You can be friends with people who have different political views, though I personally have a limit when I feel that someone's views go way too far - e.g. those EDL and Britain First types.
I had a Nurse at work as a friend for some years. We shared an interest in Seventies and Eighties Roots and Dub reggae. He had real knowledge and taste in music. It was when we became friends on Facebook that it got dodgy. Loads of Britain First reposts etc. Nowt queerer than folk, but he went down a lot in my estimation. I cannot recall him ever being anything other than the soul of compassion at work to all cultures.
Tactically Labour has probably played a blinder with its radical manifesto by making it much more difficult for the Tories to keep the focus on Brexit over the next four weeks. The public will be interested in the issues raised and a Tory response on the lines of 'strong and stable leadership' simply will not wash.
It is perfect for a full onslaught from the conservatives.
The policies would seriously damage the UK as we need a positive pro business government who will defend and promote UK business not hand over the business to the hard left controlled by the union barrons.
I would expect CCHQ to be delighted at the state of labour 4 weeks out of a GE and probably find a campaign advert with Corbyn, as a puppet, being manipulared by Mccluskey -
Salmond in 2015 - Mccluskey in 2017
I suspect you are being optimistic from a Tory perspective. Trade union leaders are nothing like as well known as back in the 70s and 80s and many people will be very sympathetic - partly based on their own work experiences - to the idea that the pendulum has swung too far to the employer at the expense of ordinary workers. One does not need to be particularly left wing at all to hold such a view.
Sporting's GE Seat Spreads have been suspended for some time now ..... are we expecting some poll(s) results this evening? Meanwhile Spreadex remains open for business with their mid-spread prices largely unchanged, i.e.: Tories ....... 400 Labour ...... 156 LibDem ...... 17.5
Most seats - 1.03 Majority - 1.06 ...... The biggest dilemma is how much to stake. It's very liquid. Should I lump all my savings on it?
Don't do that. Just don't :-)
1.03 isn't often overturned in political history, because the sample size is so small. There simply aren't that many elections to look back. In my dayjob though, I see it all the time.
Treat it like a value bet as you should any other, and stake appropriately.
The only Labour holds using national switcher/retention rates are Wentworth and Deane and Doncaster Central.
Don Valley, Stoke C and B'ham Erdinton all in the 1k-2k majority boundaries.
I find it hard to believe that parts of the North which stayed Labour even in 1983 when there was a more even split between Labour and the Alliance would go Tory now.
Posters are getting carried away with assuming UKIP to Tory transfers in Labour heartlands.
Well the Gower was Labour in 1983, I wouldn't put too much store in what places were doing in 1983 to be perfectly honest.
The boundaries there were very different in 1983 - and the seat would still be Labour-held without those changes.
Allegiances have shifted over time. Labour retained NE Derbyshire, Newcastle under Lyme, Stoke South, Bishop Auckland, Thurrock, Wrexham, Grimsby, Hartlepool, Halifax, Crewe, in 1983, but they probably won't win them now.
The only Labour holds using national switcher/retention rates are Wentworth and Deane and Doncaster Central.
Don Valley, Stoke C and B'ham Erdinton all in the 1k-2k majority boundaries.
I find it hard to believe that parts of the North which stayed Labour even in 1983 when there was a more even split between Labour and the Alliance would go Tory now.
Posters are getting carried away with assuming UKIP to Tory transfers in Labour heartlands.
The relevant stat isn't the Labour to LibDem ratio its the Conservatives lead over Labour.
And 1983 was 34 years ago - there's been a lot of demographic and political changes since then, in some places favouring one side in others another.
Most seats - 1.03 Majority - 1.06 ...... The biggest dilemma is how much to stake. It's very liquid. Should I lump all my savings on it?
Don't do that. Just don't :-)
1.03 isn't often overturned in political history, because the sample size is so small. There simply aren't that many elections to look back. In my dayjob though, I see it all the time.
Treat it like a value bet as you should any other, and stake appropriately.
Looking at the odds checker. Interesting to note the Conservatives are favourites in Carshalton and Wellington.
I would have said those odds were the wrong way round myself. I think Brake should just scrape home.
Lib Dems are not going to win over any Conservative voters whilst they are symbolically lining up with Greens and labour in a progressive alliance.
By doing so the Lib Dems have thrown away any chance of Conservative remain voters switching to Lib Dem. Such remainers would have been the biggest group for Lib Dems to target.
T'other way round. The LibDems have gone with the progressive alliance approach BECAUSE they weren't winning over any Conservative voters.
Instead they should have thought about a better tactic to win over Conservative remainers - that is the biggest pool in which to fish.
Aligning with Corbyn Labour and Greens will lose the Lib Dem voters they do have.
What are the odds for lib Dems to have fewer than five seats?
I've taken the odds on a LibDem win from Betfair Sportsbook on the top 60 LibDem seats from Westmorland (25/1 on) to Redcar (10/1 against). The sum of the probabilities total 23 seats.
I've run a simulation on them using different correlation coefficients between the constituencies. There's obviously some correlation but not 100%
With zero correlation, the 95% confidence limit is 17 to 29 seats. With 100% correlation, the 95% confidence limit is 3 to 43 seats.
My best guess is that there is about a 25% correlation which gives a 95% confidence limit of 13 to 33 seats.
I may have made some dodgy assumptions or cocked up my calculations so DYOR.
I think it is very unlikely that they will have fewer than five seats.
Tactically Labour has probably played a blinder with its radical manifesto by making it much more difficult for the Tories to keep the focus on Brexit over the next four weeks. The public will be interested in the issues raised and a Tory response on the lines of 'strong and stable leadership' simply will not wash.
It is perfect for a full onslaught from the conservatives.
The policies would seriously damage the UK as we need a positive pro business government who will defend and promote UK business not hand over the business to the hard left controlled by the union barrons.
I would expect CCHQ to be delighted at the state of labour 4 weeks out of a GE and probably find a campaign advert with Corbyn, as a puppet, being manipulared by Mccluskey -
Salmond in 2015 - Mccluskey in 2017
I share @justin124's view of this. Very wise to get the election off the subject of Brexit.
Cuts to Police, Pensions, Housing, Tuition fees, tax the rich etc may not go down well in theStockbroker belt, but will be much more a fertile source of votes in Tory target seats in the North.
Much of it is economic suicide of course, but when did that ever bother a populist voter? Dumb financially, clever politically at regaining the core vote.
Most seats - 1.03 Majority - 1.06 ...... The biggest dilemma is how much to stake. It's very liquid. Should I lump all my savings on it?
Don't do that. Just don't :-)
1.03 isn't often overturned in political history, because the sample size is so small. There simply aren't that many elections to look back. In my dayjob though, I see it all the time.
Treat it like a value bet as you should any other, and stake appropriately.
I know someone who punted £60,000 on remain to win last year on the basis it was "free money". I am fairly certain he borrowed the £60,000.
Tactically Labour has probably played a blinder with its radical manifesto by making it much more difficult for the Tories to keep the focus on Brexit over the next four weeks. The public will be interested in the issues raised and a Tory response on the lines of 'strong and stable leadership' simply will not wash.
It is perfect for a full onslaught from the conservatives.
The policies would seriously damage the UK as we need a positive pro business government who will defend and promote UK business not hand over the business to the hard left controlled by the union barrons.
I would expect CCHQ to be delighted at the state of labour 4 weeks out of a GE and probably find a campaign advert with Corbyn, as a puppet, being manipulared by Mccluskey -
Salmond in 2015 - Mccluskey in 2017
I suspect you are being optimistic from a Tory perspective. Trade union leaders are nothing like as well known as back in the 70s and 80s and many people will be very sympathetic - partly based on their own work experiences - to the idea that the pendulum has swung too far to the employer at the expense of ordinary workers. One does not need to be particularly left wing at all to hold such a view.
I think there are a lot of policies there that are popular, but people
(a) will wonder who's going to pay for them, (b) reckon that Labour are led by muppets who don't like this country and will crash the economy.
Tactically Labour has probably played a blinder with its radical manifesto by making it much more difficult for the Tories to keep the focus on Brexit over the next four weeks. The public will be interested in the issues raised and a Tory response on the lines of 'strong and stable leadership' simply will not wash.
if you think that MPs refusing to support the manifesto, refusing to support Corbyn or acknowledge him in their leaflets or writing their own manifesto, is playing a blinder, believe it, if it makes you happy.
Tactically Labour has probably played a blinder with its radical manifesto by making it much more difficult for the Tories to keep the focus on Brexit over the next four weeks. The public will be interested in the issues raised and a Tory response on the lines of 'strong and stable leadership' simply will not wash.
It's probably helped to ensure Labour hold on to second place.
You can be friends with people who have different political views, though I personally have a limit when I feel that someone's views go way too far - e.g. those EDL and Britain First types.
I had a Nurse at work as a friend for some years. We shared an interest in Seventies and Eighties Roots and Dub reggae. He had real knowledge and taste in music. It was when we became friends on Facebook that it got dodgy. Loads of Britain First reposts etc. Nowt queerer than folk, but he went down a lot in my estimation. I cannot recall him ever being anything other than the soul of compassion at work to all cultures.
Tbh you often find out who is sympathetic to Britain First via Facebook, I've heard stories from several of my friends that they know at one person who they follow who reposts/likes Britain First posts.
Meanwhile re America, Trump is literally unhinged. Trump's MSNBC interview is something to behold.
The only Labour holds using national switcher/retention rates are Wentworth and Deane and Doncaster Central.
Don Valley, Stoke C and B'ham Erdinton all in the 1k-2k majority boundaries.
I find it hard to believe that parts of the North which stayed Labour even in 1983 when there was a more even split between Labour and the Alliance would go Tory now.
Posters are getting carried away with assuming UKIP to Tory transfers in Labour heartlands.
It is self delusion on a grand scale . Post election how many will admit to having lost money backing their rampings .
I'm not ramping anything but would not be surprised to see UKIP to TRoy transfers in Labour heartlands. I can see it amongst my Facebook friends in the North. Labour supporters provide a lot of heat and light. But I am surprised by some of the other comments - Corbyn is very unpopular in the north
Tactically Labour has probably played a blinder with its radical manifesto by making it much more difficult for the Tories to keep the focus on Brexit over the next four weeks. The public will be interested in the issues raised and a Tory response on the lines of 'strong and stable leadership' simply will not wash.
Why will it not? I'm prepared to believe it won't, but there's no rule that says the public (considering voting Tory anyway) will be interested even if plenty are, and will not swallow the standard line.
I have been suggesting for months that Brexit is unlikely to prove as salient at a General Election as the commentariat - and political anoraks such as ourselves - would care to believe. To most people it is effectively 'water under the bridge' as well as being a highly technical issue. Labour is now raising a range of issues which voters will much more easily relate to whether or not they agree with the proposals, and that will surely place pressure on the Tories to come up with meaningful answers.
Tactically Labour has probably played a blinder with its radical manifesto by making it much more difficult for the Tories to keep the focus on Brexit over the next four weeks. The public will be interested in the issues raised and a Tory response on the lines of 'strong and stable leadership' simply will not wash.
It is perfect for a full onslaught from the conservatives.
The policies would seriously damage the UK as we need a positive pro business government who will defend and promote UK business not hand over the business to the hard left controlled by the union barrons.
I would expect CCHQ to be delighted at the state of labour 4 weeks out of a GE and probably find a campaign advert with Corbyn, as a puppet, being manipulared by Mccluskey -
Salmond in 2015 - Mccluskey in 2017
I suspect you are being optimistic from a Tory perspective. Trade union leaders are nothing like as well known as back in the 70s and 80s and many people will be very sympathetic - partly based on their own work experiences - to the idea that the pendulum has swung too far to the employer at the expense of ordinary workers. One does not need to be particularly left wing at all to hold such a view.
I doubt more than 10% would recognise McCluskey so they won't just do the same advert as they did with Salmond in 2015.
Most seats - 1.03 Majority - 1.06 ...... The biggest dilemma is how much to stake. It's very liquid. Should I lump all my savings on it?
Don't do that. Just don't :-)
1.03 isn't often overturned in political history, because the sample size is so small. There simply aren't that many elections to look back. In my dayjob though, I see it all the time.
Treat it like a value bet as you should any other, and stake appropriately.
I know someone who punted £60,000 on remain to win last year on the basis it was "free money". I am fairly certain he borrowed the £60,000.
Well he's an idiot. Remain was never ever "free money". Neither is Tory majority here to be perfectly honest, but Macron and Tory most seats are as close to certs as you'll find.
Tactically Labour has probably played a blinder with its radical manifesto by making it much more difficult for the Tories to keep the focus on Brexit over the next four weeks. The public will be interested in the issues raised and a Tory response on the lines of 'strong and stable leadership' simply will not wash.
Why will it not? I'm prepared to believe it won't, but there's no rule that says the public (considering voting Tory anyway) will be interested even if plenty are, and will not swallow the standard line.
I have been suggesting for months that Brexit is unlikely to prove as salient at a General Election as the commentariat - and political anoraks such as ourselves - would care to believe. To most people it is effectively 'water under the bridge' as well as being a highly technical issue. Labour is now raising a range of issues which voters will much more easily relate to whether or not they agree with the proposals, and that will surely place pressure on the Tories to come up with meaningful answers.
I hope it will, but of course Labour's problems being heard are not necessarily to do with Brexit alone, and reasonably popular or at least intriguing policies are not necessarily enough either. Ed M had some good ones too, and for all our jokes the Tories won't be bereft of some good ideas too, they will have answers to some of Labour's challenges/
Looking at the odds checker. Interesting to note the Conservatives are favourites in Carshalton and Wellington.
I would have said those odds were the wrong way round myself. I think Brake should just scrape home.
Lib Dems are not going to win over any Conservative voters whilst they are symbolically lining up with Greens and labour in a progressive alliance.
By doing so the Lib Dems have thrown away any chance of Conservative remain voters switching to Lib Dem. Such remainers would have been the biggest group for Lib Dems to target.
T'other way round. The LibDems have gone with the progressive alliance approach BECAUSE they weren't winning over any Conservative voters.
You seem to think the Lib Dems have gone with a progressive alliance approach. Come back and tell me how many seats the Lib Dems have stood down in.
Most seats - 1.03 Majority - 1.06 ...... The biggest dilemma is how much to stake. It's very liquid. Should I lump all my savings on it?
Don't do that. Just don't :-)
1.03 isn't often overturned in political history, because the sample size is so small. There simply aren't that many elections to look back. In my dayjob though, I see it all the time.
Treat it like a value bet as you should any other, and stake appropriately.
I know someone who punted £60,000 on remain to win last year on the basis it was "free money". I am fairly certain he borrowed the £60,000.
Well he's an idiot. Remain was never ever "free money". Neither is Tory majority here to be perfectly honest, but Macron and Tory most seats are as close to certs as you'll find.
Most seats - 1.03 Majority - 1.06 ...... The biggest dilemma is how much to stake. It's very liquid. Should I lump all my savings on it?
Don't do that. Just don't :-)
1.03 isn't often overturned in political history, because the sample size is so small. There simply aren't that many elections to look back. In my dayjob though, I see it all the time.
Treat it like a value bet as you should any other, and stake appropriately.
I know someone who punted £60,000 on remain to win last year on the basis it was "free money". I am fairly certain he borrowed the £60,000.
Well he's an idiot. Remain was never ever "free money". Neither is Tory majority here to be perfectly honest, but Macron and Tory most seats are as close to certs as you'll find.
You can be friends with people who have different political views, though I personally have a limit when I feel that someone's views go way too far - e.g. those EDL and Britain First types.
I had a Nurse at work as a friend for some years. We shared an interest in Seventies and Eighties Roots and Dub reggae. He had real knowledge and taste in music. It was when we became friends on Facebook that it got dodgy. Loads of Britain First reposts etc. Nowt queerer than folk, but he went down a lot in my estimation. I cannot recall him ever being anything other than the soul of compassion at work to all cultures.
Tbh you often find out who is sympathetic to Britain First via Facebook, I've heard stories from several of my friends that they know at one person who they follow who reposts/likes Britain First posts.
Meanwhile re America, Trump is literally unhinged. Trump's MSNBC interview is something to behold.
My friend is dead now, from cancer at the age of 50. Maybe it was that or his pain relief that did it.
I still play some of his stuff though, I bought quite a bit of vinyl off him.
Tactically Labour has probably played a blinder with its radical manifesto by making it much more difficult for the Tories to keep the focus on Brexit over the next four weeks. The public will be interested in the issues raised and a Tory response on the lines of 'strong and stable leadership' simply will not wash.
It is perfect for a full onslaught from the conservatives.
The policies would seriously damage the UK as we need a positive pro business government who will defend and promote UK business not hand over the business to the hard left controlled by the union barrons.
I would expect CCHQ to be delighted at the state of labour 4 weeks out of a GE and probably find a campaign advert with Corbyn, as a puppet, being manipulared by Mccluskey -
Salmond in 2015 - Mccluskey in 2017
I suspect you are being optimistic from a Tory perspective. Trade union leaders are nothing like as well known as back in the 70s and 80s and many people will be very sympathetic - partly based on their own work experiences - to the idea that the pendulum has swung too far to the employer at the expense of ordinary workers. One does not need to be particularly left wing at all to hold such a view.
Some truth in that but Theresa May will address the worst excesses.
But Mccluskey is something else. Corbyn has handed him control of the party and an 'economic car crash' is guaranteed if they got near being able to implement some of the barmy proposals they have come out with
The proposals Corbyn is putting forward regarding Public Ownership do not represent a return to the 70s either - much more a return to the late 80s or early 90s.
Tactically Labour has probably played a blinder with its radical manifesto by making it much more difficult for the Tories to keep the focus on Brexit over the next four weeks. The public will be interested in the issues raised and a Tory response on the lines of 'strong and stable leadership' simply will not wash.
It is perfect for a full onslaught from the conservatives.
The policies would seriously damage the UK as we need a positive pro business government who will defend and promote UK business not hand over the business to the hard left controlled by the union barrons.
I would expect CCHQ to be delighted at the state of labour 4 weeks out of a GE and probably find a campaign advert with Corbyn, as a puppet, being manipulared by Mccluskey -
Salmond in 2015 - Mccluskey in 2017
I share @justin124's view of this. Very wise to get the election off the subject of Brexit.
It's a good idea, but I don't really see how it is a wise or unwise decision if I am honest - much as the Tories might like otherwise, this is a long campaign and both sides were going to have to bring up non-Brexit stuff at some point, it isn't some tactical masterstroke, its an inevitability.
Most seats - 1.03 Majority - 1.06 ...... The biggest dilemma is how much to stake. It's very liquid. Should I lump all my savings on it?
Don't do that. Just don't :-)
1.03 isn't often overturned in political history, because the sample size is so small. There simply aren't that many elections to look back. In my dayjob though, I see it all the time.
Treat it like a value bet as you should any other, and stake appropriately.
Keep it to £10,000 max to be safe perhaps.
for all we know Barnesian is loaded. It's never bet anything you can't afford to lose. For some that's less for some more.
Tactically Labour has probably played a blinder with its radical manifesto by making it much more difficult for the Tories to keep the focus on Brexit over the next four weeks. The public will be interested in the issues raised and a Tory response on the lines of 'strong and stable leadership' simply will not wash.
It is perfect for a full onslaught from the conservatives.
The policies would seriously damage the UK as we need a positive pro business government who will defend and promote UK business not hand over the business to the hard left controlled by the union barrons.
I would expect CCHQ to be delighted at the state of labour 4 weeks out of a GE and probably find a campaign advert with Corbyn, as a puppet, being manipulared by Mccluskey -
Salmond in 2015 - Mccluskey in 2017
I suspect you are being optimistic from a Tory perspective. Trade union leaders are nothing like as well known as back in the 70s and 80s and many people will be very sympathetic - partly based on their own work experiences - to the idea that the pendulum has swung too far to the employer at the expense of ordinary workers. One does not need to be particularly left wing at all to hold such a view.
I think there are a lot of policies there that are popular, but people
(a) will wonder who's going to pay for them, (b) reckon that Labour are led by muppets who don't like this country and will crash the economy.
I'm a supporter of a maximum wage ratio but I'd like to know how many public sector organisations and Labour councils have chosen to apply it voluntarily already.
Tactically Labour has probably played a blinder with its radical manifesto by making it much more difficult for the Tories to keep the focus on Brexit over the next four weeks. The public will be interested in the issues raised and a Tory response on the lines of 'strong and stable leadership' simply will not wash.
It is perfect for a full onslaught from the conservatives.
The policies would seriously damage the UK as we need a positive pro business government who will defend and promote UK business not hand over the business to the hard left controlled by the union barrons.
I would expect CCHQ to be delighted at the state of labour 4 weeks out of a GE and probably find a campaign advert with Corbyn, as a puppet, being manipulared by Mccluskey -
Salmond in 2015 - Mccluskey in 2017
I suspect you are being optimistic from a Tory perspective. Trade union leaders are nothing like as well known as back in the 70s and 80s and many people will be very sympathetic - partly based on their own work experiences - to the idea that the pendulum has swung too far to the employer at the expense of ordinary workers. One does not need to be particularly left wing at all to hold such a view.
I doubt more than 10% would recognise McCluskey so they won't just do the same advert as they did with Salmond in 2015.
Got it - a poster with Corbyn in the pocket of...Corbyn.
Don't trust him in a coalition of chaos, or on his own, because the lack of suitability? It's all him.
You can be friends with people who have different political views, though I personally have a limit when I feel that someone's views go way too far - e.g. those EDL and Britain First types.
I had a Nurse at work as a friend for some years. We shared an interest in Seventies and Eighties Roots and Dub reggae. He had real knowledge and taste in music. It was when we became friends on Facebook that it got dodgy. Loads of Britain First reposts etc. Nowt queerer than folk, but he went down a lot in my estimation. I cannot recall him ever being anything other than the soul of compassion at work to all cultures.
Tbh you often find out who is sympathetic to Britain First via Facebook, I've heard stories from several of my friends that they know at one person who they follow who reposts/likes Britain First posts.
Meanwhile re America, Trump is literally unhinged. Trump's MSNBC interview is something to behold.
My friend is dead now, from cancer at the age of 50. Maybe it was that or his pain relief that did it.
I still play some of his stuff though, I bought quite a bit of vinyl off him.
We could really do with an article about the seats not being contested and likely effects - sounds complicated to analyse though
Indeed - although at the most basic level, the analysis in each seat affected boils down to one question: of those voters who would've stuck with Ukip if they'd fielded a candidate, will more go to the Tories than to their opponents or vice versa? One can certainly make the case for Ukip withdrawals being more of a hindrance than a help to Conservative candidates trying to unseat Labour incumbents, *IF* the residual Ukip support consists disproportionately of Lab-Ukip switchers, and they are more inclined to go back to Labour than to cross over to the Conservatives.
The polls certainly suggest that the large bulk of 2015 Ukip voters who have already defected prefer the Conservatives, but the holdouts may be somewhat differently inclined. I'm not sure if there's any data available out there which would have anything useful to say on this matter...?
Tactically Labour has probably played a blinder with its radical manifesto by making it much more difficult for the Tories to keep the focus on Brexit over the next four weeks. The public will be interested in the issues raised and a Tory response on the lines of 'strong and stable leadership' simply will not wash.
It is perfect for a full onslaught from the conservatives.
The policies would seriously damage the UK as we need a positive pro business government who will defend and promote UK business not hand over the business to the hard left controlled by the union barrons.
I would expect CCHQ to be delighted at the state of labour 4 weeks out of a GE and probably find a campaign advert with Corbyn, as a puppet, being manipulared by Mccluskey -
Salmond in 2015 - Mccluskey in 2017
I share @justin124's view of this. Very wise to get the election off the subject of Brexit.
It's a good idea, but I don't really see how it is a wise or unwise decision if I am honest - much as the Tories might like otherwise, this is a long campaign and both sides were going to have to bring up non-Brexit stuff at some point, it isn't some tactical masterstroke, its an inevitability.
Just 4 weeks now, and postal votes start soon.
Jezza has chucked a sackful of dead cats on the table, May cannot stick to her blank sheet of paper manifesto for long.
It is a core vote strategy, but this is an election to park the bus.
Jezza also has the advantage of the populist, no one seriously expects him to deliver. Is he the Chauncey Gardner of our times?
Tactically Labour has probably played a blinder with its radical manifesto by making it much more difficult for the Tories to keep the focus on Brexit over the next four weeks. The public will be interested in the issues raised and a Tory response on the lines of 'strong and stable leadership' simply will not wash.
It is perfect for a full onslaught from the conservatives.
The policies would seriously damage the UK as we need a positive pro business government who will defend and promote UK business not hand over the business to the hard left controlled by the union barrons.
I would expect CCHQ to be delighted at the state of labour 4 weeks out of a GE and probably find a campaign advert with Corbyn, as a puppet, being manipulared by Mccluskey -
Salmond in 2015 - Mccluskey in 2017
I share @justin124's view of this. Very wise to get the election off the subject of Brexit.
Cuts to Police, Pensions, Housing, Tuition fees, tax the rich etc may not go down well in theStockbroker belt, but will be much more a fertile source of votes in Tory target seats in the North.
Much of it is economic suicide of course, but when did that ever bother a populist voter? Dumb financially, clever politically at regaining the core vote.
I agree with that but this is all about Corbyn hanging on and sadly destroying the labour party. Hiis core vote will stay with him but stacking up votes where he doesn't need them.
Most seats - 1.03 Majority - 1.06 ...... The biggest dilemma is how much to stake. It's very liquid. Should I lump all my savings on it?
Don't do that. Just don't :-)
1.03 isn't often overturned in political history, because the sample size is so small. There simply aren't that many elections to look back. In my dayjob though, I see it all the time.
Treat it like a value bet as you should any other, and stake appropriately.
Keep it to £10,000 max to be safe perhaps.
for all we know Barnesian is loaded. It's never bet anything you can't afford to lose. For some that's less for some more.
It's the cost of the divorce if my wife finds out I've staked all our savings on a cert, even if it really is a cert.
Tactically Labour has probably played a blinder with its radical manifesto by making it much more difficult for the Tories to keep the focus on Brexit over the next four weeks. The public will be interested in the issues raised and a Tory response on the lines of 'strong and stable leadership' simply will not wash.
It is perfect for a full onslaught from the conservatives.
The policies would seriously damage the UK as we need a positive pro business government who will defend and promote UK business not hand over the business to the hard left controlled by the union barrons.
I would expect CCHQ to be delighted at the state of labour 4 weeks out of a GE and probably find a campaign advert with Corbyn, as a puppet, being manipulared by Mccluskey -
Salmond in 2015 - Mccluskey in 2017
I share @justin124's view of this. Very wise to get the election off the subject of Brexit.
It's a good idea, but I don't really see how it is a wise or unwise decision if I am honest - much as the Tories might like otherwise, this is a long campaign and both sides were going to have to bring up non-Brexit stuff at some point, it isn't some tactical masterstroke, its an inevitability.
Just 4 weeks now, and postal votes start soon.
Jezza has chucked a sackful of dead cats on the table, May cannot stick to her blank sheet of paper manifesto for long.
It is a core vote strategy, but this is an election to park the bus.
Jezza also has the advantage of the populist, no one seriously expects him to deliver. Is he the Chauncey Gardner of our times?
It's a blanket sheet because it hasn't been released yet.
Tactically Labour has probably played a blinder with its radical manifesto by making it much more difficult for the Tories to keep the focus on Brexit over the next four weeks. The public will be interested in the issues raised and a Tory response on the lines of 'strong and stable leadership' simply will not wash.
It is perfect for a full onslaught from the conservatives.
The policies would seriously damage the UK as we need a positive pro business government who will defend and promote UK business not hand over the business to the hard left controlled by the union barrons.
I would expect CCHQ to be delighted at the state of labour 4 weeks out of a GE and probably find a campaign advert with Corbyn, as a puppet, being manipulared by Mccluskey -
Salmond in 2015 - Mccluskey in 2017
I share @justin124's view of this. Very wise to get the election off the subject of Brexit.
Cuts to Police, Pensions, Housing, Tuition fees, tax the rich etc may not go down well in theStockbroker belt, but will be much more a fertile source of votes in Tory target seats in the North.
Much of it is economic suicide of course, but when did that ever bother a populist voter? Dumb financially, clever politically at regaining the core vote.
I agree with that but this is all about Corbyn hanging on and sadly destroying the labour party. Hiis core vote will stay with him but stacking up votes where he doesn't need them.
Has there ever been a more destructive leader.
Win or lose there will be a Labour leadership battle this summer, whatever the number of seats.
Most seats - 1.03 Majority - 1.06 ...... The biggest dilemma is how much to stake. It's very liquid. Should I lump all my savings on it?
Don't do that. Just don't :-)
1.03 isn't often overturned in political history, because the sample size is so small. There simply aren't that many elections to look back. In my dayjob though, I see it all the time.
Treat it like a value bet as you should any other, and stake appropriately.
Keep it to £10,000 max to be safe perhaps.
for all we know Barnesian is loaded. It's never bet anything you can't afford to lose. For some that's less for some more.
It's the cost of the divorce if my wife finds out I've staked all our savings on a cert, even if it really is a cert.
There are some bets out there actually safer than Tory seats still at longer odds.
Tactically Labour has probably played a blinder with its radical manifesto by making it much more difficult for the Tories to keep the focus on Brexit over the next four weeks. The public will be interested in the issues raised and a Tory response on the lines of 'strong and stable leadership' simply will not wash.
It is perfect for a full onslaught from the conservatives.
The policies would seriously damage the UK as we need a positive pro business government who will defend and promote UK business not hand over the business to the hard left controlled by the union barrons.
I would expect CCHQ to be delighted at the state of labour 4 weeks out of a GE and probably find a campaign advert with Corbyn, as a puppet, being manipulared by Mccluskey -
Salmond in 2015 - Mccluskey in 2017
I suspect you are being optimistic from a Tory perspective. Trade union leaders are nothing like as well known as back in the 70s and 80s and many people will be very sympathetic - partly based on their own work experiences - to the idea that the pendulum has swung too far to the employer at the expense of ordinary workers. One does not need to be particularly left wing at all to hold such a view.
Some truth in that but Theresa May will address the worst excesses.
But Mccluskey is something else. Corbyn has handed him control of the party and an 'economic car crash' is guaranteed if they got near being able to implement some of the barmy proposals they have come out with
You and I know who Len Mcluskey is, but I rather doubt that very many people have heard of him. Trade union leaders have long ceased to have the public exposure we recall from the days of Arthur Scargill, Jack Jones and Hugh Scanlon. How many people today would be able to name the TUC General Secretary? Very different from when George Woodcock , Vic Feather and Len Murray held the post.
Tactically Labour has probably played a blinder with its radical manifesto by making it much more difficult for the Tories to keep the focus on Brexit over the next four weeks. The public will be interested in the issues raised and a Tory response on the lines of 'strong and stable leadership' simply will not wash.
It is perfect for a full onslaught from the conservatives.
The policies would seriously damage the UK as we need a positive pro business government who will defend and promote UK business not hand over the business to the hard left controlled by the union barrons.
I would expect CCHQ to be delighted at the state of labour 4 weeks out of a GE and probably find a campaign advert with Corbyn, as a puppet, being manipulared by Mccluskey -
Salmond in 2015 - Mccluskey in 2017
I share @justin124's view of this. Very wise to get the election off the subject of Brexit.
It's a good idea, but I don't really see how it is a wise or unwise decision if I am honest - much as the Tories might like otherwise, this is a long campaign and both sides were going to have to bring up non-Brexit stuff at some point, it isn't some tactical masterstroke, its an inevitability.
Just 4 weeks now, and postal votes start soon.
Jezza has chucked a sackful of dead cats on the table, May cannot stick to her blank sheet of paper manifesto for long.
It is a core vote strategy, but this is an election to park the bus.
Jezza also has the advantage of the populist, no one seriously expects him to deliver. Is he the Chauncey Gardner of our times?
It's a blanket sheet because it hasn't been released yet.
It has to be deliverable though, while Labour can run a fantasy manifesto.
Harrumph - UKIP are standing in Hull Wes and Eastt, where they came second with round 20% in each seat last time. Michelle Dewberry too in West, who maybe will pick up Labour votes?
So far would easily be my best return if the Tories pinch either seat, damn you UKIP!
Am I missing something in Eastbourne; the LibDems (on Betfair) are 6/4, shouldn't they be evens at least?
Why ?
Incumbency bonus Increased Conservative national lead over the LibDems LibDems have only ever won Eastbourne in a by-election or after an expenses scandal Leave seat with significant UKIP vote The Conservatives got over 40% in the constituency in 1997, 2001 and 2005 why not in 2017
On the certainty of bets, what was hung parliament a few days before the elections? Was it about 1.1? In hindsight that really would have been a silly bet but I remember thinking that it was about right at the time.
Tactically Labour has probably played a blinder with its radical manifesto by making it much more difficult for the Tories to keep the focus on Brexit over the next four weeks. The public will be interested in the issues raised and a Tory response on the lines of 'strong and stable leadership' simply will not wash.
It is perfect for a full onslaught from the conservatives.
The policies would seriously damage the UK as we need a positive pro business government who will defend and promote UK business not hand over the business to the hard left controlled by the union barrons.
I would expect CCHQ to be delighted at the state of labour 4 weeks out of a GE and probably find a campaign advert with Corbyn, as a puppet, being manipulared by Mccluskey -
Salmond in 2015 - Mccluskey in 2017
I share @justin124's view of this. Very wise to get the election off the subject of Brexit.
It's a good idea, but I don't really see how it is a wise or unwise decision if I am honest - much as the Tories might like otherwise, this is a long campaign and both sides were going to have to bring up non-Brexit stuff at some point, it isn't some tactical masterstroke, its an inevitability.
Just 4 weeks now, and postal votes start soon.
Jezza has chucked a sackful of dead cats on the table, May cannot stick to her blank sheet of paper manifesto for long.
It is a core vote strategy, but this is an election to park the bus.
Jezza also has the advantage of the populist, no one seriously expects him to deliver. Is he the Chauncey Gardner of our times?
You are Terry Venables and I claim my five pounds...
Tactically Labour has probably played a blinder with its radical manifesto by making it much more difficult for the Tories to keep the focus on Brexit over the next four weeks. The public will be interested in the issues raised and a Tory response on the lines of 'strong and stable leadership' simply will not wash.
It is perfect for a full onslaught from the conservatives.
The policies would seriously damage the UK as we need a positive pro business government who will defend and promote UK business not hand over the business to the hard left controlled by the union barrons.
I would expect CCHQ to be delighted at the state of labour 4 weeks out of a GE and probably find a campaign advert with Corbyn, as a puppet, being manipulared by Mccluskey -
Salmond in 2015 - Mccluskey in 2017
I suspect you are being optimistic from a Tory perspective. Trade union leaders are nothing like as well known as back in the 70s and 80s and many people will be very sympathetic - partly based on their own work experiences - to the idea that the pendulum has swung too far to the employer at the expense of ordinary workers. One does not need to be particularly left wing at all to hold such a view.
I think there are a lot of policies there that are popular, but people
(a) will wonder who's going to pay for them, (b) reckon that Labour are led by muppets who don't like this country and will crash the economy.
I'm a supporter of a maximum wage ratio but I'd like to know how many public sector organisations and Labour councils have chosen to apply it voluntarily already.
This is where Labour have been missing a trick for years. They should go big time after the public-sector fat cats. None of this bollocks about how you have to pay "competitive" wages to attract "top talent" - it's true up to a point, but people do not need £200k a year, especially when it's coming out of taxpayers' pockets.
At a swoop, that would go some way to neutralise two of Labour's biggest weaknesses -- that they just throw money around at everything, and that they favour public-sector workers over private-sector workers (even low-paid private workers who would otherwise be attracted to Labour).
Tactically Labour has probably played a blinder with its radical manifesto by making it much more difficult for the Tories to keep the focus on Brexit over the next four weeks. The public will be interested in the issues raised and a Tory response on the lines of 'strong and stable leadership' simply will not wash.
It is perfect for a full onslaught from the conservatives.
The policies would seriously damage the UK as we need a positive pro business government who will defend and promote UK business not hand over the business to the hard left controlled by the union barrons.
I would expect CCHQ to be delighted at the state of labour 4 weeks out of a GE and probably find a campaign advert with Corbyn, as a puppet, being manipulared by Mccluskey -
Salmond in 2015 - Mccluskey in 2017
I suspect you are being optimistic from a Tory perspective. Trade union leaders are nothing like as well known as back in the 70s and 80s and many people will be very sympathetic - partly based on their own work experiences - to the idea that the pendulum has swung too far to the employer at the expense of ordinary workers. One does not need to be particularly left wing at all to hold such a view.
Some truth in that but Theresa May will address the worst excesses.
But Mccluskey is something else. Corbyn has handed him control of the party and an 'economic car crash' is guaranteed if they got near being able to implement some of the barmy proposals they have come out with
You and I know who Len Mcluskey is, but I rather doubt that very many people have heard of him. Trade union leaders have long ceased to have the public exposure we recall from the days of Arthur Scargill, Jack Jones and Hugh Scanlon. How many people today would be able to name the TUC General Secretary? Very different from when George Woodcock , Vic Feather and Len Murray held the post.
How many voters are over the age of 50 ?
They remember the era of the union barons and I doubt many want to bring it back.
Tactically Labour has probably played a blinder with its radical manifesto by making it much more difficult for the Tories to keep the focus on Brexit over the next four weeks. The public will be interested in the issues raised and a Tory response on the lines of 'strong and stable leadership' simply will not wash.
It is perfect for a full onslaught from the conservatives.
The policies would seriously damage the UK as we need a positive pro business government who will defend and promote UK business not hand over the business to the hard left controlled by the union barrons.
I would expect CCHQ to be delighted at the state of labour 4 weeks out of a GE and probably find a campaign advert with Corbyn, as a puppet, being manipulared by Mccluskey -
Salmond in 2015 - Mccluskey in 2017
I suspect you are being optimistic from a Tory perspective. Trade union leaders are nothing like as well known as back in the 70s and 80s and many people will be very sympathetic - partly based on their own work experiences - to the idea that the pendulum has swung too far to the employer at the expense of ordinary workers. One does not need to be particularly left wing at all to hold such a view.
Some truth in that but Theresa May will address the worst excesses.
But Mccluskey is something else. Corbyn has handed him control of the party and an 'economic car crash' is guaranteed if they got near being able to implement some of the barmy proposals they have come out with
You and I know who Len Mcluskey is, but I rather doubt that very many people have heard of him. Trade union leaders have long ceased to have the public exposure we recall from the days of Arthur Scargill, Jack Jones and Hugh Scanlon. How many people today would be able to name the TUC General Secretary? Very different from when George Woodcock , Vic Feather and Len Murray held the post.
I think you might find that there is going to be a campaign led by the sun, mail, express, and telegraph that will hold no punches in their condemnation of the hard left move by Corbyn and Mccluskey.
But the real danger is the IFS and their detailed commentary of both the damage to the economy, peoples jobs, and our ability to conclude a successful Brexit
Tactically Labour has probably played a blinder with its radical manifesto by making it much more difficult for the Tories to keep the focus on Brexit over the next four weeks. The public will be interested in the issues raised and a Tory response on the lines of 'strong and stable leadership' simply will not wash.
It is perfect for a full onslaught from the conservatives.
The policies would seriously damage the UK as we need a positive pro business government who will defend and promote UK business not hand over the business to the hard left controlled by the union barrons.
I would expect CCHQ to be delighted at the state of labour 4 weeks out of a GE and probably find a campaign advert with Corbyn, as a puppet, being manipulared by Mccluskey -
Salmond in 2015 - Mccluskey in 2017
I share @justin124's view of this. Very wise to get the election off the subject of Brexit.
It's a good idea, but I don't really see how it is a wise or unwise decision if I am honest - much as the Tories might like otherwise, this is a long campaign and both sides were going to have to bring up non-Brexit stuff at some point, it isn't some tactical masterstroke, its an inevitability.
Just 4 weeks now, and postal votes start soon.
Jezza has chucked a sackful of dead cats on the table, May cannot stick to her blank sheet of paper manifesto for long.
It is a core vote strategy, but this is an election to park the bus.
Jezza also has the advantage of the populist, no one seriously expects him to deliver. Is he the Chauncey Gardner of our times?
It's a blanket sheet because it hasn't been released yet.
It has to be deliverable though, while Labour can run a fantasy manifesto.
Labour can't really do that (except by putting itself completely into purdah for 4 weeks). As Nick Ferrari has shown, you just ask them about the numbers.
Binning free schools would be a good start for May, they haven't worked and the funding should go into mainstream schools. Leave the current ones open but close applications for future ones.
Tactically Labour has probably played a blinder with its radical manifesto by making it much more difficult for the Tories to keep the focus on Brexit over the next four weeks. The public will be interested in the issues raised and a Tory response on the lines of 'strong and stable leadership' simply will not wash.
It is perfect for a full onslaught from the conservatives.
The policies would seriously damage the UK as we need a positive pro business government who will defend and promote UK business not hand over the business to the hard left controlled by the union barrons.
I would expect CCHQ to be delighted at the state of labour 4 weeks out of a GE and probably find a campaign advert with Corbyn, as a puppet, being manipulared by Mccluskey -
Salmond in 2015 - Mccluskey in 2017
I suspect you are being optimistic from a Tory perspective. Trade union leaders are nothing like as well known as back in the 70s and 80s and many people will be very sympathetic - partly based on their own work experiences - to the idea that the pendulum has swung too far to the employer at the expense of ordinary workers. One does not need to be particularly left wing at all to hold such a view.
I think there are a lot of policies there that are popular, but people
(a) will wonder who's going to pay for them, (b) reckon that Labour are led by muppets who don't like this country and will crash the economy.
I'm a supporter of a maximum wage ratio but I'd like to know how many public sector organisations and Labour councils have chosen to apply it voluntarily already.
This is where Labour have been missing a trick for years. They should go big time after the public-sector fat cats. None of this bollocks about how you have to pay "competitive" wages to attract "top talent" - it's true up to a point, but people do not need £200k a year, especially when it's coming out of taxpayers' pockets.
At a swoop, that would go some way to neutralise two of Labour's biggest weaknesses -- that they just throw money around at everything, and that they favour public-sector workers over private-sector workers (even low-paid private workers who would otherwise be attracted to Labour).
One big problem with that is that they're probably Union members...
Tactically Labour has probably played a blinder with its radical manifesto by making it much more difficult for the Tories to keep the focus on Brexit over the next four weeks. The public will be interested in the issues raised and a Tory response on the lines of 'strong and stable leadership' simply will not wash.
It is perfect for a full onslaught from the conservatives.
The policies would seriously damage the UK as we need a positive pro business government who will defend and promote UK business not hand over the business to the hard left controlled by the union barrons.
I would expect CCHQ to be delighted at the state of labour 4 weeks out of a GE and probably find a campaign advert with Corbyn, as a puppet, being manipulared by Mccluskey -
Salmond in 2015 - Mccluskey in 2017
I suspect you are being optimistic from a Tory perspective. Trade union leaders are nothing like as well known as back in the 70s and 80s and many people will be very sympathetic - partly based on their own work experiences - to the idea that the pendulum has swung too far to the employer at the expense of ordinary workers. One does not need to be particularly left wing at all to hold such a view.
I think there are a lot of policies there that are popular, but people
(a) will wonder who's going to pay for them, (b) reckon that Labour are led by muppets who don't like this country and will crash the economy.
I'm a supporter of a maximum wage ratio ...(snip)
Do you support a Premier League football team, Richard?
On the certainty of bets, what was hung parliament a few days before the elections? Was it about 1.1? In hindsight that really would have been a silly bet but I remember thinking that it was about right at the time.
The gap between Tory most seats and Tory majority should be bigger than 3% this time round. I think 1.06 Tory Maj is probably value but perhaps should be around 1.04 or so. Tory most seats more like 1-200.
Tactically Labour has probably played a blinder with its radical manifesto by making it much more difficult for the Tories to keep the focus on Brexit over the next four weeks. The public will be interested in the issues raised and a Tory response on the lines of 'strong and stable leadership' simply will not wash.
It is perfect for a full onslaught from the conservatives.
The policies would seriously damage the UK as we need a positive pro business government who will defend and promote UK business not hand over the business to the hard left controlled by the union barrons.
I would expect CCHQ to be delighted at the state of labour 4 weeks out of a GE and probably find a campaign advert with Corbyn, as a puppet, being manipulared by Mccluskey -
Salmond in 2015 - Mccluskey in 2017
I suspect you are being optimistic from a Tory perspective. Trade union leaders are nothing like as well known as back in the 70s and 80s and many people will be very sympathetic - partly based on their own work experiences - to the idea that the pendulum has swung too far to the employer at the expense of ordinary workers. One does not need to be particularly left wing at all to hold such a view.
I think there are a lot of policies there that are popular, but people
(a) will wonder who's going to pay for them, (b) reckon that Labour are led by muppets who don't like this country and will crash the economy.
I'm a supporter of a maximum wage ratio ...(snip)
Do you support a Premier League football team, Richard?
What is to stop a company splitting in two and having all the high earners in one company, and the others in another?
Harrumph - UKIP are standing in Hull Wes and Eastt, where they came second with round 20% in each seat last time. Michelle Dewberry too in West, who maybe will pick up Labour votes?
So far would easily be my best return if the Tories pinch either seat, damn you UKIP!
Tactically Labour has probably played a blinder with its radical manifesto by making it much more difficult for the Tories to keep the focus on Brexit over the next four weeks. The public will be interested in the issues raised and a Tory response on the lines of 'strong and stable leadership' simply will not wash.
It is perfect for a full onslaught from the conservatives.
The policies would seriously damage the UK as we need a positive pro business government who will defend and promote UK business not hand over the business to the hard left controlled by the union barrons.
I would expect CCHQ to be delighted at the state of labour 4 weeks out of a GE and probably find a campaign advert with Corbyn, as a puppet, being manipulared by Mccluskey -
Salmond in 2015 - Mccluskey in 2017
I suspect you are being optimistic from a Tory perspective. Trade union leaders are nothing like as well known as back in the 70s and 80s and many people will be very sympathetic - partly based on their own work experiences - to the idea that the pendulum has swung too far to the employer at the expense of ordinary workers. One does not need to be particularly left wing at all to hold such a view.
I think there are a lot of policies there that are popular, but people
(a) will wonder who's going to pay for them, (b) reckon that Labour are led by muppets who don't like this country and will crash the economy.
I'm a supporter of a maximum wage ratio ...(snip)
Do you support a Premier League football team, Richard?
No and clearly increased pay has not resulted in increased productivity in football.
Harrumph - UKIP are standing in Hull Wes and Eastt, where they came second with round 20% in each seat last time. Michelle Dewberry too in West, who maybe will pick up Labour votes?
So far would easily be my best return if the Tories pinch either seat, damn you UKIP!
Tactically Labour has probably played a blinder with its radical manifesto by making it much more difficult for the Tories to keep the focus on Brexit over the next four weeks. The public will be interested in the issues raised and a Tory response on the lines of 'strong and stable leadership' simply will not wash.
It is perfect for a full onslaught from the conservatives.
The policies would seriously damage the UK as we need a positive pro business government who will defend and promote UK business not hand over the business to the hard left controlled by the union barrons.
I would expect CCHQ to be delighted at the state of labour 4 weeks out of a GE and probably find a campaign advert with Corbyn, as a puppet, being manipulared by Mccluskey -
Salmond in 2015 - Mccluskey in 2017
I suspect you are being optimistic from a Tory perspective. Trade union leaders are nothing like as well known as back in the 70s and 80s and many people will be very sympathetic - partly based on their own work experiences - to the idea that the pendulum has swung too far to the employer at the expense of ordinary workers. One does not need to be particularly left wing at all to hold such a view.
I think there are a lot of policies there that are popular, but people
(a) will wonder who's going to pay for them, (b) reckon that Labour are led by muppets who don't like this country and will crash the economy.
I'm a supporter of a maximum wage ratio ...(snip)
Do you support a Premier League football team, Richard?
What is to stop a company splitting in two and having all the high earners in one company, and the others in another?
It's almost a certainty that would happen if Manchester United tried to peg Pogba's salary to that of a 16 year old youth player, or one of the secretaries in the office.
Most seats - 1.03 Majority - 1.06 ...... The biggest dilemma is how much to stake. It's very liquid. Should I lump all my savings on it?
Don't do that. Just don't :-)
1.03 isn't often overturned in political history, because the sample size is so small. There simply aren't that many elections to look back. In my dayjob though, I see it all the time.
Treat it like a value bet as you should any other, and stake appropriately.
Keep it to £10,000 max to be safe perhaps.
for all we know Barnesian is loaded. It's never bet anything you can't afford to lose. For some that's less for some more.
It's the cost of the divorce if my wife finds out I've staked all our savings on a cert, even if it really is a cert.
There are some bets out there actually safer than Tory seats still at longer odds.
Jeremy Hunt for instance, 1-20 with Ladbrokes.
If she caught me betting on Jeremy Hunt winning !!!
In practice, I've built up small sums of winnings with Betfair, WH, PP and Laddies and I don't put any more into my accounts. I'm betting with my winnings so that's my limit. Not more than £1,000 in each.
Does anyone know how many UKIP candidates there are?
Does UKIP even know itself? Maybe not, as per the Guardian:
"As the deadline passed at 4pm, Ukip was not even sure it would hit its target of 400, as officials attempted to find out whether all of their potential candidates had managed to submit their nomination papers in time."
Harrumph - UKIP are standing in Hull Wes and Eastt, where they came second with round 20% in each seat last time. Michelle Dewberry too in West, who maybe will pick up Labour votes?
So far would easily be my best return if the Tories pinch either seat, damn you UKIP!
Is Michelle Dewberry standing for UKIP
No, Indy, at least according to wiki.
She is very switched on - glad it is not UKIP - would be a good MP
Tactically Labour has probably played a blinder with its radical manifesto by making it much more difficult for the Tories to keep the focus on Brexit over the next four weeks. The public will be interested in the issues raised and a Tory response on the lines of 'strong and stable leadership' simply will not wash.
It is perfect for a full onslaught from the conservatives.
The policies would seriously damage the UK as we need a positive pro business government who will defend and promote UK business not hand over the business to the hard left controlled by the union barrons.
I would expect CCHQ to be delighted at the state of labour 4 weeks out of a GE and probably find a campaign advert with Corbyn, as a puppet, being manipulared by Mccluskey -
Salmond in 2015 - Mccluskey in 2017
I suspect you are being optimistic from a Tory perspective. Trade union leaders are nothing like as well known as back in the 70s and 80s and many people will be very sympathetic - partly based on their own work experiences - to the idea that the pendulum has swung too far to the employer at the expense of ordinary workers. One does not need to be particularly left wing at all to hold such a view.
I think there are a lot of policies there that are popular, but people
(a) will wonder who's going to pay for them, (b) reckon that Labour are led by muppets who don't like this country and will crash the economy.
I'm a supporter of a maximum wage ratio but I'd like to know how many public sector organisations and Labour councils have chosen to apply it voluntarily already.
This is where Labour have been missing a trick for years. They should go big time after the public-sector fat cats. None of this bollocks about how you have to pay "competitive" wages to attract "top talent" - it's true up to a point, but people do not need £200k a year, especially when it's coming out of taxpayers' pockets.
At a swoop, that would go some way to neutralise two of Labour's biggest weaknesses -- that they just throw money around at everything, and that they favour public-sector workers over private-sector workers (even low-paid private workers who would otherwise be attracted to Labour).
Harrumph - UKIP are standing in Hull Wes and Eastt, where they came second with round 20% in each seat last time. Michelle Dewberry too in West, who maybe will pick up Labour votes?
So far would easily be my best return if the Tories pinch either seat, damn you UKIP!
Is Michelle Dewberry standing for UKIP
No, Indy, at least according to wiki.
She is very switched on - glad it is not UKIP - would be a good MP
She put all the politicians to shame when she was on Question Time a few weeks ago.
Tactically Labour has probably played a blinder with its radical manifesto by making it much more difficult for the Tories to keep the focus on Brexit over the next four weeks. The public will be interested in the issues raised and a Tory response on the lines of 'strong and stable leadership' simply will not wash.
It is perfect for a full onslaught from the conservatives.
The policies would seriously damage the UK as we need a positive pro business government who will defend and promote UK business not hand over the business to the hard left controlled by the union barrons.
I would expect CCHQ to be delighted at the state of labour 4 weeks out of a GE and probably find a campaign advert with Corbyn, as a puppet, being manipulared by Mccluskey -
Salmond in 2015 - Mccluskey in 2017
I suspect you are being optimistic from a Tory perspective. Trade union leaders are nothing like as well known as back in the 70s and 80s and many people will be very sympathetic - partly based on their own work experiences - to the idea that the pendulum has swung too far to the employer at the expense of ordinary workers. One does not need to be particularly left wing at all to hold such a view.
Some truth in that but Theresa May will address the worst excesses.
But Mccluskey is something else. Corbyn has handed him control of the party and an 'economic car crash' is guaranteed if they got near being able to implement some of the barmy proposals they have come out with
You and I know who Len Mcluskey is, but I rather doubt that very many people have heard of him. Trade union leaders have long ceased to have the public exposure we recall from the days of Arthur Scargill, Jack Jones and Hugh Scanlon. How many people today would be able to name the TUC General Secretary? Very different from when George Woodcock , Vic Feather and Len Murray held the post.
I think you might find that there is going to be a campaign led by the sun, mail, express, and telegraph that will hold no punches in their condemnation of the hard left move by Corbyn and Mccluskey.
Mrs May will have ownership of any attack campaign. What will that do to her Mrs Nice Vicar's Daughter image?
Does anyone know how many UKIP candidates there are?
Does UKIP even know itself? Maybe not, as per the Guardian:
"As the deadline passed at 4pm, Ukip was not even sure it would hit its target of 400, as officials attempted to find out whether all of their potential candidates had managed to submit their nomination papers in time."
Tactically Labour has probably played a blinder with its radical manifesto by making it much more difficult for the Tories to keep the focus on Brexit over the next four weeks. The public will be interested in the issues raised and a Tory response on the lines of 'strong and stable leadership' simply will not wash.
It is perfect for a full onslaught from the conservatives.
The policies would seriously damage the UK as we need a positive pro business government who will defend and promote UK business not hand over the business to the hard left controlled by the union barrons.
I would expect CCHQ to be delighted at the state of labour 4 weeks out of a GE and probably find a campaign advert with Corbyn, as a puppet, being manipulared by Mccluskey -
Salmond in 2015 - Mccluskey in 2017
I suspect you are being optimistic from a Tory perspective. Trade union leaders are nothing like as well known as back in the 70s and 80s and many people will be very sympathetic - partly based on their own work experiences - to the idea that the pendulum has swung too far to the employer at the expense of ordinary workers. One does not need to be particularly left wing at all to hold such a view.
Some truth in that but Theresa May will address the worst excesses.
But Mccluskey is something else. Corbyn has handed him control of the party and an 'economic car crash' is guaranteed if they got near being able to implement some of the barmy proposals they have come out with
You and I know who Len Mcluskey is, but I rather doubt that very many people have heard of him. Trade union leaders have long ceased to have the public exposure we recall from the days of Arthur Scargill, Jack Jones and Hugh Scanlon. How many people today would be able to name the TUC General Secretary? Very different from when George Woodcock , Vic Feather and Len Murray held the post.
How many voters are over the age of 50 ?
They remember the era of the union barons and I doubt many want to bring it back.
Ah those September days of the 1970's Only thing on t.v. during the day. Air thick with senior service smoke, wide ties and wider lapels. Composite A, a 66% pay rise for wheeltappers, carried unanimously.
Tactically Labour has probably played a blinder with its radical manifesto by making it much more difficult for the Tories to keep the focus on Brexit over the next four weeks. The public will be interested in the issues raised and a Tory response on the lines of 'strong and stable leadership' simply will not wash.
It is perfect for a full onslaught from the conservatives.
The policies would seriously damage the UK as we need a positive pro business government who will defend and promote UK business not hand over the business to the hard left controlled by the union barrons.
I would expect CCHQ to be delighted at the state of labour 4 weeks out of a GE and probably find a campaign advert with Corbyn, as a puppet, being manipulared by Mccluskey -
Salmond in 2015 - Mccluskey in 2017
I suspect you are being optimistic from a Tory perspective. Trade union leaders are nothing like as well known as back in the 70s and 80s and many people will be very sympathetic - partly based on their own work experiences - to the idea that the pendulum has swung too far to the employer at the expense of ordinary workers. One does not need to be particularly left wing at all to hold such a view.
Some truth in that but Theresa May will address the worst excesses.
But Mccluskey is something else. Corbyn has handed him control of the party and an 'economic car crash' is guaranteed if they got near being able to implement some of the barmy proposals they have come out with
You and I know who Len Mcluskey is, but I rather doubt that very many people have heard of him. Trade union leaders have long ceased to have the public exposure we recall from the days of Arthur Scargill, Jack Jones and Hugh Scanlon. How many people today would be able to name the TUC General Secretary? Very different from when George Woodcock , Vic Feather and Len Murray held the post.
I think you might find that there is going to be a campaign led by the sun, mail, express, and telegraph that will hold no punches in their condemnation of the hard left move by Corbyn and Mccluskey.
Mrs May will have ownership of any attack campaign. What will that do to her Mrs Nice Vicar's Daughter image?
She doesn't seek to project one, that's just an attack line; she has never claimed ownership of a special kind of moral compass.
Elections don't work for us': Shocking footage shows Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell telling supporters to back 'insurrection'... as he accuses Tories of using film to 'push fake news'
Tactically Labour has probably played a blinder with its radical manifesto by making it much more difficult for the Tories to keep the focus on Brexit over the next four weeks. The public will be interested in the issues raised and a Tory response on the lines of 'strong and stable leadership' simply will not wash.
It is perfect for a full onslaught from the conservatives.
The policies would seriously damage the UK as we need a positive pro business government who will defend and promote UK business not hand over the business to the hard left controlled by the union barrons.
I would expect CCHQ to be delighted at the state of labour 4 weeks out of a GE and probably find a campaign advert with Corbyn, as a puppet, being manipulared by Mccluskey -
Salmond in 2015 - Mccluskey in 2017
I suspect you are being optimistic from a Tory perspective. Trade union leaders are nothing like as well known as back in the 70s and 80s and many people will be very sympathetic - partly based on their own work experiences - to the idea that the pendulum has swung too far to the employer at the expense of ordinary workers. One does not need to be particularly left wing at all to hold such a view.
Some truth in that but Theresa May will address the worst excesses.
But Mccluskey is something else. Corbyn has handed him control of the party and an 'economic car crash' is guaranteed if they got near being able to implement some of the barmy proposals they have come out with
You and I know who Len Mcluskey is, but I rather doubt that very many people have heard of him. Trade union leaders have long ceased to have the public exposure we recall from the days of Arthur Scargill, Jack Jones and Hugh Scanlon. How many people today would be able to name the TUC General Secretary? Very different from when George Woodcock , Vic Feather and Len Murray held the post.
I'd say that Bob Crow was the last well known union leader.
On the certainty of bets, what was hung parliament a few days before the elections? Was it about 1.1? In hindsight that really would have been a silly bet but I remember thinking that it was about right at the time.
Don't. I had £200 at 6/4 on hung parliament, a bet placed over a year ahead of polling day. How wise I felt, how clever. Cash out? Pah!
Tactically Labour has probably played a blinder with its radical manifesto by making it much more difficult for the Tories to keep the focus on Brexit over the next four weeks. The public will be interested in the issues raised and a Tory response on the lines of 'strong and stable leadership' simply will not wash.
It is perfect for a full onslaught from the conservatives.
The policies would seriously damage the UK as we need a positive pro business government who will defend and promote UK business not hand over the business to the hard left controlled by the union barrons.
I would expect CCHQ to be delighted at the state of labour 4 weeks out of a GE and probably find a campaign advert with Corbyn, as a puppet, being manipulared by Mccluskey -
Salmond in 2015 - Mccluskey in 2017
I suspect you are being optimistic from a Tory perspective. Trade union leaders are nothing like as well known as back in the 70s and 80s and many people will be very sympathetic - partly based on their own work experiences - to the idea that the pendulum has swung too far to the employer at the expense of ordinary workers. One does not need to be particularly left wing at all to hold such a view.
Some truth in that but Theresa May will address the worst excesses.
But Mccluskey is something else. Corbyn has handed him control of the party and an 'economic car crash' is guaranteed if they got near being able to implement some of the barmy proposals they have come out with
You and I know who Len Mcluskey is, but I rather doubt that very many people have heard of him. Trade union leaders have long ceased to have the public exposure we recall from the days of Arthur Scargill, Jack Jones and Hugh Scanlon. How many people today would be able to name the TUC General Secretary? Very different from when George Woodcock , Vic Feather and Len Murray held the post.
I think you might find that there is going to be a campaign led by the sun, mail, express, and telegraph that will hold no punches in their condemnation of the hard left move by Corbyn and Mccluskey.
Mrs May will have ownership of any attack campaign. What will that do to her Mrs Nice Vicar's Daughter image?
She attacked Juncker with great effect and I think Corbyn is next . After all she has let them reveal their true hard left credentials and her own manifesto next week will put her into the spotlight at just the right time a few days before the postal votes.
Fox hunting though is a subject I do agree with her
Looking at the odds checker. Interesting to note the Conservatives are favourites in Carshalton and Wellington.
I would have said those odds were the wrong way round myself. I think Brake should just scrape home.
Lib Dems are not going to win over any Conservative voters whilst they are symbolically lining up with Greens and labour in a progressive alliance.
By doing so the Lib Dems have thrown away any chance of Conservative remain voters switching to Lib Dem. Such remainers would have been the biggest group for Lib Dems to target.
T'other way round. The LibDems have gone with the progressive alliance approach BECAUSE they weren't winning over any Conservative voters.
You seem to think the Lib Dems have gone with a progressive alliance approach. Come back and tell me how many seats the Lib Dems have stood down in.
Exactly. The Greens have been shown up as worse negotiators than the LibDems. The deal to stand down in Brighton was surely done at the time the Greens opted out of the Richmond by-election, and Lucas is probably safe in Brighton anyhow. The Greens have stood down in a small number of key seats for the GE, including Richmond, but apart from some goodwill would appear not to have asked (or certainly not got) anything in return.
On the certainty of bets, what was hung parliament a few days before the elections? Was it about 1.1? In hindsight that really would have been a silly bet but I remember thinking that it was about right at the time.
Don't. I had £200 at 6/4 on hung parliament, a bet placed over a year ahead of polling day. How wise I felt, how clever. Cash out? Pah!
I almost pulled the trigger on Hillary when she was at 1.1.
Fortunately I decided to green up after looking at the NY Times Florida tracker.
Tactically Labour has probably played a blinder with its radical manifesto by making it much more difficult for the Tories to keep the focus on Brexit over the next four weeks. The public will be interested in the issues raised and a Tory response on the lines of 'strong and stable leadership' simply will not wash.
It is perfect for a full onslaught from the conservatives.
The policies would seriously damage the UK as we need a positive pro business government who will defend and promote UK business not hand over the business to the hard left controlled by the union barrons.
I would expect CCHQ to be delighted at the state of labour 4 weeks out of a GE and probably find a campaign advert with Corbyn, as a puppet, being manipulared by Mccluskey -
Salmond in 2015 - Mccluskey in 2017
I share @justin124's view of this. Very wise to get the election off the subject of Brexit.
It's a good idea, but I don't really see how it is a wise or unwise decision if I am honest - much as the Tories might like otherwise, this is a long campaign and both sides were going to have to bring up non-Brexit stuff at some point, it isn't some tactical masterstroke, its an inevitability.
Just 4 weeks now, and postal votes start soon.
Jezza has chucked a sackful of dead cats on the table, May cannot stick to her blank sheet of paper manifesto for long.
It is a core vote strategy, but this is an election to park the bus.
Jezza also has the advantage of the populist, no one seriously expects him to deliver. Is he the Chauncey Gardner of our times?
Does anyone know how many UKIP candidates there are?
Does UKIP even know itself? Maybe not, as per the Guardian:
"As the deadline passed at 4pm, Ukip was not even sure it would hit its target of 400, as officials attempted to find out whether all of their potential candidates had managed to submit their nomination papers in time."
Elections don't work for us': Shocking footage shows Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell telling supporters to back 'insurrection'... as he accuses Tories of using film to 'push fake news'
Not principled old men, a Cancer in the labour party.
Wonks have seen it before, question is will more people who will care see it now?
His explanation of it being fake news and out of context can be disregarded - this is a man who flat out lies about seeing communist flags at a May Day rally, the one place and time of year you'd not be surprised to see them, and which he surely knows, the charlatan.
Tactically Labour has probably played a blinder with its radical manifesto by making it much more difficult for the Tories to keep the focus on Brexit over the next four weeks. The public will be interested in the issues raised and a Tory response on the lines of 'strong and stable leadership' simply will not wash.
It is perfect for a full onslaught from the conservatives.
The policies would seriously damage the UK as we need a positive pro business government who will defend and promote UK business not hand over the business to the hard left controlled by the union barrons.
I would expect CCHQ to be delighted at the state of labour 4 weeks out of a GE and probably find a campaign advert with Corbyn, as a puppet, being manipulared by Mccluskey -
Salmond in 2015 - Mccluskey in 2017
I suspect you are being optimistic from a Tory perspective. Trade union leaders are nothing like as well known as back in the 70s and 80s and many people will be very sympathetic - partly based on their own work experiences - to the idea that the pendulum has swung too far to the employer at the expense of ordinary workers. One does not need to be particularly left wing at all to hold such a view.
Some truth in that but Theresa May will address the worst excesses.
But Mccluskey is something else. Corbyn has handed him control of the party and an 'economic car crash' is guaranteed if they got near being able to implement some of the barmy proposals they have come out with
You and I know who Len Mcluskey is, but I rather doubt that very many people have heard of him. Trade union leaders have long ceased to have the public exposure we recall from the days of Arthur Scargill, Jack Jones and Hugh Scanlon. How many people today would be able to name the TUC General Secretary? Very different from when George Woodcock , Vic Feather and Len Murray held the post.
I'd say that Bob Crow was the last well known union leader.
But still far less so than ASLEF's Ray Bucton was.
Elections don't work for us': Shocking footage shows Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell telling supporters to back 'insurrection'... as he accuses Tories of using film to 'push fake news'
Not principled old men, a Cancer in the labour party.
Well, this isn't surprising. People who don't respect democracy can't be let anywhere near power. No wonder so many Corbynistas cannot tolerate anyone who even marginally disagrees with them. This is where they get it from. And Corbynistas think these people represent 'Old Labour.' As if. A gift to the Tories this story is. Wouldn't be surprised to see their campaign posters advertise this. Also, terrible for British democracy as a whole to have these types of people at the heart of the opposition.
Looking at the odds checker. Interesting to note the Conservatives are favourites in Carshalton and Wellington.
I would have said those odds were the wrong way round myself. I think Brake should just scrape home.
Lib Dems are not going to win over any Conservative voters whilst they are symbolically lining up with Greens and labour in a progressive alliance.
By doing so the Lib Dems have thrown away any chance of Conservative remain voters switching to Lib Dem. Such remainers would have been the biggest group for Lib Dems to target.
T'other way round. The LibDems have gone with the progressive alliance approach BECAUSE they weren't winning over any Conservative voters.
You seem to think the Lib Dems have gone with a progressive alliance approach. Come back and tell me how many seats the Lib Dems have stood down in.
Exactly. The Greens have been shown up as worse negotiators than the LibDems. The deal to stand down in Brighton was surely done at the time the Greens opted out of the Richmond by-election, and Lucas is probably safe in Brighton anyhow. The Greens have stood down in a small number of key seats for the GE, including Richmond, but apart from some goodwill would appear not to have asked (or certainly not got) anything in return.
Well the problem for the Greens in any progressive alliance situation is that they are so out of contention practically anywhere, that it is hard for them to ask for much, while what they can offer in a single seat is limited (appreciated, but limited) and the other parties can reasonably hold firm for a lot more than a single seat if they are to go easy on the Greens somewhere else.
I have a feeling this guy might have been a bit Economical with the truth in regards to being a professional / scratch golfer.....Has anybody seen Paul nuttall recently?
She attacked Juncker with great effect and I think Corbyn is next . After all she has let them reveal their true hard left credentials and her own manifesto next week will put her into the spotlight at just the right time a few days before the postal votes.
Fox hunting though is a subject I do agree with her
Comments
Meanwhile Spreadex remains open for business with their mid-spread prices largely unchanged, i.e.:
Tories ....... 400
Labour ...... 156
LibDem ...... 17.5
1.03 isn't often overturned in political history, because the sample size is so small. There simply aren't that many elections to look back. In my dayjob though, I see it all the time.
Treat it like a value bet as you should any other, and stake appropriately.
And 1983 was 34 years ago - there's been a lot of demographic and political changes since then, in some places favouring one side in others another.
I've run a simulation on them using different correlation coefficients between the constituencies. There's obviously some correlation but not 100%
With zero correlation, the 95% confidence limit is 17 to 29 seats.
With 100% correlation, the 95% confidence limit is 3 to 43 seats.
My best guess is that there is about a 25% correlation which gives a 95% confidence limit of 13 to 33 seats.
I may have made some dodgy assumptions or cocked up my calculations so DYOR.
I think it is very unlikely that they will have fewer than five seats.
Cuts to Police, Pensions, Housing, Tuition fees, tax the rich etc may not go down well in theStockbroker belt, but will be much more a fertile source of votes in Tory target seats in the North.
Much of it is economic suicide of course, but when did that ever bother a populist voter? Dumb financially, clever politically at regaining the core vote.
(a) will wonder who's going to pay for them,
(b) reckon that Labour are led by muppets who don't like this country and will crash the economy.
Meanwhile re America, Trump is literally unhinged. Trump's MSNBC interview is something to behold.
I still play some of his stuff though, I bought quite a bit of vinyl off him.
But Mccluskey is something else. Corbyn has handed him control of the party and an 'economic car crash' is guaranteed if they got near being able to implement some of the barmy proposals they have come out with
The worst that can happen is the worst that can happen.
Don't trust him in a coalition of chaos, or on his own, because the lack of suitability? It's all him.
Didn't put you down as a reggae fan though!
The polls certainly suggest that the large bulk of 2015 Ukip voters who have already defected prefer the Conservatives, but the holdouts may be somewhat differently inclined. I'm not sure if there's any data available out there which would have anything useful to say on this matter...?
Jezza has chucked a sackful of dead cats on the table, May cannot stick to her blank sheet of paper manifesto for long.
It is a core vote strategy, but this is an election to park the bus.
Jezza also has the advantage of the populist, no one seriously expects him to deliver. Is he the Chauncey Gardner of our times?
Has there ever been a more destructive leader.
Jeremy Hunt for instance, 1-20 with Ladbrokes.
So far would easily be my best return if the Tories pinch either seat, damn you UKIP!
Incumbency bonus
Increased Conservative national lead over the LibDems
LibDems have only ever won Eastbourne in a by-election or after an expenses scandal
Leave seat with significant UKIP vote
The Conservatives got over 40% in the constituency in 1997, 2001 and 2005 why not in 2017
At a swoop, that would go some way to neutralise two of Labour's biggest weaknesses -- that they just throw money around at everything, and that they favour public-sector workers over private-sector workers (even low-paid private workers who would otherwise be attracted to Labour).
They remember the era of the union barons and I doubt many want to bring it back.
But the real danger is the IFS and their detailed commentary of both the damage to the economy, peoples jobs, and our ability to conclude a successful Brexit
Tory most seats more like 1-200.
In practice, I've built up small sums of winnings with Betfair, WH, PP and Laddies and I don't put any more into my accounts. I'm betting with my winnings so that's my limit. Not more than £1,000 in each.
Does UKIP even know itself? Maybe not, as per the Guardian:
"As the deadline passed at 4pm, Ukip was not even sure it would hit its target of 400, as officials attempted to find out whether all of their potential candidates had managed to submit their nomination papers in time."
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/may/11/ukip-will-not-stand-against-pro-brexit-tories-in-key-marginal-seats
It's one thing to stand as a paper council candidate quite another to stump up 5k.
Air thick with senior service smoke, wide ties and wider lapels.
Composite A, a 66% pay rise for wheeltappers, carried unanimously.
Thank you Comrades.
Auld Lang Syne.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4494850/John-McDonnell-told-Labour-followers-bring-Government-down.html
Not principled old men, a Cancer in the labour party.
.
After all she has let them reveal their true hard left credentials and her own manifesto next week will put her into the spotlight at just the right time a few days before the postal votes.
Fox hunting though is a subject I do agree with her
Fortunately I decided to green up after looking at the NY Times Florida tracker.
https://twitter.com/TrueFactsStated/status/862726883611480065
His explanation of it being fake news and out of context can be disregarded - this is a man who flat out lies about seeing communist flags at a May Day rally, the one place and time of year you'd not be surprised to see them, and which he surely knows, the charlatan.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/golf/2017/05/11/professional-golfer-shoots-55-over-par-round-127-us-open-qualifying/