Howdy, Stranger!

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

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Leave till last. Identifying the next Conservative leader

2456

Comments

  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,043

    The current attitude of [X] to immigration is...

    Conservatives:
    Too strict: 21%
    Not strict enough: 44%
    About right: 15%

    Labour:
    Too strict: 3%
    Not strict enough: 48%
    About right: 24%

    via @YouGov

    Fascinating dilemma for Labour here.

    https://twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/991615215715438592
  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 32,374
    GIN1138 said:

    notme said:

    4pt con lead on latest YouGov 1st may.

    Wonder what accounts for this uptick in Con support?

    It's like the worse Windrush has got (even including a Cabinet resignation) the more Con support has picked up?
    The uptick happened 4 weeks ago in YouGov polls... last 4 weeks' Tory leads have been: 0% (level), 5%, 5%, and now 4%.
  • Options
    GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 21,080
    edited May 2018
    On Topic - Out of current cabinet members I think Javid and McVie are the front-runners to succeed Theresa personally.

    It's possible Theresa will have one more major Cabinet reshuffle before "the end" and promote a couple of other people to the Cabinet who could be in with a shot in 2020 or 2021 but for now it's Javid and McView for me.

    Keep in mind with the departments they're in both could fall under the proverbial bus at any moment mind (especially Javid)
  • Options
    Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,820

    Pulpstar said:

    Big ranges of possible results though (which is surely the correct approach to forecasting something like this):
    https://twitter.com/StephenDFisher/status/991610185306296320

    Fisher goes -206 seats for the big three ?!

    March of the residents association ?
    Makes no sense, given that UKIP will be contributing around 120 seats to the pool. It doesn't inspire confidence.

    Note the table at the end of the article, showing the outcome vs forecasts in 2017. Rallings & Thrasher were miles out then.

    Executive summary: no-one has a clue!

    Edit: Ah yes, looks like a typo. That makes much more sense.
    Are there fewer seats in total this time? I think Birmingham has had its number of councillors cut - have other councils fared similarly / been merged / abolished?
    Good question. I don't know, but I doubt if the total will have changed very much.

    I also wonder whether the fringe parties, Residents, etc, will be squeezed a bit. Given that the big two seem to be squeezing other parties nationally, it seems at least possible.
  • Options
    GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 21,080

    GIN1138 said:

    notme said:

    4pt con lead on latest YouGov 1st may.

    Wonder what accounts for this uptick in Con support?

    It's like the worse Windrush has got (even including a Cabinet resignation) the more Con support has picked up?
    The uptick happened 4 weeks ago in YouGov polls... last 4 weeks' Tory leads have been: 0% (level), 5%, 5%, and now 4%.
    Must admit I haven't been following polls at all since Election 2017.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,093
    edited May 2018
    GIN1138 said:

    notme said:

    4pt con lead on latest YouGov 1st may.

    Wonder what accounts for this uptick in Con support?

    It's like the worse Windrush has got (even including a Cabinet resignation) the more Con support has picked up?
    Well most people think we're a bit overcrowded as an island to be honest. Labour's stance plays well to the media and parliament, but the centre of gravity there is far more pro immigration than in general.
    There is no doubt the whole Windrush affair was a scandal, but the man in the provincial street sees Abbott opening the floodgates if she was ever in one of the great offices of state.
  • Options
    David_EvershedDavid_Evershed Posts: 6,506
    edited May 2018

    I'm used to Roger defending appalling luvvies and disgraceful lefties for their disgusting behaviours, and I can understand his sycophantic desire to do so.

    But why's he sticking up for Berco Baggins?


    Attributing a Hobbit name to the Speaker is surely being heightist and so subject to being called a hate crime nowadays?
  • Options
    SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 21,011

    Pulpstar said:

    Big ranges of possible results though (which is surely the correct approach to forecasting something like this):
    https://twitter.com/StephenDFisher/status/991610185306296320

    Fisher goes -206 seats for the big three ?!

    March of the residents association ?
    Makes no sense, given that UKIP will be contributing around 120 seats to the pool. It doesn't inspire confidence.

    Note the table at the end of the article, showing the outcome vs forecasts in 2017. Rallings & Thrasher were miles out then.

    Executive summary: no-one has a clue!

    Edit: Ah yes, looks like a typo. That makes much more sense.
    Are there fewer seats in total this time? I think Birmingham has had its number of councillors cut - have other councils fared similarly / been merged / abolished?
    I don't think that the boundary changes in Leeds have resulted in a reduction in seats.
  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 32,374
    geoffw said:

    GIN1138 said:

    notme said:

    4pt con lead on latest YouGov 1st may.

    Wonder what accounts for this uptick in Con support?

    It's like the worse Windrush has got (even including a Cabinet resignation) the more Con support has picked up?
    Could be that they are seen to be doing something while preserving a stringent attitude to illegals.
    The uptick occured before the Windrush scandal hit the fan.
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 39,520

    I'm used to Roger defending appalling luvvies and disgraceful lefties for their disgusting behaviours, and I can understand his sycophantic desire to do so.

    But why's he sticking up for Berco Baggins?

    Just because your boss loses his temper does not mean he is bullying you.

    For someone who spent 30 years in the navy Bercow's ex Secretary seems remarkably fragile and feeble. Let's hope the current naval staff have more backbone.
    There's an interesting distinction here: if someone only ever loses his or her temper with underlings, then it's probably bullying. If that same person also loses his or her temper with their bosses or customers, then they're just a git.

    If you do lose your temper with your employees, people under you, or other colleagues, it is so important to apologise, explain, and try to make amends. Most of all, it is important to try to moderate your behaviour in future.
    Bosses can lose their temper with the situation rather than with employees. But fragile employees might think the boss is angry with them rather than the situation.
    Yep, and I've been in that situation occasionally, on both sides. It is critical for anyone who is a boss to understand this happens, to try and reduce the number of occasions when it does happen, and to make amends when it does. That's simple professionalism.

    Heck, it can be as simple as saying sorry and buying doughnut for everyone afterwards.

    Problems occur because too many bosses think that as they are more important than their employees, they have no need to moderate behaviour in front of them, or to apologise.

    Then there are the straight out bullies.
  • Options
    david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,493

    Brom said:

    Douglas Carswell is actually one of the more palatable Brexiters, but he too seems to have been driven mad by Brexit.

    https://twitter.com/douglascarswell/status/991026293033652224?s=21

    Carswell is defined by Brexit. If you think he's driven mad look at the remain supporters who thought it would never happen and are slowly waking up to smell the coffee, these people have gone completely bonkers!
    I think in any Brexit Bonkers list A C Grayling would come pretty near the top....

    https://twitter.com/acgrayling/status/991595356558372864
    Bloody hell. How an someone so supposedly intelligent be so dumb. He must realise that voting Green or Lib Dem only takes votes away from Labour and they are still the only realistic hope Remaniacs have of reversing Brexit.
    Actually, he might have arrived at the right conclusion, if not by the right logic.

    Only Labour, acting with unity and purpose, can stop Brexit - working with other parties. If the Greens and Lib Dems take pro-Remain votes from Labour, that's the most likely way of forcing Labour to adopt a more Brexit-hostile policy. 12 Lib Dem MPs and one Green aren't going to do anything.

    But it's all hypothetical: there won't be those kind of vote swings and Corbyn and others around him remain deeply sceptical of the EU.
  • Options
    Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 6,256
    Toms said:

    off topic, with apologies to Mr. Meeks, here's a scary NY Times article about Trump's detachment from logic:
    https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/28/opinion/sunday/the-end-of-intelligence.html

    Good article. Thanks for linking it :+1:
  • Options
    geoffwgeoffw Posts: 8,245
    Bercow Baggins is not Happy.
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 39,520
    Why is the URL for this thread '__trashed-3' ? Is a not-so-subtle message being sent? ;)
  • Options
    SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 21,011
    I'm with Fisher: net gains for the Conservatives ovverall
  • Options
    GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 21,080
    geoffw said:

    Bercow Baggins is not Happy.

    Speaker B's tenure isn't going to end well... He shouldn't stuck to what he said in 2009 (which is that he'd stand down as Speaker in 8 years) trying to go "on and on" is always a bad idea...
  • Options

    Pulpstar said:

    Big ranges of possible results though (which is surely the correct approach to forecasting something like this):
    https://twitter.com/StephenDFisher/status/991610185306296320

    Fisher goes -206 seats for the big three ?!

    March of the residents association ?
    Makes no sense, given that UKIP will be contributing around 120 seats to the pool. It doesn't inspire confidence.

    Note the table at the end of the article, showing the outcome vs forecasts in 2017. Rallings & Thrasher were miles out then.

    Executive summary: no-one has a clue!

    Edit: Ah yes, looks like a typo. That makes much more sense.
    Are there fewer seats in total this time? I think Birmingham has had its number of councillors cut - have other councils fared similarly / been merged / abolished?
    Places like Hertsmere for example have scrapped elections in 3rds so we have nothing this year.

  • Options
    David_EvershedDavid_Evershed Posts: 6,506
    edited May 2018
    There is an incentive for Con and Lab controlled councils to have fewer councillors.

    The bigger the ward/division the harder it is for minor or insurgent parties to work the ward to reach a majority. Similarly boundary changes help to disrupt the efforts of smaller parties to gain a foothold over time.

    The establishment of unitary authorities reduces the number of councillors and increases the size of wards/divisions but this is happening only very slowly.
  • Options
    TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    edited May 2018
    Labour’s lax position on immigration seems to be a massive drag on their ticket.
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 39,520
    One question about Mr Sinclair's NDA: who paid the £86k ? Was it Bercow himself, or did it (as I expect) come from the taxpayer?
  • Options
    geoffwgeoffw Posts: 8,245
    GIN1138 said:

    geoffw said:

    Bercow Baggins is not Happy.

    Speaker B's tenure isn't going to end well... He shouldn't stuck to what he said in 2009 (which is that he'd stand down as Speaker in 8 years) trying to go "on and on" is always a bad idea...
    Was he dragged kicking and screaming to the Speaker's chair?
  • Options
    Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 13,234



    For someone who spent 30 years in the navy Bercow's ex Secretary seems remarkably fragile and feeble. Let's hope the current naval staff have more backbone.

    I saw, received and gave plenty of full spectrum bollockings in the RN but I think I can count on my genitals the times I saw an officer genuinely lose his shit with a rating. We were in the business of sailing all over the world looking for people to fight so the selection process ruthlessly weeds out the emotionally unstable.
  • Options
    Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,039

    One question about Mr Sinclair's NDA: who paid the £86k ? Was it Bercow himself, or did it (as I expect) come from the taxpayer?

    I suspect that will be the angle Bercow's opponents use. And quite reasonably, too.
  • Options
    David_EvershedDavid_Evershed Posts: 6,506

    The current attitude of [X] to immigration is...

    Conservatives:
    Too strict: 21%
    Not strict enough: 44%
    About right: 15%

    Labour:
    Too strict: 3%
    Not strict enough: 48%
    About right: 24%

    via @YouGov

    Fascinating dilemma for Labour here.

    https://twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/991615215715438592
    If the level of immigration was responsible for the Referendum result then surely Remainers should think immigration was a bad thing?
  • Options
    QuincelQuincel Posts: 4,016



    On that occasion, my model rightly predicted Liberal Democrat losses. In truth, it was wrongly based on the party being down in the polls. In fact, the Liberal Democrats’ Projected National Share (PNS) and NEV for 2017 were up from the comparable figures for 2013. It was not so much their own failings to win new votes but the greater rise in the Conservative vote that cost the Liberal Democrats council seats last year.

    [...]

    In 2013 and 2014 the Rallings and Thrasher estimates were better than my first two attempts. And so they should be, given their model applies predicted share changes at the seat level and not the national level. Last year my predictions were better. This may have been, as I suggested at the time, because I could take into account the most recent polls that showed a big boost for Conservatives well after the last of the local by-elections that Rallings and Thrasher had to work with. Also, as noted above, my Liberal Democrat forecast was right for the wrong reasons.

    Whoever's predictions end up being right, Prof Fisher showing us all how forecasts should be done when it comes to confidence going forwards and accountability looking back.

    https://electionsetc.com/2018/05/02/forecasting-local-election-seat-gains-losses-2018/


  • Options
    Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,039
    On topic, it's worth noting that someone who was seriously considered for Home Secretary earlier this week is available at 500/1 on betfair.
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 39,520
    Dura_Ace said:



    For someone who spent 30 years in the navy Bercow's ex Secretary seems remarkably fragile and feeble. Let's hope the current naval staff have more backbone.

    I saw, received and gave plenty of full spectrum bollockings in the RN but I think I can count on my genitals the times I saw an officer genuinely lose his shit with a rating. We were in the business of sailing all over the world looking for people to fight so the selection process ruthlessly weeds out the emotionally unstable.
    Mr Evershed might have the wrong angle on this: perhaps Mr Sinclair's decades in the Navy taught him the correct way that people should behave towards their staff, and recognise poor behaviour.
  • Options

    One question about Mr Sinclair's NDA: who paid the £86k ? Was it Bercow himself, or did it (as I expect) come from the taxpayer?

    I'd bet my last fiver that it ain't come out of his pocket.
  • Options
    Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,820

    On topic, it's worth noting that someone who was seriously considered for Home Secretary earlier this week is available at 500/1 on betfair.

    I'd just noted the same anomaly, and took the £2!
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 45,413

    On topic, it's worth noting that someone who was seriously considered for Home Secretary earlier this week is available at 500/1 on betfair.

    Ms Morgan?

    perhaps possible if Brexit is a fiasco, and a revolution takes place at grassroots. Not very likely though!
  • Options
    DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    Jeremy Hunt is TSE's 100/1 tip but he always looks a bit shabby on camera so he must seek David Cameron's mum's advice on suits, ties and haircuts. It worked for Jeremy Corbyn. Even the official Cabinet photograph at the top of this piece seems to have caught Hunt adjusting his fly.
  • Options
    TheWhiteRabbitTheWhiteRabbit Posts: 12,388

    I'm with Fisher: net gains for the Conservatives ovverall

    I think the Tories would be happy with anything between R&T (-75) and you/Fisher (+1 or better), they'd be delighted with a more than trivial number of net gains, which implies real progress outside London
  • Options
    JonnyJimmyJonnyJimmy Posts: 2,548

    I'm used to Roger defending appalling luvvies and disgraceful lefties for their disgusting behaviours, and I can understand his sycophantic desire to do so.

    But why's he sticking up for Berco Baggins?


    Attributing a Hobbit name to the Speaker is surely being heightist and so subject to being called a hate crime nowadays?
    Well, if Rog is 'qualified' to make Jew jokes, I'm no giant!
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,093
    TGOHF said:
    Sturgeon's constituents not happy with her, apparently Glasgow Southside is a bit of a dump right now.
  • Options
    David_EvershedDavid_Evershed Posts: 6,506

    One question about Mr Sinclair's NDA: who paid the £86k ? Was it Bercow himself, or did it (as I expect) come from the taxpayer?

    Because senior Commons staff are involved with confidential discussions, on Newsnight it was said that Non Disclosure Agreements are commonly used for early retirements and dismissals. NDAs will be paid from the same source as the salary.
  • Options
    TheWhiteRabbitTheWhiteRabbit Posts: 12,388

    One question about Mr Sinclair's NDA: who paid the £86k ? Was it Bercow himself, or did it (as I expect) come from the taxpayer?

    Because senior Commons staff are involved with confidential discussions, on Newsnight it was said that Non Disclosure Agreements are commonly used for early retirements and dismissals. NDAs will be paid from the same source as the salary.
    Rule #1 of an NDA is understand what it is you are asking them not to disclose. There are a million miles between House of Lords chat on business matters and allegations of bulling - so the question is, did the NDA cover those?
  • Options
    Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,820
    edited May 2018
    There are some terrific long-odds lays in the Next PM market if you've got a big enough bankroll: Ruth Davidson 38, David Miliband 95, Sadiq Kahn 200, Nigel Farage 400..
  • Options
    David_EvershedDavid_Evershed Posts: 6,506

    I'm used to Roger defending appalling luvvies and disgraceful lefties for their disgusting behaviours, and I can understand his sycophantic desire to do so.

    But why's he sticking up for Berco Baggins?


    Attributing a Hobbit name to the Speaker is surely being heightist and so subject to being called a hate crime nowadays?
    Well, if Rog is 'qualified' to make Jew jokes, I'm no giant!
    Time to grow up, :)
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,073
    Mr. Evershed, I agree. We ought not belittle the Speaker.
  • Options
    Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,039
    Foxy said:

    On topic, it's worth noting that someone who was seriously considered for Home Secretary earlier this week is available at 500/1 on betfair.

    Ms Morgan?

    perhaps possible if Brexit is a fiasco, and a revolution takes place at grassroots. Not very likely though!
    Karen Bradley.
  • Options
    Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 13,234

    There are some terrific long-odds lays in the Next PM market if you've got a big enough bankroll: Ruth Davidson 38, David Miliband 95, Sadiq Kahn 200, Nigel Farage 400..

    I layed Right Wing Ruth at the weekend. Those seem ludicrous odds for her to be the next PM.
  • Options
    ChelyabinskChelyabinsk Posts: 489

    The current attitude of [X] to immigration is...

    Conservatives:
    Too strict: 21%
    Not strict enough: 44%
    About right: 15%

    Labour:
    Too strict: 3%
    Not strict enough: 48%
    About right: 24%

    via @YouGov

    Fascinating dilemma for Labour here.

    twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/991615215715438592
    If the level of immigration was responsible for the Referendum result then surely Remainers should think immigration was a bad thing?
    Remainers are happy with the level of immigration, but think Leavers are a bad thing.
  • Options
    Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,039
    Dura_Ace said:

    There are some terrific long-odds lays in the Next PM market if you've got a big enough bankroll: Ruth Davidson 38, David Miliband 95, Sadiq Kahn 200, Nigel Farage 400..

    I layed Right Wing Ruth at the weekend. Those seem ludicrous odds for her to be the next PM.
    I think there was a reasonable path (involving a by-election) but her pregnancy has probably put paid to that.

    She'd be 3/1 if she were an MP, imo. If she weren't leader already.
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,686
    This is what I love about the Med, two coffees and 3 excellent pastries for €4.20. In Zurich that would have been about 22 francs, London at least a tenner.
  • Options
    NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,386

    I'm with Fisher: net gains for the Conservatives ovverall

    I think the Tories would be happy with anything between R&T (-75) and you/Fisher (+1 or better), they'd be delighted with a more than trivial number of net gains, which implies real progress outside London
    The collapse of UKIP surely pretty much guarantees prizes for everyone else!
  • Options
    David_EvershedDavid_Evershed Posts: 6,506

    Jeremy Hunt is TSE's 100/1 tip but he always looks a bit shabby on camera so he must seek David Cameron's mum's advice on suits, ties and haircuts. It worked for Jeremy Corbyn. Even the official Cabinet photograph at the top of this piece seems to have caught Hunt adjusting his fly.


    Two of the ladies on the front row of the Caninet photograph are now replaced by gentlemen.

  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 59,043

    Dura_Ace said:

    There are some terrific long-odds lays in the Next PM market if you've got a big enough bankroll: Ruth Davidson 38, David Miliband 95, Sadiq Kahn 200, Nigel Farage 400..

    I layed Right Wing Ruth at the weekend. Those seem ludicrous odds for her to be the next PM.
    I think there was a reasonable path (involving a by-election) but her pregnancy has probably put paid to that.

    She'd be 3/1 if she were an MP, imo. If she weren't leader already.
    Back at work in new year. Blair had child whilst in No. 10.

    It's not insurmountable.

  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,686
    I really do believe that the difference between leave and remain was the EU allowing Romania in. If they had been given a much longer accession period and a 15 year immigration restriction, I think it would have been a narrow victory for remain.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,093

    There are some terrific long-odds lays in the Next PM market if you've got a big enough bankroll: Ruth Davidson 38, David Miliband 95, Sadiq Kahn 200, Nigel Farage 400..

    Thanks I've taken D Miliband and Farage to 'boost' the Mogg lay a bit.
  • Options
    FeersumEnjineeyaFeersumEnjineeya Posts: 3,947

    Pulpstar said:

    Big ranges of possible results though (which is surely the correct approach to forecasting something like this):
    https://twitter.com/StephenDFisher/status/991610185306296320

    Fisher goes -206 seats for the big three ?!

    March of the residents association ?
    Makes no sense, given that UKIP will be contributing around 120 seats to the pool. It doesn't inspire confidence.

    Note the table at the end of the article, showing the outcome vs forecasts in 2017. Rallings & Thrasher were miles out then.

    Executive summary: no-one has a clue!

    Edit: Ah yes, looks like a typo. That makes much more sense.
    Are there fewer seats in total this time? I think Birmingham has had its number of councillors cut - have other councils fared similarly / been merged / abolished?
    Good question. I don't know, but I doubt if the total will have changed very much.

    I also wonder whether the fringe parties, Residents, etc, will be squeezed a bit. Given that the big two seem to be squeezing other parties nationally, it seems at least possible.
    The number of seats in Birmingham has been cut from 120 (40 wards each of 3 seats) to 101 (69 wards of 1 or 2 seats). Previously, only 1/3 of the seats have been up for election each time, so full coverage required a party to stand just 40 candidates. This time, though, all 101 seats are up for grabs, which is why the smaller parties have been scrabbling to field a full set of candidates.
  • Options
    David_EvershedDavid_Evershed Posts: 6,506
    Dura_Ace said:

    There are some terrific long-odds lays in the Next PM market if you've got a big enough bankroll: Ruth Davidson 38, David Miliband 95, Sadiq Kahn 200, Nigel Farage 400..

    I layed Right Wing Ruth at the weekend. Those seem ludicrous odds for her to be the next PM.
    Hence the pregnancy?
  • Options
    David_EvershedDavid_Evershed Posts: 6,506

    Mr. Evershed, I agree. We ought not belittle the Speaker.


    Nor big him up.
  • Options
    FeersumEnjineeyaFeersumEnjineeya Posts: 3,947
    MaxPB said:

    I really do believe that the difference between leave and remain was the EU allowing Romania in. If they had been given a much longer accession period and a 15 year immigration restriction, I think it would have been a narrow victory for remain.
    But wasn't it the UK that was encouraging the accession of the Eastern European countries to the EU?
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,043
    MaxPB said:

    I really do believe that the difference between leave and remain was the EU allowing Romania in. If they had been given a much longer accession period and a 15 year immigration restriction, I think it would have been a narrow victory for remain.
    While more than 413,000 Romanian and Bulgarian citizens are living in Britain only 6,200 British citizens live in Romania and Bulgaria.

    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/oct/11/number-of-romanians-and-bulgarians-in-uk-rises-413000
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,649
    MaxPB said:

    I really do believe that the difference between leave and remain was the EU allowing Romania in. If they had been given a much longer accession period and a 15 year immigration restriction, I think it would have been a narrow victory for remain.
    Although I suspect people are answering the question about the Roma rather than Romanians.
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,043

    MaxPB said:

    I really do believe that the difference between leave and remain was the EU allowing Romania in. If they had been given a much longer accession period and a 15 year immigration restriction, I think it would have been a narrow victory for remain.
    But wasn't it the UK that was encouraging the accession of the Eastern European countries to the EU?
    And indeed Turkey.....
  • Options
    Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 6,256

    MaxPB said:

    I really do believe that the difference between leave and remain was the EU allowing Romania in. If they had been given a much longer accession period and a 15 year immigration restriction, I think it would have been a narrow victory for remain.
    But wasn't it the UK that was encouraging the accession of the Eastern European countries to the EU?
    Interesting that we have (and always had) control over all those immigrants thought to be a negative (except for Romanians) and Brexit will, of course, make no difference except for the Romanians.
  • Options
    volcanopetevolcanopete Posts: 2,078
    MaxPB said:

    This is what I love about the Med, two coffees and 3 excellent pastries for €4.20. In Zurich that would have been about 22 francs, London at least a tenner.

    don't forget the olive oil and local honey.,cucumbers no longer wrapped in condoms,oranges,lemons and a sight of the fire-fly or the poop of the Scops Owl ,being woken by crickets and a big warm yellow thing in the sky.Mind the mozzies.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GPH8-tiFKHE
  • Options
    ElliotElliot Posts: 1,516
    GIN1138 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    notme said:

    4pt con lead on latest YouGov 1st may.

    Wonder what accounts for this uptick in Con support?

    It's like the worse Windrush has got (even including a Cabinet resignation) the more Con support has picked up?
    The uptick happened 4 weeks ago in YouGov polls... last 4 weeks' Tory leads have been: 0% (level), 5%, 5%, and now 4%.
    Must admit I haven't been following polls at all since Election 2017.
    I suspect Corbyn's refusal to do more than issue words on anti-Semitism has hurt him. He went from apparently being ignorant in his choice of allies to very clearly choosing to continue those alliances regardless of their bigotry.
  • Options
    The_ApocalypseThe_Apocalypse Posts: 7,830

    geoffw said:

    GIN1138 said:

    notme said:

    4pt con lead on latest YouGov 1st may.

    Wonder what accounts for this uptick in Con support?

    It's like the worse Windrush has got (even including a Cabinet resignation) the more Con support has picked up?
    Could be that they are seen to be doing something while preserving a stringent attitude to illegals.
    The uptick occured before the Windrush scandal hit the fan.
    Tbh we’ve been seeing small Tory leads since the earlier part of the year (specifically February) though it was actually around March when small Tory leads started appearing with more frequency. YouGov so far appear to be the only pollster though consistently showing a 4-5 point Tory lead - the first of which appeared around Salisbury IIRC before going back to level pegging. Others such as a MORI and ComRes are still level pegging, while ICM showed MOE movements from a previous level pegging poll. Perhaps YouGov are on to something other pollsters are not, perhaps they aren’t - only time will tell.
  • Options
    ElliotElliot Posts: 1,516
    Pulpstar said:

    There are some terrific long-odds lays in the Next PM market if you've got a big enough bankroll: Ruth Davidson 38, David Miliband 95, Sadiq Kahn 200, Nigel Farage 400..

    Thanks I've taken D Miliband and Farage to 'boost' the Mogg lay a bit.
    Sadiq Khan has to be decent value there. It's not inconceivable May could make it to the election via inertia, have a surprisingly good result, and then Labour realise Corbynism is a busted flush and need to choose a proven winner.
  • Options
    ElliotElliot Posts: 1,516

    MaxPB said:

    I really do believe that the difference between leave and remain was the EU allowing Romania in. If they had been given a much longer accession period and a 15 year immigration restriction, I think it would have been a narrow victory for remain.
    But wasn't it the UK that was encouraging the accession of the Eastern European countries to the EU?
    Yes, in apparent ignorance of the massive immigration wave of unskilled it would cause.
  • Options
    david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,493

    Pulpstar said:

    Big ranges of possible results though (which is surely the correct approach to forecasting something like this):
    https://twitter.com/StephenDFisher/status/991610185306296320

    Fisher goes -206 seats for the big three ?!

    March of the residents association ?
    Makes no sense, given that UKIP will be contributing around 120 seats to the pool. It doesn't inspire confidence.

    Note the table at the end of the article, showing the outcome vs forecasts in 2017. Rallings & Thrasher were miles out then.

    Executive summary: no-one has a clue!

    Edit: Ah yes, looks like a typo. That makes much more sense.
    Are there fewer seats in total this time? I think Birmingham has had its number of councillors cut - have other councils fared similarly / been merged / abolished?
    I don't think that the boundary changes in Leeds have resulted in a reduction in seats.
    No, Leeds hasn't (declaration of interest - I'm a candidate there this year).
  • Options
    SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 21,011

    Pulpstar said:

    Big ranges of possible results though (which is surely the correct approach to forecasting something like this):
    https://twitter.com/StephenDFisher/status/991610185306296320

    Fisher goes -206 seats for the big three ?!

    March of the residents association ?
    Makes no sense, given that UKIP will be contributing around 120 seats to the pool. It doesn't inspire confidence.

    Note the table at the end of the article, showing the outcome vs forecasts in 2017. Rallings & Thrasher were miles out then.

    Executive summary: no-one has a clue!

    Edit: Ah yes, looks like a typo. That makes much more sense.
    Are there fewer seats in total this time? I think Birmingham has had its number of councillors cut - have other councils fared similarly / been merged / abolished?
    I don't think that the boundary changes in Leeds have resulted in a reduction in seats.
    No, Leeds hasn't (declaration of interest - I'm a candidate there this year).
    May I ask which ward?
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,623
    Totally generic and pointless question, I expect there are some very hard working Somali immigrants and even a few lazy Australians who contribute little, it depends on the individual applicant not the country of origin
  • Options
    Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,039

    Pulpstar said:

    Big ranges of possible results though (which is surely the correct approach to forecasting something like this):
    https://twitter.com/StephenDFisher/status/991610185306296320

    Fisher goes -206 seats for the big three ?!

    March of the residents association ?
    Makes no sense, given that UKIP will be contributing around 120 seats to the pool. It doesn't inspire confidence.

    Note the table at the end of the article, showing the outcome vs forecasts in 2017. Rallings & Thrasher were miles out then.

    Executive summary: no-one has a clue!

    Edit: Ah yes, looks like a typo. That makes much more sense.
    Are there fewer seats in total this time? I think Birmingham has had its number of councillors cut - have other councils fared similarly / been merged / abolished?
    I don't think that the boundary changes in Leeds have resulted in a reduction in seats.
    No, Leeds hasn't (declaration of interest - I'm a candidate there this year).
    Newcastle-under-Lyme has gone from 60 to 44.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,093

    Pulpstar said:

    Big ranges of possible results though (which is surely the correct approach to forecasting something like this):
    https://twitter.com/StephenDFisher/status/991610185306296320

    Fisher goes -206 seats for the big three ?!

    March of the residents association ?
    Makes no sense, given that UKIP will be contributing around 120 seats to the pool. It doesn't inspire confidence.

    Note the table at the end of the article, showing the outcome vs forecasts in 2017. Rallings & Thrasher were miles out then.

    Executive summary: no-one has a clue!

    Edit: Ah yes, looks like a typo. That makes much more sense.
    Are there fewer seats in total this time? I think Birmingham has had its number of councillors cut - have other councils fared similarly / been merged / abolished?
    Good question. I don't know, but I doubt if the total will have changed very much.

    I also wonder whether the fringe parties, Residents, etc, will be squeezed a bit. Given that the big two seem to be squeezing other parties nationally, it seems at least possible.
    The number of seats in Birmingham has been cut from 120 (40 wards each of 3 seats) to 101 (69 wards of 1 or 2 seats). Previously, only 1/3 of the seats have been up for election each time, so full coverage required a party to stand just 40 candidates. This time, though, all 101 seats are up for grabs, which is why the smaller parties have been scrabbling to field a full set of candidates.
    Doesn't seem to just be the smaller parties that are afflicted by this, check the Worksop South result and East Retford East :

    http://www.bassetlaw.gov.uk/media/407170/BDC-Disrtict-Election-Results-2015.pdf Tories getting the highest vote in each one, but only one candidate in 3 candidate wards !

  • Options
    The_ApocalypseThe_Apocalypse Posts: 7,830
    As for Corbyn, I think it’s foreign policy which has hurt him the most. His personal approval ratings have been in gradual decline since December, but it’s been more marked ever since Sailsbury. Corbyn’s strength during GE 2017 was never playing to the traditional expectations of a leader to be ‘good in a crisis’ et al but rather as an outsider addressing the economic grievances of many people, especially the under 40s. Corbyn is a very good campaigning politician, it’s odd that it feels like he hasn’t been campaigning that much during this time around the local elections.
  • Options
    The_ApocalypseThe_Apocalypse Posts: 7,830
    HYUFD said:

    Totally generic and pointless question, I expect there are some very hard working Somali immigrants and even a few lazy Australians who contribute little, it depends on the individual applicant not the country of origin
    +1.
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 45,413
    edited May 2018
    Interesting to see the Polish so popular. It does look very much that the immigrants that Britons do not want are the duskier hued varieties, particularly Muslim ones.

    The other interesting point is that none of the groups are very negative and most significantly positive, yet overall people feel that overall immigration has been bad for the country. There is more than a little cognitive dissonance about.
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 36,146

    I'm used to Roger defending appalling luvvies and disgraceful lefties for their disgusting behaviours, and I can understand his sycophantic desire to do so.

    But why's he sticking up for Berco Baggins?


    Attributing a Hobbit name to the Speaker is surely being heightist and so subject to being called a hate crime nowadays?
    Bercow is a corrupted hobbit, ie Gollum or Lotho Sackville-Baggins.
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 36,146

    As for Corbyn, I think it’s foreign policy which has hurt him the most. His personal approval ratings have been in gradual decline since December, but it’s been more marked ever since Sailsbury. Corbyn’s strength during GE 2017 was never playing to the traditional expectations of a leader to be ‘good in a crisis’ et al but rather as an outsider addressing the economic grievances of many people, especially the under 40s. Corbyn is a very good campaigning politician, it’s odd that it feels like he hasn’t been campaigning that much during this time around the local elections.

    He has been campaigning a lot, but he hasn't received much helpful publicity.
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,649

    MaxPB said:

    I really do believe that the difference between leave and remain was the EU allowing Romania in. If they had been given a much longer accession period and a 15 year immigration restriction, I think it would have been a narrow victory for remain.
    But wasn't it the UK that was encouraging the accession of the Eastern European countries to the EU?
    Interesting that we have (and always had) control over all those immigrants thought to be a negative (except for Romanians) and Brexit will, of course, make no difference except for the Romanians.
    Remember Sarkozy’s controversial policy?

    “France sends Roma Gypsies back to Romania”

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-11020429
  • Options
    Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 6,256
    Sean_F said:

    I'm used to Roger defending appalling luvvies and disgraceful lefties for their disgusting behaviours, and I can understand his sycophantic desire to do so.

    But why's he sticking up for Berco Baggins?


    Attributing a Hobbit name to the Speaker is surely being heightist and so subject to being called a hate crime nowadays?
    Bercow is a corrupted hobbit, ie Gollum or Lotho Sackville-Baggins.
    Just remember that the Hobbits were the heroes of the stories. The doughty, tough, sincere, honest and true folk who saved everyone else's necks.

    Just saying ....
  • Options
    Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,039
  • Options
    The_ApocalypseThe_Apocalypse Posts: 7,830
    Sean_F said:

    As for Corbyn, I think it’s foreign policy which has hurt him the most. His personal approval ratings have been in gradual decline since December, but it’s been more marked ever since Sailsbury. Corbyn’s strength during GE 2017 was never playing to the traditional expectations of a leader to be ‘good in a crisis’ et al but rather as an outsider addressing the economic grievances of many people, especially the under 40s. Corbyn is a very good campaigning politician, it’s odd that it feels like he hasn’t been campaigning that much during this time around the local elections.

    He has been campaigning a lot, but he hasn't received much helpful publicity.
    Ah, thanks.

    @foxinsoxuk You should see the replies to that tweet!
  • Options
    The_ApocalypseThe_Apocalypse Posts: 7,830
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 45,413
    HYUFD said:

    Totally generic and pointless question, I expect there are some very hard working Somali immigrants and even a few lazy Australians who contribute little, it depends on the individual applicant not the country of origin
    It is interesting that you think there are "some very hard working Somali" and "even a few lazy Australians".

    Mostly, I think this poll is showing that people like immigrants who integrate peacefully. Also interesting that the Chinese are not mentioned, despite a significant community.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,898
    edited May 2018
    HYUFD said:

    Totally generic and pointless question, I expect there are some very hard working Somali immigrants and even a few lazy Australians who contribute little, it depends on the individual applicant not the country of origin
    Except when you look at those as a group, the proportion of those from different background, we know in particular Somali and Bangleshi demographic have very poor employment records, kids have poor educational attainment etc.

    In comparison, virtually no Poles are long term unemployed, kids as a whole are doing very well at school. Even when unemployment rose, the Poles as a percentage were basically still in full employment and in terms of benefits are only claiming in work benefits like child allowance and housing benefit.

    It was a few years ago, but Ch4 did a special and the difference between in "success" between different immigrant groups is massive. Indian and Chinese immigrants in particular are extremely successful.
  • Options
    rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 7,965
    HYUFD said:

    Totally generic and pointless question, I expect there are some very hard working Somali immigrants and even a few lazy Australians who contribute little, it depends on the individual applicant not the country of origin
    Clearly the British people disagree with you given the widely divergent scores.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,073
    Dr. Foxy, it's old (over 10 years probably now) but Channel 4 had a very good documentary breaking down migration by nationality and looking at how various groups did. Chinese and Indians, I think, integrated best (maybe Poles too), with Portuguese and Somalians likeliest to be criminals.

    With Indians getting a positive rating yet Bangladeshis and Pakistanis a negative one, I really don't think you can base an analysis of those figures on skin colour. Following the rape gangs of Rotherham, Rochdale, Newcastle etc, it's unsurprising if people aren't necessarily enamoured with the idea of being 'culturally sensitive' to those who perpetrate such crimes.

    If the authorities had actually done their jobs then, as a side-effect to preventing the scale of child rape that happened, the public might have been reassured that 'culture' could not be used by perpetrators to hide behind. Instead, it's reinforced suspicions that the authorities will go soft on criminals for fear of being accused of bigotry, with the innocent paying the price for the cowardice of those charged with their protection.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,093
    Foxy said:

    HYUFD said:

    Totally generic and pointless question, I expect there are some very hard working Somali immigrants and even a few lazy Australians who contribute little, it depends on the individual applicant not the country of origin
    It is interesting that you think there are "some very hard working Somali" and "even a few lazy Australians".

    Mostly, I think this poll is showing that people like immigrants who integrate peacefully. Also interesting that the Chinese are not mentioned, despite a significant community.
    Nor Uganda.
  • Options
    not_on_firenot_on_fire Posts: 4,357
    Foxy said:

    Interesting to see the Polish so popular. It does look very much that the immigrants that Britons do not want are the duskier hued varieties, particularly Muslim ones.

    The other interesting point is that none of the groups are very negative and most significantly positive, yet overall people feel that overall immigration has been bad for the country. There is more than a little cognitive dissonance about.
    India (which has more Muslims than any other country) is rated +25
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,073
    Mrs C, they were also bloody irritating.

    As an aside, it's a shame they had seventeen endings to Lord of the Rings, all adding nothing, whilst changing the end for Saruman (he goes to the Shire and effectively turns it into a Soviet hell).
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,623
    edited May 2018

    Big ranges of possible results though (which is surely the correct approach to forecasting something like this):
    https://twitter.com/StephenDFisher/status/991610185306296320

    If true that would be an excellent result for May after last year's disaster, the first net gain of district councillors mid-term for an incumbent government since 2011.

    It would also be a poor result for Corbyn, the first net loss of district councillors mid-term for the main opposition party since 1985
  • Options
    not_on_firenot_on_fire Posts: 4,357
    HYUFD said:

    Totally generic and pointless question, I expect there are some very hard working Somali immigrants and even a few lazy Australians who contribute little, it depends on the individual applicant not the country of origin
    Agreed, but our immigration system treats people very differently depending on their nationality.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,093
    HYUFD said:

    Big ranges of possible results though (which is surely the correct approach to forecasting something like this):
    https://twitter.com/StephenDFisher/status/991610185306296320

    If true that would be an excellent result for May after last year's disaster, the first net gains of district councillors for an incumbent government since 2011.

    It would also be a poor result for Corbyn, the first net loss of district councillors for the main opposition party since 1985
    He means LAB +131.
  • Options
    AnazinaAnazina Posts: 3,487
    Foxy said:

    Interesting to see the Polish so popular. It does look very much that the immigrants that Britons do not want are the duskier hued varieties, particularly Muslim ones.

    The other interesting point is that none of the groups are very negative and most significantly positive, yet overall people feel that overall immigration has been bad for the country. There is more than a little cognitive dissonance about.
    Yes, attitudes to immigration are often ill-thought through, knee-jerk and irrational. Who knew?
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,686

    MaxPB said:

    I really do believe that the difference between leave and remain was the EU allowing Romania in. If they had been given a much longer accession period and a 15 year immigration restriction, I think it would have been a narrow victory for remain.
    But wasn't it the UK that was encouraging the accession of the Eastern European countries to the EU?
    Since when has government policy on the EU ever really reflected public opinion?
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,093

    HYUFD said:

    Totally generic and pointless question, I expect there are some very hard working Somali immigrants and even a few lazy Australians who contribute little, it depends on the individual applicant not the country of origin
    Agreed, but our immigration system treats people very differently depending on their nationality.
    Well yes that's a consequence of being part of the EU, the commonwealth and anglo-Irish history.
  • Options
    rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 7,965
    Foxy said:



    The other interesting point is that none of the groups are very negative and most significantly positive, yet overall people feel that overall immigration has been bad for the country. There is more than a little cognitive dissonance about.

    Not necessarily cognitive dissonance.

    If the pro immigration people arepositive to all groups, but the anti-immigration arepositive to the rich white countries and negative to the poor muslim countries then you end up with these results more or less.

    And it's not inconsistent (or even implausible) for the anti immigration people to say overall immigration has been bad, although I welcome the Irish coming here, they're alright.
  • Options
    AnorakAnorak Posts: 6,621

    Foxy said:

    Interesting to see the Polish so popular. It does look very much that the immigrants that Britons do not want are the duskier hued varieties, particularly Muslim ones.

    The other interesting point is that none of the groups are very negative and most significantly positive, yet overall people feel that overall immigration has been bad for the country. There is more than a little cognitive dissonance about.
    India (which has more Muslims than any other country) is rated +25
    Don't think it does. Thought that honour went to Indonesia (which has 4 extra letters in the middle).
  • Options
    brendan16brendan16 Posts: 2,315

    Brom said:

    Douglas Carswell is actually one of the more palatable Brexiters, but he too seems to have been driven mad by Brexit.

    https://twitter.com/douglascarswell/status/991026293033652224?s=21

    Carswell is defined by Brexit. If you think he's driven mad look at the remain supporters who thought it would never happen and are slowly waking up to smell the coffee, these people have gone completely bonkers!
    I think in any Brexit Bonkers list A C Grayling would come pretty near the top....

    https://twitter.com/acgrayling/status/991595356558372864
    Bloody hell. How an someone so supposedly intelligent be so dumb. He must realise that voting Green or Lib Dem only takes votes away from Labour and they are still the only realistic hope Remaniacs have of reversing Brexit.
    Surely that depends where you live? It's a local election - wouldn't it be nice if people actually voted on the basis of what sort of local council they Want? Tomorrow's vote isn't going to stop Brexit - it may affect your social care or schools or roads or libraries.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,623
    Pulpstar said:

    HYUFD said:

    Big ranges of possible results though (which is surely the correct approach to forecasting something like this):
    https://twitter.com/StephenDFisher/status/991610185306296320

    If true that would be an excellent result for May after last year's disaster, the first net gains of district councillors for an incumbent government since 2011.

    It would also be a poor result for Corbyn, the first net loss of district councillors for the main opposition party since 1985
    He means LAB +131.
    Does he? Labour won the 2014 Locals when these were last up remember but are now only neck and neck in the polls at best
  • Options
    RhubarbRhubarb Posts: 359
    Foxy said:

    HYUFD said:

    Totally generic and pointless question, I expect there are some very hard working Somali immigrants and even a few lazy Australians who contribute little, it depends on the individual applicant not the country of origin
    It is interesting that you think there are "some very hard working Somali" and "even a few lazy Australians".

    Mostly, I think this poll is showing that people like immigrants who integrate peacefully. Also interesting that the Chinese are not mentioned, despite a significant community.
    I don't think yougov asked about the Chinese.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,093

    Foxy said:

    Interesting to see the Polish so popular. It does look very much that the immigrants that Britons do not want are the duskier hued varieties, particularly Muslim ones.

    The other interesting point is that none of the groups are very negative and most significantly positive, yet overall people feel that overall immigration has been bad for the country. There is more than a little cognitive dissonance about.
    India (which has more Muslims than any other country) is rated +25
    The immigrant mix from India is far more likely to be Hindu and Sikh though. I know it's anecdote and all but I personally have never known a single Indian muslim.
This discussion has been closed.