Howdy, Stranger!

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

Undefined discussion subject.

SystemSystem Posts: 8,489
edited May 2019 in General
«13456

Comments

  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 19,170
    Lib-Dems Winning Here :D
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    The self-love that dare not speak its name:

    https://twitter.com/TelePolitics/status/1129318209293889536
  • isamisam Posts: 38,638
    Sorry, the London subsets have Brexit (4/1) on 25%, and the Lib Dem’s (7/2) on 21%, and the bet is the the 7/2?
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 22,662

    The self-love that dare not speak its name:



    They’re a “persecuted sect” apparently.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 41,174
    > @AlastairMeeks said:
    > The self-love that dare not speak its name:
    >

    The author is the director of the Museum of Communist Terror.
  • argyllrsargyllrs Posts: 155
    I think that BXP vote is solid - more votes than UKIP 2014 as more votes have been shed from CON. It is possible that LD's vote could go a lot higher if remainers coalesce around one party. Could be a great bet.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 59,112
    Put tiny sums on both BP and the Lib Dems to win in London.
  • isamisam Posts: 38,638
    Mike, is this you trying to back the Greens at 1000 as a hedge, on the off chance the LDs don’t oblige?!!


  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    Cyclefree said:

    The self-love that dare not speak its name:



    They’re a “persecuted sect” apparently.
    They're certainly a sect.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 71,138
    > @isam said:
    > Mike, is this you trying to back the Greens at 1000 as a hedge, on the off chance the LDs don’t oblige?!!

    I laid up the Brexit party at 1.16 for not much, and I'm glad it was not much I laid to lose.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    edited May 2019
    I understand there's some crossover in the Euro polling ....

    Is it the Tories now slipping behind both Change UK and UKIP ?!?
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 71,138
    > @JackW said:
    > I understand there's some crossover in the Euro polling ....
    >
    > Is it the Tories now slipping behind both Change UK and UKIP ?!?

    Chuka and Batten bringing up the rear still.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 19,170
    > @JackW said:
    > I understand there's some crossover in the Euro polling ....
    >
    > Is it the Tories now slipping behind both Change UK and UKIP ?!?

    Chortle :D
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 102,739
    I see Theresa May and Jeremy Corbyn have taken David Herdson's advice.

    https://twitter.com/BBCBreaking/status/1129323253472931840
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 41,174
    > @JackW said:
    > I understand there's some crossover in the Euro polling ....
    >
    > Is it the Tories now slipping behind both Change UK and UKIP ?!?
    ---------

    Could the Tories fall far enough to end up with fewer votes than the SNP?

    The party of One Nation below the party of one nation.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 41,174
    "The Labour leader said the six weeks of cross-party discussions could not carry on due to "the increasing weakness and instability" of the government. "

    He means the increasing weakness and instability of Labour's poll ratings for the European elections.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    edited May 2019
    > @williamglenn said:
    > > @JackW said:
    > > I understand there's some crossover in the Euro polling ....
    > >
    > > Is it the Tories now slipping behind both Change UK and UKIP ?!?
    > ---------
    >
    > Could the Tories fall far enough to end up with fewer votes than the SNP?
    >
    > The party of One Nation below the party of one nation.

    :smile:

    How times change. If after the last European election you'd had told the Tories that next time they would poll around 10 points more than UKIP, I think Conservatives would have been jubilant.

    Oh dear ....
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 16,252
    If the Lib Dems do win in London, it will be <I>by far</I> their biggest election win* in the last 100 years.

    * By 'win', I mean either a single constituency (single- or multi-member), or across a whole elected-body, whether that be a parliament, a devolved assembly, a council or something of that nature. By my reckoning, their current best is Devon County Council. For constituencies (single- or multi-member), I mean finishing first; for elected bodies, I mean winning an overall majority of seats. There may be some instances of the Lib Dems running larger authorities from a minority position.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 41,174
    > @david_herdson said:
    > If the Lib Dems do win in London, it will be <I>by far</I> their biggest election win* in the last 100 years.
    >
    > * By 'win', I mean either a single constituency (single- or multi-member), or across a whole elected-body, whether that be a parliament, a devolved assembly, a council or something of that nature. By my reckoning, their current best is Devon County Council. For constituencies (single- or multi-member), I mean finishing first; for elected bodies, I mean winning an overall majority of seats. There may be some instances of the Lib Dems running larger authorities from a minority position.
    --------

    I think it would be massive for them strategically as well. If they can start to challenge Labour in urban seats, at the same time as challenging the Tories in rural seats, they could have the beginnings of a General Election winning coalition.
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 16,252
    <I>In 2014 UKIP got 16.87% of the London votes and it is hard to see BXP+UKIP getting that much more.</I>

    I'm not sure about that. In 2014, the Tories won 22.5%. That figures is likely to be substantially lower this year, with much of it shedding to the Brexit Party.

    It has to be said that the overall Brexit share reported is extraordinary. No party this century has won more than 30% in a European Election within Britain.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,143
    It's all a bit of a mess, really.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 23,394
    > @david_herdson said:
    > If the Lib Dems do win in London, it will be <I>by far</I> their biggest election win* in the last 100 years.
    >
    > * By 'win', I mean either a single constituency (single- or multi-member), or across a whole elected-body, whether that be a parliament, a devolved assembly, a council or something of that nature. By my reckoning, their current best is Devon County Council. For constituencies (single- or multi-member), I mean finishing first; for elected bodies, I mean winning an overall majority of seats. There may be some instances of the Lib Dems running larger authorities from a minority position.

    Mayor of Bedford is a bigger win, surely?
  • nico67nico67 Posts: 4,502
    The end of the talks , May going in June and a new leader coming in could effect next weeks EU election voting .
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 16,252
    > @williamglenn said:
    > > @david_herdson said:
    > > If the Lib Dems do win in London, it will be <I>by far</I> their biggest election win* in the last 100 years.
    > >
    > > * By 'win', I mean either a single constituency (single- or multi-member), or across a whole elected-body, whether that be a parliament, a devolved assembly, a council or something of that nature. By my reckoning, their current best is Devon County Council. For constituencies (single- or multi-member), I mean finishing first; for elected bodies, I mean winning an overall majority of seats. There may be some instances of the Lib Dems running larger authorities from a minority position.
    > --------
    >
    > I think it would be massive for them strategically as well. If they can start to challenge Labour in urban seats, at the same time as challenging the Tories in rural seats, they could have the beginnings of a General Election winning coalition.

    It wouldn't be a coalition: it would be running two contradictory positions and campaigning messages which couldn't possibly hold together if they ended up with any power, and proving that the Lib Dems had learned nothing from their 2015 wipeout.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 41,647
    edited May 2019

    In 2014 UKIP got 16.87% of the London votes and it is hard to see BXP+UKIP getting that much more.



    I'm not sure about that. In 2014, the Tories won 22.5%. That figures is likely to be substantially lower this year, with much of it shedding to the Brexit Party.



    It has to be said that the overall Brexit share reported is extraordinary. No party this century has won more than 30% in a European Election within Britain.

    At the very end of the 20th, twenty years ago, Hague's Tories got 33.5%.
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 16,252
    > @TheScreamingEagles said:
    > I see Theresa May and Jeremy Corbyn have taken David Herdson's advice.
    >
    > https://twitter.com/BBCBreaking/status/1129323253472931840

    I'll send an invoice.
  • isamisam Posts: 38,638
    I’d like to know how a poll showing a party on 21% makes them a good bet at 7/2, when the same poll has a 4/1 shot on 25% 🤔
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 41,174
    > @david_herdson said:
    >
    > It wouldn't be a coalition: it would be running two contradictory positions and campaigning messages which couldn't possibly hold together if they ended up with any power, and proving that the Lib Dems had learned nothing from their 2015 wipeout.
    ---------

    It would be United Remainia, given political coherence by the new dividing line in English politics.
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 14,195
    > @Scott_P said:
    > https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1129327565829804032

    What's that Labour supporters on here like to say about putting country first?
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 14,195
    > @Richard_Nabavi said:
    > It's all a bit of a mess, really.


    master of understatement :-)
  • isamisam Posts: 38,638
    Last night on BBC This Week, John Nicholson of the SNP said that if they lost a 2nd IndyRef, he would keep campaigning for a 3rd, but if they won independence, there could not be a 3rd.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 22,662

    Cyclefree said:

    The self-love that dare not speak its name:



    They’re a “persecuted sect” apparently.
    They're certainly a sect.
    Indeed. I could think of more appropriate adjectives.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 22,662
    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:

    The self-love that dare not speak its name:



    They’re a “persecuted sect” apparently.
    They're certainly a sect.
    Indeed. I could think of more appropriate adjectives.
    Still, if they’re prosperous, they’ll no doubt be willing to pay the costs of the No Deal they so ardently wish for, I’m sure.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 19,170
    > @nico67 said:
    > The end of the talks , May going in June and a new leader coming in could effect next weeks EU election voting .
    >
    >

    Doubt it. The Farage/Brexit Party juggernaut is unstoppable now.
  • TabmanTabman Posts: 1,028
    > @david_herdson said:
    > > @williamglenn said:
    > > > @david_herdson said:
    > > > If the Lib Dems do win in London, it will be <I>by far</I> their biggest election win* in the last 100 years.
    > > >
    > > > * By 'win', I mean either a single constituency (single- or multi-member), or across a whole elected-body, whether that be a parliament, a devolved assembly, a council or something of that nature. By my reckoning, their current best is Devon County Council. For constituencies (single- or multi-member), I mean finishing first; for elected bodies, I mean winning an overall majority of seats. There may be some instances of the Lib Dems running larger authorities from a minority position.
    > > --------
    > >
    > > I think it would be massive for them strategically as well. If they can start to challenge Labour in urban seats, at the same time as challenging the Tories in rural seats, they could have the beginnings of a General Election winning coalition.
    >
    > It wouldn't be a coalition: it would be running two contradictory positions and campaigning messages which couldn't possibly hold together if they ended up with any power, and proving that the Lib Dems had learned nothing from their 2015 wipeout.

    It's pretty much New Labour with added Liberalism and Remain; worked for Tony three times.
  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143
    > @isam said:
    > I’d like to know how a poll showing a party on 21% makes them a good bet at 7/2, when the same poll has a 4/1 shot on 25% 🤔

    Mike's given his reasoning in the thread header, by referring back to the result in 2014, and to the idea that the Lib Dems will squeeze the vote of other Remain parties as they establish themselves as the largest under that banner.

    Do you have reasons for disagreeing that go beyond a HYUFD-like faith in the infallibility of opinion polls?
  • ExiledInScotlandExiledInScotland Posts: 1,390
    > @isam said:
    > https://twitter.com/pencreed/status/1129323647766806531
    >
    >
    >
    > Except one

    Viagrage?
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 34,010
    > @isam said:
    > https://twitter.com/pencreed/status/1129323647766806531
    >
    >
    >
    > Except one


    'Don't take the blue pill, we'll get you hard with the red pill!'

    I know we've had polling on the politcal proclivities of those with dirty pants, anything done on viagra users?
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 41,174
    > @Tabman said:
    >
    > It's pretty much New Labour with added Liberalism and Remain; worked for Tony three times.
    -------

    Or it's the pre-New Labour Tory party.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 23,394
    > @OblitusSumMe said:
    > > @isam said:
    > > I’d like to know how a poll showing a party on 21% makes them a good bet at 7/2, when the same poll has a 4/1 shot on 25% 🤔
    >
    > Mike's given his reasoning in the thread header, by referring back to the result in 2014, and to the idea that the Lib Dems will squeeze the vote of other Remain parties as they establish themselves as the largest under that banner.
    >
    > Do you have reasons for disagreeing that go beyond a HYUFD-like faith in the infallibility of opinion polls?

    I think Mike's kidding himself if he can't see TBP getting more than Ukip got in 2014. I'd have thought the best bet would be to lay Labour.
  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 7,246
    > @isam said:
    > Sorry, the London subsets have Brexit (4/1) on 25%, and the Lib Dem’s (7/2) on 21%, and the bet is the the 7/2

    Because UKIP/Farage is crap in London.
  • nico67nico67 Posts: 4,502
    I think today’s news might save Labour in London .

    It might also help their general polling . Even though the talks were unlikely to deliver for many Labour supporters the fact they were happening and were being seen as bailing out May was a big drag on their support.

    This might also help what’s left of the Tory vote, May leaving in June and talk of Johnson taking over might also see some who were going to vote BP to either stick with the Tories or be less enthused to turn out.

    I fully expect the BP to top the EU elections but the last two days is likely to put a ceiling on their support and might see them lose a few points.
  • isamisam Posts: 38,638

    > @isam said:

    > Sorry, the London subsets have Brexit (4/1) on 25%, and the Lib Dem’s (7/2) on 21%, and the bet is the the 7/2



    Because UKIP/Farage is crap in London.

    So you think the polling is wrong?
  • isamisam Posts: 38,638
    edited May 2019

    > @isam said:

    > I’d like to know how a poll showing a party on 21% makes them a good bet at 7/2, when the same poll has a 4/1 shot on 25% 🤔



    Mike's given his reasoning in the thread header, by referring back to the result in 2014, and to the idea that the Lib Dems will squeeze the vote of other Remain parties as they establish themselves as the largest under that banner.



    Do you have reasons for disagreeing that go beyond a HYUFD-like faith in the infallibility of opinion polls?

    I certainly don’t think polls are infallible, but thanks for the implied put down.

    This is the paragraph relating to the bet

    “This one is on votes and the standout bet for me the 7/2 that the LDs will be top in the capital. The YouGov poll has a large sample which means that the regional subsets are more meaningful. In London BXP are on 25%, the LDs 21% and LAB on 20%.”

    It just seems odd to quote that to back the 21% party being good value at 7/2 if the 25% party are the same or bigger price. Sorry for asking
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 23,394
    I think @williamglenn has made this point in the past, but you might find that leavers in remainer majority parts of the country might be more Brexity. I can imagine that those Londoners who voted leave might be quite keen on Farage's party.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    The onward march of the yellow peril has a silver lining as shares in Auchentennach Fine Pies have spiked as investors note a more secure supply of essential ingredients in the short and medium term.

    This follows a difficult period for the company in recent years as worries were expressed over the endangered nature of the prized product. Speaking at a charity event for impoverished Scottish nobles, JackW of Auchentennach said :

    "The European elections provide an excellent opportunity for the nation to consolidate the position of a wonderful culinary institution, founded in 1745 and with a worldwide reputation. I urge the electorate to strike a blow for British exports and vote Liberal Democrat in their tens, if not hundreds in this completely meaningless exercise in government induced election incompetence, albeit that it will only cost the taxpayer little more that £100m.

    Additionally Mike Smithson would also win his 32p bet !! .."
  • RobCRobC Posts: 398
    You can't help thinking Vince is shuffling off the scene just at the wrong moment. Thanks to the local election boost and being quicker on their feet the Lib Dems have cleverly shafted ChangeUk and have more momentum with them than they've had for years. Labour are floundering and managing to under-perform all expectations. I'd be tempted to keep a crafty old stager like Vince going for a another year to ensure Heidi Allen and her upstarts are truly buried.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 41,174
    > @tlg86 said:
    > I think @williamglenn has made this point in the past, but you might find that leavers in remainer majority parts of the country might be more Brexity. I can imagine that those Londoners who voted leave might be quite keen on Farage's party.

    Yes, and vice-versa. If you were a Remainer in a deep Leave area in 2016, you really meant it.
  • ExiledInScotlandExiledInScotland Posts: 1,390
    > @JackW said:
    > The onward march of the yellow peril has a silver lining as shares in Auchentennach Fine Pies have spiked as investors note a more secure supply of essential ingredients in the short and medium term.
    >
    > This follows a difficult period for the company in recent years as worries were expressed over the endangered nature of the prized product. Speaking at a charity event for impoverished Scottish nobles, JackW of Auchentennach said :
    >
    > "The European elections provide an excellent opportunity for the nation to consolidate the position of a wonderful culinary institution, founded in 1745 and with a worldwide reputation. I urge the electorate to strike a blow for British exports and vote Liberal Democrat in their tens, if not hundreds in this completely meaningless exercise in government induced election incompetence, albeit that it will only cost the taxpayer little more that £100m.
    >
    > Additionally Mike Smithson would also win his 32p bet !! .."

    If Auchentennach Fine Pies are Auchentennach Fine Dining, would that mean you support AFD?
  • _Anazina__Anazina_ Posts: 1,810
    If Jezza is to be believed, the Government remains keen on importing chlorinated chicken and (presumably) a whole load of other low-standard foodstuffs from the United States. Can anyone explain why they think this is a good idea?
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 41,647
    The last time Labour won the Euro Elections was in 1994.
  • ExiledInScotlandExiledInScotland Posts: 1,390
    edited May 2019
    > @_Anazina_ said:
    > If Jezza is to be believed, the Government remains keen on importing chlorinated chicken and (presumably) a whole load of other low-standard foodstuffs from the United States. Can anyone explain why they think this is a good idea?

    If we exit the EU, presumably we can adopt better food labelling laws. Could we not require the packaging to show if the chicken had been chlorine washed and allow consumers to choose? Likewise with GM content?
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 35,326
    _Anazina_ said:

    If Jezza is to be believed, the Government remains keen on importing chlorinated chicken and (presumably) a whole load of other low-standard foodstuffs from the United States. Can anyone explain why they think this is a good idea?

    "If Jezza is to be believed"

    *snort*
  • ah009ah009 Posts: 436
    > @williamglenn said:
    > https://twitter.com/Nigel_Farage/status/1129332991610818560

    Democracy only works if the participants don't cheat in the campaign
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 55,591
    Of course it might boost Labour support among Remain voters.....

    https://twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/1129300905030037504
  • BromBrom Posts: 3,760
    > @MikeSmithson said:
    > > @isam said:
    > > Sorry, the London subsets have Brexit (4/1) on 25%, and the Lib Dem’s (7/2) on 21%, and the bet is the the 7/2
    >
    > Because UKIP/Farage is crap in London.

    40% of Londoners voted leave. If The Brexit party get over half of those voters (adjusted for a lower turnout) they might win. In my borough I think they will win comfortably. Ethnic minority voters will not go Lib Dem in large numbers which will hinder them.
  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143
    > @isam said:

    > This is the paragraph relating to the bet

    Look at the thread title. The whole post relates to the bet.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    > @ExiledInScotland said:
    > > @JackW said:
    > > The onward march of the yellow peril has a silver lining as shares in Auchentennach Fine Pies have spiked as investors note a more secure supply of essential ingredients in the short and medium term.
    > >
    > > This follows a difficult period for the company in recent years as worries were expressed over the endangered nature of the prized product. Speaking at a charity event for impoverished Scottish nobles, JackW of Auchentennach said :
    > >
    > > "The European elections provide an excellent opportunity for the nation to consolidate the position of a wonderful culinary institution, founded in 1745 and with a worldwide reputation. I urge the electorate to strike a blow for British exports and vote Liberal Democrat in their tens, if not hundreds in this completely meaningless exercise in government induced election incompetence, albeit that it will only cost the taxpayer little more that £100m.
    > >
    > > Additionally Mike Smithson would also win his 32p bet !! .."
    >
    > If Auchentennach Fine Pies are Auchentennach Fine Dining, would that mean you support AFD?

    There is no alternative to fine dining at Chez JackW
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    _Anazina_ said:

    If Jezza is to be believed, the Government remains keen on importing chlorinated chicken and (presumably) a whole load of other low-standard foodstuffs from the United States. Can anyone explain why they think this is a good idea?

    https://twitter.com/JohnRentoul/status/1129327307208953857
  • isamisam Posts: 38,638

    > @isam said:



    > This is the paragraph relating to the bet



    Look at the thread title. The whole post relates to the bet.

    The thread is based on a poll that has BXP on more than double the Lib Dem score, though that isn’t mentioned, and beating them 25-21 in London. I just don’t see how the best bet is Lib Dem’s win London at 7/2 on that evidence. It may be a good bet nonetheless
  • El_CapitanoEl_Capitano Posts: 3,034

    > @williamglenn said:

    I think it would be massive for them strategically as well. If they can start to challenge Labour in urban seats, at the same time as challenging the Tories in rural seats, they could have the beginnings of a General Election winning coalition.



    It wouldn't be a coalition: it would be running two contradictory positions and campaigning messages which couldn't possibly hold together if they ended up with any power, and proving that the Lib Dems had learned nothing from their 2015 wipeout.

    Not at all.

    The Lib Dems are becoming the party of the educated, affluent pro-Remain crowd. There are a lot of them in Labour-held London seats, just as there are in Conservative-held rural seats. "Rural" can mean the Cotswolds just as it can mean the south-west.

    Inevitably, yes, there will be some degree of tailoring the message. But no more than Labour trying to hold together the pro-Remain votes of Islington South and the WWC heartland of Bolsover, or the Conservatives trying to hold together the Brexit voters of Essex and the small businessmen who are going to be trashed by Brexit. Outside the SNP, the Lib Dems are probably now the party with the most coherent internal coalition.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,143
    edited May 2019
    _Anazina_ said:

    If Jezza is to be believed, the Government remains keen on importing chlorinated chicken and (presumably) a whole load of other low-standard foodstuffs from the United States. Can anyone explain why they think this is a good idea?

    I don't think the government is at all keen to do that, but if you are asking about the merits of the idea, (a) it is safer than the salmonella-infested chicken produced in the EU, and (b) it is cheaper, a consideration which you might have thought would be rather compelling for a party which purports to be interested in the interests of the least well-off.

    Not that the realities are relevant, of course. 'Chlorinated chicken' sound bad, despite the fact that consumers quite happily buy chlorinated salads and drink chlorinated water. So it won't happen, unfortunately.
  • _Anazina__Anazina_ Posts: 1,810

    > @_Anazina_ said:

    > If Jezza is to be believed, the Government remains keen on importing chlorinated chicken and (presumably) a whole load of other low-standard foodstuffs from the United States. Can anyone explain why they think this is a good idea?



    If we exit the EU, presumably we can adopt better food labelling laws. Could we not require the packaging to show if the chicken had been chlorine washed and allow consumers to choose? Likewise with GM content?

    By that way of thinking, there would be no need for any food standards. You could literally sell a shit sandwich, as long as it was so labelled.

    No, food standards are a good idea. There is nothing to commend importing the tons of quasi-edible trash that lurks in US supermarkets.
  • _Anazina__Anazina_ Posts: 1,810
    TOPPING said:

    _Anazina_ said:

    If Jezza is to be believed, the Government remains keen on importing chlorinated chicken and (presumably) a whole load of other low-standard foodstuffs from the United States. Can anyone explain why they think this is a good idea?

    "If Jezza is to be believed"

    *snort*
    Well I recognise that it's a stretch, but it might be true. Who knows?
  • _Anazina__Anazina_ Posts: 1,810

    Of course it might boost Labour support among Remain voters.....

    https://twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/1129300905030037504


    Am I the only one who finds Goodwin deeply annoying? He is academia's version of Han Dodges, he writes the same thing over and over again and gets some idiot to pay him for it.
  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143
    > @isam said:
    > > @isam said:
    >
    >
    >
    > > This is the paragraph relating to the bet
    >
    >
    >
    > Look at the thread title. The whole post relates to the bet.
    >
    > The thread is based on a poll that has BXP on more than double the Lib Dem score, though that isn’t mentioned, and beating them 25-21 in London. I just don’t see how the best bet is Lib Dem’s win London at 7/2 on that evidence. It may be a good bet nonetheless

    Sure. I might even agree with you that Mike is guilty of wishful thinking. What I don't understand is why you won't make an argument based on his reasoning, rather than just petulant sniping.

    If political betting were only about comparing opinion polls to betting odds then Mike would never have made that 50-1 bet on Obama.
  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095
    edited May 2019
    > @_Anazina_ said:
    > If Jezza is to be believed, the Government remains keen on importing chlorinated chicken and (presumably) a whole load of other low-standard foodstuffs from the United States. Can anyone explain why they think this is a good idea?
    >
    > "If Jezza is to be believed"
    >
    > *snort*
    >
    > Well I recognise that it's a stretch, but it might be true. Who knows?

    I wouldn't trust Corbyn if he told me it was 12.47pm. I'd check my watch first... i
    I am an hr ahead of gmt btw...
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 19,170
    > @_Anazina_ said:
    > If Jezza is to be believed, the Government remains keen on importing chlorinated chicken and (presumably) a whole load of other low-standard foodstuffs from the United States. Can anyone explain why they think this is a good idea?

    Well we thought it was a good idea to add chlorine to tap water 40 years ago?
  • _Anazina__Anazina_ Posts: 1,810

    > @_Anazina_ said:

    > If Jezza is to be believed, the Government remains keen on importing chlorinated chicken and (presumably) a whole load of other low-standard foodstuffs from the United States. Can anyone explain why they think this is a good idea?

    >

    > "If Jezza is to be believed"

    >

    > *snort*

    >

    > Well I recognise that it's a stretch, but it might be true. Who knows?



    I woildnt trust Corbyn if he told me it was 12.47pm. I'd check my watch first... i am an hr agead of gmt btw...

    And you'd be right not to.

    Your post was timed at 1248hrs CET.

  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 18,405
    > @williamglenn said:
    > https://twitter.com/Nigel_Farage/status/1129332991610818560

    He is becoming messianic. Dangerous.
  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143
    > @SquareRoot said:
    > > @_Anazina_ said:
    > > If Jezza is to be believed, the Government remains keen on importing chlorinated chicken and (presumably) a whole load of other low-standard foodstuffs from the United States. Can anyone explain why they think this is a good idea?
    > >
    > > "If Jezza is to be believed"
    > >
    > > *snort*
    > >
    > > Well I recognise that it's a stretch, but it might be true. Who knows?
    >
    > I wouldn't trust Corbyn if he told me it was 12.47pm. I'd check my watch first... i
    > I am an hr ahead of gmt btw...

    So am I, where it is now 11:53. So I think you're ahead of yourself by an hour too.

    Can we have another summer time argument?
  • isamisam Posts: 38,638
    edited May 2019




    Sure. I might even agree with you that Mike is guilty of wishful thinking. What I don't understand is why you won't make an argument based on his reasoning, rather than just petulant sniping.



    If political betting were only about comparing opinion polls to betting odds then Mike would never have made that 50-1 bet on Obama.

    The whole thread is about the opinion poll and the reasoning of the bet cites the London subset that has a bigger priced runner scoring better. I don’t get how you can’t see this?
  • Pro_RataPro_Rata Posts: 3,525
    What? You take the effort to poll a 7000 sample, and then you only break down the survey by North, Mid/Wales and South!!!
  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143
    > @isam said:
    >
    > The whole thread is about the opinion poll and the reasoning of the bet cites the London subset that has a bigger priced rubber scoring better. I don’t get how you can’t see this?

    And I cited the parts of his post where Mike explains his reasoning for looking beyond the raw figures in the opinion poll.

    Unless you are now able to see those paragraphs then I think this dialogue has run its course.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    So the talks are dead.

    Which one of the parties is ready to set out a bold vision of how we can move forward from here rather than spout excuses and platitudes ?
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 52,574
    edited May 2019
    Jonathan said:
    The main parties were warned repeatedly that this would happen. I don't see how the genie is put back now. UK has a Nationalist Populist party and it will win seats. Whether it can sweep aside the entire political system is another question.

    No doubt Bannon is providing plenty of advice to Nigel.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 22,662

    > @_Anazina_ said:

    > If Jezza is to be believed, the Government remains keen on importing chlorinated chicken and (presumably) a whole load of other low-standard foodstuffs from the United States. Can anyone explain why they think this is a good idea?



    If we exit the EU, presumably we can adopt better food labelling laws. Could we not require the packaging to show if the chicken had been chlorine washed and allow consumers to choose? Likewise with GM content?

    The US would not allow that ie would make it a condition of any FTA that we did not label such products so that consumers could refuse to buy them.
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 16,252
    > @tlg86 said:
    > > @david_herdson said:
    > > If the Lib Dems do win in London, it will be <I>by far</I> their biggest election win* in the last 100 years.
    > >
    > > * By 'win', I mean either a single constituency (single- or multi-member), or across a whole elected-body, whether that be a parliament, a devolved assembly, a council or something of that nature. By my reckoning, their current best is Devon County Council. For constituencies (single- or multi-member), I mean finishing first; for elected bodies, I mean winning an overall majority of seats. There may be some instances of the Lib Dems running larger authorities from a minority position.
    >
    > Mayor of Bedford is a bigger win, surely?

    No, the population of Bedford is only about 170,000 - way below that of Devon. Watford - the Lib Dems' other mayoral win - is also small.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 26,337
    > @_Anazina_ said:
    > Of course it might boost Labour support among Remain voters.....
    >
    > https://twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/1129300905030037504
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > Am I the only one who finds Goodwin deeply annoying? He is academia's version of Han Dodges, he writes the same thing over and over again and gets some idiot to pay him for it.

    I cant help but feel you find him annoying because his analysis does not match your political views. Personally i find his analysis both interesting and at times compelling. But I also recognise that is because his conclusions are often more in line with my own political views
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 52,574
    Wonder whether the rise of Faragism is starting to be noticed in Jezza's inner cabinet? They may be complacently thinking it splits the Right and Jezza gets in.

    But look at BP latest advert: going straight for the older working class vote.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 22,662
    Jonathan said:

    He certainly is. There is, at the risk of invoking Godwin’s Law, more than a hint of the Fuehrerprincip about him, with all this talk of betrayal and Will of the People stuff, and a party built purely around him with no checks and balances with him being funded personally by a man under investigation by the NCA.
  • SlackbladderSlackbladder Posts: 9,124
    > @rottenborough said:
    > > @williamglenn said:
    >
    > > https://twitter.com/Nigel_Farage/status/1129332991610818560
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > He is becoming messianic. Dangerous.
    >
    > The main parties were warned repeatedly that this would happen. I don't see how the genie is put back now. UK has a Nationalist Populist party and it will win seats. Whether it can sweep aside the entire political system is another question.
    >
    > No doubt Bannon is providing plenty of advice to Nigel.

    Yep, if Nige can continue this momentum, then a GE becomes a lot more risky and dangerous for both tories and labour.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 26,337
    > @Cyclefree said:
    > > @williamglenn said:
    >
    > > https://twitter.com/Nigel_Farage/status/1129332991610818560
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > He is becoming messianic. Dangerous.
    >
    >
    > He certainly is. There is, at the risk of invoking Godwin’s Law, more than a hint of the Fuehrerprincip about him, with all this talk of betrayal and Will of the People stuff, and a party built purely around him with no checks and balances with him being funded personally by a man under investigation by the NCA.

    Yep. You invoked Godwin.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 22,662
    Given the Standard’s report about him agreeing with May to stop a second referendum even being put to the vote, who does he think he’s kidding?
  • isamisam Posts: 38,638

    > @isam said:

    >

    > The whole thread is about the opinion poll and the reasoning of the bet cites the London subset that has a bigger priced rubber scoring better. I don’t get how you can’t see this?



    And I cited the parts of his post where Mike explains his reasoning for looking beyond the raw figures in the opinion poll.



    Unless you are now able to see those paragraphs then I think this dialogue has run its course.

    I think we are Jez and Tez and will not come to agreement
  • isamisam Posts: 38,638

    > @Cyclefree said:

    > > @williamglenn said:

    >

    > >



    >

    >

    >

    >

    >

    > He is becoming messianic. Dangerous.

    >

    >

    > He certainly is. There is, at the risk of invoking Godwin’s Law, more than a hint of the Fuehrerprincip about him, with all this talk of betrayal and Will of the People stuff, and a party built purely around him with no checks and balances with him being funded personally by a man under investigation by the NCA.



    Yep. You invoked Godwin.
    If the will of the people hadn’t been transparently betrayed, his behaviour would indeed look rather worrying
  • Andy_CookeAndy_Cooke Posts: 4,237
    And, of course, if the winners accept the result.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 52,574

    > @_Anazina_ said:

    > Of course it might boost Labour support among Remain voters.....

    >

    >



    >

    >

    >

    >

    > Am I the only one who finds Goodwin deeply annoying? He is academia's version of Han Dodges, he writes the same thing over and over again and gets some idiot to pay him for it.



    I cant help but feel you find him annoying because his analysis does not match your political views. Personally i find his analysis both interesting and at times compelling. But I also recognise that is because his conclusions are often more in line with my own political views
    His recent book is v good (with Eatwell) and more established politicians should be reading it to understand where this is coming from. I'd say it is a little complacent over how easily Nat Populism can be tipped over into out-right hard far right politics of the nasty sort, but otherwise well worth reading.

    Seems to me that Lab and Tories are standing on a burning platform and have no idea they are.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 41,174
    > @Slackbladder said:
    >
    > Yep, if Nige can continue this momentum, then a GE becomes a lot more risky and dangerous for both tories and labour.

    If he has enough ERG Tories willing to do his bidding, he could make it very difficult to avoid a GE.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 23,394
    > @Cyclefree said:
    > > @williamglenn said:
    >
    > > https://twitter.com/Nigel_Farage/status/1129332991610818560
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > He is becoming messianic. Dangerous.
    >
    >
    > He certainly is. There is, at the risk of invoking Godwin’s Law, more than a hint of the Fuehrerprincip about him, with all this talk of betrayal and Will of the People stuff, and a party built purely around him with no checks and balances with him being funded personally by a man under investigation by the NCA.

    Did the Lib Dems ever repay the money donated to them by Michael Brown?

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/jul/17/inquiry-fraudster-michael-brown-donation-lib-dems
This discussion has been closed.