Howdy, Stranger!

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

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Following the SNPs loss of its Holyrood majority last week

2»

Comments

  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @BethRigby: June 2nd 8pm, David Cameron will take questions from @SkyNews journos & public in #EUref special prog. Gove on too
  • Options
    WandererWanderer Posts: 3,838
    DavidL said:

    What I am not sure about in the Scottish system is the merits of having a series of top up MSPs selected from regional lists instead of a national one. It seems to encourage a disproportionate result and means that the value of the list vote varies considerably depending on what part of the country you are in. A list vote for the SNP in the West of Scotland region, for example, was a complete waste of time whilst a list vote in other areas was not.

    I think if we are to have top up MSPs to reflect the overall share of the vote we should just have a single vote which counts for both and then even out the votes per MSP on a national level.

    How important is the constituency link with MSPs?
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,053
    The flats story must be the most obvious employment tribunal in years.
  • Options
    WandererWanderer Posts: 3,838
    New Polling Matters podcast?
  • Options
    oxfordsimonoxfordsimon Posts: 5,831
    Pulpstar said:

    The flats story must be the most obvious employment tribunal in years.
    That shoe story annoys me.

    Out-of-work actress takes a temp job, signs to accept the T&Cs (including the dress code), fails to abide by what she signed up to and is sent home.

    5 months later she starts making a fuss.

    I wonder what prompted her to start a bit of self-promotion?
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,788
    Wanderer said:

    New Polling Matters podcast?

    Yup.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,053

    Pulpstar said:

    The flats story must be the most obvious employment tribunal in years.
    That shoe story annoys me.

    Out-of-work actress takes a temp job, signs to accept the T&Cs (including the dress code), fails to abide by what she signed up to and is sent home.

    5 months later she starts making a fuss.

    I wonder what prompted her to start a bit of self-promotion?
    I wonder if the dress code would be the same for my other half, she is 6'2...
  • Options
    AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    edited May 2016
    Scott_P said:

    Alistair said:

    To be honest I'm still not seeing any evidence of SNP-to_Con switching as opposed to SNP stay-at-home-voters and Tory Surge accounting for Turnout increases.

    Well there are two competing narratives then.

    Scenario 1. Voters who previously put a tick in the SNP box decided on this occasion at this election to vote for an alternative.

    Scenario 2. SNP voters, enthused by the referendum and the General election, though nah, can't be arsed this time, while voters who didn't bother previously got up off the couch specifically to put a tick in a Tory box.

    Choose whichever one helps you sleep better at night :)
    Referendum Turnout: 85%
    General election Turnout: 71%
    Scottish Election Turnout: 55% (+5% on 2011)

    It's pretty clear that the 5% increase was pretty much all Tory voters.

    In Moray - one of the highlighted seats for massive SNP Vote decline shocker their vote share went from 58% to 47%. The gap in 2011 was 11,000 votes. The seat was the very definition of safe seat.

    An even then the SNP vote fell by less than 1000 votes. The Conservative vote rose just shy of 7000 whilst overall turnout was up 3.4 percentage points in the constituency. With no change in the Labour or Lib Dem vote the only logical conclusion is Scenario 2

    SNP voters in rocks solid safe seat don't bother whilst Tory Surge gets out long term Tory inclined but previously non-voting people.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,585
    Wanderer said:

    DavidL said:

    What I am not sure about in the Scottish system is the merits of having a series of top up MSPs selected from regional lists instead of a national one. It seems to encourage a disproportionate result and means that the value of the list vote varies considerably depending on what part of the country you are in. A list vote for the SNP in the West of Scotland region, for example, was a complete waste of time whilst a list vote in other areas was not.

    I think if we are to have top up MSPs to reflect the overall share of the vote we should just have a single vote which counts for both and then even out the votes per MSP on a national level.

    How important is the constituency link with MSPs?
    No clear idea but presumably they will get some case work on devolved matters and they certainly work hard to get local publicity in the local press. I suppose as the number of devolved matters increases the work load may too. I also think some people like to go to a list MSP with the right rosette rather than a constituency MSP with the wrong one but how big an issue that is I really can't say.
  • Options
    oxfordsimonoxfordsimon Posts: 5,831
    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    The flats story must be the most obvious employment tribunal in years.
    That shoe story annoys me.

    Out-of-work actress takes a temp job, signs to accept the T&Cs (including the dress code), fails to abide by what she signed up to and is sent home.

    5 months later she starts making a fuss.

    I wonder what prompted her to start a bit of self-promotion?
    I wonder if the dress code would be the same for my other half, she is 6'2...
    If the complainant was cast in a play that required her to wear heels, of course she would do it...
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,193

    Telegraph reporting Cameron says no to go debates on eu ref.

    Leave it to Osborne....
    Oh, please: let it be true.
    Even Remain ain't DAT stoopid....
  • Options
    WandererWanderer Posts: 3,838
    Pulpstar said:

    The flats story must be the most obvious employment tribunal in years.
    That picture of Boris posing with inferior asparagus is going to cost him round my way.
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,868
    Wanderer said:

    Pulpstar said:

    The flats story must be the most obvious employment tribunal in years.
    That picture of Boris posing with inferior asparagus is going to cost him round my way.
    Do you have any tips?
  • Options
    GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 20,959
    Happy 70th birthday Mike. Many to come hopefully. :)
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,585
    Pulpstar said:

    The flats story must be the most obvious employment tribunal in years.
    Unless all the men have to wear high heels too I can see at least one major problem, and one that does not require a 2 year qualifying employment period at that. Of course if they do all have to wear high heels then this might be the least of their problems.
  • Options
    Scrapheap_as_wasScrapheap_as_was Posts: 10,060
    edited May 2016

    Pulpstar said:

    The flats story must be the most obvious employment tribunal in years.
    That shoe story annoys me.

    Out-of-work actress takes a temp job, signs to accept the T&Cs (including the dress code), fails to abide by what she signed up to and is sent home.

    5 months later she starts making a fuss.

    I wonder what prompted her to start a bit of self-promotion?
    I heard her on R5 earlier, how she was broadening the issue to a more significant message and her objective was to get a petition up to 100k - had a whiff of that self-promoting solicitor lady who got so much attention months ago.

    There's definitely a genuine issue here but it sounded like a grandstanding oppo hearing her talk....
  • Options
    GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 20,959
    Failed and discredited politicians on the EU gravy train and laughing all the way to the bank...

    Sensible Brit's will surely pull the plug on this nonsense on 23rd June.
  • Options
    TheWhiteRabbitTheWhiteRabbit Posts: 12,388
    DavidL said:

    Pulpstar said:

    The flats story must be the most obvious employment tribunal in years.
    Unless all the men have to wear high heels too I can see at least one major problem, and one that does not require a 2 year qualifying employment period at that. Of course if they do all have to wear high heels then this might be the least of their problems.
    Actually dress discrimination is legal: http://www.acas.org.uk/index.aspx?articleid=4953
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,193
    Alistair said:

    Scott_P said:

    Alistair said:

    To be honest I'm still not seeing any evidence of SNP-to_Con switching as opposed to SNP stay-at-home-voters and Tory Surge accounting for Turnout increases.

    Well there are two competing narratives then.

    Scenario 1. Voters who previously put a tick in the SNP box decided on this occasion at this election to vote for an alternative.

    Scenario 2. SNP voters, enthused by the referendum and the General election, though nah, can't be arsed this time, while voters who didn't bother previously got up off the couch specifically to put a tick in a Tory box.

    Choose whichever one helps you sleep better at night :)
    Referendum Turnout: 85%
    General election Turnout: 71%
    Scottish Election Turnout: 55% (+5% on 2011)

    It's pretty clear that the 5% increase was pretty much all Tory voters.

    In Moray - one of the highlighted seats for massive SNP Vote decline shocker their vote share went from 58% to 47%. The gap in 2011 was 11,000 votes. The seat was the very definition of safe seat.

    An even then the SNP vote fell by less than 1000 votes. The Conservative vote rose just shy of 7000 whilst overall turnout was up 3.4 percentage points in the constituency. With no change in the Labour or Lib Dem vote the only logical conclusion is Scenario 2

    SNP voters in rocks solid safe seat don't bother whilst Tory Surge gets out long term Tory inclined but previously non-voting people.
    I'm hearing the Can't Be Arsed Party are looking forward to a significant swing to them from the SNP.

    Still no joy for Labour though.
  • Options
    runnymederunnymede Posts: 2,536
    GIN1138 said:

    Failed and discredited politicians on the EU gravy train and laughing all the way to the bank...

    Sensible Brit's will surely pull the plug on this nonsense on 23rd June.
    Turfing those two spongers out is almost the best reason I can think of for voting LEAVE
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,585

    DavidL said:

    Pulpstar said:

    The flats story must be the most obvious employment tribunal in years.
    Unless all the men have to wear high heels too I can see at least one major problem, and one that does not require a 2 year qualifying employment period at that. Of course if they do all have to wear high heels then this might be the least of their problems.
    Actually dress discrimination is legal: http://www.acas.org.uk/index.aspx?articleid=4953
    No its not. It is permitted to have differences between the sexes but they must be reasonable and for a business related reason. High heels are never going to qualify unless it is universal.
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Pulpstar said:

    The flats story must be the most obvious employment tribunal in years.
    Unless all the men have to wear high heels too I can see at least one major problem, and one that does not require a 2 year qualifying employment period at that. Of course if they do all have to wear high heels then this might be the least of their problems.
    Actually dress discrimination is legal: http://www.acas.org.uk/index.aspx?articleid=4953
    No its not. It is permitted to have differences between the sexes but they must be reasonable and for a business related reason. High heels are never going to qualify unless it is universal.
    Dammit. Back to the drawing board for our new nurses uniforms....
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,585
    runnymede said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Failed and discredited politicians on the EU gravy train and laughing all the way to the bank...

    Sensible Brit's will surely pull the plug on this nonsense on 23rd June.
    Turfing those two spongers out is almost the best reason I can think of for voting LEAVE
    Do you really think their pensions etc would stop? More likely the UK taxpayer would end up agreeing to pay them as part of the leaving negotiations. The sums are truly obscene.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,585

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Pulpstar said:

    The flats story must be the most obvious employment tribunal in years.
    Unless all the men have to wear high heels too I can see at least one major problem, and one that does not require a 2 year qualifying employment period at that. Of course if they do all have to wear high heels then this might be the least of their problems.
    Actually dress discrimination is legal: http://www.acas.org.uk/index.aspx?articleid=4953
    No its not. It is permitted to have differences between the sexes but they must be reasonable and for a business related reason. High heels are never going to qualify unless it is universal.
    Dammit. Back to the drawing board for our new nurses uniforms....
    Surely the drawing board is half the fun?
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,053
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Pulpstar said:

    The flats story must be the most obvious employment tribunal in years.
    Unless all the men have to wear high heels too I can see at least one major problem, and one that does not require a 2 year qualifying employment period at that. Of course if they do all have to wear high heels then this might be the least of their problems.
    Actually dress discrimination is legal: http://www.acas.org.uk/index.aspx?articleid=4953
    No its not. It is permitted to have differences between the sexes but they must be reasonable and for a business related reason. High heels are never going to qualify unless it is universal.
    My work dress code is very relaxed, but I can understand where people are required to wear a suit/ uniform to project a certain image. Heels are just plain damaging to your feet :/
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,053
    Trump's muslim ban is going to end up as bans from Iran, Pakistan, Afghanistan and other muslim majority countries in the middle east/central asia.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,585
    Pulpstar said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Pulpstar said:

    The flats story must be the most obvious employment tribunal in years.
    Unless all the men have to wear high heels too I can see at least one major problem, and one that does not require a 2 year qualifying employment period at that. Of course if they do all have to wear high heels then this might be the least of their problems.
    Actually dress discrimination is legal: http://www.acas.org.uk/index.aspx?articleid=4953
    No its not. It is permitted to have differences between the sexes but they must be reasonable and for a business related reason. High heels are never going to qualify unless it is universal.
    My work dress code is very relaxed, but I can understand where people are required to wear a suit/ uniform to project a certain image. Heels are just plain damaging to your feet :/
    Oh yes, there is absolutely nothing wrong with requiring a uniform or a suit or a tie or no trousers for women. Given I attend work most days dressed as a penguin who for some reason has horse hair on his head I have limited sympathy for her but her erstwhile employers are idiots.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,053
    DavidL said:

    Pulpstar said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Pulpstar said:

    The flats story must be the most obvious employment tribunal in years.
    Unless all the men have to wear high heels too I can see at least one major problem, and one that does not require a 2 year qualifying employment period at that. Of course if they do all have to wear high heels then this might be the least of their problems.
    Actually dress discrimination is legal: http://www.acas.org.uk/index.aspx?articleid=4953
    No its not. It is permitted to have differences between the sexes but they must be reasonable and for a business related reason. High heels are never going to qualify unless it is universal.
    My work dress code is very relaxed, but I can understand where people are required to wear a suit/ uniform to project a certain image. Heels are just plain damaging to your feet :/
    Oh yes, there is absolutely nothing wrong with requiring a uniform or a suit or a tie or no trousers for women. Given I attend work most days dressed as a penguin who for some reason has horse hair on his head I have limited sympathy for her but her erstwhile employers are idiots.
    Her circumstances are (almost) irrelevant, I'm playing the ball here :)
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,788
    If any companies/organisations want someone to come up with an appropriate fashion code, I'm available.
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @tnewtondunn: EU referendum TV debates heading for the courts: Vote Leave say they will sue ITV for asking Farage on vs PM instead of their man, Gove.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 59,036
    DavidL said:

    runnymede said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Failed and discredited politicians on the EU gravy train and laughing all the way to the bank...

    Sensible Brit's will surely pull the plug on this nonsense on 23rd June.
    Turfing those two spongers out is almost the best reason I can think of for voting LEAVE
    Do you really think their pensions etc would stop? More likely the UK taxpayer would end up agreeing to pay them as part of the leaving negotiations. The sums are truly obscene.
    I assume their incomes are from directorships, although I'm not sue how you can be in a situation where you recieve £4mn per annum in allowances!
  • Options
    WandererWanderer Posts: 3,838
    DavidL said:

    Pulpstar said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Pulpstar said:

    The flats story must be the most obvious employment tribunal in years.
    Unless all the men have to wear high heels too I can see at least one major problem, and one that does not require a 2 year qualifying employment period at that. Of course if they do all have to wear high heels then this might be the least of their problems.
    Actually dress discrimination is legal: http://www.acas.org.uk/index.aspx?articleid=4953
    No its not. It is permitted to have differences between the sexes but they must be reasonable and for a business related reason. High heels are never going to qualify unless it is universal.
    My work dress code is very relaxed, but I can understand where people are required to wear a suit/ uniform to project a certain image. Heels are just plain damaging to your feet :/
    Oh yes, there is absolutely nothing wrong with requiring a uniform or a suit or a tie or no trousers for women. Given I attend work most days dressed as a penguin who for some reason has horse hair on his head I have limited sympathy for her but her erstwhile employers are idiots.
    There's good reason to suppose high heels (at least if they are worn daily) are damaging to your feet and your spine. It's stupid to wear them and wicked to force other people to.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 59,036

    If any companies/organisations want someone to come up with an appropriate fashion code, I'm available.

    May & Eagles, or Eagles & May? :D
  • Options
    FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,085
    Pulpstar said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Pulpstar said:

    The flats story must be the most obvious employment tribunal in years.
    Unless all the men have to wear high heels too I can see at least one major problem, and one that does not require a 2 year qualifying employment period at that. Of course if they do all have to wear high heels then this might be the least of their problems.
    Actually dress discrimination is legal: http://www.acas.org.uk/index.aspx?articleid=4953
    No its not. It is permitted to have differences between the sexes but they must be reasonable and for a business related reason. High heels are never going to qualify unless it is universal.
    My work dress code is very relaxed, but I can understand where people are required to wear a suit/ uniform to project a certain image. Heels are just plain damaging to your feet :/
    Doesn't stop my GP wearing them.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 59,036
    Scott_P said:

    @tnewtondunn: EU referendum TV debates heading for the courts: Vote Leave say they will sue ITV for asking Farage on vs PM instead of their man, Gove.

    Is there a law that they will have broken by not inviting the leader of the leave campaign?
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,585
    RobD said:

    DavidL said:

    runnymede said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Failed and discredited politicians on the EU gravy train and laughing all the way to the bank...

    Sensible Brit's will surely pull the plug on this nonsense on 23rd June.
    Turfing those two spongers out is almost the best reason I can think of for voting LEAVE
    Do you really think their pensions etc would stop? More likely the UK taxpayer would end up agreeing to pay them as part of the leaving negotiations. The sums are truly obscene.
    I assume their incomes are from directorships, although I'm not sue how you can be in a situation where you recieve £4mn per annum in allowances!
    I assumed this was the wages, allowances, expenses and pensions they had received as a result of the positions they had held in the EU. Surely these are not current salaries?
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548

    If any companies/organisations want someone to come up with an appropriate fashion code, I'm available.

    Dare I suggest that such a dress code for Remainers should be copied from Eurovision contestants, while Leavers make do with Anne Widdecombe's charity clothing donations?
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 59,036
    DavidL said:

    RobD said:

    DavidL said:

    runnymede said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Failed and discredited politicians on the EU gravy train and laughing all the way to the bank...

    Sensible Brit's will surely pull the plug on this nonsense on 23rd June.
    Turfing those two spongers out is almost the best reason I can think of for voting LEAVE
    Do you really think their pensions etc would stop? More likely the UK taxpayer would end up agreeing to pay them as part of the leaving negotiations. The sums are truly obscene.
    I assume their incomes are from directorships, although I'm not sue how you can be in a situation where you recieve £4mn per annum in allowances!
    I assumed this was the wages, allowances, expenses and pensions they had received as a result of the positions they had held in the EU. Surely these are not current salaries?
    Well, it seems a little misleading then. I was under the impression that's what they were receiving now!
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    DavidL said:

    RobD said:

    DavidL said:

    runnymede said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Failed and discredited politicians on the EU gravy train and laughing all the way to the bank...

    Sensible Brit's will surely pull the plug on this nonsense on 23rd June.
    Turfing those two spongers out is almost the best reason I can think of for voting LEAVE
    Do you really think their pensions etc would stop? More likely the UK taxpayer would end up agreeing to pay them as part of the leaving negotiations. The sums are truly obscene.
    I assume their incomes are from directorships, although I'm not sue how you can be in a situation where you recieve £4mn per annum in allowances!
    I assumed this was the wages, allowances, expenses and pensions they had received as a result of the positions they had held in the EU. Surely these are not current salaries?
    At least they did something for the money. Compare and contrast with what our UKIP MEP's have trousered for doing bugger all.
  • Options
    WandererWanderer Posts: 3,838
    Scott_P said:

    @tnewtondunn: EU referendum TV debates heading for the courts: Vote Leave say they will sue ITV for asking Farage on vs PM instead of their man, Gove.

    Hmm. The blue-on-blue aspect aside, if I were BSE I might prefer to see Gove on. He's unpopular, he has a face for radio. He may speak cogently but does that matter?
  • Options
    WandererWanderer Posts: 3,838

    Pulpstar said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Pulpstar said:

    The flats story must be the most obvious employment tribunal in years.
    Unless all the men have to wear high heels too I can see at least one major problem, and one that does not require a 2 year qualifying employment period at that. Of course if they do all have to wear high heels then this might be the least of their problems.
    Actually dress discrimination is legal: http://www.acas.org.uk/index.aspx?articleid=4953
    No its not. It is permitted to have differences between the sexes but they must be reasonable and for a business related reason. High heels are never going to qualify unless it is universal.
    My work dress code is very relaxed, but I can understand where people are required to wear a suit/ uniform to project a certain image. Heels are just plain damaging to your feet :/
    Doesn't stop my GP wearing them.
    I was amused to see that the Christmas tree in my GP's surgery had piles of booze and chocolate beneath it.

    Then again, booze and chocolate can make you happy. A shoe is just a shoe.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 59,036

    DavidL said:

    RobD said:

    DavidL said:

    runnymede said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Failed and discredited politicians on the EU gravy train and laughing all the way to the bank...

    Sensible Brit's will surely pull the plug on this nonsense on 23rd June.
    Turfing those two spongers out is almost the best reason I can think of for voting LEAVE
    Do you really think their pensions etc would stop? More likely the UK taxpayer would end up agreeing to pay them as part of the leaving negotiations. The sums are truly obscene.
    I assume their incomes are from directorships, although I'm not sue how you can be in a situation where you recieve £4mn per annum in allowances!
    I assumed this was the wages, allowances, expenses and pensions they had received as a result of the positions they had held in the EU. Surely these are not current salaries?
    At least they did something for the money. Compare and contrast with what our UKIP MEP's have trousered for doing bugger all.
    I wouldn't say that. The only vides I every see from the EU parliament are when UKIP members give speeches.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,585

    If any companies/organisations want someone to come up with an appropriate fashion code, I'm available.

    Dare I suggest that such a dress code for Remainers should be copied from Eurovision contestants, while Leavers make do with Anne Widdecombe's charity clothing donations?
    I was going to link to a possible Remain outfit involving a fair amount of glossy rubber given the amount of obedience and submissive behaviour required to be members of the EU but on reflection...perhaps not.
  • Options
    RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737
    OGH: Congratulations, Old Cock!

    You don't look a day older than the next POTUS, whoever s/he may be...

    [historical date of note: exactly two years since the first Tory poll crossover, predicted with precision on this site a year in advance]
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,585
    RobD said:

    DavidL said:

    RobD said:

    DavidL said:

    runnymede said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Failed and discredited politicians on the EU gravy train and laughing all the way to the bank...

    Sensible Brit's will surely pull the plug on this nonsense on 23rd June.
    Turfing those two spongers out is almost the best reason I can think of for voting LEAVE
    Do you really think their pensions etc would stop? More likely the UK taxpayer would end up agreeing to pay them as part of the leaving negotiations. The sums are truly obscene.
    I assume their incomes are from directorships, although I'm not sue how you can be in a situation where you recieve £4mn per annum in allowances!
    I assumed this was the wages, allowances, expenses and pensions they had received as a result of the positions they had held in the EU. Surely these are not current salaries?
    Well, it seems a little misleading then. I was under the impression that's what they were receiving now!
    You don't fine combined EU pensions of more than £160K pa obscene enough? Well you could always add on his House of Commons pension as well.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 59,036
    And because PB Tories are known for their accuracy and general correctness... SNP only got 49.97% at the previous GE ;)
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 59,036
    DavidL said:

    RobD said:

    DavidL said:

    RobD said:

    DavidL said:

    runnymede said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Failed and discredited politicians on the EU gravy train and laughing all the way to the bank...

    Sensible Brit's will surely pull the plug on this nonsense on 23rd June.
    Turfing those two spongers out is almost the best reason I can think of for voting LEAVE
    Do you really think their pensions etc would stop? More likely the UK taxpayer would end up agreeing to pay them as part of the leaving negotiations. The sums are truly obscene.
    I assume their incomes are from directorships, although I'm not sue how you can be in a situation where you recieve £4mn per annum in allowances!
    I assumed this was the wages, allowances, expenses and pensions they had received as a result of the positions they had held in the EU. Surely these are not current salaries?
    Well, it seems a little misleading then. I was under the impression that's what they were receiving now!
    You don't fine combined EU pensions of more than £160K pa obscene enough? Well you could always add on his House of Commons pension as well.
    Yes I do, and it's tax free to make matters worse. Still doesn't make it less misleading.
  • Options

    If any companies/organisations want someone to come up with an appropriate fashion code, I'm available.

    Dare I suggest that such a dress code for Remainers should be copied from Eurovision contestants, while Leavers make do with Anne Widdecombe's charity clothing donations?
    No, cavaliers and round heads.
  • Options
    sarissasarissa Posts: 1,807
    Scott_P said:
    I don't see Edinburgh West or South, NE Fife or East Lothian in that selection - the Scottish electorate is far more sophisticated about tactical voting, especially in constituencies, than this simplistic analysis suggests.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 59,036
    sarissa said:

    Scott_P said:

    twitter.com/richesoliver/status/730498224750997504

    I don't see Edinburgh West or South, NE Fife or East Lothian in that selection - the Scottish electorate is far more sophisticated about tactical voting, especially in constituencies, than this simplistic analysis suggests.
    Doesn't the analysis simply show tactical voting at work? Not sure how you can get more sophisticated than that.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,585

    If any companies/organisations want someone to come up with an appropriate fashion code, I'm available.

    Dare I suggest that such a dress code for Remainers should be copied from Eurovision contestants, while Leavers make do with Anne Widdecombe's charity clothing donations?
    No, cavaliers and round heads.
    Were round heads not right but repulsive while the cavaliers were wrong but wromantic?

    Not sure either side tick both boxes of either option.
  • Options
    Danny565Danny565 Posts: 8,091
    Wanderer said:

    Scott_P said:

    @tnewtondunn: EU referendum TV debates heading for the courts: Vote Leave say they will sue ITV for asking Farage on vs PM instead of their man, Gove.

    Hmm. The blue-on-blue aspect aside, if I were BSE I might prefer to see Gove on. He's unpopular, he has a face for radio. He may speak cogently but does that matter?
    Quite. Neither is ideal, but Farage has more appeal to core Labour voters. Gove will merely be preaching to the kind of 'retired colonel' Tory voter who is already 100% in the bag for Leave. Boris would be much better than either, though.
  • Options
    RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737
    I lurrrvve... sparklines! They are sooo sexy in a polling chart.
    https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1V6KwNnbBO1q4dDwC1r0rujdcNByLHpVI1O2WKpzNfV8/edit?usp=sharing

    Hopefully I'll integrate Betfair, 538 and PEC forecasts into this sheet in the fullness of time...

    PB's own One-Stop-Shop for the greatest POTUS election in our lifetimes.
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548

    Pulpstar said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Pulpstar said:

    The flats story must be the most obvious employment tribunal in years.
    Unless all the men have to wear high heels too I can see at least one major problem, and one that does not require a 2 year qualifying employment period at that. Of course if they do all have to wear high heels then this might be the least of their problems.
    Actually dress discrimination is legal: http://www.acas.org.uk/index.aspx?articleid=4953
    No its not. It is permitted to have differences between the sexes but they must be reasonable and for a business related reason. High heels are never going to qualify unless it is universal.
    My work dress code is very relaxed, but I can understand where people are required to wear a suit/ uniform to project a certain image. Heels are just plain damaging to your feet :/
    Doesn't stop my GP wearing them.
    Is he embracing transgender issues as part of his practice?
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 59,036
    RodCrosby said:

    I lurrrvve... sparklines! They are sooo sexy in a polling chart.
    https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1V6KwNnbBO1q4dDwC1r0rujdcNByLHpVI1O2WKpzNfV8/edit?usp=sharing

    Hopefully I'll integrate Betfair, 538 and PEC forecasts into this sheet in the fullness of time...

    PB's own One-Stop-Shop for the greatest POTUS election in our lifetimes.

    The excel-fu is strong with this one. Do the red/blue blocks represent leads for their respective party, or a poll that has moved in the direction of that party, but the lead has not necessarily changed.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 59,036
    edited May 2016
    @RodCrosby .. what is the 'flip' column denoting? Couldn't quite work it out.

    Ah, right, a custom forecast.
  • Options
    WandererWanderer Posts: 3,838
    Danny565 said:

    Wanderer said:

    Scott_P said:

    @tnewtondunn: EU referendum TV debates heading for the courts: Vote Leave say they will sue ITV for asking Farage on vs PM instead of their man, Gove.

    Hmm. The blue-on-blue aspect aside, if I were BSE I might prefer to see Gove on. He's unpopular, he has a face for radio. He may speak cogently but does that matter?
    Quite. Neither is ideal, but Farage has more appeal to core Labour voters. Gove will merely be preaching to the kind of 'retired colonel' Tory voter who is already 100% in the bag for Leave. Boris would be much better than either, though.
    Speaking of core Labour voters, do you think Brown's intervention will have any effect there?
  • Options
    No_Offence_AlanNo_Offence_Alan Posts: 3,904
    RobD said:

    DavidL said:

    runnymede said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Failed and discredited politicians on the EU gravy train and laughing all the way to the bank...

    Sensible Brit's will surely pull the plug on this nonsense on 23rd June.
    Turfing those two spongers out is almost the best reason I can think of for voting LEAVE
    Do you really think their pensions etc would stop? More likely the UK taxpayer would end up agreeing to pay them as part of the leaving negotiations. The sums are truly obscene.
    I assume their incomes are from directorships, although I'm not sue how you can be in a situation where you recieve £4mn per annum in allowances!
    You can't - the sum of £4m comes from adding together many, many years of allowances, most of which will be staff pay.


  • Options
    RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737
    RobD said:

    @RodCrosby .. what is the 'flip' column denoting? Couldn't quite work it out.

    Ah, right, a custom forecast.

    Try it and see. Flips states from their present forecast. Useful to see how Trump could get to 269/270 from the current position.
  • Options
    WandererWanderer Posts: 3,838
    RodCrosby said:

    I lurrrvve... sparklines! They are sooo sexy in a polling chart.
    https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1V6KwNnbBO1q4dDwC1r0rujdcNByLHpVI1O2WKpzNfV8/edit?usp=sharing

    Hopefully I'll integrate Betfair, 538 and PEC forecasts into this sheet in the fullness of time...

    PB's own One-Stop-Shop for the greatest POTUS election in our lifetimes.

    Ha. Those are excellent additions.

    It does have the potential to be an historic election.
  • Options
    WandererWanderer Posts: 3,838
    RobD said:

    RodCrosby said:

    I lurrrvve... sparklines! They are sooo sexy in a polling chart.
    https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1V6KwNnbBO1q4dDwC1r0rujdcNByLHpVI1O2WKpzNfV8/edit?usp=sharing

    Hopefully I'll integrate Betfair, 538 and PEC forecasts into this sheet in the fullness of time...

    PB's own One-Stop-Shop for the greatest POTUS election in our lifetimes.

    The excel-fu is strong with this one.
    Weeell, to be pedantic it's not Excel.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 59,036
    Wanderer said:

    RobD said:

    RodCrosby said:

    I lurrrvve... sparklines! They are sooo sexy in a polling chart.
    https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1V6KwNnbBO1q4dDwC1r0rujdcNByLHpVI1O2WKpzNfV8/edit?usp=sharing

    Hopefully I'll integrate Betfair, 538 and PEC forecasts into this sheet in the fullness of time...

    PB's own One-Stop-Shop for the greatest POTUS election in our lifetimes.

    The excel-fu is strong with this one.
    Weeell, to be pedantic it's not Excel.
    Google sheets-fu just doesn't have the same ring to it. ;)
  • Options
    Danny565Danny565 Posts: 8,091
    edited May 2016
    Wanderer said:

    Danny565 said:

    Wanderer said:

    Scott_P said:

    @tnewtondunn: EU referendum TV debates heading for the courts: Vote Leave say they will sue ITV for asking Farage on vs PM instead of their man, Gove.

    Hmm. The blue-on-blue aspect aside, if I were BSE I might prefer to see Gove on. He's unpopular, he has a face for radio. He may speak cogently but does that matter?
    Quite. Neither is ideal, but Farage has more appeal to core Labour voters. Gove will merely be preaching to the kind of 'retired colonel' Tory voter who is already 100% in the bag for Leave. Boris would be much better than either, though.
    Speaking of core Labour voters, do you think Brown's intervention will have any effect there?
    Probably not him alone (I don't actually think Brown excites very strong opinions eitherway these days), but if it's part of a cumulative effort of the whole "Labour establishment" going on about how "the proper Labour thing to do" is to vote Remain then it might have some impact.
  • Options
    WandererWanderer Posts: 3,838
    RobD said:

    Wanderer said:

    RobD said:

    RodCrosby said:

    I lurrrvve... sparklines! They are sooo sexy in a polling chart.
    https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1V6KwNnbBO1q4dDwC1r0rujdcNByLHpVI1O2WKpzNfV8/edit?usp=sharing

    Hopefully I'll integrate Betfair, 538 and PEC forecasts into this sheet in the fullness of time...

    PB's own One-Stop-Shop for the greatest POTUS election in our lifetimes.

    The excel-fu is strong with this one.
    Weeell, to be pedantic it's not Excel.
    Google sheets-fu just doesn't have the same ring to it. ;)
    Dunno, it sounds a bit enticing to be honest.
  • Options
    RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737
    RobD said:

    RodCrosby said:

    I lurrrvve... sparklines! They are sooo sexy in a polling chart.
    https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1V6KwNnbBO1q4dDwC1r0rujdcNByLHpVI1O2WKpzNfV8/edit?usp=sharing

    Hopefully I'll integrate Betfair, 538 and PEC forecasts into this sheet in the fullness of time...

    PB's own One-Stop-Shop for the greatest POTUS election in our lifetimes.

    The excel-fu is strong with this one. Do the red/blue blocks represent leads for their respective party, or a poll that has moved in the direction of that party, but the lead has not necessarily changed.
    If you are talking about the sparklines next to the ^ v arrows for the states.

    Yes, it's called a win/loss chart, and is just a simple sparkline of the latest polls, showing the winner of each. Just enough info to make an informed judgment, as to whether further investigation is required.

    E.g. New York is trending GOP [since 2012], but all the latest polls still show it safely DEM.

    If any poll should (miraculously) show a GOP lead, the sparkline will flag it up as a pink square above the axis...
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 59,036
    RodCrosby said:

    RobD said:

    RodCrosby said:

    I lurrrvve... sparklines! They are sooo sexy in a polling chart.
    https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1V6KwNnbBO1q4dDwC1r0rujdcNByLHpVI1O2WKpzNfV8/edit?usp=sharing

    Hopefully I'll integrate Betfair, 538 and PEC forecasts into this sheet in the fullness of time...

    PB's own One-Stop-Shop for the greatest POTUS election in our lifetimes.

    The excel-fu is strong with this one. Do the red/blue blocks represent leads for their respective party, or a poll that has moved in the direction of that party, but the lead has not necessarily changed.
    If you are talking about the sparklines next to the ^ v arrows for the states.

    Yes, it's called a win/loss chart, and is just a simple sparkline of the latest polls, showing the winner of each. Just enough info to make an informed judgment, as to whether further investigation is required.

    E.g. New York is trending GOP [since 2012], but all the latest polls still show it safely DEM.

    If any poll should (miraculously) show a GOP lead, the sparkline will flag it up as a pink square above the axis...
    Gotcha, so it indicates poll leads rather than trending in a particular direction. Still, very nice!
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,788
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,193

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Pulpstar said:

    The flats story must be the most obvious employment tribunal in years.
    Unless all the men have to wear high heels too I can see at least one major problem, and one that does not require a 2 year qualifying employment period at that. Of course if they do all have to wear high heels then this might be the least of their problems.
    Actually dress discrimination is legal: http://www.acas.org.uk/index.aspx?articleid=4953
    No its not. It is permitted to have differences between the sexes but they must be reasonable and for a business related reason. High heels are never going to qualify unless it is universal.
    Dammit. Back to the drawing board for our new nurses uniforms....
    Wouldn't PVC be easy to clean? Just a thought...
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 59,036
    ITV led by Robert Preston? Talk about rising in the ranks! Didn't he join ITV a few weeks ago? LOL
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,788
    RobD said:

    ITV led by Robert Preston? Talk about rising in the ranks! Didn't he join ITV a few weeks ago? LOL
    Yup.

    If Leave do lose on June 23rd, the amount of whingeing by some Leavers could power the national grid for decades to come.
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,355
    RodCrosby said:

    RobD said:

    @RodCrosby .. what is the 'flip' column denoting? Couldn't quite work it out.

    Ah, right, a custom forecast.

    Try it and see. Flips states from their present forecast. Useful to see how Trump could get to 269/270 from the current position.
    Or how Hillary could go from the current position to a Chirac vs. Le Pen style landslide... (Just kidding.)
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,334
    RodCrosby said:

    RobD said:

    RodCrosby said:

    I lurrrvve... sparklines! They are sooo sexy in a polling chart.
    https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1V6KwNnbBO1q4dDwC1r0rujdcNByLHpVI1O2WKpzNfV8/edit?usp=sharing

    Hopefully I'll integrate Betfair, 538 and PEC forecasts into this sheet in the fullness of time...

    PB's own One-Stop-Shop for the greatest POTUS election in our lifetimes.

    The excel-fu is strong with this one. Do the red/blue blocks represent leads for their respective party, or a poll that has moved in the direction of that party, but the lead has not necessarily changed.
    If you are talking about the sparklines next to the ^ v arrows for the states.

    Yes, it's called a win/loss chart, and is just a simple sparkline of the latest polls, showing the winner of each. Just enough info to make an informed judgment, as to whether further investigation is required.

    E.g. New York is trending GOP [since 2012], but all the latest polls still show it safely DEM.

    If any poll should (miraculously) show a GOP lead, the sparkline will flag it up as a pink square above the axis...
    Clinton has led by double digits in every NY poll
  • Options
    john_zimsjohn_zims Posts: 3,399
    @Casino_Royale

    https://twitter.com/DanHannanMEP/status/730060175768489985'


    In case anyone was wondering why they are so enthusiastic about the EU.
  • Options
    No_Offence_AlanNo_Offence_Alan Posts: 3,904
    john_zims said:

    @Casino_Royale

    https://twitter.com/DanHannanMEP/status/730060175768489985'


    In case anyone was wondering why they are so enthusiastic about the EU.

    If this was "just a minute" you'd be disqualified for repetition.
  • Options
    RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737
    RobD said:

    RodCrosby said:

    RobD said:

    RodCrosby said:

    I lurrrvve... sparklines! They are sooo sexy in a polling chart.
    https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1V6KwNnbBO1q4dDwC1r0rujdcNByLHpVI1O2WKpzNfV8/edit?usp=sharing

    Hopefully I'll integrate Betfair, 538 and PEC forecasts into this sheet in the fullness of time...

    PB's own One-Stop-Shop for the greatest POTUS election in our lifetimes.

    The excel-fu is strong with this one. Do the red/blue blocks represent leads for their respective party, or a poll that has moved in the direction of that party, but the lead has not necessarily changed.
    If you are talking about the sparklines next to the ^ v arrows for the states.

    Yes, it's called a win/loss chart, and is just a simple sparkline of the latest polls, showing the winner of each. Just enough info to make an informed judgment, as to whether further investigation is required.

    E.g. New York is trending GOP [since 2012], but all the latest polls still show it safely DEM.

    If any poll should (miraculously) show a GOP lead, the sparkline will flag it up as a pink square above the axis...
    Gotcha, so it indicates poll leads rather than trending in a particular direction. Still, very nice!
    Well those leads - even just as equal sized squares - may give some impression of a trend, worthy of further investigation. Almost like Morse Code!

    -.----.------ (not much to see here, probably a win for -)

    At the moment they are all three squares [the minimum setting owing to a lack of polls], but that will soon change...
  • Options
    NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,380
    ITV's decision ONLY to have Tories and UKIP on their referendum debates, if correctly reported, is well weird.

    Quite a good article on why London votes as it does and what it means for the longer term:

    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/may/11/how-london-became-a-labour-city-and-what-it-means-for-british-politics
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,411
    On social media he claimed to be the manager of a takeaway in Birmingham and also a student in the city – all while supposedly living under refugee status in an asylum hostel in Bari.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3585722/Bomb-plotter-s-tour-Britain-Afghan-suspected-planning-terror-attacks-used-fake-IDs-visit-high-profile-UK-sites.html
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 59,036
    RodCrosby said:

    RobD said:

    RodCrosby said:

    RobD said:

    RodCrosby said:

    I lurrrvve... sparklines! They are sooo sexy in a polling chart.
    https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1V6KwNnbBO1q4dDwC1r0rujdcNByLHpVI1O2WKpzNfV8/edit?usp=sharing

    Hopefully I'll integrate Betfair, 538 and PEC forecasts into this sheet in the fullness of time...

    PB's own One-Stop-Shop for the greatest POTUS election in our lifetimes.

    The excel-fu is strong with this one. Do the red/blue blocks represent leads for their respective party, or a poll that has moved in the direction of that party, but the lead has not necessarily changed.
    If you are talking about the sparklines next to the ^ v arrows for the states.

    Yes, it's called a win/loss chart, and is just a simple sparkline of the latest polls, showing the winner of each. Just enough info to make an informed judgment, as to whether further investigation is required.

    E.g. New York is trending GOP [since 2012], but all the latest polls still show it safely DEM.

    If any poll should (miraculously) show a GOP lead, the sparkline will flag it up as a pink square above the axis...
    Gotcha, so it indicates poll leads rather than trending in a particular direction. Still, very nice!
    Well those leads - even just as equal sized squares - may give some impression of a trend, worthy of further investigation. Almost like Morse Code!

    -.----.------ (not much to see here, probably a win for -)

    At the moment they are all three squares [the minimum setting owing to a lack of polls], but that will soon change...
    Another point.. shouldn't cell AA be "clinton", since she is the one winning on the current forecast?
  • Options
    RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737
    The Popular Vote (PV) sparkline, on the other hand, is configured to show actual leads [and highlights the best poll for each candidate in the timeline - I said sparklines were sexy!].

    And my eyes tell me Hillary's PV lead might be narrowing...
  • Options
    Stark_DawningStark_Dawning Posts: 9,348

    RobD said:

    ITV led by Robert Preston? Talk about rising in the ranks! Didn't he join ITV a few weeks ago? LOL
    Yup.

    If Leave do lose on June 23rd, the amount of whingeing by some Leavers could power the national grid for decades to come.
    My God that's chilling: 'ITV has effectively joined the official IN campaign and they'll be consequences for its future.' So Leave are planning to close down unsupportive media outlets? Is this coups d'état to be mounted after a Leave vote, a Remain vote or both?
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,355

    RobD said:

    ITV led by Robert Preston? Talk about rising in the ranks! Didn't he join ITV a few weeks ago? LOL
    Yup.

    If Leave do lose on June 23rd, the amount of whingeing by some Leavers could power the national grid for decades to come.
    My God that's chilling: 'ITV has effectively joined the official IN campaign and they'll be consequences for its future.' So Leave are planning to close down unsupportive media outlets? Is this coups d'état to be mounted after a Leave vote, a Remain vote or both?
    If it becomes a 'who governs?' vote, the people on the Leave side won't be in a good position to win.
  • Options
    RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737
    edited May 2016
    RobD said:

    RodCrosby said:

    RobD said:

    RodCrosby said:

    RobD said:

    RodCrosby said:

    I lurrrvve... sparklines! They are sooo sexy in a polling chart.
    https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1V6KwNnbBO1q4dDwC1r0rujdcNByLHpVI1O2WKpzNfV8/edit?usp=sharing

    Hopefully I'll integrate Betfair, 538 and PEC forecasts into this sheet in the fullness of time...

    PB's own One-Stop-Shop for the greatest POTUS election in our lifetimes.

    The excel-fu is strong with this one. Do the red/blue blocks represent leads for their respective party, or a poll that has moved in the direction of that party, but the lead has not necessarily changed.
    If you are talking about the sparklines next to the ^ v arrows for the states.

    Yes, it's called a win/loss chart, and is just a simple sparkline of the latest polls, showing the winner of each. Just enough info to make an informed judgment, as to whether further investigation is required.

    E.g. New York is trending GOP [since 2012], but all the latest polls still show it safely DEM.

    If any poll should (miraculously) show a GOP lead, the sparkline will flag it up as a pink square above the axis...
    Gotcha, so it indicates poll leads rather than trending in a particular direction. Still, very nice!
    Well those leads - even just as equal sized squares - may give some impression of a trend, worthy of further investigation. Almost like Morse Code!

    -.----.------ (not much to see here, probably a win for -)

    At the moment they are all three squares [the minimum setting owing to a lack of polls], but that will soon change...
    Another point.. shouldn't cell AA be "clinton", since she is the one winning on the current forecast?
    AA35?

    No, Trump!

    It is telling you how much of a swing [6.0%, better described as meta-margin; we in the UK would call it a 3.0% swing] Trump (the forecast underdog) needs to overturn the current forecast, in order to win.

    In other words, he needs to win every state down to North Carolina to eke out a 273 Electoral Vote victory [his easiest path, based on current polling, as shown in the sheet]...
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 59,036
    RodCrosby said:

    RobD said:

    RodCrosby said:

    RobD said:

    RodCrosby said:

    RobD said:

    RodCrosby said:

    I lurrrvve... sparklines! They are sooo sexy in a polling chart.
    https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1V6KwNnbBO1q4dDwC1r0rujdcNByLHpVI1O2WKpzNfV8/edit?usp=sharing

    Hopefully I'll integrate Betfair, 538 and PEC forecasts into this sheet in the fullness of time...

    PB's own One-Stop-Shop for the greatest POTUS election in our lifetimes.

    The excel-fu is strong with this one. Do the red/blue blocks represent leads for their respective party, or a poll that has moved in the direction of that party, but the lead has not necessarily changed.
    If you are talking about the sparklines next to the ^ v arrows for the states.

    Yes, it's called a win/loss chart, and is just a simple sparkline of the latest polls, showing the winner of each. Just enough info to make an informed judgment, as to whether further investigation is required.

    E.g. New York is trending GOP [since 2012], but all the latest polls still show it safely DEM.

    If any poll should (miraculously) show a GOP lead, the sparkline will flag it up as a pink square above the axis...
    Gotcha, so it indicates poll leads rather than trending in a particular direction. Still, very nice!
    Well those leads - even just as equal sized squares - may give some impression of a trend, worthy of further investigation. Almost like Morse Code!

    -.----.------ (not much to see here, probably a win for -)

    At the moment they are all three squares [the minimum setting owing to a lack of polls], but that will soon change...
    Another point.. shouldn't cell AA be "clinton", since she is the one winning on the current forecast?
    AA35?

    No, Trump!

    It is telling you how much of a swing [6.0%, better described as meta-margin; we in the UK would call it a 3.0% swing] Trump (the forecast underdog) needs to overturn the current forecast, in order to win.

    In other words, he needs to win every state down to North Carolina to eke out a 273 Electoral Vote victory [his easiest path, based on current polling, as shown in the sheet]...
    Ah okay, so if Trump started to lead in the EV forecast, that box would change to describe what was the swing state Clinton needed in order to win?
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,411
    edited May 2016
    A new base for BBC Three is to be created in Birmingham

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-36270371

    For a channel that got shut down, sorry went "online only", a new logo and now a new base. They might as well not bothered changing anything.
  • Options
    NormNorm Posts: 1,251
    Without Farage there'd be no referendum and whatever other faults he has by and large being an effective communicator isn't one of them. He'll reach a part of the electorate that Leave need to actually turnout and vote if they're to have the remotest chance of winning. I'm not sure that same segment would respond to Gove. So while I'm not a fan of the man or his party the Leave campaign really shouldn't fret too much.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,411
    David Cameron will not debate against any Tory ahead of EU referendum

    The Prime Minister’s has set a “red line” over the prospect of a televised debate against a Tory Eurosceptic such as Boris Johnson.

    The disclosure will come as a major blow to the BBC, which had been pushing for a TV debate featuring the Prime Minister against one of his Eurosceptic Cabinet colleagues, most likely Michael Gove, the Justice Secretary.

    Asked if he would take part in a head-to-head contest with the Prime Minister, Mr Johnson told the Spectator magazine: “Put it this way. I think I’d look a bit of a wimp if I said no… For me to recuse myself from the debates would be wet.”

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/05/11/david-cameron-will-not-debate-against-any-tory-ahead-of-eu-refer/

    Pasties in the air like you just don't care.....
  • Options
    RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737
    edited May 2016
    RobD said:

    RodCrosby said:

    RobD said:

    RodCrosby said:

    RobD said:

    RodCrosby said:

    RobD said:

    RodCrosby said:

    I lurrrvve... sparklines! They are sooo sexy in a polling chart.
    https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1V6KwNnbBO1q4dDwC1r0rujdcNByLHpVI1O2WKpzNfV8/edit?usp=sharing

    Hopefully I'll integrate Betfair, 538 and PEC forecasts into this sheet in the fullness of time...

    PB's own One-Stop-Shop for the greatest POTUS election in our lifetimes.

    The excel-fu is strong with this one. Do the red/blue blocks represent leads for their respective party, or a poll that has moved in the direction of that party, but the lead has not necessarily changed.
    Yes, it's called a win/loss chart, and is just a simple sparkline of the latest polls, showing the winner of each. Just enough info to make an informed judgment, as to whether further investigation is required.

    E.g. New York is trending GOP [since 2012], but all the latest polls still show it safely DEM.

    If any poll should (miraculously) show a GOP lead, the sparkline will flag it up as a pink square above the axis...
    Gotcha, so it indicates poll leads rather than trending in a particular direction. Still, very nice!
    Well those leads - even just as equal sized squares - may give some impression of a trend, worthy of further investigation. Almost like Morse Code!

    -.----.------ (not much to see here, probably a win for -)

    At the moment they are all three squares [the minimum setting owing to a lack of polls], but that will soon change...
    Another point.. shouldn't cell AA be "clinton", since she is the one winning on the current forecast?
    AA35?

    No, Trump!

    It is telling you how much of a swing [6.0%, better described as meta-margin; we in the UK would call it a 3.0% swing] Trump (the forecast underdog) needs to overturn the current forecast, in order to win.

    In other words, he needs to win every state down to North Carolina to eke out a 273 Electoral Vote victory [his easiest path, based on current polling, as shown in the sheet]...
    Ah okay, so if Trump started to lead in the EV forecast, that box would change to describe what was the swing state Clinton needed in order to win?
    Yup!

    [fingers crossed] (^_-)

    Lots of faffing today with the signs/colours/which way is "up"?, etc...

    Pollsters CSS [the bastards] seem to have an ad-hoc way of presenting the data. [Who is in the leftmost column? - Trump? Clinton? dunno - need a separate check, to decide which way to deduct one from the other, and propagate this through some deeply-embedded formulae in, for example, the sparklines...]
  • Options
    Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 25,707
    Scott_P said:

    @tnewtondunn: EU referendum TV debates heading for the courts: Vote Leave say they will sue ITV for asking Farage on vs PM instead of their man, Gove.

    Bunch of silly twats.
  • Options
    scotslassscotslass Posts: 912
    This has got to be one of your most biased posts ever Mike.

    One Salmond did not "moan" about the system. I actually listened to the LBC SHOW which you clearly did not and he was very cheerful about the SNP result - pointing out that it was the highest vote at 47 per cent for any governing party in western Europe!

    Second he merely repeated evidence he first gave to the Electoral Commission (I think in 2002) arguing for a national rather than a local list and for good reason. It would help iron out some of the kinks in the system. This view is more relevant now given that the Scottish Parliament and not Westminster will now control the elections. Salmond has never liked the regional list and has said so many times before.

    Third the SNP have never supported FPP and still do not, despite gaining from it last year. This
    principled approach rather marks them out from the crowd.

    Nothing about Salmond's interview or track record on this justifies your attack which makes you look like what the Speaker might describe as an "irritating" Liberal Democrat.
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,355
    It looks like the never Trumps have found a new angle. A call for his delegates to abstain until he releases his tax returns.

    http://www.nationalreview.com/article/435254/donald-trumps-tax-returns-delegates-should-abstain-if-he-wont-release
  • Options
    RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737
    edited May 2016
    HYUFD said:

    RodCrosby said:

    RobD said:

    RodCrosby said:

    I lurrrvve... sparklines! They are sooo sexy in a polling chart.
    https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1V6KwNnbBO1q4dDwC1r0rujdcNByLHpVI1O2WKpzNfV8/edit?usp=sharing

    Hopefully I'll integrate Betfair, 538 and PEC forecasts into this sheet in the fullness of time...

    PB's own One-Stop-Shop for the greatest POTUS election in our lifetimes.

    The excel-fu is strong with this one. Do the red/blue blocks represent leads for their respective party, or a poll that has moved in the direction of that party, but the lead has not necessarily changed.
    If you are talking about the sparklines next to the ^ v arrows for the states.

    Yes, it's called a win/loss chart, and is just a simple sparkline of the latest polls, showing the winner of each. Just enough info to make an informed judgment, as to whether further investigation is required.

    E.g. New York is trending GOP [since 2012], but all the latest polls still show it safely DEM.

    If any poll should (miraculously) show a GOP lead, the sparkline will flag it up as a pink square above the axis...
    Clinton has led by double digits in every NY poll
    I'm sure, but the median DEM lead is 20%, significantly 'more GOP' than in 2012 (DEM 28%) - hence the ^ arrow - while the sparkline still shows a continuous DEM lead in the latest polls...

    Catch my drift? If the NY sparkline should suddenly go

    .....-

    Hey! Maybe we have an interesting situation?
  • Options
    viewcodeviewcode Posts: 19,240

    Pulpstar said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Pulpstar said:

    The flats story must be the most obvious employment tribunal in years.
    Unless all the men have to wear high heels too I can see at least one major problem, and one that does not require a 2 year qualifying employment period at that. Of course if they do all have to wear high heels then this might be the least of their problems.
    Actually dress discrimination is legal: http://www.acas.org.uk/index.aspx?articleid=4953
    No its not. It is permitted to have differences between the sexes but they must be reasonable and for a business related reason. High heels are never going to qualify unless it is universal.
    My work dress code is very relaxed, but I can understand where people are required to wear a suit/ uniform to project a certain image. Heels are just plain damaging to your feet :/
    Doesn't stop my GP wearing them.
    Is he embracing transgender issues as part of his practice?
    The GP in question is a woman.
  • Options
    IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966
    What is the feeling on the latest AEP missive ?

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/05/11/italy-must-chose-between-the-euro-and-its-own-economic-survival/

    Doesn't look good for Italy, those production figures are pretty terrifying.
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,355
    Indigo said:

    What is the feeling on the latest AEP missive ?

    AEP is never knowingly phlegmatic.
  • Options
    logical_songlogical_song Posts: 9,740
    Norm said:

    Without Farage there'd be no referendum and whatever other faults he has by and large being an effective communicator isn't one of them. He'll reach a part of the electorate that Leave need to actually turnout and vote if they're to have the remotest chance of winning. I'm not sure that same segment would respond to Gove. So while I'm not a fan of the man or his party the Leave campaign really shouldn't fret too much.

    Good points but Britain's 'rump, Nigel Farage, is a loose cannon. He could help firm up Remain.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,334
    RodCrosby said:

    HYUFD said:

    RodCrosby said:

    RobD said:

    RodCrosby said:

    I lurrrvve... sparklines! They are sooo sexy in a polling chart.
    https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1V6KwNnbBO1q4dDwC1r0rujdcNByLHpVI1O2WKpzNfV8/edit?usp=sharing

    Hopefully I'll integrate Betfair, 538 and PEC forecasts into this sheet in the fullness of time...

    PB's own One-Stop-Shop for the greatest POTUS election in our lifetimes.

    The excel-fu is strong with this one. Do the red/blue blocks represent leads for their respective party, or a poll that has moved in the direction of that party, but the lead has not necessarily changed.
    If you are talking about the sparklines next to the ^ v arrows for the states.

    Yes, it's called a win/loss chart, and is just a simple sparkline of the latest polls, showing the winner of each. Just enough info to make an informed judgment, as to whether further investigation is required.

    E.g. New York is trending GOP [since 2012], but all the latest polls still show it safely DEM.

    If any poll should (miraculously) show a GOP lead, the sparkline will flag it up as a pink square above the axis...
    Clinton has led by double digits in every NY poll
    I'm sure, but the median DEM lead is 20%, significantly 'more GOP' than in 2012 (DEM 28%) - hence the ^ arrow - while the sparkline still shows a continuous DEM lead in the latest polls...

    Catch my drift? If the NY sparkline should suddenly go

    .....-

    Hey! Maybe we have an interesting situation?
    If Hillary cannot win NY where she was Senator she may as well give up
  • Options
    Awkward....

    "The United States is investigating an international aid group headed by David Miliband over allegations of corruption in projects intended to help Syrian civilians and refugees
    agen bola online | domain hosting
  • Options
    donitatadonitata Posts: 11
    Wonder if anyone would have a bet on this if we put some odds up?
    Judi Poker | Poker Online
  • Options
    memangmemang Posts: 2
    This is really amazing. Such detail!
    bola88 | judi bola
This discussion has been closed.