, the PM doing a deal with unions for pro-EU funding, doctors' strike, polls showing Leave ahead and UKIP on 20 points, Trump and Clinton all but certain... Maybe we should ask Billy Joel to update his song to be about current events
Thank you for the kind words following my contribution on Monday.
It seems to me both LEAVE and REMAIN have a number of awkward questions to answer and instead of dealing with these are playing baseline politics saying primarily what their supporters want to hear and talk about.
REMAIN has still failed to adequately explain Britain's future relationship with the EU. It's not unreasonable, given where we've travelled after 40+ years, to consider where we might be in another ten or twenty. We've also had the usual old "Britain must take the lead in the EU" which has been the mantra since the 1970s.
The problem is as soon as the EU comes up with something it's almost inevitably opposed by Britain which leaves us on the edge and being dragged reluctantly along as a child by its mother - less a position of leadership than petulance with periodic meaningless "flounces" and "tough talking" for domestic consumption while basically going along with almost anything and everything in time.
Where are our ideas for taking the EU forward or is it so often 27 against that we've stopped putting anything forward positive ? Even the Single Market, which was largely a British initiative, has not turned out as its proponents would have liked.
LEAVE has been trying to articulate the future outside the EU with less than convincing results. The variation of options and opinion on the LEAVE campaign has prevented clarity in a number of areas. The point I would make is LEAVE should be about our negotiating position rather than the outcome of the negotiations themselves.
The truth is we will still have an economic and political relationship with the EU even if we leave - Norway and Switzerland have different relationships with the EU and I'm not suggesting they are models for us - and LEAVE needs to be thinking about the "red lines" in any negotiation just as political parties do when forming coalitions.
One such "red line" might be control of our borders but as in any and all negotiations LEAVE has to consider the "must haves" and the "would likes". I suspect we would like continued access to the Single Market but if we must have control of our borders then that might have to be negotiated. Remember, Britain will not be going "naked into the debating chamber" (pace Nye Bevan) - even if you don't consider the EU a democratic body, the weight of the will of the people is considerable and will provide a bargaining position and once the rhetoric of the campaign has finished, the reality is the EU will want to do a deal with Britain which will be, as far as possible, in everyone's interests.
Brexiteers remind me of Scottish nationalists—and not in a good way
"The parallels between the leave campaign and the SNP are ironic as well as instructive"
http://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/politics/brexiteers-scottish-nationalists-european-union-scotland
: Conservatives: 2,612
:: Labour: 2,622
:: Lib Dems: 1,758
:: Green: 1,479
:: Ukip: 1,388
:: Independents: 714
https://twitter.com/rog_ukip/status/725576518638944256
Once through the taxes that pay for the CAP, again to support all the various charities that try to pick up the pieces and perhaps a third time when desperately poor Africans come to the UK and end up either as asylum seekers or taking low-paid and state-subsidised work.
A virtue signalling trifecta
Dan says it was the image that sold the £250m cost that cut through.
https://twitter.com/GuidoFawkes/status/725596506900811776
Defeat in Indiana, particularly one that delivered a lot of CDs to Trump, would surely be terminal now.
George Galloway & Michael Gove?
1. Balance the budget but do so in a way that has a reasonable balance between tax rises and spending cuts (I think we're taxed enough apart from the 0.1%) and allocates spending cuts in a fair way too (sorry rich pensioners you need to be in this together with everyone else).
2. Defend our country and our culture. (Yes I am thinking of the EU and of Islam, defence spending, overseas aid and all the rest).
3. Defend free speech. We have proscribed speech right now. Some look for 'safe spaces'. Free speech means free speech - especially the right to offend someone else.
4. Is socially liberal - I'm fine with gays, soft drugs, etc. But doesn't seek to shove PC crap down my neck.
5. Enforce the law. (Rotherham, etc)
6. Put citizens first and the establishment second. Children over teachers, passengers over tube drivers, patients over doctors, customers over unions, etc.
I have no party to vote for these days. It's depressing.
http://order-order.com/2016/04/28/rupa-huq-defends-naz-shahs-anti-semitism/
Gosh. That's a quite remarkable atrophying of what was once a national party.
Taxi For The Lib-Dem!
Remind me where Nick Clegg (the guy that single-handedly destroyed the Lib-Dems) stands on our staying in the EU?
Why on earth would anybody take this fool seriously on anything?