Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The numbers of Lib Dem lost deposits at GE2015 could be in

SystemSystem Posts: 12,250
edited August 2013 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The numbers of Lib Dem lost deposits at GE2015 could be in the hundreds

One feature of the recent bout of local by-elections as well as last week’s Welsh Assembly contest in Ynys Mons has been the huge collapse in the Lib Dem vote.

Read the full story here


«13

Comments

  • fitalassfitalass Posts: 4,320
    First
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    I'm sure that Lib Dem vote shares in many seats will drop and in many cases they may drop sharply. But I'm not at all sure that the Lib Dems will lose many deposits. In 2010, they tallied more than 10% in every single one of what are now Labour's top 150 target seats (which are the seats where you would have expected their vote share to have come under most pressure at successive elections).

    I wrote about this on pb2 just after the last election:

    http://politicalbetting.blogspot.co.uk/2010/08/golden-eggs-lib-dem-voters-in.html

    My doubts as to whether Labour would pick up a disproportionate number of the positive preferences for Lib Dems seem to have been unfounded. I would still make many of the other points that I made then.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,658
    fitalass said:
    What with Cameron going out of his way to insult them is this surprising ? A failure of leadership.
  • RichardNabaviRichardNabavi Posts: 3,413
    I'm not sure that extrapolating from the LibDems' performances in local by-elections really tells you much. (In fact, it's unclear whether extrapolating anything from local by-elections tells you much). It will be very interesting to see what the proposed betting market offers us, but I'd be very surprised indeed to see hundreds of lost deposits.
  • fitalassfitalass Posts: 4,320
    Telegraph - Give David Cameron his due for unleashing Tory animal spirits

    " There were two Margaret Thatchers. The first one signed the European Single Act, the Anglo-Irish Agreement and the deal which kept the Common Agricultural Policy in being. She also abolished O-levels and presided over steady increases in public spending, often without securing better value for money. The second one was the warrior queen who defeated the Argentinians, the trade unions, the nationalised industries and the defeatists – the real “enemy within” – who thought that Britain was doomed to perpetual decline. As a result, many Tories came to regard her as the once and future leader: the standard against which all future chieftains should be judged. That is also unwise. As with Churchill, the circumstances that made her necessary are unlikely to be repeated, which is just as well. We should not want politics to consist of endless threats to national survival.

    Not that we were exactly unthreatened back in 2010. I suspect that Mr Cameron’s fixity of economic purpose has won him more public regard than has yet shown up in the opinion polls. The pilot that weathered the storm finds it easy to claim respect. It would be easier still if his party would complete its post-Thatcher rehab and recognise strong leadership in a contemporary idiom."

    fitalass said:
    What with Cameron going out of his way to insult them is this surprising ? A failure of leadership.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,658
    fitalass said:

    Telegraph - Give David Cameron his due for unleashing Tory animal spirits

    " There were two Margaret Thatchers. The first one signed the European Single Act, the Anglo-Irish Agreement and the deal which kept the Common Agricultural Policy in being. She also abolished O-levels and presided over steady increases in public spending, often without securing better value for money. The second one was the warrior queen who defeated the Argentinians, the trade unions, the nationalised industries and the defeatists – the real “enemy within” – who thought that Britain was doomed to perpetual decline. As a result, many Tories came to regard her as the once and future leader: the standard against which all future chieftains should be judged. That is also unwise. As with Churchill, the circumstances that made her necessary are unlikely to be repeated, which is just as well. We should not want politics to consist of endless threats to national survival.

    Not that we were exactly unthreatened back in 2010. I suspect that Mr Cameron’s fixity of economic purpose has won him more public regard than has yet shown up in the opinion polls. The pilot that weathered the storm finds it easy to claim respect. It would be easier still if his party would complete its post-Thatcher rehab and recognise strong leadership in a contemporary idiom."

    fitalass said:
    What with Cameron going out of his way to insult them is this surprising ? A failure of leadership.
    Where's the strong leadership ? Cameron's only strength is the opposition is so weak. If labour had a half decent leader Cameron would be struggling.

    Ed = Dave's Ace
  • AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815

    fitalass said:
    What with Cameron going out of his way to insult them is this surprising ? A failure of leadership.
    Mr Brooke.

    I think Cameron has learnt a useful lesson from his holiday on the Portuguese coast.

    If you boil squid alive their eyes stop swivelling.

  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,658
    AveryLP said:

    fitalass said:
    What with Cameron going out of his way to insult them is this surprising ? A failure of leadership.
    Mr Brooke.

    I think Cameron has learnt a useful lesson from his holiday on the Portuguese coast.

    If you boil squid alive their eyes stop swivelling.

    I think we can take it Cameron's a slow learner and not that forward thinking.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 33,090
    edited August 2013
    I'd be surprised if the number of LD lost deposits in 2015 is more than about 50 at worst.
  • MarkSeniorMarkSenior Posts: 4,699
    I too certainly don't think there will be very many Lib Dem lost deposits at the next GE . If the deposit level were still set at 12.5% it would be a different story but 5% will be achieved in most constituencies .
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 33,090
    Just rustled up this spreadsheet showing the LD share in 2010 from lowest to highest.

    They avoided losing any deposits, coming closest in Glasgow East with 5.03%:

    https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0At91c3wX1Wu5dGtQck5wOU5mN1lQSjIydkZRQTNWbFE#gid=0
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    "A few weeks ago I blogged that one of our Local Government Committees had taken a brave and exciting decision to run a truly open primary to select a candidate for a particular ward. And when I speak of an open primary, I mean just that.

    Too often we talk of open primaries when we actually mean an open caucus. A meeting, whether open to party members, party supporters or members of the public, is a caucus, not an open primary. An Open Primary is quite different.

    Open primary. "All voters on the electoral register can take part in an open primary and may cast votes in a ballot of any party to select that party's candidate for the forthcoming poll."

    At the time I was quite circumspect, as we were still in the planning stage and I am never keen to show our hand too soon. However, now the mailshot is starting to land on doormats, the secret is out and I will write more freely... > http://votingandboating.blogspot.co.uk/2013/08/a-few-weeks-ago-i-blogged-that-one-of.html
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    Andy_JS said:

    Just rustled up this spreadsheet showing the LD share in 2010 from lowest to highest.

    They avoided losing any deposits, coming closest in Glasgow East with 5.03%:

    https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0At91c3wX1Wu5dGtQck5wOU5mN1lQSjIydkZRQTNWbFE#gid=0

    Are you still on Twitter - this is super stuff to share more widely.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,573
    All these Lib Dem lost deposit votes have to go somewhere, or well some of them will at least. I'm pricing it in as Good news for Labour personally.

    O/T Not sure which way the Test will go, but I'm liking my Draw Lay. England's position still OK but I think a result looks v likely with low scores all round.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,110
    Pulpstar said:

    All these Lib Dem lost deposit votes have to go somewhere

    Well that deficit isn't going to pay itself off ;)


  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 33,090
    edited August 2013
    @Plato

    Yes I am. I don't seem to post much these days.

    Taken your advice and tweeted the LD spreadsheet:

    https://twitter.com/andyjsajs
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    Andy_JS said:

    @Plato

    Yes I am. I don't seem to post much these days.

    Taken your advice and tweeted the LD spreadsheet:

    https://twitter.com/andyjsajs

    RTd it - some super stuff.
  • Another world class display from England's batsmen then. What a desperately weak unit they are.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 33,090

    Another world class display from England's batsmen then. What a desperately weak unit they are.

    England are winning the Ashes because Australia are poor rather than because they're particularly brilliant.
  • Andy_JS said:

    Another world class display from England's batsmen then. What a desperately weak unit they are.

    England are winning the Ashes because Australia are poor rather than because they're particularly brilliant.

    Let's see where we are at series end. Our batting unit is so poor it could hand the Aussies significant momentum going into the winter. Our bowlers can't keep on digging the batsmen out of self-inflicted holes.

  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095
    edited August 2013

    Another world class display from England's batsmen then. What a desperately weak unit they are.

    Boring, boring. lets see how Australia bat first. Why you are interested in any sport or supporting anyone.... with such a consistently negative attitude, is beyond me.

  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,061
    Good evening, everyone.

    "England are winning the Ashes because Australia are poor rather than because they're particularly brilliant. "

    Reminds me of Caesar and the Civil Wars.
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,301
    POACAWS - 8 Wickets down...
  • IOSIOS Posts: 1,450
    Very good article Fitalass has linked. There does seem to be a consensus that the Tories now have a membership of less than 100k.
  • ojcorbsojcorbs Posts: 30
    Big question here, the financial implications of hundreds of lost libdem deposits and hundreds of saved UKIP ones.
  • IOSIOS Posts: 1,450
    Ojcorbs

    Not much. Every party will have no money after the election.
  • Any prices for a LibDem majority in 2015?
  • MarkSeniorMarkSenior Posts: 4,699

    Any prices for a LibDem majority in 2015?

    200/1 . I have £2 on it . I had a similar bet in 2008 which I was able to trade on Betfair during the Cleggasm for a decent profit .
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,517
    In Australia Nielsen has the Coalition up 52-48, rounding up a week when most polls have had the Coalition with a narrow lead after the first week of the campaign. Newspoll and Reachtel also have it 52-48 to the Coalition, Essential has the Coalition up 51-49 and Morgan has it tied 50-50. Of course Howard also started most of his re-election campaigns slightly behind in the polls as did Keating in 1993, but both were re-elected so while Abbott is favourite, still all to play for. A crucial moment could be the TV debate between Abbott and Rudd on Sunday evening (Sunday morning UK time)
  • Plato said:

    Relentless , shameless , cocky , ignorant , and revolting.

    Weiner is a model modern politician.

  • saddenedsaddened Posts: 2,245
    IOS said:

    Very good article Fitalass has linked. There does seem to be a consensus that the Tories now have a membership of less than 100k.

    One you agree with you mean? Does it mention the ground war by any chance.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 42,311
    edited August 2013
    IOS said:

    Very good article Fitalass has linked. There does seem to be a consensus that the Tories now have a membership of less than 100k.

    Genuine question, do you have an idea of Scottish Labour's actual membership? They seem very tight lipped about it, which is a bit rich since they still describe themselves as Scotland's largest party.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,517
    Moniker - Weiner is now in 4th place in most polls, I think his campaign is dead, it is likely NY will have its first Lesbian Mayor in Christine Quinn
  • IOS said:

    Very good article Fitalass has linked. There does seem to be a consensus that the Tories now have a membership of less than 100k.

    Genuine question, do you have an idea of Scottish Labour's actual membership? They seem very tight lipped about it, which is a bit rich since they still describe themselves as Scotland's largest party.

    McLachlan deserves a medal. Few men could go through this ;

    http://www.dgstandard.co.uk/dumfries-news/local-news-dumfries/local-news-dumfriesshire/2013/08/09/msp-joan-named-in-divorce-row-51311-33708235/


    And live.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    Could be a problem if there is no overall control and another election a few months later!

    IOS said:

    Ojcorbs

    Not much. Every party will have no money after the election.

  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,517
    PPP Georgia 2016

    Chris Christie (R) 44%
    Hillary Clinton (D) 42%

    Hillary Clinton (D) 45%
    Jeb Bush (R) 45%

    Hillary Clinton (D) 47% (50%)
    Paul Ryan (R) 44% (45%)

    Hillary Clinton (D) 47% (51%)
    Newt Gingrich (R) 43% (44%)

    Hillary Clinton (D) 48%
    Rand Paul (R) 43%

    Hillary Clinton (D) 51%
    Sarah Palin (R) 38%
  • The Labour lost deposits in 2010

    Westmorland and Lonsdale
    Cornwall North
    Newbury
    Somerton and Frome
    Eastbourne

    Lewes, Richmond Park, Guildford, Taunton Deane, Cheltenham, Devon North, Yeovil, Devon West and Torridge, Dorset North and Winchester were between 5 and 5.5%.

    Conservative lost deposits in 1997

    Rhondda


  • RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737
    I too don't think there will be many lost deposits. More than recent elections, to be sure, but not many more, and certainly not 'hundreds'. 5% is still a very low threshold.

    I can't see the LDs getting lower than 15% of the national vote in 2015. With a standard deviation of around 9% (perhaps lower), they might just touch 100 lost deposits, with a perfectly symmetrical vote distribution. I'd be surprise if it's 50 on the day..
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    edited August 2013
    Jeez - what a dickhead

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LD4NgHxylF0

    Relentless , shameless , cocky , ignorant , and revolting.

    Godfrey is a model PB Burley politician.


    ;^ )
  • richardDoddrichardDodd Posts: 5,472
    No photo shoots at all from the opposition front bench.. something to be grateful for I suppose..as most of them seem to be on a beach somewhere..
  • tim said:

    And of course as the man who tried decontamination but resorted to poison when rattled by UKIP

    @shamindernahal: Former Tory aide Derek Laud says "Go Home" vans were "nasty" and that Cameron has "decided modernity is out" #c4news

    Cameron , Osborne , Clegg and Cable will be remembered as the heroes who cleared up New Labour's messes ;

    http://www.theguardian.com/business/2013/aug/08/uk-economic-growth-strengthen-2013
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,110
    edited August 2013
    Mick_Pork said:


    Godfrey is a model PB Burley politician.

    Time to throw out all my "PB Tory" merchandise. ;)
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 42,311
    Nice to see your empathising with bonafide Cybernat Mark McLachlan.

  • richardDoddrichardDodd Posts: 5,472
    edited August 2013
    Derek Laud.. the nation waits in suspense for his every word ..who the F*** is he..?
  • NextNext Posts: 826
    edited August 2013
    Mick_Pork said:

    Jeez - what a dickhead

    Relentless , shameless , cocky , ignorant , and revolting.

    Godfrey is a model PB Burley politician.


    ;^ )

    I would rather have Free Speech, and people making embarrassing comments from time to time, than the Thought Police.

  • richardDoddrichardDodd Posts: 5,472
    I
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    "What we are seeing is the product of the party’s GE2015 defence strategy of only focusing on those areas where they’ve got an MP or have a good chance of getting one. Elsewhere they are only making a token appearance on the ballot."

    It's a necessity not some cunning plan. It's almost the only option left since the lib dem base is still getting hammered year on year and they have the toxic Clegg leading them.
  • AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    tim said:

    "In Sherwood, with a Conservative majority of 214, the party does not reveal its membership. But it took £730 from members’ subscriptions last year – which at £25 a head works out at fewer than 30 members. The chairman wrote: “Expenditure over income during 2012 was significant and is clearly unsustainable in the long term.”

    At this rate Cameron's legacy will be the man who blew the unloseable election and who killed the Tory Party on the ground.
    But he had some nice photoshoots

    Now if the Conservative and Lib Dem parties were on bankers style bonuses, the amount they would get for cleaning up Labour's mess and turning around the economy would mean that neither would have to collect individual member subscriptions for a generation.

    And if the UK state were able to collect compensation payments for the miss-selling of Economy Protection Insurance, then we would never hear from the Labour Party again.

    Oh for the politicians to be subject to the risks and rewards of the bankers.

  • richardDoddrichardDodd Posts: 5,472
    ' "relentless,shameless.cocky, ignorant and revolting " is that from Porks CV.
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    Next said:

    I would rather have Free Speech, and people making embarrassing comments from time to time, than the Thought Police.



    Then NannyCam is clearly the incompetent fop you are looking for.
    Nathan McGrath ‏@NathanMcGrathSF

    Cameron urges parents to 'boycott vile internet sites' http://www.itn.co.uk/uk/82443/CAM_BULLY … via @NewsRepublic



    Top Marks IT ‏@TopMarksIT

    Someone who knows how the Internet works: Wikipedia founder brands @David_Cameron porn filters plan 'ridiculous' >> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23558865
  • NextNext Posts: 826
    Mick_Pork said:



    Next said:

    I would rather have Free Speech, and people making embarrassing comments from time to time, than the Thought Police.



    Then NannyCam is clearly the incompetent fop you are looking for.
    Nathan McGrath ‏@NathanMcGrathSF

    Cameron urges parents to 'boycott vile internet sites' http://www.itn.co.uk/uk/82443/CAM_BULLY … via @NewsRepublic



    Top Marks IT ‏@TopMarksIT

    Someone who knows how the Internet works: Wikipedia founder brands @David_Cameron porn filters plan 'ridiculous' >> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23558865


    The porn filter idea was a stupid idea.

    But not as stupid as "Prime Minister Ed Miliband".
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    RobD said:

    Mick_Pork said:


    Godfrey is a model PB Burley politician.

    Time to throw out all my "PB Tory" merchandise. ;)
    I wouldn't have bothered too much with it were it not for so many of the usual suspects throwing an epic hissy fit while throwing their toys out of the pram just at the mere mention of it. ;)

  • richardDoddrichardDodd Posts: 5,472
    edited August 2013
    Porn filters should be Parents.. with some authority and responsibilty for their children..The State is not a parent..look after your own children
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,110
    Mick_Pork said:



    I wouldn't have bothered too much with it were it not for so many of the usual suspects throwing an epic hissy fit while throwing their toys out of the pram just at the mere mention of it. ;)

    Jeez.. the PB Tory rattle was my favourite :-(
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    Next said:

    Mick_Pork said:



    Next said:

    I would rather have Free Speech, and people making embarrassing comments from time to time, than the Thought Police.



    Then NannyCam is clearly the incompetent fop you are looking for.
    Nathan McGrath ‏@NathanMcGrathSF

    Cameron urges parents to 'boycott vile internet sites' http://www.itn.co.uk/uk/82443/CAM_BULLY … via @NewsRepublic



    Top Marks IT ‏@TopMarksIT

    Someone who knows how the Internet works: Wikipedia founder brands @David_Cameron porn filters plan 'ridiculous' >> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23558865
    The porn filter idea was a stupid idea.

    But not as stupid as "Prime Minister Ed Miliband".


    Hilarious as that is we now have Prime Minister Cameron and Deputy Prime Minister Clegg which are scarcely any more stupid. So I'm afraid just because something is ridiculous does not negate it's possibility. Some people still think Boris is in with a chance after 2015 should things go pear shaped for Cammie. Boris has already proved that ridicule is not necessarily a barrier by becoming London Mayor.
  • Mick_Pork said:

    Next said:

    Mick_Pork said:



    Next said:

    I would rather have Free Speech, and people making embarrassing comments from time to time, than the Thought Police.



    Then NannyCam is clearly the incompetent fop you are looking for.
    Nathan McGrath ‏@NathanMcGrathSF

    Cameron urges parents to 'boycott vile internet sites' http://www.itn.co.uk/uk/82443/CAM_BULLY … via @NewsRepublic



    Top Marks IT ‏@TopMarksIT

    Someone who knows how the Internet works: Wikipedia founder brands @David_Cameron porn filters plan 'ridiculous' >> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23558865
    The porn filter idea was a stupid idea.

    But not as stupid as "Prime Minister Ed Miliband".

    Hilarious as that is we now have Prime Minister Cameron and Deputy Prime Minister Clegg which are scarcely any more stupid. So I'm afraid just because something is ridiculous does not negate it's possibility. Some people still think Boris is in with a chance after 2015 should things go pear shaped for Cammie. Boris has already proved that ridicule is not necessarily a barrier by becoming London Mayor.


    "Ridicule is nothing to be scared of." :)
  • NextNext Posts: 826

    "Ridicule is nothing to be scared of." :)

    That's very Charming of you.
  • richardDoddrichardDodd Posts: 5,472
    Everything is Hilarious in Pork World..Apparently..Must be Scotland..yeh.. that's understandable...
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530

    Mick_Pork said:

    Next said:

    Mick_Pork said:



    Next said:

    I would rather have Free Speech, and people making embarrassing comments from time to time, than the Thought Police.



    Then NannyCam is clearly the incompetent fop you are looking for.
    Nathan McGrath ‏@NathanMcGrathSF

    Cameron urges parents to 'boycott vile internet sites' http://www.itn.co.uk/uk/82443/CAM_BULLY … via @NewsRepublic



    Top Marks IT ‏@TopMarksIT

    Someone who knows how the Internet works: Wikipedia founder brands @David_Cameron porn filters plan 'ridiculous' >> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23558865
    The porn filter idea was a stupid idea.

    But not as stupid as "Prime Minister Ed Miliband".

    Hilarious as that is we now have Prime Minister Cameron and Deputy Prime Minister Clegg which are scarcely any more stupid. So I'm afraid just because something is ridiculous does not negate it's possibility. Some people still think Boris is in with a chance after 2015 should things go pear shaped for Cammie. Boris has already proved that ridicule is not necessarily a barrier by becoming London Mayor.
    "Ridicule is nothing to be scared of." :)


    Indeed.
    Matt Chorley ‏@MattChorley

    Cameron/Partridge on pop artists having to tour to make money: 'It’s back to the days of the wandering minstrel' http://dailym.ai/1cxDkPw
    :)
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,110

    Porn filters should be Parents.. with some authority and responsibilty for their children..The State is not a parent..look after your own children

    Yep.

    An alternative would have been to include filtering software on the modems that ISPs send out which could be configured by parents to restrict whatever they wanted. Then of course set a password so the kid couldn't change the settings without you knowing. If they are being smart and wipe the router to remove the setting -- ban them from using the computer until they learn their lesson. Of course, this doesn't stop access to similar material over 3/4G, but I know that mobile providers offer filtering services on their networks.

    This way the parent is in control, rather than handing off their responsibility to the state. All that the government should do is offer advice on its gov.uk website about how to set these things up.

    Child porn is another matter, I am in favour of that being filtered. But I do realise it is a slippery slope.
  • richardDoddrichardDodd Posts: 5,472
    RobD..Limit the access to the comp..there should be a cut of time ..unless it is in the family environment for such things as homework etc.. parents are very lazy and just let it all slide by.. they have to realise that those children are actually theirs, not the states..or the porn merchants
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    RobD said:

    Porn filters should be Parents.. with some authority and responsibilty for their children..The State is not a parent..look after your own children

    Yep.

    An alternative would have been to include filtering software on the modems that ISPs send out which could be configured by parents to restrict whatever they wanted. Then of course set a password so the kid couldn't change the settings without you knowing. If they are being smart and wipe the router to remove the setting -- ban them from using the computer until they learn their lesson. Of course, this doesn't stop access to similar material over 3/4G, but I know that mobile providers offer filtering services on their networks.

    This way the parent is in control, rather than handing off their responsibility to the state. All that the government should do is offer advice on its gov.uk website about how to set these things up.

    Child porn is another matter, I am in favour of that being filtered. But I do realise it is a slippery slope.

    The legislation and law is already in place with a dedicated police task force to tackle child porn. By all means increase the funding to those task forces if you want results since they have the required skills and knowledge of the crimes and the dark internet to tackle it. Filtering is just Cammie posturing away as usual.
  • NextNext Posts: 826
    edited August 2013
    Mick_Pork said:

    RobD said:

    Porn filters should be Parents.. with some authority and responsibilty for their children..The State is not a parent..look after your own children

    Yep.

    An alternative would have been to include filtering software on the modems that ISPs send out which could be configured by parents to restrict whatever they wanted. Then of course set a password so the kid couldn't change the settings without you knowing. If they are being smart and wipe the router to remove the setting -- ban them from using the computer until they learn their lesson. Of course, this doesn't stop access to similar material over 3/4G, but I know that mobile providers offer filtering services on their networks.

    This way the parent is in control, rather than handing off their responsibility to the state. All that the government should do is offer advice on its gov.uk website about how to set these things up.

    Child porn is another matter, I am in favour of that being filtered. But I do realise it is a slippery slope.

    The legislation and law is already in place with a dedicated police task force to tackle child porn. By all means increase the funding to those task forces if you want results since they have the required skills and knowledge of the crimes and the dark internet to tackle it. Filtering is just Cammie posturing away as usual.
    Name a politician that has never postured.

    Zero-hours contracts, for example.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,110
    Mick_Pork said:



    The legislation and law is already in place with a dedicated police task force to tackle child porn. By all means increase the funding to those task forces if you want results since they have the required skills and knowledge of the crimes and the dark internet to tackle it. Filtering is just Cammie posturing away as usual.

    Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think child porn is currently filtered by the ISP -- it isn't mandatory.
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    Next said:

    Mick_Pork said:

    RobD said:

    Porn filters should be Parents.. with some authority and responsibilty for their children..The State is not a parent..look after your own children

    Yep.

    An alternative would have been to include filtering software on the modems that ISPs send out which could be configured by parents to restrict whatever they wanted. Then of course set a password so the kid couldn't change the settings without you knowing. If they are being smart and wipe the router to remove the setting -- ban them from using the computer until they learn their lesson. Of course, this doesn't stop access to similar material over 3/4G, but I know that mobile providers offer filtering services on their networks.

    This way the parent is in control, rather than handing off their responsibility to the state. All that the government should do is offer advice on its gov.uk website about how to set these things up.

    Child porn is another matter, I am in favour of that being filtered. But I do realise it is a slippery slope.

    The legislation and law is already in place with a dedicated police task force to tackle child porn. By all means increase the funding to those task forces if you want results since they have the required skills and knowledge of the crimes and the dark internet to tackle it. Filtering is just Cammie posturing away as usual.
    Name a politician that has never postured.

    Zero-hours contracts, for example.
    Bit of a straw man since I never claimed politicians don't. This however is becoming a bit of a a pattern with NannyCam after his snoopers charter. So after all the pretend outrage at labour's authoritarian nonsense from some tories it's more than valid to being up NannyCam's posturing in that regard.

    As for little Ed, I tend to think the idea of an ineffectual policy wonk like him crusading for workers rights negates his posturing even more than certain labour councils are. Prominent lib dem government ministers have also postured on zero hour contracts and they are supposed to have some say in policy. Only theoretically of course ;)

  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,110
    tim said:

    it's one of his more stomach churning habits

    Appearing like that in your avatar is another one of those ;-)

  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    edited August 2013
    RobD said:

    Mick_Pork said:



    The legislation and law is already in place with a dedicated police task force to tackle child porn. By all means increase the funding to those task forces if you want results since they have the required skills and knowledge of the crimes and the dark internet to tackle it. Filtering is just Cammie posturing away as usual.

    Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think child porn is currently filtered by the ISP -- it isn't mandatory.
    Some will be on an ISP by ISP basis. I never claimed it was mandatory nor should it be as it will have no effect on the real criminals who would be well aware of how to get round such barriers. Hence the need for the dedicated police task forces who are technologically savvy enough to tackle such crimes.
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,110
    Mick_Pork said:



    Some will be on an ISP by ISP basis. I never claimed it was mandatory nor should it be as it will have no effect on the real criminals who would be well aware of how to get round such barriers. Hence the need for the dedicated police task forces who are technologically savvy enough to tackle such crimes.

    Ah, sorry. I wasn't clear in my original post -- I support the voluntary filtering of CP by ISPs. If someone is so offended by any form of censorship, they can chose another ISP, or set up their own if they think there are a sufficient number of customers with a similar viewpoint.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,110
    tim said:

    @IndyPolitics: Gregory Lauder-Frost exposed: The Tory fringe group leader with Nazi sympathies http://t.co/rLrn2IxwRs

    Don't worry tim, your secret about Dave's stomach churning habits is safe with me ;-)
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    tim said:

    "In Sherwood, with a Conservative majority of 214, the party does not reveal its membership. But it took £730 from members’ subscriptions last year – which at £25 a head works out at fewer than 30 members. The chairman wrote: “Expenditure over income during 2012 was significant and is clearly unsustainable in the long term.”

    At this rate Cameron's legacy will be the man who blew the unloseable election and who killed the Tory Party on the ground.
    But he had some nice photoshoots

    Yesterday, Avery was telling me that if I looked into the figures, it was a bad night for Labour.

    Labour, on average, went up 7.1%. Tories went down 14.3%

    It was a very bad night for Labour. A swing of 10.7% since after 2010 mostly.

    Real elections, real votes. Not opinion polls.
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    tim said:

    @IndyPolitics: Gregory Lauder-Frost exposed: The Tory fringe group leader with Nazi sympathies http://t.co/rLrn2IxwRs

    Was he also having dinner in France with his mates ?
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,110
    surbiton said:


    Yesterday, Avery was telling me that if I looked into the figures, it was a bad night for Labour.

    Labour, on average, went up 7.1%. Tories went down 14.3%

    It was a very bad night for Labour. A swing of 10.7% since after 2010 mostly.

    Real elections, real votes. Not opinion polls.

    It would be interesting to see the swing if we compiled all of the previous months by-elections, as opposed to just the four yesterday. Small-number statistics and all that. How about a monthly (or every two months) by-election summary here on PB?
  • surbiton said:

    tim said:

    "In Sherwood, with a Conservative majority of 214, the party does not reveal its membership. But it took £730 from members’ subscriptions last year – which at £25 a head works out at fewer than 30 members. The chairman wrote: “Expenditure over income during 2012 was significant and is clearly unsustainable in the long term.”

    At this rate Cameron's legacy will be the man who blew the unloseable election and who killed the Tory Party on the ground.
    But he had some nice photoshoots

    Yesterday, Avery was telling me that if I looked into the figures, it was a bad night for Labour.

    Labour, on average, went up 7.1%. Tories went down 14.3%

    It was a very bad night for Labour. A swing of 10.7% since after 2010 mostly.

    Real elections, real votes. Not opinion polls.
    Do you think Labour will win Surbiton?
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549

    surbiton said:

    tim said:

    "In Sherwood, with a Conservative majority of 214, the party does not reveal its membership. But it took £730 from members’ subscriptions last year – which at £25 a head works out at fewer than 30 members. The chairman wrote: “Expenditure over income during 2012 was significant and is clearly unsustainable in the long term.”

    At this rate Cameron's legacy will be the man who blew the unloseable election and who killed the Tory Party on the ground.
    But he had some nice photoshoots

    Yesterday, Avery was telling me that if I looked into the figures, it was a bad night for Labour.

    Labour, on average, went up 7.1%. Tories went down 14.3%

    It was a very bad night for Labour. A swing of 10.7% since after 2010 mostly.

    Real elections, real votes. Not opinion polls.
    Do you think Labour will win Surbiton?
    No. Not by a long shot.
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    edited August 2013
    RobD said:

    Mick_Pork said:



    Some will be on an ISP by ISP basis. I never claimed it was mandatory nor should it be as it will have no effect on the real criminals who would be well aware of how to get round such barriers. Hence the need for the dedicated police task forces who are technologically savvy enough to tackle such crimes.

    Ah, sorry. I wasn't clear in my original post -- I support the voluntary filtering of CP by ISPs. If someone is so offended by any form of censorship, they can chose another ISP, or set up their own if they think there are a sufficient number of customers with a similar viewpoint.

    Some ISPs have long made 'family friendly' features a selling point and no doubt it pays off. You might have to pay slightly more since maintaining the filter and keeping everything running smoothly at the customer service end in the event of problems will entail more work.

    As long as ISPs clearly and accurately describe, label and advertise their services then there is no problem. Sadly ISPs have been in trouble before for being dishonest over what they are offering. Though that was mainly overblown and false claims about speed and some customer service/migration problems IIRC.

  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    RobD said:

    surbiton said:


    Yesterday, Avery was telling me that if I looked into the figures, it was a bad night for Labour.

    Labour, on average, went up 7.1%. Tories went down 14.3%

    It was a very bad night for Labour. A swing of 10.7% since after 2010 mostly.

    Real elections, real votes. Not opinion polls.

    It would be interesting to see the swing if we compiled all of the previous months by-elections, as opposed to just the four yesterday. Small-number statistics and all that. How about a monthly (or every two months) by-election summary here on PB?
    Not a bad idea. If an entire months was added up and then the swing calculated, it would give us some valuable information. Yesterday, we saw that whilst UKIP had fallen back from the heady heights of May 2013, they were still polling big numbers. The good news for the Tories is that the Lib Dem decline, notwithstanding Mike's commentary above, could be gathering momentum.

    Purists may not like this "cumulative swing" as they would not be representative. But local elections themselves are not representative. There is a big difference between London and Shire Counties elections.

  • MarkSeniorMarkSenior Posts: 4,699
    surbiton said:

    RobD said:

    surbiton said:


    Yesterday, Avery was telling me that if I looked into the figures, it was a bad night for Labour.

    Labour, on average, went up 7.1%. Tories went down 14.3%

    It was a very bad night for Labour. A swing of 10.7% since after 2010 mostly.

    Real elections, real votes. Not opinion polls.

    It would be interesting to see the swing if we compiled all of the previous months by-elections, as opposed to just the four yesterday. Small-number statistics and all that. How about a monthly (or every two months) by-election summary here on PB?
    Not a bad idea. If an entire months was added up and then the swing calculated, it would give us some valuable information. Yesterday, we saw that whilst UKIP had fallen back from the heady heights of May 2013, they were still polling big numbers. The good news for the Tories is that the Lib Dem decline, notwithstanding Mike's commentary above, could be gathering momentum.

    Purists may not like this "cumulative swing" as they would not be representative. But local elections themselves are not representative. There is a big difference between London and Shire Counties elections.

    The problem is that the swings are from different starting points , Merton from 2010 , Redcar and Waveney from 2011 and Swindon from 2012 so they cannot sensibly be combined .

  • IOSIOS Posts: 1,450
    I think Labour will win Sunil as we are facing an opposition with no members.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,110
    surbiton said:


    Not a bad idea. If an entire months was added up and then the swing calculated, it would give us some valuable information. Yesterday, we saw that whilst UKIP had fallen back from the heady heights of May 2013, they were still polling big numbers. The good news for the Tories is that the Lib Dem decline, notwithstanding Mike's commentary above, could be gathering momentum.

    I'll try to remember to mention this to OGH next time he's around.. it would only be about a few hours work every month or so to collate all the information -- I'd be glad to help out!
    surbiton said:


    Purists may not like this "cumulative swing" as they would not be representative. But local elections themselves are not representative. There is a big difference between London and Shire Counties elections.

    Where's Sunil when you need him?!
  • IOSIOS Posts: 1,450
    Foxinsox

    Very good I hadn't considered a second election. But the loss of councillors matters more than deposits in my opinion.
  • RobD said:


    surbiton said:


    Purists may not like this "cumulative swing" as they would not be representative. But local elections themselves are not representative. There is a big difference between London and Shire Counties elections.

    Where's Sunil when you need him?!
    Good moaning! :)
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,110



    The problem is that the swings are from different starting points , Merton from 2010 , Redcar and Waveney from 2011 and Swindon from 2012 so they cannot sensibly be combined .

    Could you not incorporate the national 2010->2011 and 2010->2012 swing to project what the 2012 vote would have been in Merton and Redcar & Waveney, then produce a swing from that projected starting point?
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    The nearest thing Wee Eck will get to a Royal Baby

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BRQFL3ZCcAApYWu.jpg:large
  • IOS said:

    I think Labour will win Sunil as we are facing an opposition with no members.

    I meant in Surbiton!

    ("Do you think Labour will win Surbiton?" referred to the place, not PB's surbiton!)
  • NextNext Posts: 826
    Plato said:

    The nearest thing Wee Eck will get to a Royal Baby

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BRQFL3ZCcAApYWu.jpg:large

    It all seems very confusing. Are we clear yet whether the panda is pregnant? Is it black and white?
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    edited August 2013
    Chris Smith ‏@ccsmith25653

    Looking at the gestation period of a Panda & presuming she is, there are now 2.356 more Pandas than Tories in Scotland.

    Martin Eaglestone ‏@Carrageryr

    'They come here eating our bamboo plants and having babies'. Tories react to Panda pregnancy - okay I made it up! But ad van next surely?

    Great news for the PB Burleys.

    ;^ )
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    Next said:

    Plato said:

    The nearest thing Wee Eck will get to a Royal Baby

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BRQFL3ZCcAApYWu.jpg:large

    It all seems very confusing. Are we clear yet whether the panda is pregnant? Is it black and white?
    The Jock Pandas twitter account says it all.

    The Edinburgh Pandas @TheJockPandas
    So we can claim asylum now right?

  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 33,090
    edited August 2013
    Conservative share of the vote in 2010 by constituency, lowest to highest:

    https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0At91c3wX1Wu5dERLZGRKazJLSmxnLVpnQktKNEpxT3c#gid=0

    Wealden recorded the 30th highest Tory share at 56.56%.
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    Ostercy ‏@ostercywriter

    David Cameron's #Tories are still the 'nasty party', says ex-aide Derek Laud http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/david-camerons-tories-are-still-the-nasty-party-says-exaide-derek-laud-8744976.html
    Same old nasty party. They never learn.
  • Andy_JS said:

    Conservative share of the vote in 2010 by constituency, lowest to highest:

    https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0At91c3wX1Wu5dERLZGRKazJLSmxnLVpnQktKNEpxT3c#gid=0

    Wealden recorded the 30th highest Tory share at 56.56%.

    Brilliant stuff, Andy! So only two lost deposits?
  • MarkSeniorMarkSenior Posts: 4,699
    RobD said:



    The problem is that the swings are from different starting points , Merton from 2010 , Redcar and Waveney from 2011 and Swindon from 2012 so they cannot sensibly be combined .

    Could you not incorporate the national 2010->2011 and 2010->2012 swing to project what the 2012 vote would have been in Merton and Redcar & Waveney, then produce a swing from that projected starting point?
    and an increasing number of by elections will be swings from 2013 . The more you lok at the swings you see that there are wild variations from ward to ward . Littlemoor in Ribble Valley last week had a 15% swing from Con to LD . Oulton this week had UKIP going from 0 to 24.6% but in May they polled around 38% in the larger CC division .
    You are trying to quantify into a single exact figure something which is a combination of different patterns . It is possible to combine say 6 month's results and average the party's vote shares but even here you must be careful When the 6 month rule comes in in November then the following by elections will have a heavy Conservative bias in the number of seats fought .

  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549

    surbiton said:

    RobD said:

    surbiton said:


    Yesterday, Avery was telling me that if I looked into the figures, it was a bad night for Labour.

    Labour, on average, went up 7.1%. Tories went down 14.3%

    It was a very bad night for Labour. A swing of 10.7% since after 2010 mostly.

    Real elections, real votes. Not opinion polls.

    It would be interesting to see the swing if we compiled all of the previous months by-elections, as opposed to just the four yesterday. Small-number statistics and all that. How about a monthly (or every two months) by-election summary here on PB?
    Not a bad idea. If an entire months was added up and then the swing calculated, it would give us some valuable information. Yesterday, we saw that whilst UKIP had fallen back from the heady heights of May 2013, they were still polling big numbers. The good news for the Tories is that the Lib Dem decline, notwithstanding Mike's commentary above, could be gathering momentum.

    Purists may not like this "cumulative swing" as they would not be representative. But local elections themselves are not representative. There is a big difference between London and Shire Counties elections.

    The problem is that the swings are from different starting points , Merton from 2010 , Redcar and Waveney from 2011 and Swindon from 2012 so they cannot sensibly be combined .

    Maybe , we do separate one for 2010, 2011, 2012. Cumulatively, there still be close 10000 votes in each category, probably higher.

    I accept purists will not agree but this is the second best thing. What does Rallings 7 Thrasher do when they extrapolate local by-elections to the national scene. More or less the same thing, I suppose.

    Total votes is not we should be looking for but the overall swing.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,110



    and an increasing number of by elections will be swings from 2013 . The more you lok at the swings you see that there are wild variations from ward to ward . Littlemoor in Ribble Valley last week had a 15% swing from Con to LD . Oulton this week had UKIP going from 0 to 24.6% but in May they polled around 38% in the larger CC division .
    You are trying to quantify into a single exact figure something which is a combination of different patterns . It is possible to combine say 6 month's results and average the party's vote shares but even here you must be careful When the 6 month rule comes in in November then the following by elections will have a heavy Conservative bias in the number of seats fought .

    Yeah, it's tricky! There must be some statistical trick we can use, surely.

    What is this 6-month rule?
  • @IOS

    Groundwar fails to be assessed. Alert the NEC to send a inquiring team to Swindon as they were spotted canvassing a street in the wrong ward yesterday on local by-election day!!
This discussion has been closed.