Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Why I’m betting that Farage’s Brexit party will get fewer than

1235

Comments

  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,674
    GIN1138 said:

    Which will come first: Johnson has visited every single hospital in UK for a regional news photoshoot, or a GE?

    I'd rather have Boris at my bedside than Glumbucket Theresa May to be fair. :D
    Hmm, you have me worried there GIN.
  • NooNoo Posts: 2,380

    Is he doing that at the moment? I would have thought he had other things on his mind given what’s coming up next month.

    Admittedly, he probably needs the money.

    I'll be honest, I don't know. I never tuned in but I've seen clips. Doesn't seem like a bad program, from what little I've seen, I just worry that it drives traffic to an outlet whose main aim is to disrupt and damage Western democracy.
    After the invasion of Ukraine, the hybrid warfare, the propaganda campaigns against the West, the election meddling and interference, the promotion of the far right, the illegal funding of political organisations and campaigns, and the unleashing of a tide of refugees in the direction of Europe by bombing Syrian civilians, we really should be thinking continually of Russia's foreign policy goals when considering domestic policy.
    I don't want to say that we should change our minds on things just because they suit Putin -- Scottish independence and Brexit are both strategic wins for him but that doesn't make them wrong in of themselves. But we should be wary of feeding the Russian state's propaganda machine. That means, amongst other things, avoiding RT. It also means the media in this country pulling their bloody socks up and being a bit more even handed when it comes to politics. Because although it was imo stupid for Salmond to take an RT job, it also looks understandable from his perspective: the overblown hostility to certain points of view in the media leads to a seeking of alternative channels. The UK media has as much to answer for as Alex Salmond, which is to say, a lot.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,674
    ydoethur said:

    Noo said:

    malcolmg said:

    Alistair said:

    That's absolutely not what the poll says.
    Is Alex Salmond still taking RT’s rouble?
    Why not more honest than working for UK Pravda BBC unit. Helps us get some real news rather than the fake stuff we are used to.
    There's a difference. RT is the mouthpiece of a fascist regime. However bad Westminster is -- and it's bad, no mistake -- it's not fascist or even close.
    Yes the BBC is a pile of shit. It's that bad I've cancelled my TV license cos I refuse to pay a penny for it. Yes it's narrow, biased, blind, deferential to elites and every so often racist. But there's a qualitative difference between the British and Russian governments they speak up for. I think Salmond has made a profound mistake in signing up with RT.
    Is he doing that at the moment? I would have thought he had other things on his mind given what’s coming up next month.

    Admittedly, he probably needs the money.
    I doubt that , he made a quick £500K+ profit on the first round , given the disaster and chums involved and what we have seen/heard so far it may well be he makes much more in later rounds.
  • NooNoo Posts: 2,380

    Noo said:

    malcolmg said:

    Alistair said:

    That's absolutely not what the poll says.
    Is Alex Salmond still taking RT’s rouble?
    Why not more honest than working for UK Pravda BBC unit. Helps us get some real news rather than the fake stuff we are used to.
    There's a difference. RT is the mouthpiece of a fascist regime. However bad Westminster is -- and it's bad, no mistake -- it's not fascist or even close.
    Yes the BBC is a pile of shit. It's that bad I've cancelled my TV license cos I refuse to pay a penny for it. Yes it's narrow, biased, blind, deferential to elites and every so often racist. But there's a qualitative difference between the British and Russian governments they speak up for. I think Salmond has made a profound mistake in signing up with RT.
    So have you junked all your TVs?


    No. But I don't watch live TV or BBC iPlayer. You can legally use a TV without a license.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709
    edited October 2019

    HYUFD said:

    MikeL said:

    I thought LDs have said very clearly they won't go into coalition with anyone.

    And it's surely inconceivable they would ever go into coalition with SNP - given their views on the Union are the complete opposite.

    If the numbers were there it's far more likely there would be a Lab Minority Govt with LD and SNP supporting on vote by vote basis.

    1 - The LDs said that they would never increase student loans. Changing your mind is part of the horse trading necessary when trying to make government work

    2 - The SNP will demand their 2nd referendum as part of any deal - whether formal or informal. Hard for the LDs to deny them that.
    The LDs will block both a Corbyn Premiership and indyref2 as Swinson has made clear
    I simply don't believe her
    Most LD target seats are in southern Tory Remain seats where voters hate both Corbyn and the SNP, so it is logical
  • humbuggerhumbugger Posts: 377
    crandles said:

    humbugger said:

    kle4 said:

    humbugger said:

    kle4 said:

    So, have the government stopped pouting and agreed to continue trying to see us Brexit even if denied an election, or are they still insisting that they love Brexit so much they will stop trying to Brexit in protest?

    There's really no point in the government "trying to Brexit" as unless something significant occurs this remainer parliament will find whatever reasons, whatever devices and whatever procedures it needs to thwart Brexit. Trying to overcome such obstacles will be a waste of time.

    .
    No, it demonstrates that Boris wants to Brexit but is being thwarted. That's a more powerful message than just saying that they till thwart you. Trying to overcome such obstacles is only a waste of time if the governments think it will fail, is unable to overcome them, and thus is an admission of weakness.

    Particularly when the government's spin was they had the numbers to pass it, which would make them either weak now, or lying then.

    Indeed, trying but failing to Brexit has helped Boris in the polls - he would be advised to continue that, rather than sulk, as it would help his polling even more.
    That Boris wants to Brexit but is being thwarted has been demonstrated more than adequately already. The government knows it will fail to overcome the obstacles as has been proven with the Programme Motion this week. Winning the vote on the WAIB was pyrrhic as by the time the 3rd reading comes forward parliament will have found a reason to defeat it.


    All the Programme Motion proves is that a majority of MPs wanted more time to scrutinise it (some for that reason and some to thwart Brexit). Can't say how many of each.

    Sure lots of people will believe that "Brexit is being thwarted has been demonstrated more than adequately already" but they are confirmed Tory voters; what about marginal voters?

    Surely Boris's plan was to be a man with a plan which silly MPs blocked. Now he is failing to follow through on demonstrating this and looks like he is refusing to even try instead.
    The Programme Motion proves this HOC wants to delay Brexit, which it will continue to do in the hope that something turns up to prevent Brexit, unless its hand is forced. Ordinarily the opposition would welcome a GE to try to overthrow what they say is a useless government and have the chance of implementing their own policies. Labour however seemingly do not want a GE because they fear the result.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,400
    humbugger said:

    kle4 said:

    humbugger said:

    kle4 said:

    So, have the government stopped pouting and agreed to continue trying to see us Brexit even if denied an election, or are they still insisting that they love Brexit so much they will stop trying to Brexit in protest?

    There's really no point in the government "trying to Brexit" as unless something significant occurs this remainer parliament will find whatever reasons, whatever devices and whatever procedures it needs to thwart Brexit. Trying to overcome such obstacles will be a waste of time.

    .
    No, it demonstrates that Boris wants to Brexit but is being thwarted. That's a more powerful message than just saying that they till thwart you. Trying to overcome such obstacles is only a waste of time if the governments think it will fail, is unable to overcome them, and thus is an admission of weakness.

    Particularly when the government's spin was they had the numbers to pass it, which would make them either weak now, or lying then.

    Indeed, trying but failing to Brexit has helped Boris in the polls - he would be advised to continue that, rather than sulk, as it would help his polling even more.
    That Boris wants to Brexit but is being thwarted has been demonstrated more than adequately already. The government knows it will fail to overcome the obstacles as has been proven with the Programme Motion this week. Winning the vote on the WAIB was pyrrhic as by the time the 3rd reading comes forward parliament will have found a reason to defeat it.


    Glad we established that they were misleading when they were talking about passing it then, and that they would prefer to admit weakness than attempt strength.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 38,851
    ydoethur said:

    That runs the risk of going round in a hoop.

    No that is just wrongole.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,674
    Noo said:

    malcolmg said:

    Alistair said:

    That's absolutely not what the poll says.
    Is Alex Salmond still taking RT’s rouble?
    Why not more honest than working for UK Pravda BBC unit. Helps us get some real news rather than the fake stuff we are used to.
    There's a difference. RT is the mouthpiece of a fascist regime. However bad Westminster is -- and it's bad, no mistake -- it's not fascist or even close.
    Yes the BBC is a pile of shit. It's that bad I've cancelled my TV license cos I refuse to pay a penny for it. Yes it's narrow, biased, blind, deferential to elites and every so often racist. But there's a qualitative difference between the British and Russian governments they speak up for. I think Salmond has made a profound mistake in signing up with RT.
    Why do you think it is a mistake, unless he is planning on a return to politics it is just a way to make some money, much better than having sitting Tory politicians working for PR companies. Many RT programmes are much better balanced than any UK ones and they cover things our tame media avoid on government orders.
    I have yet to see or hear any Russian government propaganda on any of his programmes. Most just cover UK stories that our lot like to avoid.
  • NooNoo Posts: 2,380
    humbugger said:

    crandles said:

    humbugger said:

    kle4 said:

    humbugger said:

    kle4 said:

    So, have the government stopped pouting and agreed to continue trying to see us Brexit even if denied an election, or are they still insisting that they love Brexit so much they will stop trying to Brexit in protest?

    There's really no point in the government "trying to Brexit" as unless something significant occurs this remainer parliament will find whatever reasons, whatever devices and whatever procedures it needs to thwart Brexit. Trying to overcome such obstacles will be a waste of time.

    .
    No, it demonstrates that Boris wants to Brexit but is being thwarted. That's a more powerful message than just saying that they till thwart you. Trying to overcome such obstacles is only a waste of time if the governments think it will fail, is unable to overcome them, and thus is an admission of weakness.

    Particularly when the government's spin was they had the numbers to pass it, which would make them either weak now, or lying then.

    Indeed, trying but failing to Brexit has helped Boris in the polls - he would be advised to continue that, rather than sulk, as it would help his polling even more.
    That Boris wants to Brexit but is being thwarted has been demonstrated more than adequately already. The government knows it will fail to overcome the obstacles as has been proven with the Programme Motion this week. Winning the vote on the WAIB was pyrrhic as by the time the 3rd reading comes forward parliament will have found a reason to defeat it.


    All the Programme Motion proves is that a majority of MPs wanted more time to scrutinise it (some for that reason and some to thwart Brexit). Can't say how many of each.

    Sure lots of people will believe that "Brexit is being thwarted has been demonstrated more than adequately already" but they are confirmed Tory voters; what about marginal voters?

    Surely Boris's plan was to be a man with a plan which silly MPs blocked. Now he is failing to follow through on demonstrating this and looks like he is refusing to even try instead.
    The Programme Motion proves this HOC wants to delay Brexit
    It would have passed if Boris had allowed for a few more days' scrutiny.

    One wonders why he didn't.
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 9,688
    I wish BF would list David Milliband as a runner in a few more markets.

  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,674
    Noo said:

    malcolmg said:

    I'll sell SNP at 47 at a quid a seat if any of you boasty Separatists want to Buy at that level with me.

    You've changed your tune, you were suggesting the SNP might go below their current 35 a few weeks ago.
    Yes and we tried to agree terms, but like the UK and EU we were unable to (you needed me to travel to Glasgow ffs if I lost)

    Post by cheque is my terms (I know terribly old fashioned)
    I'll be chuffed if the SNP get 47+ seats, so it's a no deal for me.
    LOL - chicken like Corbyn (or wisely avoiding spreadbetting)
    Given there is no chance SNP will get less seats surely it is just 12 quid at stake either way. Starting at 47 is a bit cheeky though, show how confident you are.
    Whiny separatist Scot quelle surprise

    I took the 47 Sporting Index,

    Let's see how confident you are.

    I'll sell at 40 - you buy at 40 - quid a seat?
    Drag him malc
    You are on Briskin, send me a PM confirming.
  • humbuggerhumbugger Posts: 377
    kle4 said:

    humbugger said:

    kle4 said:

    humbugger said:

    kle4 said:

    So, have the government stopped pouting and agreed to continue trying to see us Brexit even if denied an election, or are they still insisting that they love Brexit so much they will stop trying to Brexit in protest?

    There's really no point in the government "trying to Brexit" as unless something significant occurs this remainer parliament will find whatever reasons, whatever devices and whatever procedures it needs to thwart Brexit. Trying to overcome such obstacles will be a waste of time.

    .
    No, it demonstrates that Boris wants to Brexit but is being thwarted. That's a more powerful message than just saying that they till thwart you. Trying to overcome such obstacles is only a waste of time if the governments think it will fail, is unable to overcome them, and thus is an admission of weakness.

    Particularly when the government's spin was they had the numbers to pass it, which would make them either weak now, or lying then.

    Indeed, trying but failing to Brexit has helped Boris in the polls - he would be advised to continue that, rather than sulk, as it would help his polling even more.
    That Boris wants to Brexit but is being thwarted has been demonstrated more than adequately already. The government knows it will fail to overcome the obstacles as has been proven with the Programme Motion this week. Winning the vote on the WAIB was pyrrhic as by the time the 3rd reading comes forward parliament will have found a reason to defeat it.


    Glad we established that they were misleading when they were talking about passing it then, and that they would prefer to admit weakness than attempt strength.
    They were not being misleading and this week made a genuine attempt to get the WAIB through the House. The Programme Motion vote has changed the situation. The government's position now is not admitting weakness, it's simply a reflection of the parliamentary numbers which are against it. That's why the government wants a GE.
  • malcolmg said:

    Noo said:

    malcolmg said:

    I'll sell SNP at 47 at a quid a seat if any of you boasty Separatists want to Buy at that level with me.

    You've changed your tune, you were suggesting the SNP might go below their current 35 a few weeks ago.
    Yes and we tried to agree terms, but like the UK and EU we were unable to (you needed me to travel to Glasgow ffs if I lost)

    Post by cheque is my terms (I know terribly old fashioned)
    I'll be chuffed if the SNP get 47+ seats, so it's a no deal for me.
    LOL - chicken like Corbyn (or wisely avoiding spreadbetting)
    Given there is no chance SNP will get less seats surely it is just 12 quid at stake either way. Starting at 47 is a bit cheeky though, show how confident you are.
    Whiny separatist Scot quelle surprise

    I took the 47 Sporting Index,

    Let's see how confident you are.

    I'll sell at 40 - you buy at 40 - quid a seat?
    Drag him malc
    You are on Briskin, send me a PM confirming.
    Sent
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 7,979
    edited October 2019

    stodge said:

    SELL LD seats at 43 - I'm an LD, I'd love us to win 443 seats but that probably won't happen. The Party won 46 seats in 1997 on 18% of the vote and while some of those have been regained or are close (St Ives, Cheltenham Fife NE), I don't quite see where the rest come from and the party starts, let's be honest, at 13 not 18 or 19 despite the defections. A realistic number for me looks to be in the low 30s.

    I agree that, sadly, the Lib Dems winning 443 seats is unlikely to happen!

    As for 43... though it's a stretch, I wouldn't necessarily rule it out. Looking at http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/targets/liberal-democrat (which is crudely sorted by swing from 2017, but a useful starting point), there are seats in the 40s which the LDs certainly won't win, but also seats in the 60s which I think they might. There are also wildcards like Cities of London & Westminster and Finchley & Golders Green, which don't feature anywhere in this 100 but which are nonetheless in play.

    (It would be fascinating to develop a crowdsourced prediction site which gathers PBers' local knowledge to make predictions for individual seats.)
    My prediction for the top LD seats in order of majority for England and Wales

    Twickenham
    Kingston and Surbiton
    Bath
    Oxford West and Abingdon
    North Norfolk
    Carshalton and Wallington
    Richmond Park
    Ceredigion
    Eastbourne
    Westmorland and Lonsdale
    St Ives
    Sheffield, Hallam
    Cheltenham
    St Albans
    Cheadle
    North Devon
    Lewes
    Wells
    Leeds North West
    Hazel Grove
    North Cornwall
    Winchester
    Southport
    Brecon and Radnorshire
    Eastleigh
    Sutton and Cheam
    Bermondsey and Old Southwark
    Cambridge
    Taunton Deane
    Thornbury and Yate
    Yeovil
    Torbay
    Chippenham
    Montgomeryshire
    Portsmouth South
    Guildford

  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 20,401
    Can someone please remind me - were the Tories desperate for a General Election in 2001?
  • NooNoo Posts: 2,380
    malcolmg said:

    Noo said:

    malcolmg said:

    Alistair said:

    That's absolutely not what the poll says.
    Is Alex Salmond still taking RT’s rouble?
    Why not more honest than working for UK Pravda BBC unit. Helps us get some real news rather than the fake stuff we are used to.
    There's a difference. RT is the mouthpiece of a fascist regime. However bad Westminster is -- and it's bad, no mistake -- it's not fascist or even close.
    Yes the BBC is a pile of shit. It's that bad I've cancelled my TV license cos I refuse to pay a penny for it. Yes it's narrow, biased, blind, deferential to elites and every so often racist. But there's a qualitative difference between the British and Russian governments they speak up for. I think Salmond has made a profound mistake in signing up with RT.
    Why do you think it is a mistake, unless he is planning on a return to politics it is just a way to make some money, much better than having sitting Tory politicians working for PR companies. Many RT programmes are much better balanced than any UK ones and they cover things our tame media avoid on government orders.
    I have yet to see or hear any Russian government propaganda on any of his programmes. Most just cover UK stories that our lot like to avoid.
    Salmond is still very influential within the SNP even if he's currently suspended (is that correct?). It raises questions if he's working for a Putinist mouthpiece of whether there's a direct line into the party from the Kremlin. And this is something the Kremlin is definitely cultivating. They will be seeking ways in to any party they can. I am also worried about Cummings, Milne, and various others.
    As for RT's balance, I understand that they pick their battles somewhat. It's not going to be like InfoWars, 24 hours of total garbage. But they have key narratives to push. RT was behind the elevation of the story of the German girl who was "raped" by a Muslim immigrant which was then "covered up" by police. This story -- entirely fabricated, as it turns out -- turned into huge protests and was coordinated with AfD's filthy propaganda and was designed to boost their standing because Putin loves illiberal parties and the far right. That's the kind of thing an often-reasonable platform buys you, an opportunity to strike at democracy and promote damaging fiction.

    And before you say, yes, the BBC is up to the same tricks. Every so often, you'll see something that's pure propaganda. It's just that the BBC isn't doing it in the name of a fascist.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 12,745

    Let us all pause and reflect at the haunting dying words of despair of the young woman in the back of the trailer to her family as she died, having paid £30,000 to the smugglers. Her last words were to apologise to her family

    The texts are so upsetting it is difficult to think of the agonies that young woman and her family suffered.

    May she rest in peace

    Let's hope we find all those responsible and ensure after appropriate legal process, if convicted, their bollocks are nailed to the wall (pardon my language but I share your anger).

    And yet...

    The promise of a better life elsewhere has motivated so many to risk so much down the centuries - is that so different now?
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,842

    Can someone please remind me - were the Tories desperate for a General Election in 2001?

    Did they try and stop one at the time ?
  • Good evening all and frankly all this talk of Liberal success is nonsense. In 2015 I was vilified on here for daring to say that the Liberals would be poleaxed and of course I was correct.

    In Scotland the SNP need to rely on sweeping up most of the anti-Tory and remain votes. The Liberals recovering will limit that and indeed could see them losing seats like Fife NE to the Liberals.

    It is all very well to assume that wealthy suburban and county seats which went Liberal from 1997 until 2010 will revert to the Liberals but it has one major flaw - this time unlike 2017 a Corbyn Government has to be a serious risk for these higher rate taxpayers.

    Will well-heeled Tory/Liberal floating voters really risk turfing out their Tory MP and help put Corbyn into 10 Downing Street?

    The election is fairly simple.
    Vote Tory get Boris
    Vote Labour get Corbyn
    Vote Liberal get Corbyn
    Vote Brexit get Corbyn
    Vote SNP get Corbyn
    Vote Green get Corbyn
    Vote PC get Corbyn

    Which really means more to the well-heeled voters in the South of England? The prospect of having to queue for a while at customs and passport control as they fly off for their 2-3 foreign holidays a year or be able to go through the blue channel but with a Corbyn PM, being unable to afford those foreign holidays as he hikes their tax rates and trashes their pension funds and investments with his policy of renationalisation paid for with government bonds, which if anything like War bonds will never have a surrender value during their lifetimes.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,959
    Foxy said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Which will come first: Johnson has visited every single hospital in UK for a regional news photoshoot, or a GE?

    I'd rather have Boris at my bedside than Glumbucket Theresa May to be fair. :D
    Isn't it odd that BoZo has time for hospital visits and a primary school but hasn't got time to appear in front of the Liasion Committee?
    There are no votes to be won in the Liaison Committee.

    "Dr Sarah, will you be voting for...no? Oh what a surprise....."
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 9,688
    Noo said:

    Noo said:

    malcolmg said:

    Alistair said:

    That's absolutely not what the poll says.
    Is Alex Salmond still taking RT’s rouble?
    Why not more honest than working for UK Pravda BBC unit. Helps us get some real news rather than the fake stuff we are used to.
    There's a difference. RT is the mouthpiece of a fascist regime. However bad Westminster is -- and it's bad, no mistake -- it's not fascist or even close.
    Yes the BBC is a pile of shit. It's that bad I've cancelled my TV license cos I refuse to pay a penny for it. Yes it's narrow, biased, blind, deferential to elites and every so often racist. But there's a qualitative difference between the British and Russian governments they speak up for. I think Salmond has made a profound mistake in signing up with RT.
    So have you junked all your TVs?


    No. But I don't watch live TV or BBC iPlayer. You can legally use a TV without a license.
    Do you suffer from a small period of fear on the evenings you watch a dvd on your TV when it blindly shows you bbc1 when you turn it on?

    I've long thought tv detector vans were/are an elaborate myth. Or at least their ability to actually detect.

    Nonetheless I happily pay my license, and would do so for a tenth of the content. (I watch little TV, and it's mainly the radio I like - I've got a transistor one you know... much like the wireless but smaller! )
  • Barnesian said:

    stodge said:

    SELL LD seats at 43 - I'm an LD, I'd love us to win 443 seats but that probably won't happen. The Party won 46 seats in 1997 on 18% of the vote and while some of those have been regained or are close (St Ives, Cheltenham Fife NE), I don't quite see where the rest come from and the party starts, let's be honest, at 13 not 18 or 19 despite the defections. A realistic number for me looks to be in the low 30s.

    I agree that, sadly, the Lib Dems winning 443 seats is unlikely to happen!

    As for 43... though it's a stretch, I wouldn't necessarily rule it out. Looking at http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/targets/liberal-democrat (which is crudely sorted by swing from 2017, but a useful starting point), there are seats in the 40s which the LDs certainly won't win, but also seats in the 60s which I think they might. There are also wildcards like Cities of London & Westminster and Finchley & Golders Green, which don't feature anywhere in this 100 but which are nonetheless in play.

    (It would be fascinating to develop a crowdsourced prediction site which gathers PBers' local knowledge to make predictions for individual seats.)
    My prediction for the top LD seats in order of majority for England and Wales

    Twickenham
    Kingston and Surbiton
    Bath
    Oxford West and Abingdon
    North Norfolk
    Carshalton and Wallington
    Richmond Park
    Ceredigion
    Eastbourne
    Westmorland and Lonsdale
    St Ives
    Sheffield, Hallam
    Cheltenham
    St Albans
    Cheadle
    North Devon
    Lewes
    Wells
    Leeds North West
    Hazel Grove
    North Cornwall
    Winchester
    Southport
    Brecon and Radnorshire
    Eastleigh
    Sutton and Cheam
    Bermondsey and Old Southwark
    Cambridge
    Taunton Deane
    Thornbury and Yate
    Yeovil
    Torbay
    Chippenham
    Montgomeryshire
    Portsmouth South
    Guildford

    You forgot Wimbledon. Unless Stephen Hammond is admittted back to the fold it is a likely LD gain with a split in the Tory vote.
  • NooNoo Posts: 2,380

    In Scotland the SNP need to rely on sweeping up most of the anti-Tory and remain votes. The Liberals recovering will limit that and indeed could see them losing seats like Fife NE to the Liberals.

    I'm not sure that's right. There will have been a fair bit of tactical anti-SNP voting in some seats. The Lib Dem recovery will be partially fuelled by those unionist votes returning from the Conservatives. The SNP are polling higher than the election result in 2017, meaning they could be winning seats from the Tories because of, not despite, the Lib Dem revival.
    I don't doubt that one of two SNP seats may be vulnerable. But the overall picture looks very positive for them right now.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,674
    Noo said:

    malcolmg said:

    Noo said:

    malcolmg said:

    Alistair said:

    That's absolutely not what the poll says.
    Is Alex Salmond still taking RT’s rouble?
    Why not more honest than working for UK Pravda BBC unit. Helps us get some real news rather than the fake stuff we are used to.
    There's a difference. RT is the mouthpiece of a fascist regime. However bad Westminster is -- and it's bad, no mistake -- it's not fascist or even close.
    Yes the BBC is a pile of shit. It's that bad I've cancelled my TV license cos I refuse to pay a penny for it. Yes it's narrow, biased, blind, deferential to elites and every so often racist. But there's a qualitative difference between the British and Russian governments they speak up for. I think Salmond has made a profound mistake in signing up with RT.
    SNIP
    Salmond is still very influential within the SNP even if he's currently suspended (is that correct?). It raises questions if he's working for a Putinist mouthpiece of whether there's a direct line into the party from the Kremlin. And this is something the Kremlin is definitely cultivating. They will be seeking ways in to any party they can. I am also worried about Cummings, Milne, and various others.
    As for RT's balance, I understand that they pick their battles somewhat. It's not going to be like InfoWars, 24 hours of total garbage. But they have key narratives to push. RT was behind the elevation of the story of the German girl who was "raped" by a Muslim immigrant which was then "covered up" by police. This story -- entirely fabricated, as it turns out -- turned into huge protests and was coordinated with AfD's filthy propaganda and was designed to boost their standing because Putin loves illiberal parties and the far right. That's the kind of thing an often-reasonable platform buys you, an opportunity to strike at democracy and promote damaging fiction.

    And before you say, yes, the BBC is up to the same tricks. Every so often, you'll see something that's pure propaganda. It's just that the BBC isn't doing it in the name of a fascist.
    Yes he is still influential I suspect , he resigned immediately to save party any hassle. however he was ill done by the government for sure.
    Be interesting to see the outcome of the trial , and if nor Ref before next election there could be fight for leadership, people are getting very impatient with SNP dicking about and allowing Tories to ignore their requests..
  • NooNoo Posts: 2,380
    edited October 2019

    a Corbyn Government has to be a serious risk for these higher rate taxpayers.

    What proportion of the ~15% who are higher tax rate payers do you think currently vote Labour?
  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143
    Omnium said:

    Noo said:

    Noo said:

    malcolmg said:

    Alistair said:

    That's absolutely not what the poll says.
    Is Alex Salmond still taking RT’s rouble?
    Why not more honest than working for UK Pravda BBC unit. Helps us get some real news rather than the fake stuff we are used to.
    There's a difference. RT is the mouthpiece of a fascist regime. However bad Westminster is -- and it's bad, no mistake -- it's not fascist or even close.
    Yes the BBC is a pile of shit. It's that bad I've cancelled my TV license cos I refuse to pay a penny for it. Yes it's narrow, biased, blind, deferential to elites and every so often racist. But there's a qualitative difference between the British and Russian governments they speak up for. I think Salmond has made a profound mistake in signing up with RT.
    So have you junked all your TVs?


    No. But I don't watch live TV or BBC iPlayer. You can legally use a TV without a license.
    Do you suffer from a small period of fear on the evenings you watch a dvd on your TV when it blindly shows you bbc1 when you turn it on?

    I've long thought tv detector vans were/are an elaborate myth. Or at least their ability to actually detect.

    Nonetheless I happily pay my license, and would do so for a tenth of the content. (I watch little TV, and it's mainly the radio I like - I've got a transistor one you know... much like the wireless but smaller! )
    My TV is incapable of receiving a TV signal unaided (without being plugged into an aerial, or a box of some sort, or both, probably), so that isn't a concern.
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 9,688

    Apropos of nothing except today is St Crispin's day and this is a wonderful bit of Shakespeare.

    "We few, we happy few, we band of brothers;
    For he to-day that sheds his blood with me
    Shall be my brother; be he ne'er so vile,
    This day shall gentle his condition;
    And gentlemen in England now a-bed
    Shall think themselves accurs'd they were not here,
    And hold their manhoods cheap whiles any speaks
    That fought with us upon Saint Crispin's day."

    So how is the PB Band of Brothers this wet St Crispin's evening?

    I too love that quote, and hat's off to you for spotting the day and posting it.
  • OllyTOllyT Posts: 4,911
    nico67 said:

    I’m sorry to say but Corbyns position is falling apart on an election .

    It’s impossible to rule out no deal at the end of the transition period unless Labour win an election .

    Regardless of what law is passed now that can be changed in the future if the Tories win an election .

    It’s impossible for this government to last until July 2020 which is the date at which any further extension to the transition period needs to be agreed by.

    Johnson is playing stupid games but Labour aren’t exactly ones to moralize too much on this issue .

    Macron is getting on many people’s nerves but he does have a point , clearly if no election is called soon it will then be impossible to have one before the end of January 2020.

    And then the EU will have to put up with more Commons psychodrama .

    I agree that No Deal cannot be ruled out other than by the Conservatives ruling it out in their manifesto. They won't and nobody would trust Johnson to keep his word anyway.

    Refusing to rule out No Deal and with Johnson choosing Raab as his Foreign Sec and Patel as his Home Sec the suspicion will remain throughout a GE campaign that No Deal is exactly what he may do.
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 7,979

    Barnesian said:

    stodge said:

    SELL LD seats at 43 - I'm an LD, I'd love us to win 443 seats but that probably won't happen. The Party won 46 seats in 1997 on 18% of the vote and while some of those have been regained or are close (St Ives, Cheltenham Fife NE), I don't quite see where the rest come from and the party starts, let's be honest, at 13 not 18 or 19 despite the defections. A realistic number for me looks to be in the low 30s.

    I agree that, sadly, the Lib Dems winning 443 seats is unlikely to happen!

    As for 43... though it's a stretch, I wouldn't necessarily rule it out. Looking at http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/targets/liberal-democrat (which is crudely sorted by swing from 2017, but a useful starting point), there are seats in the 40s which the LDs certainly won't win, but also seats in the 60s which I think they might. There are also wildcards like Cities of London & Westminster and Finchley & Golders Green, which don't feature anywhere in this 100 but which are nonetheless in play.

    (It would be fascinating to develop a crowdsourced prediction site which gathers PBers' local knowledge to make predictions for individual seats.)
    My prediction for the top LD seats in order of majority for England and Wales

    Twickenham
    Kingston and Surbiton
    Bath
    Oxford West and Abingdon
    North Norfolk
    Carshalton and Wallington
    Richmond Park
    Ceredigion
    Eastbourne
    Westmorland and Lonsdale
    St Ives
    Sheffield, Hallam
    Cheltenham
    St Albans
    Cheadle
    North Devon
    Lewes
    Wells
    Leeds North West
    Hazel Grove
    North Cornwall
    Winchester
    Southport
    Brecon and Radnorshire
    Eastleigh
    Sutton and Cheam
    Bermondsey and Old Southwark
    Cambridge
    Taunton Deane
    Thornbury and Yate
    Yeovil
    Torbay
    Chippenham
    Montgomeryshire
    Portsmouth South
    Guildford

    You forgot Wimbledon. Unless Stephen Hammond is admittted back to the fold it is a likely LD gain with a split in the Tory vote.
    Yes Wimbledon is a good bet. I'll add it to the list.
  • NooNoo Posts: 2,380

    Omnium said:

    Noo said:

    Noo said:

    malcolmg said:

    Alistair said:

    That's absolutely not what the poll says.
    Is Alex Salmond still taking RT’s rouble?
    Why not more honest than working for UK Pravda BBC unit. Helps us get some real news rather than the fake stuff we are used to.
    There's a difference. RT is the mouthpiece of a fascist regime. However bad Westminster is -- and it's bad, no mistake -- it's not fascist or even close.
    Yes the BBC is a pile of shit. It's that bad I've cancelled my TV license cos I refuse to pay a penny for it. Yes it's narrow, biased, blind, deferential to elites and every so often racist. But there's a qualitative difference between the British and Russian governments they speak up for. I think Salmond has made a profound mistake in signing up with RT.
    So have you junked all your TVs?


    No. But I don't watch live TV or BBC iPlayer. You can legally use a TV without a license.
    Do you suffer from a small period of fear on the evenings you watch a dvd on your TV when it blindly shows you bbc1 when you turn it on?

    I've long thought tv detector vans were/are an elaborate myth. Or at least their ability to actually detect.

    Nonetheless I happily pay my license, and would do so for a tenth of the content. (I watch little TV, and it's mainly the radio I like - I've got a transistor one you know... much like the wireless but smaller! )
    My TV is incapable of receiving a TV signal unaided (without being plugged into an aerial, or a box of some sort, or both, probably), so that isn't a concern.
    Exactly the same here. I've genuinely not watched any live tv for a long time, apart from when I've been a pub or friends' or relatives' houses.
  • Me and Malc's bet is On.

    See you all tomorrow, or after the F1
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,149
    malcolmg said:

    ydoethur said:

    Noo said:

    malcolmg said:

    Alistair said:

    That's absolutely not what the poll says.
    Is Alex Salmond still taking RT’s rouble?
    Why not more honest than working for UK Pravda BBC unit. Helps us get some real news rather than the fake stuff we are used to.
    There's a difference. RT is the mouthpiece of a fascist regime. However bad Westminster is -- and it's bad, no mistake -- it's not fascist or even close.
    Yes the BBC is a pile of shit. It's that bad I've cancelled my TV license cos I refuse to pay a penny for it. Yes it's narrow, biased, blind, deferential to elites and every so often racist. But there's a qualitative difference between the British and Russian governments they speak up for. I think Salmond has made a profound mistake in signing up with RT.
    Is he doing that at the moment? I would have thought he had other things on his mind given what’s coming up next month.

    Admittedly, he probably needs the money.
    I doubt that , he made a quick £500K+ profit on the first round , given the disaster and chums involved and what we have seen/heard so far it may well be he makes much more in later rounds.
    Not a profit - just his legal costs paid for him without quibble or trimming of the usual margin.

    But there were obviously some serious procedural issues exposed. Whether those feed on into later court action I wouldn't like to say.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,771

    Good evening all and frankly all this talk of Liberal success is nonsense. In 2015 I was vilified on here for daring to say that the Liberals would be poleaxed and of course I was correct.

    In Scotland the SNP need to rely on sweeping up most of the anti-Tory and remain votes. The Liberals recovering will limit that and indeed could see them losing seats like Fife NE to the Liberals.

    It is all very well to assume that wealthy suburban and county seats which went Liberal from 1997 until 2010 will revert to the Liberals but it has one major flaw - this time unlike 2017 a Corbyn Government has to be a serious risk for these higher rate taxpayers.

    Will well-heeled Tory/Liberal floating voters really risk turfing out their Tory MP and help put Corbyn into 10 Downing Street?

    The election is fairly simple.
    Vote Tory get Boris
    Vote Labour get Corbyn
    Vote Liberal get Corbyn
    Vote Brexit get Corbyn
    Vote SNP get Corbyn
    Vote Green get Corbyn
    Vote PC get Corbyn

    Which really means more to the well-heeled voters in the South of England? The prospect of having to queue for a while at customs and passport control as they fly off for their 2-3 foreign holidays a year or be able to go through the blue channel but with a Corbyn PM, being unable to afford those foreign holidays as he hikes their tax rates and trashes their pension funds and investments with his policy of renationalisation paid for with government bonds, which if anything like War bonds will never have a surrender value during their lifetimes.

    Everyone on here was short LibDems in 2015. It was the bet that paid us all a fortune.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,959

    Barnesian said:

    stodge said:

    SELL LD seats at 43 - I'm an LD, I'd love us to win 443 seats but that probably won't happen. The Party won 46 seats in 1997 on 18% of the vote and while some of those have been regained or are close (St Ives, Cheltenham Fife NE), I don't quite see where the rest come from and the party starts, let's be honest, at 13 not 18 or 19 despite the defections. A realistic number for me looks to be in the low 30s.

    I agree that, sadly, the Lib Dems winning 443 seats is unlikely to happen!

    As for 43... though it's a stretch, I wouldn't necessarily rule it out. Looking at http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/targets/liberal-democrat (which is crudely sorted by swing from 2017, but a useful starting point), there are seats in the 40s which the LDs certainly won't win, but also seats in the 60s which I think they might. There are also wildcards like Cities of London & Westminster and Finchley & Golders Green, which don't feature anywhere in this 100 but which are nonetheless in play.

    (It would be fascinating to develop a crowdsourced prediction site which gathers PBers' local knowledge to make predictions for individual seats.)
    My prediction for the top LD seats in order of majority for England and Wales

    Twickenham
    Kingston and Surbiton
    Bath
    Oxford West and Abingdon
    North Norfolk
    Carshalton and Wallington
    Richmond Park
    Ceredigion
    Eastbourne
    Westmorland and Lonsdale
    St Ives
    Sheffield, Hallam
    Cheltenham
    St Albans
    Cheadle
    North Devon
    Lewes
    Wells
    Leeds North West
    Hazel Grove
    North Cornwall
    Winchester
    Southport
    Brecon and Radnorshire
    Eastleigh
    Sutton and Cheam
    Bermondsey and Old Southwark
    Cambridge
    Taunton Deane
    Thornbury and Yate
    Yeovil
    Torbay
    Chippenham
    Montgomeryshire
    Portsmouth South
    Guildford

    You forgot Wimbledon. Unless Stephen Hammond is admittted back to the fold it is a likely LD gain with a split in the Tory vote.
    Kevin Foster has run Torbay like he was a LibDem. Very active locally, has given his pay rise to local charities since 2015, very connected to the faith groups, a massive mailing list with a weekly report on his activities in Westminster and a "What's Going On" locally section. And a 14k majority. He ain't letting go!
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    Omnium said:

    Noo said:

    Noo said:

    malcolmg said:

    Alistair said:

    That's absolutely not what the poll says.
    Is Alex Salmond still taking RT’s rouble?
    Why not more honest than working for UK Pravda BBC unit. Helps us get some real news rather than the fake stuff we are used to.
    There's a difference. RT is the mouthpiece of a fascist regime. However bad Westminster is -- and it's bad, no mistake -- it's not fascist or even close.
    Yes the BBC is a pile of shit. It's that bad I've cancelled my TV license cos I refuse to pay a penny for it. Yes it's narrow, biased, blind, deferential to elites and every so often racist. But there's a qualitative difference between the British and Russian governments they speak up for. I think Salmond has made a profound mistake in signing up with RT.
    So have you junked all your TVs?


    No. But I don't watch live TV or BBC iPlayer. You can legally use a TV without a license.
    Do you suffer from a small period of fear on the evenings you watch a dvd on your TV when it blindly shows you bbc1 when you turn it on?

    I've long thought tv detector vans were/are an elaborate myth. Or at least their ability to actually detect.

    Nonetheless I happily pay my license, and would do so for a tenth of the content. (I watch little TV, and it's mainly the radio I like - I've got a transistor one you know... much like the wireless but smaller! )
    TV detector vans are a myth. I have been so advised by people who formerly were employed to chase non-Licence payers.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,263
    O/T: it's car insurance renewal time. I went to a comparison website, applied for a reasonable-looking policy from Bewise insurance, got no documentation or response after several days, so assumed it hadn't gone through and took out insurance with someone else (who has promptly sent all the documentation). I now see they've taken my money. Is there a cooling-off period so I can get it back? The renewal doesn't actually kick in till the 30th.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    Noo said:

    In Scotland the SNP need to rely on sweeping up most of the anti-Tory and remain votes. The Liberals recovering will limit that and indeed could see them losing seats like Fife NE to the Liberals.

    I'm not sure that's right. There will have been a fair bit of tactical anti-SNP voting in some seats. The Lib Dem recovery will be partially fuelled by those unionist votes returning from the Conservatives. The SNP are polling higher than the election result in 2017, meaning they could be winning seats from the Tories because of, not despite, the Lib Dem revival.
    I don't doubt that one of two SNP seats may be vulnerable. But the overall picture looks very positive for them right now.
    This is obviously true. The SNP vote is static to slightly up. The Con vote is down, the LD vote is up.

    You can construct ludicrous scenarios but the obvious thi gis that there is Con to LD swing. Where is the most potential for Con to LD swing? Why in all those vaguely NE seats of course. Which are held by the Tories currently.

    SNP stands still and the Tories drop beneath them whilst the LDs fail to rise up enough is a fairly straight forward scenario.
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    Barnesian said:

    Barnesian said:

    stodge said:

    SELL LD seats at 43 - I'm an LD, I'd love us to win 443 seats but that probably won't happen. The Party won 46 seats in 1997 on 18% of the vote and while some of those have been regained or are close (St Ives, Cheltenham Fife NE), I don't quite see where the rest come from and the party starts, let's be honest, at 13 not 18 or 19 despite the defections. A realistic number for me looks to be in the low 30s.

    I agree that, sadly, the Lib Dems winning 443 seats is unlikely to happen!

    As for 43... though it's a stretch, I wouldn't necessarily rule it out. Looking at http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/targets/liberal-democrat (which is crudely sorted by swing from 2017, but a useful starting point), there are seats in the 40s which the LDs certainly won't win, but also seats in the 60s which I think they might. There are also wildcards like Cities of London & Westminster and Finchley & Golders Green, which don't feature anywhere in this 100 but which are nonetheless in play.

    (It would be fascinating to develop a crowdsourced prediction site which gathers PBers' local knowledge to make predictions for individual seats.)
    My prediction for the top LD seats in order of majority for England and Wales

    Twickenham
    Kingston and Surbiton
    Bath
    Oxford West and Abingdon
    North Norfolk
    Carshalton and Wallington
    Richmond Park
    Ceredigion
    Eastbourne
    Westmorland and Lonsdale
    St Ives
    Sheffield, Hallam
    Cheltenham
    St Albans
    Cheadle
    North Devon
    Lewes
    Wells
    Leeds North West
    Hazel Grove
    North Cornwall
    Winchester
    Southport
    Brecon and Radnorshire
    Eastleigh
    Sutton and Cheam
    Bermondsey and Old Southwark
    Cambridge
    Taunton Deane
    Thornbury and Yate
    Yeovil
    Torbay
    Chippenham
    Montgomeryshire
    Portsmouth South
    Guildford

    You forgot Wimbledon. Unless Stephen Hammond is admittted back to the fold it is a likely LD gain with a split in the Tory vote.
    Yes Wimbledon is a good bet. I'll add it to the list.
    Disagree. Wimbledon will be a Tory v Labour contest - as will Portsmouth South.
  • timmotimmo Posts: 1,469
    humbugger said:

    crandles said:

    humbugger said:

    kle4 said:

    humbugger said:

    kle4 said:

    So, have the government stopped pouting and agreed to continue trying to see us Brexit even if denied an election, or are they still insisting that they love Brexit so much they will stop trying to Brexit in protest?

    There's really no point in the government "trying to Brexit" as unless something significant occurs this remainer parliament will find whatever reasons, whatever devices and whatever procedures it needs to thwart Brexit. Trying to overcome such obstacles will be a waste of time.

    .
    No, it demonstrates that Boris wants to Brexit but is being thwarted. That's a more powerful message than just saying that they till thwart you. Trying to overcome such obstacles is only a waste of time if the governments think it will fail, is unable to overcome them, and thus is an admission of weakness.

    Particularly when the government's spin was they had the numbers to pass it, which would make them either weak now, or lying then.

    Indeed, trying but failing to Brexit has helped Boris in the polls - he would be advised to continue that, rather than sulk, as it would help his polling even more.
    That Boris wants to Brexit but is being thwarted has been demonstrated more than adequately already. The government knows it will fail to overcome the obstacles as has been proven with the Programme Motion this week. Winning the vote on the WAIB was pyrrhic as by the time the 3rd reading comes forward parliament will have found a reason to defeat it.


    All the Programme Motion proves is that a majority of MPs wanted more time to scrutinise it (some for that reason and some to thwart Brexit). Can't say how many of each.

    Sure lots of people will believe that "Brexit is being thwarted has been demonstrated more than adequately already" but they are confirmed Tory voters; what about marginal voters?

    Surely Boris's plan was to be a man with a plan which silly MPs blocked. Now he is failing to follow through on demonstrating this and looks like he is refusing to even try instead.
    The Programme Motion proves this HOC wants to delay Brexit, which it will continue to do in the hope that something turns up to prevent Brexit, unless its hand is forced. Ordinarily the opposition would welcome a GE to try to overthrow what they say is a useless government and have the chance of implementing their own policies. Labour however seemingly do not want a GE because they fear the result.
    Spot on analysis
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    Alistair said:

    Noo said:

    In Scotland the SNP need to rely on sweeping up most of the anti-Tory and remain votes. The Liberals recovering will limit that and indeed could see them losing seats like Fife NE to the Liberals.

    I'm not sure that's right. There will have been a fair bit of tactical anti-SNP voting in some seats. The Lib Dem recovery will be partially fuelled by those unionist votes returning from the Conservatives. The SNP are polling higher than the election result in 2017, meaning they could be winning seats from the Tories because of, not despite, the Lib Dem revival.
    I don't doubt that one of two SNP seats may be vulnerable. But the overall picture looks very positive for them right now.
    This is obviously true. The SNP vote is static to slightly up. The Con vote is down, the LD vote is up.

    You can construct ludicrous scenarios but the obvious thi gis that there is Con to LD swing. Where is the most potential for Con to LD swing? Why in all those vaguely NE seats of course. Which are held by the Tories currently.

    SNP stands still and the Tories drop beneath them whilst the LDs fail to rise up enough is a fairly straight forward scenario.
    The SNP vote remains lower than shown by polls throughout the 2017 campaign. I will be surprised if they exceed 35%.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,771
    Barnesian said:

    stodge said:

    SELL LD seats at 43 - I'm an LD, I'd love us to win 443 seats but that probably won't happen. The Party won 46 seats in 1997 on 18% of the vote and while some of those have been regained or are close (St Ives, Cheltenham Fife NE), I don't quite see where the rest come from and the party starts, let's be honest, at 13 not 18 or 19 despite the defections. A realistic number for me looks to be in the low 30s.

    I agree that, sadly, the Lib Dems winning 443 seats is unlikely to happen!

    As for 43... though it's a stretch, I wouldn't necessarily rule it out. Looking at http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/targets/liberal-democrat (which is crudely sorted by swing from 2017, but a useful starting point), there are seats in the 40s which the LDs certainly won't win, but also seats in the 60s which I think they might. There are also wildcards like Cities of London & Westminster and Finchley & Golders Green, which don't feature anywhere in this 100 but which are nonetheless in play.

    (It would be fascinating to develop a crowdsourced prediction site which gathers PBers' local knowledge to make predictions for individual seats.)
    My prediction for the top LD seats in order of majority for England and Wales

    Twickenham
    Kingston and Surbiton
    Bath
    Oxford West and Abingdon
    North Norfolk
    Carshalton and Wallington
    Richmond Park
    Ceredigion
    Eastbourne
    Westmorland and Lonsdale
    St Ives
    Sheffield, Hallam
    Cheltenham
    St Albans
    Cheadle
    North Devon
    Lewes
    Wells
    Leeds North West
    Hazel Grove
    North Cornwall
    Winchester
    Southport
    Brecon and Radnorshire
    Eastleigh
    Sutton and Cheam
    Bermondsey and Old Southwark
    Cambridge
    Taunton Deane
    Thornbury and Yate
    Yeovil
    Torbay
    Chippenham
    Montgomeryshire
    Portsmouth South
    Guildford

    I suspect that the SW seats - other than St Ives - are unlikely. I also don't know how realistic Ceridigion is as a prospect.

    Eastbourne will be held by the independent.

    North Norfolk loses its incumbent, and was Leave voting so that may not be an easy hold.

    Richmond Park will be an easy LibDem gain. Sheffield Hallam will, I suspect, fall to the LDs. Other likely gains are St Ives, Cheltenham and St Albans. Beyond there is gets a bit difficult for the LDs.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,771
    rcs1000 said:

    Barnesian said:

    stodge said:

    SELL LD seats at 43 - I'm an LD, I'd love us to win 443 seats but that probably won't happen. The Party won 46 seats in 1997 on 18% of the vote and while some of those have been regained or are close (St Ives, Cheltenham Fife NE), I don't quite see where the rest come from and the party starts, let's be honest, at 13 not 18 or 19 despite the defections. A realistic number for me looks to be in the low 30s.

    I agree that, sadly, the Lib Dems winning 443 seats is unlikely to happen!

    As for 43... though it's a stretch, I wouldn't necessarily rule it out. Looking at http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/targets/liberal-democrat (which is crudely sorted by swing from 2017, but a useful starting point), there are seats in the 40s which the LDs certainly won't win, but also seats in the 60s which I think they might. There are also wildcards like Cities of London & Westminster and Finchley & Golders Green, which don't feature anywhere in this 100 but which are nonetheless in play.

    (It would be fascinating to develop a crowdsourced prediction site which gathers PBers' local knowledge to make predictions for individual seats.)
    My prediction for the top LD seats in order of majority for England and Wales

    Twickenham
    Kingston and Surbiton
    Bath
    Oxford West and Abingdon
    North Norfolk
    Carshalton and Wallington
    Richmond Park
    Ceredigion
    Eastbourne
    Westmorland and Lonsdale
    St Ives
    Sheffield, Hallam
    Cheltenham
    St Albans
    Cheadle
    North Devon
    Lewes
    Wells
    Leeds North West
    Hazel Grove
    North Cornwall
    Winchester
    Southport
    Brecon and Radnorshire
    Eastleigh
    Sutton and Cheam
    Bermondsey and Old Southwark
    Cambridge
    Taunton Deane
    Thornbury and Yate
    Yeovil
    Torbay
    Chippenham
    Montgomeryshire
    Portsmouth South
    Guildford

    I suspect that the SW seats - other than St Ives - are unlikely. I also don't know how realistic Ceridigion is as a prospect.

    Eastbourne will be held by the independent.

    North Norfolk loses its incumbent, and was Leave voting so that may not be an easy hold.

    Richmond Park will be an easy LibDem gain. Sheffield Hallam will, I suspect, fall to the LDs. Other likely gains are St Ives, Cheltenham and St Albans. Beyond there is gets a bit difficult for the LDs.
    Also, Cambridgeshire South has been moving in an LD direction for a decade, and Heidi Allen will be the candidate. I'd reckon they have a reasonable chance there.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,771

    O/T: it's car insurance renewal time. I went to a comparison website, applied for a reasonable-looking policy from Bewise insurance, got no documentation or response after several days, so assumed it hadn't gone through and took out insurance with someone else (who has promptly sent all the documentation). I now see they've taken my money. Is there a cooling-off period so I can get it back? The renewal doesn't actually kick in till the 30th.

    Just call up and cancel. They'll be obliged to return any unused premium.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,771
    HYUFD said:
    I think that's bullshit. Trump is on way more than that with the Republican base.
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    rcs1000 said:

    Barnesian said:

    stodge said:

    SELL LD seats at 43 - I'm an LD, I'd love us to win 443 seats but that probably won't happen. The Party won 46 seats in 1997 on 18% of the vote and while some of those have been regained or are close (St Ives, Cheltenham Fife NE), I don't quite see where the rest come from and the party starts, let's be honest, at 13 not 18 or 19 despite the defections. A realistic number for me looks to be in the low 30s.

    I agree that, sadly, the Lib Dems winning 443 seats is unlikely to happen!

    As for 43... though it's a stretch, I wouldn't necessarily rule it out. Looking at http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/targets/liberal-democrat (which is crudely sorted by swing from 2017, but a useful starting point), there are seats in the 40s which the LDs certainly won't win, but also seats in the 60s which I think they might. There are also wildcards like Cities of London & Westminster and Finchley & Golders Green, which don't feature anywhere in this 100 but which are nonetheless in play.

    (It would be fascinating to develop a crowdsourced prediction site which gathers PBers' local knowledge to make predictions for individual seats.)
    My prediction for the top LD seats in order of majority for England and Wales

    Twickenham
    Kingston and Surbiton
    Bath
    Oxford West and Abingdon
    North Norfolk
    Carshalton and Wallington
    Richmond Park
    Ceredigion
    Eastbourne
    Westmorland and Lonsdale
    St Ives
    Sheffield, Hallam
    Cheltenham
    St Albans
    Cheadle
    North Devon
    Lewes
    Wells
    Leeds North West
    Hazel Grove
    North Cornwall
    Winchester
    Southport
    Brecon and Radnorshire
    Eastleigh
    Sutton and Cheam
    Bermondsey and Old Southwark
    Cambridge
    Taunton Deane
    Thornbury and Yate
    Yeovil
    Torbay
    Chippenham
    Montgomeryshire
    Portsmouth South
    Guildford

    I suspect that the SW seats - other than St Ives - are unlikely. I also don't know how realistic Ceridigion is as a prospect.

    Eastbourne will be held by the independent.

    North Norfolk loses its incumbent, and was Leave voting so that may not be an easy hold.

    Richmond Park will be an easy LibDem gain. Sheffield Hallam will, I suspect, fall to the LDs. Other likely gains are St Ives, Cheltenham and St Albans. Beyond there is gets a bit difficult for the LDs.
    Not persuaded re- St Albans - though agree about the others.Fife NE is likely surely.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709
    edited October 2019
    rcs1000 said:

    HYUFD said:
    I think that's bullshit. Trump is on way more than that with the Republican base.
    Registered Republicans are not all Trump supporters, remember 55% of Republican primary voters did not vote for Trump in 2016.

    So he has increased his vote from 45% to 76%
  • timmotimmo Posts: 1,469
    rcs1000 said:

    Barnesian said:

    stodge said:

    SELL LD seats at 43 - I'm an LD, I'd love us to win 443 seats but that probably won't happen. The Party won 46 seats in 1997 on 18% of the vote and while some of those have been regained or are close (St Ives, Cheltenham Fife NE), I don't quite see where the rest come from and the party starts, let's be honest, at 13 not 18 or 19 despite the defections. A realistic number for me looks to be in the low 30s.

    I agree that, sadly, the Lib Dems winning 443 seats is unlikely to happen!

    As for 43... though it's a stretch, I wouldn't necessarily rule it out. Looking at http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/targets/liberal-democrat (which is crudely sorted by swing from 2017, but a useful starting point), there are seats in the 40s which the LDs certainly won't win, but also seats in the 60s which I think they might. There are also wildcards like Cities of London & Westminster and Finchley & Golders Green, which don't feature anywhere in this 100 but which are nonetheless in play.

    (It would be fascinating to develop a crowdsourced prediction site which gathers PBers' local knowledge to make predictions for individual seats.)
    My prediction for the top LD seats in order of majority for England and Wales

    Twickenham
    Kingston and Surbiton
    Bath
    Oxford West and Abingdon
    North Norfolk
    Carshalton and Wallington
    Richmond Park
    Ceredigion
    Eastbourne
    Westmorland and Lonsdale
    St Ives
    Sheffield, Hallam
    Cheltenham
    St Albans
    Cheadle
    North Devon
    Lewes
    Wells
    Leeds North West
    Hazel Grove
    North Cornwall
    Winchester
    Southport
    Brecon and Radnorshire
    Eastleigh
    Sutton and Cheam
    Bermondsey and Old Southwark
    Cambridge
    Taunton Deane
    Thornbury and Yate
    Yeovil
    Torbay
    Chippenham
    Montgomeryshire
    Portsmouth South
    Guildford

    I suspect that the SW seats - other than St Ives - are unlikely. I also don't know how realistic Ceridigion is as a prospect.

    Eastbourne will be held by the independent.

    North Norfolk loses its incumbent, and was Leave voting so that may not be an easy hold.

    Richmond Park will be an easy LibDem gain. Sheffield Hallam will, I suspect, fall to the LDs. Other likely gains are St Ives, Cheltenham and St Albans. Beyond there is gets a bit difficult for the LDs.
    Interesting list...
    Think you can move Guildford right up the list..Milton in trouble there.
    Sutton and Cheam.will depend.
    The LD candidate has been parachuted in and has a few skeletons in the cupboard that may be exposed.
    I reckon Westminster is in play for them.
  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 7,483
    justin124 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Barnesian said:

    stodge said:

    SELL LD seats at 43 - I'm an LD, I'd love us to win 443 seats but that probably won't happen. The Party won 46 seats in 1997 on 18% of the vote and while some of those have been regained or are close (St Ives, Cheltenham Fife NE), I don't quite see where the rest come from and the party starts, let's be honest, at 13 not 18 or 19 despite the defections. A realistic number for me looks to be in the low 30s.

    I agree that, sadly, the Lib Dems winning 443 seats is unlikely to happen!

    As for 43... though it's a stretch, I wouldn't necessarily rule it out. Looking at http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/targets/liberal-democrat (which is crudely sorted by swing from 2017, but a useful starting point), there are seats in the 40s which the LDs certainly won't win, but also seats in the 60s which I think they might. There are also wildcards like Cities of London & Westminster and Finchley & Golders Green, which don't feature anywhere in this 100 but which are nonetheless in play.

    (It would be fascinating to develop a crowdsourced prediction site which gathers PBers' local knowledge to make predictions for individual seats.)
    My prediction for the top LD seats in order of majority for England and Wales

    Twickenham
    Kingston and Surbiton
    Bath
    Oxford West and Abingdon
    North Norfolk
    Carshalton and Wallington
    Richmond Park
    Ceredigion
    Eastbourne
    Westmorland and Lonsdale
    St Ives
    Sheffield, Hallam
    Cheltenham
    St Albans
    Cheadle
    North Devon
    Lewes
    Wells
    Leeds North West
    Hazel Grove
    North Cornwall
    Winchester
    Southport
    Brecon and Radnorshire
    Eastleigh
    Sutton and Cheam
    Bermondsey and Old Southwark
    Cambridge
    Taunton Deane
    Thornbury and Yate
    Yeovil
    Torbay
    Chippenham
    Montgomeryshire
    Portsmouth South
    Guildford

    I suspect that the SW seats - other than St Ives - are unlikely. I also don't know how realistic Ceridigion is as a prospect.

    Eastbourne will be held by the independent.

    North Norfolk loses its incumbent, and was Leave voting so that may not be an easy hold.

    Richmond Park will be an easy LibDem gain. Sheffield Hallam will, I suspect, fall to the LDs. Other likely gains are St Ives, Cheltenham and St Albans. Beyond there is gets a bit difficult for the LDs.
    Not persuaded re- St Albans - though agree about the others.Fife NE is likely surely.
    Yeovil they have the cash the organization and the MPs is a muppet of the worst order.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,771
    justin124 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    I suspect that the SW seats - other than St Ives - are unlikely. I also don't know how realistic Ceridigion is as a prospect.

    Eastbourne will be held by the independent.

    North Norfolk loses its incumbent, and was Leave voting so that may not be an easy hold.

    Richmond Park will be an easy LibDem gain. Sheffield Hallam will, I suspect, fall to the LDs. Other likely gains are St Ives, Cheltenham and St Albans. Beyond there is gets a bit difficult for the LDs.

    Not persuaded re- St Albans - though agree about the others.Fife NE is likely surely.
    It was an England and Wales list. But yes, I agree that Fife NE is a likely gain, because Unionist tactical voting will kick in.

    The LDs did an incredible job with Daisy Cooper in St Albans in 2017. The LDs leapfrogged Labour in an election where they were being squeezed hard.

    She's continued to work the seat incredibly hard in the interim, and the LibDems did really well in the local elections there earlier this year, getting 50% more votes than the Conservatives.

    There are no "gimmies", but I would have thought that's a seat where Labour will get squeezed, where (in most seats) it will be the LDs that suffer.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709
    Omnium said:

    I wish BF would list David Milliband as a runner in a few more markets.

    https://twitter.com/JKCorden/status/1187614515220738048?s=20
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,771
    HYUFD said:

    rcs1000 said:

    HYUFD said:
    I think that's bullshit. Trump is on way more than that with the Republican base.
    Registered Republicans are not all Trump supporters, remember 55% of Republican primary voters did not vote for Trump in 2016.

    So he has increased his vote from 45% to 76%
    I think you'll find that sitting Presidents do better in Primaries than they did when they were merely candidates in crowded fields.
  • timmotimmo Posts: 1,469
    rcs1000 said:

    justin124 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    I suspect that the SW seats - other than St Ives - are unlikely. I also don't know how realistic Ceridigion is as a prospect.

    Eastbourne will be held by the independent.

    North Norfolk loses its incumbent, and was Leave voting so that may not be an easy hold.

    Richmond Park will be an easy LibDem gain. Sheffield Hallam will, I suspect, fall to the LDs. Other likely gains are St Ives, Cheltenham and St Albans. Beyond there is gets a bit difficult for the LDs.

    Not persuaded re- St Albans - though agree about the others.Fife NE is likely surely.
    It was an England and Wales list. But yes, I agree that Fife NE is a likely gain, because Unionist tactical voting will kick in.

    The LDs did an incredible job with Daisy Cooper in St Albans in 2017. The LDs leapfrogged Labour in an election where they were being squeezed hard.

    She's continued to work the seat incredibly hard in the interim, and the LibDems did really well in the local elections there earlier this year, getting 50% more votes than the Conservatives.

    There are no "gimmies", but I would have thought that's a seat where Labour will get squeezed, where (in most seats) it will be the LDs that suffer.
    I do believe there will be a few left field seats where the LDs come from nowhere and win..that will be the fun of the night.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709
    rcs1000 said:

    HYUFD said:

    rcs1000 said:

    HYUFD said:
    I think that's bullshit. Trump is on way more than that with the Republican base.
    Registered Republicans are not all Trump supporters, remember 55% of Republican primary voters did not vote for Trump in 2016.

    So he has increased his vote from 45% to 76%
    I think you'll find that sitting Presidents do better in Primaries than they did when they were merely candidates in crowded fields.
    Though Carter only got 52% in 1980, Bush Snr 72% in 1992
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,771
    timmo said:

    rcs1000 said:

    justin124 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    I suspect that the SW seats - other than St Ives - are unlikely. I also don't know how realistic Ceridigion is as a prospect.

    Eastbourne will be held by the independent.

    North Norfolk loses its incumbent, and was Leave voting so that may not be an easy hold.

    Richmond Park will be an easy LibDem gain. Sheffield Hallam will, I suspect, fall to the LDs. Other likely gains are St Ives, Cheltenham and St Albans. Beyond there is gets a bit difficult for the LDs.

    Not persuaded re- St Albans - though agree about the others.Fife NE is likely surely.
    It was an England and Wales list. But yes, I agree that Fife NE is a likely gain, because Unionist tactical voting will kick in.

    The LDs did an incredible job with Daisy Cooper in St Albans in 2017. The LDs leapfrogged Labour in an election where they were being squeezed hard.

    She's continued to work the seat incredibly hard in the interim, and the LibDems did really well in the local elections there earlier this year, getting 50% more votes than the Conservatives.

    There are no "gimmies", but I would have thought that's a seat where Labour will get squeezed, where (in most seats) it will be the LDs that suffer.
    I do believe there will be a few left field seats where the LDs come from nowhere and win..that will be the fun of the night.
    That does happen from time to time, such as when Lynne Featherstone took Hornsey and Wood Green from Labour.
  • eggegg Posts: 1,749
    rcs1000 said:

    Barnesian said:

    stodge said:

    SELL LD seats at 43 - I'm an LD, I'd love us to win 443 seats but that probably won't happen. The Party won 46 seats in 1997 on 18% of the vote and while some of those have been regained or are close (St Ives, Cheltenham Fife NE), I don't quite see where the rest come from and the party starts, let's be honest, at 13 not 18 or 19 despite the defections. A realistic number for me looks to be in the low 30s.

    I agree that, sadly, the Lib Dems winning 443 seats is unlikely to happen!

    As for 43... though it's a stretch, I wouldn't necessarily rule it out. Looking at http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/targets/liberal-democrat (which is crudely sorted by swing from 2017, but a useful starting point), there are seats in the 40s which the LDs certainly won't win, but also seats in the 60s which I think they might. There are also wildcards like Cities of London & Westminster and Finchley & Golders Green, which don't feature anywhere in this 100 but which are nonetheless in play.

    (It would be fascinating to develop a crowdsourced prediction site which gathers PBers' local knowledge to make predictions for individual seats.)
    My prediction for the top LD seats in order of majority for England and Wales

    Twickenham
    Kingston and Surbiton
    Bath
    Oxford West and Abingdon
    North Norfolk
    Carshalton and Wallington
    Richmond Park
    Ceredigion
    Eastbourne
    Westmorland and Lonsdale
    St Ives
    Sheffield, Hallam
    Cheltenham
    St Albans
    Cheadle
    North Devon
    Lewes
    Wells
    Leeds North West
    Hazel Grove
    North Cornwall
    Winchester
    Southport
    Brecon and Radnorshire
    Eastleigh
    Sutton and Cheam
    Bermondsey and Old Southwark
    Cambridge
    Taunton Deane
    Thornbury and Yate
    Yeovil
    Torbay
    Chippenham
    Montgomeryshire
    Portsmouth South
    Guildford

    I suspect that the SW seats - other than St Ives - are unlikely. I also don't know how realistic Ceridigion is as a prospect.

    Eastbourne will be held by the independent.

    North Norfolk loses its incumbent, and was Leave voting so that may not be an easy hold.

    Richmond Park will be an easy LibDem gain. Sheffield Hallam will, I suspect, fall to the LDs. Other likely gains are St Ives, Cheltenham and St Albans. Beyond there is gets a bit difficult for the LDs.
    I was surprised Wells didn’t go gold last time. But libdems were still unpopular after the coalition years and labour vote leapt up from nowhere.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,771
    HYUFD said:

    rcs1000 said:

    HYUFD said:

    rcs1000 said:

    HYUFD said:
    I think that's bullshit. Trump is on way more than that with the Republican base.
    Registered Republicans are not all Trump supporters, remember 55% of Republican primary voters did not vote for Trump in 2016.

    So he has increased his vote from 45% to 76%
    I think you'll find that sitting Presidents do better in Primaries than they did when they were merely candidates in crowded fields.
    Though Carter only got 52% in 1980, Bush Snr 72% in 1992
    They both increased their vote shares relative to the contested primaries.
  • eggegg Posts: 1,749
    timmo said:

    rcs1000 said:

    justin124 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    I suspect that the SW seats - other than St Ives - are unlikely. I also don't know how realistic Ceridigion is as a prospect.

    Eastbourne will be held by the independent.

    North Norfolk loses its incumbent, and was Leave voting so that may not be an easy hold.

    Richmond Park will be an easy LibDem gain. Sheffield Hallam will, I suspect, fall to the LDs. Other likely gains are St Ives, Cheltenham and St Albans. Beyond there is gets a bit difficult for the LDs.

    Not persuaded re- St Albans - though agree about the others.Fife NE is likely surely.
    It was an England and Wales list. But yes, I agree that Fife NE is a likely gain, because Unionist tactical voting will kick in.

    The LDs did an incredible job with Daisy Cooper in St Albans in 2017. The LDs leapfrogged Labour in an election where they were being squeezed hard.

    She's continued to work the seat incredibly hard in the interim, and the LibDems did really well in the local elections there earlier this year, getting 50% more votes than the Conservatives.

    There are no "gimmies", but I would have thought that's a seat where Labour will get squeezed, where (in most seats) it will be the LDs that suffer.
    I do believe there will be a few left field seats where the LDs come from nowhere and win..that will be the fun of the night.
    I think that as well.

    Meanwhile the Tories have counted all the Barnsley chickens before they have hatched.
  • timmotimmo Posts: 1,469
    Noo said:

    humbugger said:

    crandles said:

    humbugger said:

    kle4 said:

    humbugger said:

    kle4 said:

    So, have the government stopped pouting and agreed to continue trying to see us Brexit even if denied an election, or are they still insisting that they love Brexit so much they will stop trying to Brexit in protest?

    There's really no point in the government "trying to Brexit" as unless something significant occurs this remainer parliament will find whatever reasons, whatever devices and whatever procedures it needs to thwart Brexit. Trying to overcome such obstacles will be a waste of time.

    .
    No, it demonstrates that Boris wants to Brexit but is being thwarted. That's a more powerful message than just saying that they till thwart you. Trying to overcome such obstacles is only a waste of time if the governments think it will fail, is unable to overcome them, and thus is an admission of weakness.

    Particularly when the government's spin was they had the numbers to pass it, which would make them either weak now, or lying then.

    Indeed, trying but failing to Brexit has helped Boris in the polls - he would be advised to continue that, rather than sulk, as it would help his polling even more.
    That Boris wants to Brexit but is being thwarted has been demonstrated more than adequately already. The government knows it will fail to overcome the obstacles as has been proven with the Programme Motion this week. Winning the vote on the WAIB was pyrrhic as by the time the 3rd reading comes forward parliament will have found a reason to defeat it.


    All the Programme Motion proves is that a majority of MPs wanted more time to scrutinise it (some for that reason and some to thwart Brexit). Can't say how many of each.

    Sure lots of people will believe that "Brexit is being thwarted has been demonstrated more than adequately already" but they are confirmed Tory voters; what about marginal voters?

    Surely Boris's plan was to be a man with a plan which silly MPs blocked. Now he is failing to follow through on demonstrating this and looks like he is refusing to even try instead.
    The Programme Motion proves this HOC wants to delay Brexit
    It would have passed if Boris had allowed for a few more days' scrutiny.

    One wonders why he didn't.
    No it wouldnt
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,842
    egg said:

    timmo said:

    rcs1000 said:

    justin124 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    I suspect that the SW seats - other than St Ives - are unlikely. I also don't know how realistic Ceridigion is as a prospect.

    Eastbourne will be held by the independent.

    North Norfolk loses its incumbent, and was Leave voting so that may not be an easy hold.

    Richmond Park will be an easy LibDem gain. Sheffield Hallam will, I suspect, fall to the LDs. Other likely gains are St Ives, Cheltenham and St Albans. Beyond there is gets a bit difficult for the LDs.

    Not persuaded re- St Albans - though agree about the others.Fife NE is likely surely.
    It was an England and Wales list. But yes, I agree that Fife NE is a likely gain, because Unionist tactical voting will kick in.

    The LDs did an incredible job with Daisy Cooper in St Albans in 2017. The LDs leapfrogged Labour in an election where they were being squeezed hard.

    She's continued to work the seat incredibly hard in the interim, and the LibDems did really well in the local elections there earlier this year, getting 50% more votes than the Conservatives.

    There are no "gimmies", but I would have thought that's a seat where Labour will get squeezed, where (in most seats) it will be the LDs that suffer.
    I do believe there will be a few left field seats where the LDs come from nowhere and win..that will be the fun of the night.
    I think that as well.

    Meanwhile the Tories have counted all the Barnsley chickens before they have hatched.
    They're not taking Barnsley lol
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,959
    edited October 2019
    egg said:

    timmo said:

    rcs1000 said:

    justin124 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    I suspect that the SW seats - other than St Ives - are unlikely. I also don't know how realistic Ceridigion is as a prospect.

    Eastbourne will be held by the independent.

    North Norfolk loses its incumbent, and was Leave voting so that may not be an easy hold.

    Richmond Park will be an easy LibDem gain. Sheffield Hallam will, I suspect, fall to the LDs. Other likely gains are St Ives, Cheltenham and St Albans. Beyond there is gets a bit difficult for the LDs.

    Not persuaded re- St Albans - though agree about the others.Fife NE is likely surely.
    It was an England and Wales list. But yes, I agree that Fife NE is a likely gain, because Unionist tactical voting will kick in.

    The LDs did an incredible job with Daisy Cooper in St Albans in 2017. The LDs leapfrogged Labour in an election where they were being squeezed hard.

    She's continued to work the seat incredibly hard in the interim, and the LibDems did really well in the local elections there earlier this year, getting 50% more votes than the Conservatives.

    There are no "gimmies", but I would have thought that's a seat where Labour will get squeezed, where (in most seats) it will be the LDs that suffer.
    I do believe there will be a few left field seats where the LDs come from nowhere and win..that will be the fun of the night.
    I think that as well.

    Meanwhile the Tories have counted all the Barnsley chickens before they have hatched.
    Not Barnsley. But places like Coventry and Wolverhampton could be fun.....
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,281
    rcs1000 said:

    O/T: it's car insurance renewal time. I went to a comparison website, applied for a reasonable-looking policy from Bewise insurance, got no documentation or response after several days, so assumed it hadn't gone through and took out insurance with someone else (who has promptly sent all the documentation). I now see they've taken my money. Is there a cooling-off period so I can get it back? The renewal doesn't actually kick in till the 30th.

    Just call up and cancel. They'll be obliged to return any unused premium.
    Although they may charge a cancelleation fee, I believe.
  • eggegg Posts: 1,749
    HYUFD said:

    Omnium said:

    I wish BF would list David Milliband as a runner in a few more markets.

    https://twitter.com/JKCorden/status/1187614515220738048?s=20
    That was a canny post HY. Just one picture of the bananaman was all it needed to put Oms crazy thoughts to bed and tucked in with the light out.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,281
    edited October 2019

    Stocky said:

    Big_G said: "Both of you are missing the point that the electoral commission would have to work out the wording to including no deal. As in everything brexit it is not as simple as it seems"

    Why would No Deal have to be an option?

    A constitutional expert clearly stated that any referendum has to include all options including no deal as the electoral commission have to be even handed with all opinions and there is considerable support for no deal

    However, if someone can get a constitutional expert to disprove this I would be very interested to see their reasoning
    ‘No deal’ doesn't mean anything.
    Everyone who supports it has a different idea of what it means.

    That is not democracy.
    Seems the electoral commission would not agree

    Source?
    Two separate constitutional experts and contrary to some the government legislates but the electoral commission then decides the wording and takes into account all views. If the electoral commission missed of no deal Farage would be at the Supreme Court faster than Gina Miller
    Who are these two separate constitutional experts?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,959
    timmo said:

    rcs1000 said:

    justin124 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    I suspect that the SW seats - other than St Ives - are unlikely. I also don't know how realistic Ceridigion is as a prospect.

    Eastbourne will be held by the independent.

    North Norfolk loses its incumbent, and was Leave voting so that may not be an easy hold.

    Richmond Park will be an easy LibDem gain. Sheffield Hallam will, I suspect, fall to the LDs. Other likely gains are St Ives, Cheltenham and St Albans. Beyond there is gets a bit difficult for the LDs.

    Not persuaded re- St Albans - though agree about the others.Fife NE is likely surely.
    It was an England and Wales list. But yes, I agree that Fife NE is a likely gain, because Unionist tactical voting will kick in.

    The LDs did an incredible job with Daisy Cooper in St Albans in 2017. The LDs leapfrogged Labour in an election where they were being squeezed hard.

    She's continued to work the seat incredibly hard in the interim, and the LibDems did really well in the local elections there earlier this year, getting 50% more votes than the Conservatives.

    There are no "gimmies", but I would have thought that's a seat where Labour will get squeezed, where (in most seats) it will be the LDs that suffer.
    I do believe there will be a few left field seats where the LDs come from nowhere and win..that will be the fun of the night.
    I think the LibDems might be in for a rude awkening - discovering that Jo Swinson is not anywhere near as popular as they think......
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 9,688
    egg said:

    HYUFD said:

    Omnium said:

    I wish BF would list David Milliband as a runner in a few more markets.

    https://twitter.com/JKCorden/status/1187614515220738048?s=20
    That was a canny post HY. Just one picture of the bananaman was all it needed to put Oms crazy thoughts to bed and tucked in with the light out.
    We need this man!

    I'd love to see him listed in the 3:30 at Haydock Park!

    As usual I'd assess his form. I have to say I've found myself laying rather than backing him when he's been listed, but I almost find myself a greater fan for that very reason.

  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    stodge said:

    SunnyJim said:



    If the extension comes back until 31/01 then I am not sure what other reassurances Corbyn could be given about ND being off the table.

    We all know it is just about avoiding a GE which is why Abbott look so flummoxed when she was asked what Labour were actually looking for.

    My feeling is their requirements will be deliberately unattainable so as to give Corbyn at least something to hide behind.

    Passing the WA with the current transition timetable means we have to agree an FTA with the EU by 31/12/20 or we leave on WTO rules - i.e: crash out as some want us to on 31/10/19.

    The WA does not prevent or stop No deal - it postpones it and there have been plenty saying agreeing a comprehensive FTA with the EU in 12 months is impossible so we will be back to a further extension of transition sometime around July 2020.

    Were we to have a Johnson majority Government at the time, his sheep would all vote as he tells them so they would rule out an extension and we could crash out on 31/12/20 at the end of transition.

    While this Parliament could be bound by a guarantee not to exit transition without a comprehensive FTA in place, a future Parliament wouldn't be bound by it so Johnson wants his GE and his majority - it's long past being about the WA it's now about an FTA.

    I think you are misreading Johnson

    The whole No Deal thing is about negotiating leverage; the no extension is about BXP

    After we leave I think BXP falls well back - and extension of transition in June 2020 (assuming post an election) will be easy for Johnson
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,263
    rcs1000 said:

    O/T: it's car insurance renewal time. I went to a comparison website, applied for a reasonable-looking policy from Bewise insurance, got no documentation or response after several days, so assumed it hadn't gone through and took out insurance with someone else (who has promptly sent all the documentation). I now see they've taken my money. Is there a cooling-off period so I can get it back? The renewal doesn't actually kick in till the 30th.

    Just call up and cancel. They'll be obliged to return any unused premium.
    Thanks!
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,842
    I've personally had David Miliband added to the next PM market and laid him around 35-1ish. He's in for next Labour leader.

    What else is there - Lib Dem leader ?
  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 7,483

    timmo said:

    rcs1000 said:

    justin124 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    I suspect that the SW seats - other than St Ives - are unlikely. I also don't know how realistic Ceridigion is as a prospect.

    Eastbourne will be held by the independent.

    North Norfolk loses its incumbent, and was Leave voting so that may not be an easy hold.

    Richmond Park will be an easy LibDem gain. Sheffield Hallam will, I suspect, fall to the LDs. Other likely gains are St Ives, Cheltenham and St Albans. Beyond there is gets a bit difficult for the LDs.

    Not persuaded re- St Albans - though agree about the others.Fife NE is likely surely.
    It was an England and Wales list. But yes, I agree that Fife NE is a likely gain, because Unionist tactical voting will kick in.

    The LDs did an incredible job with Daisy Cooper in St Albans in 2017. The LDs leapfrogged Labour in an election where they were being squeezed hard.

    She's continued to work the seat incredibly hard in the interim, and the LibDems did really well in the local elections there earlier this year, getting 50% more votes than the Conservatives.

    There are no "gimmies", but I would have thought that's a seat where Labour will get squeezed, where (in most seats) it will be the LDs that suffer.
    I do believe there will be a few left field seats where the LDs come from nowhere and win..that will be the fun of the night.
    I think the LibDems might be in for a rude awkening - discovering that Jo Swinson is not anywhere near as popular as they think......
    Well maybe the baby eating party may not be as popular as you think
  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 7,483
    egg said:

    timmo said:

    rcs1000 said:

    justin124 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    I suspect that the SW seats - other than St Ives - are unlikely. I also don't know how realistic Ceridigion is as a prospect.

    Eastbourne will be held by the independent.

    North Norfolk loses its incumbent, and was Leave voting so that may not be an easy hold.

    Richmond Park will be an easy LibDem gain. Sheffield Hallam will, I suspect, fall to the LDs. Other likely gains are St Ives, Cheltenham and St Albans. Beyond there is gets a bit difficult for the LDs.

    Not persuaded re- St Albans - though agree about the others.Fife NE is likely surely.
    It was an England and Wales list. But yes, I agree that Fife NE is a likely gain, because Unionist tactical voting will kick in.

    The LDs did an incredible job with Daisy Cooper in St Albans in 2017. The LDs leapfrogged Labour in an election where they were being squeezed hard.

    She's continued to work the seat incredibly hard in the interim, and the LibDems did really well in the local elections there earlier this year, getting 50% more votes than the Conservatives.

    There are no "gimmies", but I would have thought that's a seat where Labour will get squeezed, where (in most seats) it will be the LDs that suffer.
    I do believe there will be a few left field seats where the LDs come from nowhere and win..that will be the fun of the night.
    I think that as well.

    Meanwhile the Tories have counted all the Barnsley chickens before they have hatched.

    I thought they were chops?
  • spire2spire2 Posts: 183
    Pulpstar said:

    I've personally had David Miliband added to the next PM market and laid him around 35-1ish. He's in for next Labour leader.

    What else is there - Lib Dem leader ?

    Manchester united manager?
  • The_TaxmanThe_Taxman Posts: 2,979

    O/T: it's car insurance renewal time. I went to a comparison website, applied for a reasonable-looking policy from Bewise insurance, got no documentation or response after several days, so assumed it hadn't gone through and took out insurance with someone else (who has promptly sent all the documentation). I now see they've taken my money. Is there a cooling-off period so I can get it back? The renewal doesn't actually kick in till the 30th.

    Martin Lewis "the money saving expert" advises to renew car insurance 21 days before the due date as people who leave it until later are charged more apparently. Maybe too late for this renewal but next year it may mean a lower price. Apparently the same dynamic works for house insurance as well.

    https://www.moneysavingexpert.com/tips/01-08-2018
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,072
    @MarqueeMark thinks that just because the xenophobic frothers in his/her village like Boris everyone else must do.
  • eggegg Posts: 1,749
    Omnium said:

    egg said:

    HYUFD said:

    Omnium said:

    I wish BF would list David Milliband as a runner in a few more markets.

    https://twitter.com/JKCorden/status/1187614515220738048?s=20
    That was a canny post HY. Just one picture of the bananaman was all it needed to put Oms crazy thoughts to bed and tucked in with the light out.
    We need this man!

    I'd love to see him listed in the 3:30 at Haydock Park!

    As usual I'd assess his form. I have to say I've found myself laying rather than backing him when he's been listed, but I almost find myself a greater fan for that very reason.

    Are you serious?

    Or have I stumbled in halfway through some bizarre alternative comedy night?
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 18,232
    edited October 2019

    Apropos of nothing except today is St Crispin's day and this is a wonderful bit of Shakespeare.

    "We few, we happy few, we band of brothers;
    For he to-day that sheds his blood with me
    Shall be my brother; be he ne'er so vile,
    This day shall gentle his condition;
    And gentlemen in England now a-bed
    Shall think themselves accurs'd they were not here,
    And hold their manhoods cheap whiles any speaks
    That fought with us upon Saint Crispin's day."

    So how is the PB Band of Brothers this wet St Crispin's evening?

    Due to some bad occurrences, many trains are considerably disrupted. However I am reasonably familiar with the network and, thanks to WiFi and www.realtimetrains.co.uk I managed to plot a plan B without bothering the flustered staff and will now still arrive tonight, albeit 90 minutes late. Since in previous disasters I have had to go find a taxi driver and give him the thick end of £100, I am paradoxically feeling quite smug.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 38,851
    Pulpstar said:

    I've personally had David Miliband added to the next PM market and laid him around 35-1ish. He's in for next Labour leader.

    What else is there - Lib Dem leader ?

    Stokes might not be as nailed on for SPOTY as people think so ...
  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 7,483

    @MarqueeMark thinks that just because the xenophobic frothers in his/her village like Boris everyone else must do.

    No he is the expert from west bury westwards
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 9,688

    rcs1000 said:

    O/T: it's car insurance renewal time. I went to a comparison website, applied for a reasonable-looking policy from Bewise insurance, got no documentation or response after several days, so assumed it hadn't gone through and took out insurance with someone else (who has promptly sent all the documentation). I now see they've taken my money. Is there a cooling-off period so I can get it back? The renewal doesn't actually kick in till the 30th.

    Just call up and cancel. They'll be obliged to return any unused premium.
    Thanks!
    Do you miss the MP tag? Did you get mileage out of it in these sort of daft things at the time?

    You're far too straightforward and honest to ever misuse the MP tag, but I imagine you've previously wanted to communicate it at some point. Restaurant table or the like. Easyish if you phone up - online though title, name, surname... hang on no box for 'MP' !

    Is there an obvious way?
  • The_TaxmanThe_Taxman Posts: 2,979

    @MarqueeMark thinks that just because the xenophobic frothers in his/her village like Boris everyone else must do.

    I cannot stand Boris Johnson and everybody I know dislikes him at this point in time...
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,959

    @MarqueeMark thinks that just because the xenophobic frothers in his/her village like Boris everyone else must do.

    My record here is out there to be shot at.

    Yours?
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 38,851
    Does anybody fancy matching me at 18 on betfair for an April 2020 election? Me backing.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,842
    Trump giving an interesting speech right now, attacking the "Clinton crime act" as being institutionally racist.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,072

    @MarqueeMark thinks that just because the xenophobic frothers in his/her village like Boris everyone else must do.

    My record here is out there to be shot at.

    Yours?
    I’m not the one spraying hubris everywhere.
  • nunuonenunuone Posts: 1,138
    Pulpstar said:

    egg said:

    timmo said:

    rcs1000 said:

    justin124 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    I suspect that the SW seats - other than St Ives - are unlikely. I also don't know how realistic Ceridigion is as a prospect.

    Eastbourne will be held by the independent.

    North Norfolk loses its incumbent, and was Leave voting so that may not be an easy hold.

    Richmond Park will be an easy LibDem gain. Sheffield Hallam will, I suspect, fall to the LDs. Other likely gains are St Ives, Cheltenham and St Albans. Beyond there is gets a bit difficult for the LDs.

    Not persuaded re- St Albans - though agree about the others.Fife NE is likely surely.
    It was an England and Wales list. But yes, I agree that Fife NE is a likely gain, because Unionist tactical voting will kick in.

    The LDs did an incredible job with Daisy Cooper in St Albans in 2017. The LDs leapfrogged Labour in an election where they were being squeezed hard.

    She's continued to work the seat incredibly hard in the interim, and the LibDems did really well in the local elections there earlier this year, getting 50% more votes than the Conservatives.

    There are no "gimmies", but I would have thought that's a seat where Labour will get squeezed, where (in most seats) it will be the LDs that suffer.
    I do believe there will be a few left field seats where the LDs come from nowhere and win..that will be the fun of the night.
    I think that as well.

    Meanwhile the Tories have counted all the Barnsley chickens before they have hatched.
    They're not taking Barnsley lol
    What about Pennistone and Stocksbridge?
  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 7,483
    Life is strange I have just had to take my last dog to be put to sleep, I took my wife with me so that maybe , just maybe, she will remember why and when, but it’s a sad moment and although life will now be easier there will be a gap.
  • eggegg Posts: 1,749
    viewcode said:

    Apropos of nothing except today is St Crispin's day and this is a wonderful bit of Shakespeare.

    "We few, we happy few, we band of brothers;
    For he to-day that sheds his blood with me
    Shall be my brother; be he ne'er so vile,
    This day shall gentle his condition;
    And gentlemen in England now a-bed
    Shall think themselves accurs'd they were not here,
    And hold their manhoods cheap whiles any speaks
    That fought with us upon Saint Crispin's day."

    So how is the PB Band of Brothers this wet St Crispin's evening?

    Due to some bad occurrences, many trains are considerably disrupted. However I am reasonably familiar with the network and, thanks to WiFi and www.realtimetrains.co.uk I managed to plot a plan B without bothering the flustered staff and will now still arrive tonight, albeit 90 minutes late. Since in previous disasters I have had to go find a taxi driver and give him the thick end of £100, I am paradoxically feeling quite smug.
    If it rains on St Crispins do we get lineker for forty days and forty nights?
    With rumbles of Mariah Carey?
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,842
    nunuone said:

    Pulpstar said:

    egg said:

    timmo said:

    rcs1000 said:

    justin124 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    I suspect that the SW seats - other than St Ives - are unlikely. I also don't know how realistic Ceridigion is as a prospect.

    Eastbourne will be held by the independent.

    North Norfolk loses its incumbent, and was Leave voting so that may not be an easy hold.

    Richmond Park will be an easy LibDem gain. Sheffield Hallam will, I suspect, fall to the LDs. Other likely gains are St Ives, Cheltenham and St Albans. Beyond there is gets a bit difficult for the LDs.

    Not persuaded re- St Albans - though agree about the others.Fife NE is likely surely.
    It was an England and Wales list. But yes, I agree that Fife NE is a likely gain, because Unionist tactical voting will kick in.

    The LDs did an incredible job with Daisy Cooper in St Albans in 2017. The LDs leapfrogged Labour in an election where they were being squeezed hard.

    She's continued to work the seat incredibly hard in the interim, and the LibDems did really well in the local elections there earlier this year, getting 50% more votes than the Conservatives.

    There are no "gimmies", but I would have thought that's a seat where Labour will get squeezed, where (in most seats) it will be the LDs that suffer.
    I do believe there will be a few left field seats where the LDs come from nowhere and win..that will be the fun of the night.
    I think that as well.

    Meanwhile the Tories have counted all the Barnsley chickens before they have hatched.
    They're not taking Barnsley lol
    What about Pennistone and Stocksbridge?
    It's going Tory on UNS at the moment.
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 9,688
    egg said:

    Omnium said:

    egg said:

    HYUFD said:

    Omnium said:

    I wish BF would list David Milliband as a runner in a few more markets.

    https://twitter.com/JKCorden/status/1187614515220738048?s=20
    That was a canny post HY. Just one picture of the bananaman was all it needed to put Oms crazy thoughts to bed and tucked in with the light out.
    We need this man!

    I'd love to see him listed in the 3:30 at Haydock Park!

    As usual I'd assess his form. I have to say I've found myself laying rather than backing him when he's been listed, but I almost find myself a greater fan for that very reason.

    Are you serious?

    Or have I stumbled in halfway through some bizarre alternative comedy night?
    I'm serious as to needing him in betting markets where I can simply lay him to be next pope or whatever.

    So far as I can imagine he's no chance of having any importance in British politics in the future.

    According to BF though he has 2.5% chance of being the next Labour leader.

    As a judgement as to the man, David Milliband is ok though, I've nothing against him.
  • The_TaxmanThe_Taxman Posts: 2,979
    nichomar said:

    Life is strange I have just had to take my last dog to be put to sleep, I took my wife with me so that maybe , just maybe, she will remember why and when, but it’s a sad moment and although life will now be easier there will be a gap.

    Sorry to hear that, losing a member of the family whether it is human or a pet is always hard. Tough decision to make and something I have experienced several times.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,842
    nichomar said:

    Life is strange I have just had to take my last dog to be put to sleep, I took my wife with me so that maybe , just maybe, she will remember why and when, but it’s a sad moment and although life will now be easier there will be a gap.

    Ah that's very sad, condolences.
  • O/T: it's car insurance renewal time. I went to a comparison website, applied for a reasonable-looking policy from Bewise insurance, got no documentation or response after several days, so assumed it hadn't gone through and took out insurance with someone else (who has promptly sent all the documentation). I now see they've taken my money. Is there a cooling-off period so I can get it back? The renewal doesn't actually kick in till the 30th.

    Martin Lewis "the money saving expert" advises to renew car insurance 21 days before the due date as people who leave it until later are charged more apparently. Maybe too late for this renewal but next year it may mean a lower price. Apparently the same dynamic works for house insurance as well.

    https://www.moneysavingexpert.com/tips/01-08-2018
    Very easy to check - just alter the start date on the comparison site and run the various quotes.
    Have my doubts about this, more pertinent is the fact that premiums change on a frequent(weekly?) basis.
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905

    egg said:

    I think that as well.

    Meanwhile the Tories have counted all the Barnsley chickens before they have hatched.

    Not Barnsley. But places like Coventry and Wolverhampton could be fun.....
    FWIW (which ain't much, I have all the predictive powers of Mystic Meg,) I don't fancy the chances of a Tory majority. I don't think that the total number of losses to the SNP (because there aren't that many Scottish Tories to begin with) and to the Lib Dems (because they're mostly working against hefty Tory majorities in non-Remainiac seats) will be huge, but gains from Labour still won't be sufficient to compensate.

    I suspect that the cumulative effect of Labour's tribal loyalty vote, strong Leave but "never Tory" voters in Labour areas either sticking with Labour or spaffing their votes away on the Brexit Party, and an election campaign that gives Corbyn the opportunity to remind poorer electors that they'll get more handouts under a Labour Government, will be enough for Labour not to go too far backwards. For all of those reasons, I also think it's likely that the current opinion polls showing particularly awful Labour figures may be disguising a "shy Labour" vote.

    I reckon that, even assuming that the Conservatives win back all the seats of the whipless rebels, they'll still need at least 20 gains from Labour to compensate for losses to the SNP and LDs, in order to reach 320 and a working majority of one. This is doable in theory - there are about thirty Lab-Con marginals that can fall on a swing of less than 3% - but I'm not so sure about their getting across the winning line in practice.

    After the 2017 election, I feel very much once bitten, twice shy when it comes to predictions of disaster for the Labour Party (except in Scotland, where they've had their chips.)
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 18,232
    Noo said:

    Omnium said:

    Noo said:

    Noo said:

    malcolmg said:

    Alistair said:

    That's absolutely not what the poll says.
    Is Alex Salmond still taking RT’s rouble?
    Why not more honest than working for UK Pravda BBC unit. Helps us get some real news rather than the fake stuff we are used to.
    There's a difference. RT is the mouthpiece of a fascist regime. However bad Westminster is -- and it's bad, no mistake -- it's not fascist or even close.
    Yes the BBC is a pile of shit. It's that bad I've cancelled my TV license cos I refuse to pay a penny for it. Yes it's narrow, biased, blind, deferential to elites and every so often racist. But there's a qualitative difference between the British and Russian governments they speak up for. I think Salmond has made a profound mistake in signing up with RT.
    So have you junked all your TVs?


    No. But I don't watch live TV or BBC iPlayer. You can legally use a TV without a license.
    Do you suffer from a small period of fear on the evenings you watch a dvd on your TV when it blindly shows you bbc1 when you turn it on?

    I've long thought tv detector vans were/are an elaborate myth. Or at least their ability to actually detect.

    Nonetheless I happily pay my license, and would do so for a tenth of the content. (I watch little TV, and it's mainly the radio I like - I've got a transistor one you know... much like the wireless but smaller! )
    My TV is incapable of receiving a TV signal unaided (without being plugged into an aerial, or a box of some sort, or both, probably), so that isn't a concern.
    Exactly the same here. I've genuinely not watched any live tv for a long time, apart from when I've been a pub or friends' or relatives' houses.
    I'm actually getting a bit sad about it. Series 1 of Star Trek Discovery has been sold to Channel 4 and I am thinking of watching it, but it's been so long since I switched the telly on I've forgotten the start-up procedure (y'know, it involves remotes and two buttons). The BBC remake of War of the Worlds ( butchers the book but oddly good) has been leaked to YouTube so I've already watched it, so when it's shown (Xmas time?) I might miss it. Life is changing fast... :(
  • eggegg Posts: 1,749
    Omnium said:

    egg said:

    Omnium said:

    egg said:

    HYUFD said:

    Omnium said:

    I wish BF would list David Milliband as a runner in a few more markets.

    https://twitter.com/JKCorden/status/1187614515220738048?s=20
    That was a canny post HY. Just one picture of the bananaman was all it needed to put Oms crazy thoughts to bed and tucked in with the light out.
    We need this man!

    I'd love to see him listed in the 3:30 at Haydock Park!

    As usual I'd assess his form. I have to say I've found myself laying rather than backing him when he's been listed, but I almost find myself a greater fan for that very reason.

    Are you serious?

    Or have I stumbled in halfway through some bizarre alternative comedy night?
    I'm serious as to needing him in betting markets where I can simply lay him to be next pope or whatever.

    So far as I can imagine he's no chance of having any importance in British politics in the future.

    According to BF though he has 2.5% chance of being the next Labour leader.

    As a judgement as to the man, David Milliband is ok though, I've nothing against him.
    Nothing against him? You sure?

    What about the haircut. He’s never sorted it out.
This discussion has been closed.