Howdy, Stranger!

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

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » PB Nighthawks is now open

SystemSystem Posts: 11,015
edited April 2013 in General

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » PB Nighthawks is now open

If you’ve always been a lurker, this thread is, Especially for you, then this thread is for you, get, Into the Groove, by posting on PB, become the New Kids On The Block.

Read the full story here


«1

Comments

  • Options
    Apologies for not doing a more comprehensive analysis on the Angus Reid poll, I've been up since 5 am for the second day in a row, and I'm knucking fackered.
  • Options
    eekeek Posts: 24,956
    Conservatives have 27% but it doesn't matter. If UKIP poll anything like 6-8% they will destroy the Conservative vote in marginals and hand Labour a massive victory.
  • Options
    Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    We need Seth O Logue to try and spin this ineptly. ;)
  • Options
    MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053
    I said yesterday, or was it early this morning, that now would be a good time to buy gold after its recent falls. But woah! Hold the horses. Experts are saying that no one know why Gold fell in such a drastic fashion:

    Scariest Part of Gold Crash? No One Knows Why It Happened (CNBC)

    The two-day crash in the price of gold is one of the most devastating asset sell-offs ever witnessed on Wall Street, right up there with the stock market crash of 1987. What makes it that much worse is no one is exactly sure why it happened.
    And until investors get some answers, the selling may continue, they say.

    "Unless you have a catalyst, 'cheap' gets a lot cheaper during a crash in price expectations," said Keith McCullough of Hedgeye Risk Management. "Old Wall calls it 'catching a falling knife' for a reason."

    Gold posted its biggest two-day dollar drop ever and its biggest percentage drop since 1980 when the carnage settled Monday. Prices rebounded slightly in early trading Tuesday. It's now down 26 percent from its 2011 high. (For the latest price, click here.)

    "We are running out of superlatives to attach to the gold price move since last Friday," Nomura analyst Tyler Broda wrote in a note to clients. "The rarity of a move like this is notable."

    It seems like every trader on Wall Street has a theory for the move. Most commonly cited are fears of central bank selling (especially Cyprus), exchange-traded funds liquidation, global deflation setting in, a weak yen strengthening the dollar, and mysterious hedge funds blowing up from margin calls.

    "The major holders of gold other than the U.S. (i.e., the EU and England) need gold to support their economies and banks," said Sean Egan of Egan-Jones research. "A little selling has a major impact on supply and feeds price declines and follow-on selling." But the Cyprus theory has yet to be proven. Reportedly, there is an internal debate still raging inside Cyprus to sell gold to pay its growing bailout tab, but they have not sold any gold yet.

    Many say there may not be a fundamental reason to pinpoint for the bullion crash. After all, the metal has no fundamentals like cash flows or dividends, so it is only worth what others are willing to pay for it. After a 13-year run, perhaps it was time for other assets like Treasurys and high-yielding stocks to gain favor among the safe-haven crowd.

    "Commodities trade even more technically than other assets since it's futures driven," said Enis Taner, global macro editor for RiskReversal.com. The crash "was technical more than anything in my view."

    Taner points to the $1,530 to $1,550 area for gold, which was support for the metal for almost two years. Once it broke below that, the rush for the exits started.

    And that's where a new facet of this trade, which was not around in 1980, may have thrown fuel on the fire: ETFs. They give the average Joe access to the gold futures market and these less sophisticated investors may not have the same pain threshold or capital as institutional investors.

    (Read More: Mark Fisher: Gold Bulls Should Love This)

    The SPDR Gold Trust (GLD), the most popular gold ETF, traded 150 million shares during the two-day slam, more than the total volume of the previous 16 days. This smacks of panic selling.

    "The gold market metrics are in uncharted territory," said David Greenberg of Greenberg Capital. "The GLD effects on gold in a panic sell-off have never been tested."

    History has shown that once gold enters a bear market (20 percent off high), it keeps going lower by another 14 percent on average, according to data going back to 1975 crunched by Bespoke Investment Group. That would put the metal well below $1,300.

    "While no one of these explanations may be sufficient to explain a 20 percent move, collectively they all matter," said Robert Savage, chief strategist at FX Concepts and previous director of FX macro sales at Goldman Sachs. "Gold is unlikely to bounce much—it's a heavy metal after all—with the larger medium term risk of $1,100."
  • Options
    anotherDaveanotherDave Posts: 6,746
    eek said:

    Conservatives have 27% but it doesn't matter. If UKIP poll anything like 6-8% they will destroy the Conservative vote in marginals and hand Labour a massive victory.

    I don't think its clear how much UKIP help/hurt other parties. They seem to draw votes from all over.

    I'm looking forward to the post-mortem of the May elections.

  • Options
    Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 49,261
    edited April 2013
    TSE the Tory percentage is missing!

    EDIT - corrected now

    (love the music refs by the way!)
  • Options
    AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    edited April 2013
    TSE

    The body of the Angus Reid webpage is at odds with its graphics:

    See:

    Across Britain, 39 per cent of decided voters and leaners (-3 since January) would support the Labour candidate in their constituency in the next General Election.

    The Conservative Party is in second place with 29 per cent (=), followed by UKIP with 16 per cent (+5) and the Liberal Democrats with eight per cent (-2). Support is lower for the Scottish National Party (SNP) (3%), the Green Party (also 3%) and the British National Party (BNP) (2%).


    It is so messed up that I can only conclude that Pork did the polling.

    As polling dates were 12-13 April it is almost certainly best binning.
  • Options

    TSE the Tory percentage is missing!

    (love the music refs by the way!)

    Thanks Sunil.

    Added the Tory figure.

  • Options
    MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053
    From PT (repeat).
    tim said:
    Angus Reid poll
    Con 27
    Lab 39
    UKIP 16
    LD 8

    http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/48753/labour-party-still-first-ukip-reaches-16-in-british-politics/

    Hehe; Ukip still beating the L/Dems it seems. But why does Angus Reid drape the parties in such abismal colours. I mean the L/Dems are in a sickly green hue: that may be because they are really feeling sick on these results.
  • Options
    AveryLP said:

    TSE

    The body of the Angus Reid webpage is at odds with its graphics:

    See:

    Across Britain, 39 per cent of decided voters and leaners (-3 since January) would support the Labour candidate in their constituency in the next General Election.

    The Conservative Party is in second place with 29 per cent (=), followed by UKIP with 16 per cent (+5) and the Liberal Democrats with eight per cent (-2). Support is lower for the Scottish National Party (SNP) (3%), the Green Party (also 3%) and the British National Party (BNP) (2%).


    It is so messed up that I can only conclude that Pork did the polling.

    As polling dates were 12-13 April it is almost certainly best binning.

    Angus Reid are comparing it with their first January poll and not their last poll in January.

    Which is very naughty of them.

  • Options
    Mick, perhaps YOU should calm yourself. OR as we say in Seattle, "Keep Clam"!

    NOTE that in US, law enforcement is NOT centralized as in UK. While FBI is lead agency in investigating Boston Marathon Bombings, and US Justice Dept may well end up being lead prosecutors, main jurisdiction is state & local. Meaning in this instance City of Bostonn (BPD) and Commonwealth of Massachusetts (Mass State Police) and (for legal prosecution) Suffolk County.

    Speaking of the latter, there's currently some kind of threat/flap at the Courthouse, according to Boston Globe live blog:

    http://live.boston.com/Event/Live_blog_Explosion_in_Copley_Square
  • Options
    Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    AveryLP said:

    As polling dates were 12-13 April it is almost certainly best binning.

    Along with your always amusingly incompetent spin, Seth O Logue.

    This poll sadly predates Lansley becoming PM as you predicted. As will all polling since your prediction was hilarious lunacy.


  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,983
    First Canadian poll after Trudeau's election as Liberal leader

    Liberal Party = 43%

    Conservative Party = 30%

    New Democratic Party = 19%

    Bloc Quebecois = 5%

    Green Party = 2%

    Other = 1%

  • Options
    Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530

    NOTE that in US, law enforcement is NOT centralized as in UK.

    That's nice but since I never claimed it was then maybe the entertaining capitalisation are indicating precisely who still needs to calm down.

  • Options
    AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    edited April 2013


    This poll sadly predates Lansley becoming PM as you predicted.

    That bit was funny, Pork, but don't overdo the acorns.

    I'd avoid the poll too. You may find the SNP bits indigestible.

  • Options
    Way off topic - did anyone at PB notice, that JUSTIN TRUDEAU, son of late Pierre Trudeau, is the new Leader of the Liberal Party of Canada?

    From Globe & Mail:
    104,552 Liberal members and supporters cast a ballot in the leadership race, making turnout 82.16 per cent.

    The party’s voting system gave Canada’s 308 ridings equal weight in the final tally. Each riding was given 100 points, and a candidate got the number of points equal to the percentage of votes they won in that riding.

    There were 30,800 points in total, with 15,401 needed to win. The final results:

    •Former cabinet minister Martin Cauchon got 815 points.
    •Toronto lawyer Deborah Coyne got 214 points.
    •Former MP Martha Hall Findlay got 1,760 points.
    •Retired military officer Karen McCrimmon got 210 points.
    •B.C. MP Joyce Murray got 3,130 points.
    •Quebec MP Justin Trudeau got 24,668 points, winning in the first round of the preferential ballot.

    As you can see, Trudeau the Younger had no serious competition, for what at the moment many regard as a poisoned chalice. OF COURSE that's what many said nearly a century ago, when William Lyon Mackenzie King was chosen Liberal leader, at the (then) nadir of the party's fortunes. He & Grits went on to dominate Canadian politics, during his lifetime and for another half century thereafter.

    Part of Justin T's problem is the lingering dislike>hatred for his father's memory in western Canada AND Quebec. Does that remind you of anything from today's news???
  • Options
    AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    edited April 2013
    tim said:

    To repeat the point about approval ratings vs best PM/ from what you've heard good job-bad job, AngusReid use the approval (favourability in the US question) which is regarded in all the academic research as a better guide to VI.

    It still produces negatives for all 3

    Dave -26
    Ed -20
    Nick -47

    Did Angus Reid poll approvals for Tony Blair, David Blunkett, Lord Mandelson, Alan Milburn and Hugh Grant as well as Ed Miliband?

    It is so difficult to know who is leading the Labour party these days.
  • Options
    JohnLoonyJohnLoony Posts: 1,790
    Just in case anybody missed the multiple Dimbleblunders on the BBC:

    Dimbleby referred to Michael and Amanda as Baroness Thatcher's "granddaughters"

    Dimbleby misread the label on the floral wreath as "Always In Our Minds" when it actually said "Always In Our Hearts"

    Dimbleby accidentally said that Thatcher was "not against Apartheid" when he meant "not for Apartheid"
  • Options
    SeaShantyIrishSeaShantyIrish Posts: 117
    edited April 2013
    Mick_Pork said:

    NOTE that in US, law enforcement is NOT centralized as in UK.

    That's nice but since I never claimed it was then maybe the entertaining capitalisation are indicating precisely who still needs to calm down.

    Mick_Pork said:

    NOTE that in US, law enforcement is NOT centralized as in UK.

    That's nice but since I never claimed it was then maybe the entertaining capitalisation are indicating precisely who still needs to calm down.

    Mick, your thick IF you think my use of caps is sign of hyper-excitement. Rather, it's my standard method of highlighting.


  • Options
    JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901
    edited April 2013
    Whilst this an AR poll, it still underlines a consistent theme that Clegg is a lame duck.

    Wonder how far ahead they would be with a popular leader.
  • Options
    Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    edited April 2013
    Moderated



  • Options
    Actually, Boston courthouse with apparent bomb scare is the Moakley federal courthouse (for eastern district of Mass) NOT the Suffolk Co courthouse.

    Named for former longtime US Rep. Joe Moakley, one of the above-average members of the Bay State delegation, indeed the entire US Congress.

    Of course, that was back in the day when Senators & Representative of BOTH parties (trying to stay calm here!) believed they were sent to Our Nation's Capital to get things done, NOT to keep things from happennig.
  • Options
    SeaShantyIrishSeaShantyIrish Posts: 117
    edited April 2013
    Moderated
  • Options
    AndreaParma_82AndreaParma_82 Posts: 4,714
    edited April 2013
    Northern Echo has made 2 front pages....

    http://www.thenorthernecho.co.uk/features/columnists/latest/10362048.Two_front_pages_for_the_two_sides_of_the_Thatcher_debate/

    ....newsagents can show the one they prefer tomorrow...or the one that would make them sell more copies
  • Options
    JonnyJimmyJonnyJimmy Posts: 2,548
    tim said:

    @Avery.

    Most Tories wish they had a corpse leading their party.

    And 15% of Lab supporters wish they had that Tory corpse as PM too. The funny old world of opinion polls, eh?
  • Options
    AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    HYUFD said:

    First Canadian poll after Trudeau's election as Liberal leader

    Liberal Party = 43%

    Conservative Party = 30%

    New Democratic Party = 19%

    Bloc Quebecois = 5%

    Green Party = 2%

    Other = 1%

    Is that poll for the whole of Canada or just one province like Ontario for example?
  • Options
    AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    I see the NDP vote seems to have collapsed since the 2011 election:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/42nd_Canadian_federal_election#Opinion_polls
  • Options
    Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    tim said:

    @Avery.

    Most Tories wish they had a corpse leading their party.

    After the Republicans hilarious parade of eccentrics, during the GOP circus, they clearly missed a chance in not having a corpse for a nominee instead of their less charismatic choice of Romney. A corpse would have looked more in touch with the voters than he did.
  • Options
    carlcarl Posts: 750
    "Most Tories wish they had a corpse leading their party."

    Haven't they?

    Anyway, the rancid old bat is a pile of ashes now, not technically a corpse.
  • Options
    anotherDaveanotherDave Posts: 6,746
    Mick_Pork said:

    tim said:

    @Avery.

    Most Tories wish they had a corpse leading their party.

    After the Republicans hilarious parade of eccentrics, during the GOP circus, they clearly missed a chance in not having a corpse for a nominee instead of their less charismatic choice of Romney. A corpse would have looked more in touch with the voters than he did.
    The result was 51:47.
  • Options
    AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Apparently the American media have been reporting inaccurate news of an arrest without bothering to check with the authorities.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,983
    AndyJS - It is a national Canadian poll, Harper was in London for Thatcher's funeral, he may decide not to contest the next election himself on those figures, it would be a Canadian 1997, although not as bad as 1993
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,983
    SSI - I posted the result on Sunday and for latest poll see below
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,983
    AndyJS - Indeed, and no Jack Layton anymore
  • Options
    Y0kelY0kel Posts: 2,307
    At least one person seems to have nailed their colours to the mast over who did the Boston bombing.

    Congressman Peter King has pointed the finger at Jihadists or specifically Al Qaeda. His logic is sound, though time will tell whether correct. Interestingly he referred to the Saudi man questioned as not being in the clear quite yet.

    Certainly police have also spoken to one of his associates and were seeking another late Monday.

    The question is whether King being fed by his own connections within the counter terror intelligence community that his privelaged position has got him or he's putting two and two together to get an understandable four.

    This much is sure, every time there is a suggestion of jihadist inspired possibilities the investigators seek to silence it.

    King of course knows his way around terrorists, he spent plenty making mates with violent Irish nationalists.
  • Options
    davidthecondavidthecon Posts: 165
    HYUFD said:

    AndyJS - It is a national Canadian poll, Harper was in London for Thatcher's funeral, he may decide not to contest the next election himself on those figures, it would be a Canadian 1997, although not as bad as 1993

    That poll seems to be a total freak, new Liberal leader and all that. Most polls have the Libs and Cons within 2 or 3 points. And greens down from 9 to 2% in a week? It needs to settle down after the Libs leadership election.

  • Options
    mosesmoses Posts: 45
    I stood today at the bottom of Ludgate hill and as the cortege passed with solemn applause I watched the antics of the left and thought this is the time ....this thee defining moment where Labour and MIlliband lost the 2015 election.

    Indeed they now will. Mark my words.
  • Options
    NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    moses said:

    this thee defining moment where Labour and MIlliband lost the 2015 election.

    What specific part of Miliband's response to her death do you think will cost him the next general election?
  • Options
    JonnyJimmyJonnyJimmy Posts: 2,548
    edited April 2013
    I'm quite stunned by what I posted a little earlier, ie that around one in six Labour supporters would want Maggie as PM in an economic crisis. I'd love to know what our Labour supporting posters think of that; I'm utterly astonished that even one in twenty five Conservative supporters would want Gordon Brown... I know there are a lot of idiots out there but still, ONE IN SIX
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,983
    Davidthecon- Well it matches a pre-leadership election poll showing Trudeau taking the Libs up to 39%, and the Liberals had taken a narrow lead even beforehand. He is the son of the most popular PM in Canadian history, it is not that surprising!
  • Options
    Y0kelY0kel Posts: 2,307
    AndyJS said:

    Apparently the American media have been reporting inaccurate news of an arrest without bothering to check with the authorities.

    My understanding is that it may be that someone originally questioned by police after the incident may have been flagged as been in breach of the law in some form, though not related to the attack itself.

  • Options
    AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    I hope SeanT hasn't been buying Chinese municipal bonds. Some alarming news from inside China:

    China’s local government debt is out of control and could trigger a larger financial crisis than the US housing market crash, a senior auditor from the country told the Financial Times.

    Zhang Ke, of accounting firm ShinWing, said China’s struggles had prompted his company to stop signing off on bond sales by local governments.

    "We audited some local government bond issues and found them very dangerous, so we pulled out,"said Zhang, who is also Vice-Chairman of China’s accounting association.

    "Most don’t have strong debt servicing abilities. Things could become very serious."

    While the International Monetary Fund (IMF) has raised concerns about Chinese government debt, it is unusual for an established figure in the nation’s financial industry like Zhang to make such a statement.

    "It is already out of control," Zhang said. "A crisis is possible. But since the debt is being rolled over and is long-term, the timing of its explosion is uncertain."

    China’s provinces, cities, counties and villages are estimated to owe between Rmb10tn and Rmb20tn, which represents about 20% to 40% of the economy.

    The debts began to rise after 2008 when Beijing relaxed borrowing restraints to spur growth during the financial crisis.

    Fitch last week cut China’s sovereign credit rating. Moody’s also cut its outlook for China’s rating from ‘positive’ to ‘stable’ on Tuesday.

    Local governments have been issuing bonds under special purpose vehicles to evade rules that prohibit them from directly raising debt.

    Investment companies owned by local governments sold Rmb283bn of bonds in the first quarter of 2013, more than double than the same period last year. While that would normally be expected to help drive the economy, China’s growth slowed 7.7% in the first quarter of 2013.


    BenM will be on in a minute to claim this is necessary stimulus borrowing.
  • Options
    NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    @Yokel

    Can there be a more odious and hypocritical politician out there than King?
  • Options
    Y0kelY0kel Posts: 2,307
    @Neil

    Probably but he's up there.
  • Options

    I'm quite stunned by what I posted a little earlier, ie that around one in six Labour supporters would want Maggie as PM in an economic crisis. I'd love to know what our Labour supporting posters think of that; I'm utterly astonished that even one in twenty five Conservative supporters would want Gordon Brown... I know there are a lot of idiots out there but still, ONE IN SIX

    It is possible they just want someone to blame,
  • Options
    AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    edited April 2013
    tim said:

    @Neil

    We're into "The TUC trashed Fortnum and Mason, terrible backlash for Miliband" territory here.

    I fully expect Miliband to be an innocent and short term loser as a result of the Thatcher protests.

    It may be a dip that lasts days or one that persists over a longer period. We need to wait and see,

    Miliband is innocent in that he has behaved impeccably over Thatcher's death, even to the point of donning a morning coat to attend the funeral.

    But he can't help being tarred by his loony and militant left.

    Perhaps he needs a UKIP type party to shield him? I shall speak to some potential sponsors.

  • Options
    NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    @Y0kel

    Having thought about it deeply I would rather snog Brian Coleman than have to engage Peter King in polite conversation.
  • Options
    JonnyJimmyJonnyJimmy Posts: 2,548
    tim said:

    @JonnyJimmy

    All that tells you is that Labour has got the support of the C2s and C1s who Voted for Thatcher and a fop-led Tory Party can't win back

    So one in six that Labour could well lose to UKIP? That would make things interesting...
  • Options
    JonnyJimmyJonnyJimmy Posts: 2,548

    It is possible they just want someone to blame,

    I see what you're saying but that does seem a rather sophisticated response for one in six Labour supporters to have made during an opinion poll. I think tim's probably closer to the mark (with his C1 C2 group who voted Thatcher but hate fops); if he is right then I expect Labour's poll lead is rather precarious.
  • Options
    JonnyJimmyJonnyJimmy Posts: 2,548
    tim said:

    @JonnyJimmy

    Not under FPTP they won't .

    So, people who vote on the basis that they don't like fops wouldn't change their allegiance because of our electoral system? I think you have a little too much confidence in their intelligence and loyalty to your cause.
  • Options
    anotherDaveanotherDave Posts: 6,746
    moses said:

    I stood today at the bottom of Ludgate hill and as the cortege passed with solemn applause I watched the antics of the left and thought this is the time ....this thee defining moment where Labour and MIlliband lost the 2015 election.

    Indeed they now will. Mark my words.

    Hey! I was in Ludgate Hill too (opposite the Starbucks). I didn't see any 'antics'. (except one woman walking past singing 'Between the wars' peppered with some slogans, but that was an hour before the main event.)

  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,983
    I see Mandelson has said he did not think Thatcher should have been granted a state funeral, well I don't think there is any need to worry about one for you Peter
  • Options
    JonnyJimmyJonnyJimmy Posts: 2,548
    I haven't yet expressed my approval of Ed Miliband's speech to the Commons on Thatcher. I thought he was superb; I actually watched it twice, having never had the patience to watch an entire Ed speech before. I know that my opinion on it is skewed by my politics but he, for once, sounded convincing, like he really meant it. I'm now living in Tottenham and am going to Islington tomorrow to see my girlfriend. I think I'm going to walk there and stop at Highgate cemetery to see if Ralph has turned in his grave
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,611
    "THE SNP must develop plans to create a new currency if Scotland becomes independent, a leading economist has argued."

    http://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/referendum-news/scotland-must-have-own-currency-after-yes-vote.20811822

  • Options
    AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
  • Options
    Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 49,261
    We are all PB Tories now!
  • Options
    AndreaParma_82AndreaParma_82 Posts: 4,714
    edited April 2013
    AndyJS said:
    Bersani , Monti and Berlusconi agreed on Maroni this evening.
    Renzi is revolting ("can you picture Marini on the phone with Obama?"). I guess many PD activists won't like the choice of Marini either. 90 PD MPs voted against the choice tonight (222 in favour).
  • Options
    Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    edited April 2013
    tim said:

    @anotherDave.

    Don't underestimate the terrible effect on Miliband that a Trot whistling "Stand Down Margaret" on Ludgate Hill could have.


    Don't underestimate the stupidity of tea party tory anecdotes about a terrible backlash.

    Indeed if they don't meet the weight requirements of the most amusingly out of touch PB tories, those Trots will feel the wrath of the PB Public Relations incompetents. ;^)
  • Options
    MrJonesMrJones Posts: 3,523
    "C1 C2 group who voted Thatcher but hate fops"

    They don't support the Tories because the Tories don't represent their interests and have no desire to represent their interests.
  • Options
    JonnyJimmyJonnyJimmy Posts: 2,548
    MrJones said:

    "C1 C2 group who voted Thatcher but hate fops"

    They don't support the Tories because the Tories don't represent their interests and have no desire to represent their interests.

    But do UKIP?
  • Options
    Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530

    The result was 51:47.

    Is that you stuarttruth?

    LOL ;)

    Not exactly a landslide for Romney then was it? Even if we ignore the electoral college hammering.

  • Options
    CarolaCarola Posts: 1,805
    Maggie tells George to man up:

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/matt/
  • Options
    AndreaParma_82AndreaParma_82 Posts: 4,714
    edited April 2013
    Former South Tyneside Independent Cllr Ahmed Khan has announced he will stand in the by-election. He lost his council seat in 2012.
  • Options
    JonnyJimmyJonnyJimmy Posts: 2,548
    edited April 2013
    @tim I'm intrigued by how you could think that the one in six Lab supporters who would like Maggie as PM wouldn't vote UKIP because of FPTP but that you don't appear to believe that the Con to UKIP switchers will switch back for the same reason. Have you got an explanation for that, or is it just a wet dream?
  • Options
    JonnyJimmyJonnyJimmy Posts: 2,548
    Carola said:

    Maggie tells George to man up:

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/matt/

    Love it! Matt is the Maggie of political cartoonists :)

  • Options
    RichardNabaviRichardNabavi Posts: 3,413
    @Carola - That is a classic!
  • Options
    AnneJGPAnneJGP Posts: 2,869
    Carola said:

    Maggie tells George to man up:

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/matt/

    That really does show the man's genius - the funeral of a very controversial figure and he produces something absolutely topical, very funny, utterly inoffensive.
  • Options
    RichardNabaviRichardNabavi Posts: 3,413
    On a separate subject, why are Unison engaging in a pro-government propaganda exercise, publishing a study which shows rebalancing is happening and over-manning in the public sector is being addressed?

    http://uk.news.yahoo.com/450-public-sector-jobs-lost-daily-231130460.html;_ylt=AkHeUkoNvVYYab3ZoPerA9jFfMl_;_ylu=X3oDMTRkOGxlNm1kBG1pdANVSyBzZWN0aW9uIG1peGVkIGxpc3QEcGtnA2IxYTg2NWFhLTBhZDgtMzNhYy1hZDZiLTU0NzkxYjE0YmE1NARwb3MDOARzZWMDTWVkaWFCTGlzdE1peGVkTF#PHC35lG
  • Options
    JonnyJimmyJonnyJimmy Posts: 2,548
    edited April 2013
    I think this was my favourite ever Matt cartoon http://telegraph.newsprints.co.uk/view/2520133/tg2351690_matt cartoon_jpg
  • Options
    Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    edited April 2013
    Carola said:

    Maggie tells George to man up:

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/matt/

    Man up indeed. ;)

    LOL

  • Options
    Lib Dems 8 UKIP 16 - result!!!!!
  • Options
    AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    Tom Newton-Dunn suggesting that YouGov polls are continuing to show a change in polling patterns in interview with Sky News. Not giving away details though.

    Do we have the figures yet?
  • Options
    RichardNabaviRichardNabavi Posts: 3,413
    A pub quiz question for lefties: Under which Prime Minister was insider trading outlawed in the UK?
  • Options
    edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,149

    A pub quiz question for lefties: Under which Prime Minister was insider trading outlawed in the UK?

    I'm guessing it was Thatcher, because the theory was that no gentleman would do anything ungentlemanly like insider trading and gentlemen didn't check up on other gentlemen to see if they were behaving like gentlemen, until the Big Bang, when they had to let all the foreigners in who couldn't be relied on to act like gentlemen. Am I close?
  • Options
    AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    edited April 2013
    IMF warns on risks of excessive easing

    Extraordinarily loose monetary policy risks sparking new and dangerous credit bubbles which threaten to tip the world back into financial crisis, the International Monetary Fund warned on Wednesday.

    http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/916252a0-a738-11e2-9fbe-00144feabdc0.html#axzz2QjLW3dHe

    Extraordinary fun on Sky News as Ed Conway announced today's IMF warnings and then tried to claim that they didn't invalidate Blancmange's "criticism" of Osborne yesterday.

    As a famous Scot would say:

    Oh what a tangled web we weave,
    When first we practise to deceive!
  • Options
    AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    edited April 2013

    A pub quiz question for lefties: Under which Prime Minister was insider trading outlawed in the UK?

    I'm guessing it was Thatcher, because the theory was that no gentleman would do anything ungentlemanly like insider trading and gentlemen didn't check up on other gentlemen to see if they were behaving like gentlemen, until the Big Bang, when they had to let all the foreigners in who couldn't be relied on to act like gentlemen. Am I close?
    [Ineffective] Legislation was 1980.

  • Options
    RichardNabaviRichardNabavi Posts: 3,413
    edited April 2013


    I'm guessing it was Thatcher, because the theory was that no gentleman would do anything ungentlemanly like insider trading and gentlemen didn't check up on other gentlemen to see if they were behaving like gentlemen, until the Big Bang, when they had to let all the foreigners in who couldn't be relied on to act like gentlemen. Am I close?

    Yes, very close, although it was actually the Companies Act 1980 which first made insider trading a criminal offence. The law was beefed up in the Company Securities (Insider Dealing) Act 1985, and the first prosecution was in 1987 of Geoffrey Collier (whom, oddly enough, I met once at a dinner with neighbours):

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/july/1/newsid_2489000/2489179.stm
  • Options
    AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815


    I'm guessing it was Thatcher, because the theory was that no gentleman would do anything ungentlemanly like insider trading and gentlemen didn't check up on other gentlemen to see if they were behaving like gentlemen, until the Big Bang, when they had to let all the foreigners in who couldn't be relied on to act like gentlemen. Am I close?

    ... the first prosecution was in 1987 of Geoffrey Collier (whom, oddly enough, I met once at a dinner with neighbours).
    I hoped Carlton House rules applied, Richard.

  • Options
    JonnyJimmyJonnyJimmy Posts: 2,548
    No. Forget what I said earlier. THIS was the best Matt ever http://telegraph.newsprints.co.uk/view/2520140/tg2356697_matt cartoon_jpg
  • Options
    RichardNabaviRichardNabavi Posts: 3,413
    edited April 2013
    AveryLP said:


    I hoped Carlton House rules applied, Richard.

    It's OK, it was after his conviction. Realisation dawned during chit-chat over the hors d'oeuvre.
  • Options
    JonnyJimmyJonnyJimmy Posts: 2,548
    Has this page gone strange for anyone else? For me the text has gone tiny and the lines of it are stretching way off to the right; I really don't like it....
  • Options
    AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815

    Has this page gone strange for anyone else? For me the text has gone tiny and the lines of it are stretching way off to the right; I really don't like it....

    Reading OK here, JJ.
  • Options
    JonnyJimmyJonnyJimmy Posts: 2,548
    edited April 2013
    @AveryLP I'm on my iPad and have checked on my iPhone, where it's the same, but on both the previous thread looks fine. I'm going to bed and hoping it's back to normal tomorrow...
  • Options
    AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited April 2013
  • Options
    Lewis_DuckworthLewis_Duckworth Posts: 90
    edited April 2013
    My Polish father-in-law - a partisan who fought the Soviets in the 1940s - watched the Thatcher funeral on Polish TV and thought it a magnificent spectacle. He found it very moving (so I presume the Polish commentary must have been effective).
  • Options
    AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited April 2013
    Like others, I thought Mrs Thatcher's granddaughter put in a marvellous performance.
  • Options
    mosesmoses Posts: 45
    During last week's Commons tribute to Margaret Thatcher, the Conservative MP Conor Burns, a close confidante of the former prime minister, recalled showing her a poll last November with the Tories nine points behind. Thatcher, he revealed, replied, "That's not far enough behind at this stage", explaining that "she took a view that to do things that were right did entail unpopularity until people saw that what you were doing was working."

    http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2013/04/what-lies-behind-labours-shrinking-poll-
  • Options
    NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    SeanT said:


    Why don't lefties see this?

    I dont think they want to intrude on your triumph. Dont you enjoy these things more when they symbolise the defeat of the left?
  • Options
    corporealcorporeal Posts: 2,549
    SeanT said:

    Just occurred to me: Thatcher is the humblest, most working class person EVER to receive such obsequies from the British state.

    Churchill was an aristo. Royals are royals. Wellington was a duke. And so forth.

    Thatcher was a grocer's daughter, yet here was the Queen turning up to bow her head in salutation, in a "state funeral" at St Paul's. Remarkable.

    Why don't lefties see this?

    Are you sure it's true?
  • Options
    AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    edited April 2013
    Neil said:

    SeanT said:


    Why don't lefties see this?

    I dont think they want to intrude on your triumph. Dont you enjoy these things more when they symbolise the defeat of the left?
    It is not the defeat we enjoy, but the annoyance.

    If we did defeat, who would there be to annoy?

  • Options
    corporealcorporeal Posts: 2,549
    corporeal said:

    SeanT said:

    Just occurred to me: Thatcher is the humblest, most working class person EVER to receive such obsequies from the British state.

    Churchill was an aristo. Royals are royals. Wellington was a duke. And so forth.

    Thatcher was a grocer's daughter, yet here was the Queen turning up to bow her head in salutation, in a "state funeral" at St Paul's. Remarkable.

    Why don't lefties see this?

    Are you sure it's true?
    (Off the top of my head Gladstone was pretty humble in background for example, "EVER" can be quite a long time).
  • Options
    AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    edited April 2013
    SeanT said:

    Just occurred to me: Thatcher is the humblest, most working class person EVER to receive such obsequies from the British state.

    Churchill was an aristo. Royals are royals. Wellington was a duke. And so forth.

    Thatcher was a grocer's daughter, yet here was the Queen turning up to bow her head in salutation, in a "state funeral" at St Paul's. Remarkable.

    Why don't lefties see this?

    Isaac Newton received a state funeral, Sean. He was the son of a farmer who died early. His mother remarried a vicar and he was brought up by his grandmother.

    OK, not working class, but provincial middle class in an age where this would have been a greater barrier to advancement than today.

    The really interesting bit is that he was educated at the The King's School, Grantham. Margaret Thatcher was educated at the equivalent school for girls, Kesteven and Grantham Girls School. Both won scholarships to study at Cambridge and Oxford respectively.

    There must be something in the Grantham air that causes its children to achieve,
  • Options
    corporealcorporeal Posts: 2,549
    SeanT said:

    corporeal said:

    SeanT said:

    Just occurred to me: Thatcher is the humblest, most working class person EVER to receive such obsequies from the British state.

    Churchill was an aristo. Royals are royals. Wellington was a duke. And so forth.

    Thatcher was a grocer's daughter, yet here was the Queen turning up to bow her head in salutation, in a "state funeral" at St Paul's. Remarkable.

    Why don't lefties see this?

    Are you sure it's true?
    Which other prime ministers have had state or ceremonial funerals?

    Churchill: aristo
    Palmerston: aristo
    Nelson: quasi-aristo (mother grand niece of prime minister Walpole)
    Gladstone: Etonian, almost aristo

    As for royalty, well, they are royalty, as I say.

    Who else is there? Cromwell? He is English, not British, but he was gentry, anyway.

    I can't think of anyone in all English history, let alone British history, who was of such obviously humble background as Thatcher, who has received such stately pomp and circumstance in death.






    Newton?
  • Options
    corporealcorporeal Posts: 2,549
    SeanT said:

    AveryLP said:

    SeanT said:

    Just occurred to me: Thatcher is the humblest, most working class person EVER to receive such obsequies from the British state.

    Churchill was an aristo. Royals are royals. Wellington was a duke. And so forth.

    Thatcher was a grocer's daughter, yet here was the Queen turning up to bow her head in salutation, in a "state funeral" at St Paul's. Remarkable.

    Why don't lefties see this?

    Isaac Newton received a state funeral, Sean. He was the son of a farmer who died early. His mother remarried a vicar and he was brought up by his grandmother.

    OK, not working class, but provincial middle class in an age where this would have been a greater barrier to advancement than today.

    The really interesting bit is that he was educated at the The King's School, Grantham. Margaret Thatcher was educated at the equivalent school for girls, Kesteven and Grantham Girls School. Both won scholarships to study at Cambridge and Oxford respectively.

    There must be something in the Grantham air that causes its children to achieve,
    Isaac Newton was prosperous rural middle class, not lower middle or upper working class like Thatcher. He is also an English figure: pre-British.

    But even if we accept him as another provincial pleb made good, that's fairly extraordinary: Thatcher is the most humbly-born Briton thus honoured, in death, since the days of Isaac Newton. Arguably she is the most humbly-born Briton EVER to receive such ceremonial.
    I'd agree with that. (Albeit I wouldn't call Newton 'pre-British')
  • Options
    corporealcorporeal Posts: 2,549
    SeanT said:

    corporeal said:

    corporeal said:

    SeanT said:

    Just occurred to me: Thatcher is the humblest, most working class person EVER to receive such obsequies from the British state.

    Churchill was an aristo. Royals are royals. Wellington was a duke. And so forth.

    Thatcher was a grocer's daughter, yet here was the Queen turning up to bow her head in salutation, in a "state funeral" at St Paul's. Remarkable.

    Why don't lefties see this?

    Are you sure it's true?
    (Off the top of my head Gladstone was pretty humble in background for example, "EVER" can be quite a long time).
    Gladstone went to Eton and was the son of a Baronet.

    Eh, my memory exaggerating on that one at least.
  • Options
    JamesKellyJamesKelly Posts: 1,348
    "I have relished today, and the humiliation of the Left."

    The humiliation of the left? Did I sleep through that? I thought there was some kind of funeral going on?

    By the way, Attlee is the most radical PM we have ever had, and a fair bit of the good that he did even survived the devastation of the 1980s.
  • Options
    corporealcorporeal Posts: 2,549
    SeanT said:

    "I have relished today, and the humiliation of the Left."

    The humiliation of the left? Did I sleep through that? I thought there was some kind of funeral going on?

    By the way, Attlee is the most radical PM we have ever had, and a fair bit of the good that he did even survived the devastation of the 1980s.

    THIS Attlee? -

    "Clement Richard Attlee was born on the 3rd January 1883 at the family home at Putney in London, being the seventh of eight children born to Henry Attlee and his wife Ellen Bravery Watson. His grandfather Richard Attlee had made a considerable amount of money from a corn mill in Surrey and was able to provide handsomely for his seven sons.

    "In Henry's case he provided a suitable education that enabled him to become a solicitor and a senior partner in the firm of Druces and Attlee, and later President of the Law Society. Thus the Attlee family were most emphatically upper-middle class; the Attlee home in Putney featured a dedicated billiard room with its own full sized billiard table, and the family employed a cook, a parlour maid, a housemaid and a gardener, with a governess for the children when necessary; the Attlee holiday home on the Essex coast came with two hundred acres of land attached."
    What's that got to do with whether he was radical as a prime minister or not?
  • Options
    JamesKellyJamesKelly Posts: 1,348
    Yes, that Attlee. Call me old-fashioned, but I judge a man's radicalism by his actions.

    Still, don't let me interrupt your inverted snobbery. "Thatcherite outlaws" are full of irony.
  • Options
    AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    edited April 2013

    "I have relished today, and the humiliation of the Left."

    The humiliation of the left? Did I sleep through that? I thought there was some kind of funeral going on?

    By the way, Attlee is the most radical PM we have ever had, and a fair bit of the good that he did even survived the devastation of the 1980s.

    The Guardian has already conceded defeat, James. And who is to argue it doesn't have the authority to negotiate surrender on behalf of the left?

    Here is the evidence:

    Burying the 1980s is not a straight- forward business, not in Britain where that decade occupies a similar space to that of the 1960s in the US: the period when our "culture wars" were at their most intense, the divisions raw and open. At the centre, governing every day of that decade — elected just before it and deposed just after it – was Margaret Thatcher. So what more fitting moment to draw a line under that vexed period and call a truce than at her funeral?

    Except Thatcher was never in the truce business and, for all its elegance and piety, the ceremony in St Paul's was not either. It was rather an event which sought, however subtly, to declare victory in the titanic struggles of that era. Its message, tacit but unmistakable: "That time is over – and Thatcher won."


    Read more of Jonathan Freedland on http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2013/apr/17/margaret-thatcher-funeral-report

    If you decide against then you may miss the knife turning::

    "We are all Thatcherites now," David Cameron had said a few hours before the procession. It was the most explicit statement to date of what the day – and the last week – has been about, even if the Telegraph scolded him for politicising an event that was meant, the paper said, to be non-political. In other words, he had given the game away. The Lady's authorised biographer, Charles Moore, was even more candid, telling Radio 5 Live: "Thatcher is reviled in parts of the country that are less important."
This discussion has been closed.