Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » So far, at least, it is hard to discern a Falkirk or Flowe
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » So far, at least, it is hard to discern a Falkirk or Flowers effect in YouGov’s daily polls
The YouGov/Sunday Times has
Con 33%
Lab 40%
LD9%
UKIP 11%
So no sign that the Flowers story or Falkirk is impinging on LAB position
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Guardian - Labour faces cash crisis as Co-op's new bosses move to cut funding
Flowers scandal fallout 'could cost £850,000' in what would be a major blow for the party in the runup to a general election
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/nov/23/labour-faces-co-op-cash-crisis
More than £2 million in loans from Co-op and sister bank to the party may now have to be paid off before 2015 general election
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/10470556/Labour-in-financial-crisis-in-wake-of-Co-op-scandal.html
Doing a Well/badly (net)
Cameron : -13 (+6)
Miliband: -31 (-1)
Clegg: -50 (+4)
Five new towns will be built in the first five years of a Labour government under plans being drawn up by the party, its new shadow housing minister has claimed.
As Andrew Neil pointed out, even if they named the sites on their first day in office, construction wouldn't have started by 2020.
Voters get it right on where blame lies for Flowers appointment:
Coop board: 45
FSA: 19
Politicians within Coop: 16
Also support Osborne enquiry (net): +50 (Lab:+38)
And severing Labour/Coop links: +19 (Lab: -44)
I thought you were going to defend Labours ludicrous claim on the basis of its record - but I see your difficulty,,,,,,
As for your other point......
MAN CRIES AT FUNERAL
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2013/nov/23/london-slaves-political-collective-captor-police
The Observer left that bit out......
http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/news/uk_news/article1344419.ece
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2512503/Slave-womans-scented-love-letters-photographs-neighbour-obsessed-with.html
Independence Day: 24 March 2016
Inverness, Nairn, Badenoch & Strathspey: Danny Alexander 4/6 (Ladbrokes)
So, is Danny planning on representing the Scots or the English side at the negotiating table? His constituents deserve to know.
Net Well
Rest of South -41
London -44
Midlands/Wales -49
North -57
Scotland -73
Great Britain -50
http://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/q0ir85hkfv/YG-Archive-Pol-Sunday-Times-results-221113.pdf
For extra constitutionally-interesting points, the main party returned in 2015 and tasked with completing the Scotland negotiation could be a few seats short and end up forming a coalition with the SNP...
The Reverend Paul Flowers boasted to his drug dealer that a retired police chief inspector friend was allowed to watch over last week’s raid at his home.
Flowers called Peter Wilson hours after the raid finished and said a ‘good mate of mine’ knew the officers and that they had not found anything incriminating.
West Yorkshire officers with sniffer dogs executed a search warrant at Flowers’s home in Bradford on Tuesday.
Just as well the West Yorkshire Police are above reproach.....
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2512511/Sex-drugs-blasphemy-depravity-arrogance-Crystal-Methodist-didnt-believe-God--brazen-texts.html#ixzz2lXxexjIe
Not only this
"Miliband grew up in London in a political and intellectual environment. His father, Ralph, was a prominent Marxist thinker."
but this!
"Ed went to the school disco and this was playing and had an extremely bad pair of white trousers and a purple jumper"
Shocking stuff.
http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/news/Politics/article1344424.ece
On a separate, but related, note: will a Scottish constitution have to be written and approved by referendum prior to independence? You'd have thought that would definitely have to be a cross-party affair for it to have any kind of permanence. That could also complicate things.
Should we get a Yes it will put everything else in the shade in these islands for years to come. But it could be a fantastic opportunity to rework everything.
I'm not really sure how everyone would play an actual negotiation - I could imagine both sides making all-party delegations, then having the cabinet and parliament sign off on the result, rather than the whole thing being Salmond vs ＜Cameron|Miliband＞ while everybody else demagogues whatever deal they come up with. If that happened I guess you'd have MPs representing Scottish seats inside the Scottish delegation and outside the rUK delegation, but still potentially inside the cabinet that gave the final sign-off.
We'll see if it lasts, and if people begin to feel more prosperous themselves (still very low and no change) in the months ahead.
That's what will decide the election.
I agree with all of that except for this bit: Scottish voters couldn't really be disfranchised at the UK level until independence was actually in force and their replacement Scottish vote was meaningful, so MPs would still have a vote in Westminster until Independence Day when everything was settled and power was formally transferred.
For the uninitiated, Carlotta is referring to The McStavka Directive:
http://wingsoverscotland.com/burning-the-lifeboats/
Problem is, for the Tories, that people don't FEEL better off. Fuel costs are up, and talked a lot about, the cost of living is up but wages, salaries, except for very few, and those few right at the top, aren't improving. Increase in house prices doesn't stir anyone either; it's just as difficult to get on the housing ladder, and I suspect a lot of people are "once bitten" as far as mortgage costs and similar debts are concerned. Then there's report after report suggesting that the NHS is in trouble, which frightens people …… what happens if I get sick, what happens if Mum/Granny gets sick?
I think we'd find there'd be a cross-party agreement that Scottish MPs would not vote on constitutional issues. So they'd be in Westminster, able to make decisions on issues affecting Scotland while it remained part of the UK, but not on stuff that would affect rUK once Scotland is gone.
What's more, should Scotland vote Yes, no Scottish-based politician with the remotest ambition would be interested in a Westminster seat. Scots representing seats elsewhere in rUK would also have some serious thinking to; especially, I suspect, Labour ones.
AIUI, Flowers was an elected member of the board, meaning that the blame lies with the voting members/politicians within the Co-op.
Oh ......
Unspoofable.
This brings us to the other interesting constitutional outcome, which is a Lab or Lib/Lab government dependent on the votes of MPs representing Scottish seats, after Scotland had voted to leave. A government in circumstances like this would be anxious to make sure that the settlement was very thorough and had full cross-party agreement, rather than rush the process so that they lost their MPs before 2020...
Betting PostBacked Rosberg to get a podium at 2.16:
http://enormo-haddock.blogspot.co.uk/2013/11/brazil-pre-race.html
MOS stuff on him today pretty sensational, he was seriously off the rails. I hope he is getting some support from his friends, he is at serious risk of self harm, but we shall see if they are fairweather friends soon.
There are four ways of reading this:
1. The improvements are among people who were going to vote Tory or LibDem anyway, but are now less fed up. That would probably increase their certainty to vote and reduce the chance of UKIP snaffling more votes on an "you're all rubbish" basis. It would not affect the Labour share. Note that it's not reduced the UKIP vote.
2. The improvements are across the board but voting intentions are quite settled. People will take a more or less friendly view of individual issues, but a plurality intends to remove the Government when they get the chance, and improving economic data, leadership ratings etc. have no impact on that intention. In principle this seems rather unlikely, but the stability of the Labour share in particular suggests it may be correct.
3. The poll has happened to sample people who are a bit more favourable to aspects of the Government than average. In that case the Labour lead in a more critical sample would be higher.
4. It's all just random movement and we happen to have a sample who are a bit unusual, and the next polls may see it all reversed. It's happened before.
Personally I think it's a mix of 1 and 2. I think Tories are starting to cheer up a bit and it will help their turnout and limit further UKIP gains, but the Lab/Lib voter coalition to remove the Government is quite solid, and impervious to good economic data, which they tend not to attribute to the brilliance of the Coalition and/or don't feel it's benefiting them. The Government project of either reducing UKIP share or getting back 2010 LibDems is not making progress.
Can`t see Conservatives stop using aggressive tactics though.But individually it should make them a little weary incase they are called smearers and their careers and reputations go down the pan.
I'm not sure that it's true that the vast majority of decisions would be delegated to Holyrood in the interim. The stuff that's easy to delegate while the UK exists has mostly already been devolved, so we're talking about stuff that's going to need a bit of work to unpick. I'd imagine there would be more consultation with Scotland than there is now about areas that affected Scotland, but parliament would still be sovereign over and responsible for the whole UK until such time as it wasn't.
Pull the other one.
Just as well Miliband has never mentioned Bullingdon, Plebs or Flashman at PMQs, isn't it?
LOL
This in itself would cause problems in that Labour could well have a Westminster majority but not a rUK majority, and may not be able to implement its manifesto.
Indeed, I would like the WLQ answered even with a No vote.
a) Froch on points
b) Froch 10-12th round
c) Groves victory
With the frankly unbelievable judge's cards though even if the referee hadn't stopped it early Groves would have definitely lost on points.
Fwiw I had the fight Froch 73 - 78 Groves after the 8th. The 9th would have most likely have been a 10-8 to Froch meaning if the rest of the rounds had gone to Froch with Groves not being knocked down in the 10th - 12th the fight would have ended a draw. But Groves could have hung in for the 10th and 11th and then just gone all out to pip the 12th perhaps... we will never know. He wasn't robbed of victory, but he was robbed of a massive chance for it. It sets up the biggest British boxing rematch since the Benn-Eubank days.
I think Groves will win the rematch, those 9 rounds were fantastic experience for him and Froch is suddenly looking 'old overnight' but again I think it is No bet as boxing is utterly unpredictable, especially with some of the dreadful scoring we have around these days. Was a corker of a fight, Froch needs a chance to beat Groves 'properly', Groves certainly deserves it, and the rematch will sell out within about 5 minutes. It is a no brainer from every perspective. Don't count the Cobra out though.
Onto the 1st Test - Oh Dear Oh Dear oh dear. Expect 4 more pitches full of bounce, Australia have a bowler that can strike genuine fear into England's top order - something I haven't seen for a very long time. When Mitch is bad he is very bad, but when he's good he is Jonathan Trott's nightmare. England can come back though - remember India.
Profit on the Test was £39.90 (I was quite cautious but sensible with my various moves), but 3-0 Eng is a loser so Net £29.90 out of the Ashes thus far.
Right, onto ON topic - The Labour vote share is very resilient, I was predicting a bit of a Conservative bounce with Camo cutting the Green nonsense, improving economy and perhaps a small Labour drop with the crystal methodist etc (Falkirk really is a non story in my book). But this still has time to come as Mike says and the Autumn statement could see a small upturn in CON fortunes.
Having said that the Labour vote share looks super-solid at the moment, though there is still a long time to the election. Labour Minority is still my view on it.
It may not be in Labour's hands, and blocking or trashing the bill would not play well in rUK marginals in the run up to GE 2015.
If a No vote and negotiations to some form of increased devolution the WLQ will feature in the GE manifestos.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2512516/Anger-current-deputy-chairman-Co-op-arrest-gross-indecency-male-lover-17-hotel-room.html
And Flowers just goes on......
‘When I asked him what chairing a bank entailed, he was a bit short on detail and just said he was mostly a figurehead and not concerned with the actual running of it.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2512480/Humbling-bank-chief-Rev-Flowers-boasted-lunches-Labour-MPs-took-cocaine-Co-op-board-meetings.html#ixzz2lYP9OQI3
It's one thing a company or an individual or organisation donating (although that should be absolutely watched and policed to ensure that there is no influence peddling). It's quite another when an organisation is embedded to the extent that they have affiliate membership or participate in the internal procedures.
The problem is that these organisations will inevitably have their own interests, and any lack of transparency makes it very hard to see where their influence starts and stops. A good parallel is, perhaps, Michael Ashcroft. It was very unhealthy for the Conservative party that one person had, historically, as much influence as he did.
We are hypothesizing a Yes vote, and in that situation I think Constitutional issues will suddenly be very prominent election issues. Suddenly the constitution would have major financial implications in midland marginals.
Who negotiates for rUK would not be an obscure issue, and Lib Dems and Labour would either be incoherent or have to back the WLQ answer.
This fight was well trailed as having Groves outboxing Froch then Froch would wear him down and thats exactly what happened. None of what I saw was a surprise, Froch gets hit hard in fights, he is too slow to get out of the way. He has problems with anyone with speed. On all measures of boxing skill, Froch shouldn't have the achievements that he does, yet there he is as a top of the tree in his trade because the man is an absolute brute of a fighter.
Premature step in by the referee maybe but Froch would have stopped him and I'd have put my last cent on it. The man is worthy of being a World Champion on Sunday morning.
As it was I had money on stoppage in rounds 9 10 or 11 because the pattern of the fight was enitrely predictable.
Where it comes to the representative functions of an MP - lobbying and so forth - that could be handled by their MSPs? Or by non-voting MPs
First part of my miserable double has already come in, Spurs to complete the let down.
It says that the Group Chair is elected "from the Board" but it doesn't say who by.
Latest 6 = 39.1 average
Oldest 5 = 39.8
Mid 5 = 40
Latest 5 = 39.2
Not quite an england collapse granted!
People aren't going to dream up, think through and pass a whole new constitutional settlement to cover the period while you're busy dreaming up, thinking through and passing a different new constitutional settlement. You have the old one, until you're finished making the new one, and then you switch to the new one.
The 2010 LD split is Cons: 11; LAB: 42; LD: 33; UKIP:8; Green:4
This is at the top end of split in favour of Labour compared with recent VIs.
To which the Conservative response is, not unreasonably, that, for eight years, they have put up with sneering references to the Bullingdon, “Notting Hill Tories”, the “Chipping Norton set” and the supposedly sybaritic elite that runs the Conservative Party. Now it is Labour’s turn.
Happy to dish it out.....but can't take it.....
The Times and Mail have by far the most interesting political story of the day for me, Dave's latest planned clash with Brussels over immigrants.
Can we expect a new 'flounce bounce' over the coming weeks?
And tim falls for it every time.
Perhaps he'd like to tell us how many new towns were built between 1997 and 2010 ?
For tim's education I'll tell him what Labour's housing policy will be in government:
TO GET HOUSE PRICES TO GO UP
tim, always wrong, never learns
Scottish Labour's pain will be amusing though. However this is all theoretical anyway.
Namely that when a person or organisation deems themselves 'ethical' they therefore deem themselves above criticism or indeed above the rules and regulations everyone else has to follow.
So
Labour wrecks the economy - doesn't matter as Labour deem themselves 'ethical'
Labour starts illegal wars - doesn't matter as Labour deem themselves 'ethical'
Labour politicians steal money - doesn't matter as Labour deem themselves 'ethical'
Labour politicians treat their constituencies like shite - doesn't matter as Labour deem themselves 'ethical'
etc, etc, etc
I doubt the public would care very much about a politician having done drugs at university. Hash certainly not. Cocaine I doubt. Heroin or crystal meth I suspect would be more widely condemned.
The biggest impact, perhaps, would be on 60+ voters who would be most disapproving (I actually recall a report recently suggesting that the 35-55 group is more likely to have taken drugs than the 18-24 group). So perhaps a moderate risk to the Tories, but not that significant.
However, what is clear - from multiple stories - is that Labour was prepared to turn a blind eye to all sorts of behaviour by their friends.
Welcome to the Beatles after selling Elvis...
England's batting will continue to be what it has been for a long time: brittle, unconvincing, suspect under pressure and generally not good enough. And the Aussies will not prepare pitches that will help our excellent, downtrodden, all-too-often letdown bowlers.
It has to be recognised that the Co-op was part of the Movement in the very early days. There were, IIRC, once upon a time occasional Co-ops which weren't part, as there were TUC-affiliated Trade Unions which aren't. But, again IIRC, they're very few and far between.
Onto the 1st Test - Oh Dear Oh Dear oh dear. Expect 4 more pitches full of bounce, Australia have a bowler that can strike genuine fear into England's top order - something I haven't seen for a very long time. When Mitch is bad he is very bad, but when he's good he is Jonathan Trott's nightmare. England can come back though - remember India.
Profit on the Test was £39.90 (I was quite cautious but sensible with my various moves), but 3-0 Eng is a loser so Net £29.90 out of the Ashes thus far.
I would take Trott out of the firing line, same with Prior, and would give both Swann and Anderson one more test as they deserve that. However 2-215 and a pair in Swann's case is not good and Anderson managed 2-140 in conditions that don't suit him. We also need a fourth seamer, to me a number six has to do more than just bat. I know Root can turn his arm over but he should be higher up the order. Personally I believe too many of our players have peaked and are no longer as good as they were, I would go for the following in Adelaide:
Cook
Carberry
Root
Pieterson
Bell
Bairstow
Stokes
Broad
Swann/Monty
Anderson
Tremlett/Finn
When attempting to run out a batsman, a fielder can use any part of his arm to hit the stumps/bails as long as the ball is in the hand of the arm in question.
So you can use your upper arm or elbow, which is what almost happened in Brisbane a few hours ago to take the final wicket.
I am one of the most anti drug posters on here, having seen too many lives ruined by them, and it would not change my opinion on a politician if they had done some in the past.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Cameron#cite_note-Lamont.27s_Spad-48
.@YvetteCooperMP on Marr: Labour have sources of funding from "many different areas"..Unite, Unison, GMB, CWU, in fact 77% from union barons