Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » You’ve got to drop to 89 on LAB’s target list to find a sea

SystemSystem Posts: 12,214
edited January 2014 in General

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » You’ve got to drop to 89 on LAB’s target list to find a seat that Tories are betting favourites to retain

How I miss the commons seats spread betting markets. This is the first election for two decades where this form of betting has not operated. Here the number of seats the parties will get are traded like stocks and shares and the more you are right the more money you make.

Read the full story here


«1

Comments

  • corporealcorporeal Posts: 2,549
    First in, I was invited.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    My ARSE JackW Dozen Constituency Projections to be issued May 2014.

    A political blog of some repute awaits ....
  • corporealcorporeal Posts: 2,549
    @Carnyx Iirc it was the Generals of CES that insisted on turning around at Derby rather than him. Whether through military assessment that they couldn't win (and promised French help wasn't coming), or just Scottish un-interest in having CES become King of England as well.

    (I'm of the mind that had he stayed put in Scotland he would've faced an invasion once troops had been gathered, but at least a defensive one. He fell between two stools as they say).

    I'm grateful for what I think is a compliment, albeit I don't know what a colocutor is.
  • corporealcorporeal Posts: 2,549
    JackW said:

    My ARSE JackW Dozen Constituency Projections to be issued May 2014.

    A political blog of some repute awaits ....

    Get out you foreign invader.
  • Just picked up on David's previous article. Think you can add a couple more points to the list:

    The newspapers - while circulation continue to decline they are still read by a lot of people (and more so older people who are more likely to vote). Labour has made enemies of the press, particularly the Murdoch press. If there is any dirt on senior Labour figures expect this to come out during the campaign. To see the enduring power of the press, look at what they did the LDs after the Cleggasm.

    Campaign finance - It's looking like Labour will cave into the Unions over finance reforms. Despite this Labour may have less money to fight the election due to the GMB etc cutting funding. Conversely all the talk of taxing bankers' bonuses should aid to the Tories fundraising drive.

  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 7,382
    JackW said:

    My ARSE JackW Dozen Constituency Projections to be issued May 2014.

    A political blog of some repute awaits ....

    I hope that Watford is on your list - the seat was subject to much debate last time and you took a different view from me.

    Last time I ws on the Tory who won This time I'm on the LDs at 6/1 - which I think is a great price. It's now 2/1

  • "Currently you can get 6/4 with Hills which seems a much better bet on Labour than almost any of the constituency prices."

    Beware.

    There are London Labour activists at UKPR who openly say they have almost no chance of winning Battersea.

    But your point on betting Conservative at constituency level and Labour at overall level is sound.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,410
    JackW said:

    My ARSE JackW Dozen Constituency Projections to be issued May 2014.

    A political blog of some repute awaits ....

    CON hold Kingswood ?
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 43,343
    corporeal said:

    @Carnyx Iirc it was the Generals of CES that insisted on turning around at Derby rather than him. Whether through military assessment that they couldn't win (and promised French help wasn't coming), or just Scottish un-interest in having CES become King of England as well.

    (I'm of the mind that had he stayed put in Scotland he would've faced an invasion once troops had been gathered, but at least a defensive one. He fell between two stools as they say).

    I'm grateful for what I think is a compliment, albeit I don't know what a colocutor is.

    Ah - checked, yes, I was mildly wrong - it is 'collocutor' with 2 l's - a person who engages in a discussion with another. Seemed more accurate than disputant!

    As for your further comments re the '45, they sound very sensible. Hmm, London was plainly very worried about its northern ex-frontier if they were splurging good money on the first purpose built barracks in Britain at Berwick-upon-Tweed a decade or so AFTER the 1707 Union. They are still open to the public BTW under English Heritage - part of the astonishing military complex to be seen in, on and around that very underestimated town (even if the North British Railway rammed the East Coast line straight through the centre of the castle, with a curious result
    http://openplaques.org/plaques/10798 - but that is getting out of temporal sequence!)
  • Interesting discussion on the previous thread. Despite Farage's claim to be the last Thatcherite, UKIP are starting to remind me of the BNP in some ways - an unsettling combination of xenophobia and truculent economic protectionism. At least Nick Griffin confessed to the BNP's Leftism eventually; Farage is still peddling the line that he's for the free market. His deception must be exposed!
  • perdixperdix Posts: 1,806

    Just picked up on David's previous article. Think you can add a couple more points to the list:

    The newspapers - while circulation continue to decline they are still read by a lot of people (and more so older people who are more likely to vote). Labour has made enemies of the press, particularly the Murdoch press. If there is any dirt on senior Labour figures expect this to come out during the campaign. To see the enduring power of the press, look at what they did the LDs after the Cleggasm.

    Campaign finance - It's looking like Labour will cave into the Unions over finance reforms. Despite this Labour may have less money to fight the election due to the GMB etc cutting funding. Conversely all the talk of taxing bankers' bonuses should aid to the Tories fundraising drive.

    Newspaper front pages feature greatly on TV, giving more exposure to the papers' choices of subject. Even the "Tory" press like to scaremonger to sell papers - this doesn't usually help the government.

  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,300
    edited January 2014
    @pulpstar Kingswood - would be mildly surprised to see Labour take it given the odd circumstances of Josie Channer's recent retirement as Labour PPS. The local candidate for a local seat theme was trotted out when she was selected.

    Much would depend on Chris Skidmore's performance as a MP, but he did win in 2010 with a 9.4% swing against Labour.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 26,790
    edited January 2014

    Interesting discussion on the previous thread. Despite Farage's claim to be the last Thatcherite, UKIP are starting to remind me of the BNP in some ways - an unsettling combination of xenophobia and truculent economic protectionism. At least Nick Griffin confessed to the BNP's Leftism eventually; Farage is still peddling the line that he's for the free market. His deception must be exposed!

    Your problem is that the establishment parties don't support the free market either.

    They support corportism, the alliance of big government and big business.

    Now Farage can certainly be critcised on the free market issue but he sounds like he sympathises with the problems the average person faces.

    Cameron, Clegg and Miliband though sound like they're on the side of the powerful who are ripping off and ordering about the average person - business power for Cameron, EU power for Clegg and statist power for Miliband.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    corporeal said:

    JackW said:

    My ARSE JackW Dozen Constituency Projections to be issued May 2014.

    A political blog of some repute awaits ....

    Get out you foreign invader.
    You are not Nigel Farage and I claim 29 million Bulgars

  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787

    JackW said:

    My ARSE JackW Dozen Constituency Projections to be issued May 2014.

    A political blog of some repute awaits ....

    I hope that Watford is on your list - the seat was subject to much debate last time and you took a different view from me.

    Last time I ws on the Tory who won This time I'm on the LDs at 6/1 - which I think is a great price. It's now 2/1

    Watford was first on my list !!

    Broxtowe for some chance reason has taken up the second spot.

    Eleven more to go for the "JackW Dozen". I'm looking to add two constituencies per month through April and the final three in May.

    Broadly I'd like 2 in Wales, 3 in Scotland and 8 in England.

  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,410
    AndyJS said:
    Lol Corby !
  • perdixperdix Posts: 1,806

    Interesting discussion on the previous thread. Despite Farage's claim to be the last Thatcherite, UKIP are starting to remind me of the BNP in some ways - an unsettling combination of xenophobia and truculent economic protectionism. At least Nick Griffin confessed to the BNP's Leftism eventually; Farage is still peddling the line that he's for the free market. His deception must be exposed!

    Your problem is that the establishment parties don't support the free market either.

    They support corportism, the alliance of big government and big business.

    Now Farage can certainly be critcised on the free market issue but he sounds like he sympathises with the problems the average person faces.

    Cameron, Clegg and Miliband though sound like they're on the side of the powerful who are ripping off and ordering about the average person - business power for Cameron, EU power for Clegg and statist power for Miliband.
    More chip-on-the-shoulder stuff worthy of a Labour activist. The government tries to promote small business as potentially the creators of most jobs and the businesses of the future. See recent tax changes. But large business has the firepower to invest in a big way and to particularly sell overseas.

  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,410
    AndyJS said:
    Tough road to overall majority for Miliband tbh.
  • Interesting discussion on the previous thread. Despite Farage's claim to be the last Thatcherite, UKIP are starting to remind me of the BNP in some ways - an unsettling combination of xenophobia and truculent economic protectionism. At least Nick Griffin confessed to the BNP's Leftism eventually; Farage is still peddling the line that he's for the free market. His deception must be exposed!

    There is no deception,. You are just too fixed in your own world view to even try to understand what he is saying.

    Neither xenophobia nor protectionism form part of UKIPs agenda. The idea is that we trade with the wider world rather than being trapped within a protectionist bloc that suffocates our free trade whilst allowing other countries within the bloc to dominate European trade by fixing the rules to prevent real competition.

    We can always tell when the Tories start to get desperate when they throw around the old BNP-lite accusations.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,410
    edited January 2014
  • smithersjones2013smithersjones2013 Posts: 740
    edited January 2014

    Interesting discussion on the previous thread. Despite Farage's claim to be the last Thatcherite, UKIP are starting to remind me of the BNP in some ways - an unsettling combination of xenophobia and truculent economic protectionism. At least Nick Griffin confessed to the BNP's Leftism eventually; Farage is still peddling the line that he's for the free market. His deception must be exposed!

    [Yawn] Been talking to Sayeeda Warsi have you? She was the last one trying to peddle such infantile smears. I thought you were better
    than that Stark!

    PS And how does fixing the guaranteed price for energy in the Nuclear Power contracts fit in your "free market deceptions" narrative? Tories in glass houses (especially ones that have suffered arson attacks from Clegg) really shouldn't throw stones.....
  • anotherDaveanotherDave Posts: 6,746
    Pulpstar said:
    I don't think the comparison with Mrs T would help.

  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,410

    Pulpstar said:
    I don't think the comparison with Mrs T would help.

    The yellow peril was working rather better then (For CON) too.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,410
    JackW said:

    JackW said:

    My ARSE JackW Dozen Constituency Projections to be issued May 2014.

    A political blog of some repute awaits ....

    I hope that Watford is on your list - the seat was subject to much debate last time and you took a different view from me.

    Last time I ws on the Tory who won This time I'm on the LDs at 6/1 - which I think is a great price. It's now 2/1

    Watford was first on my list !!

    Broxtowe for some chance reason has taken up the second spot.

    Eleven more to go for the "JackW Dozen". I'm looking to add two constituencies per month through April and the final three in May.

    Broadly I'd like 2 in Wales, 3 in Scotland and 8 in England.

    Soubry hold or Palmer gain though ;) ?
  • TheWatcherTheWatcher Posts: 5,262
    'Now Farage can certainly be critcised on the free market issue but he sounds like he sympathises with the problems the average person faces.'

    'Sounds like' being the operative words.

    I doubt that privately educated, wealthy commodities trader Nigel feels the pain of 'ordinary' people, just like the other party leaders and politicians.
  • perdix said:

    Interesting discussion on the previous thread. Despite Farage's claim to be the last Thatcherite, UKIP are starting to remind me of the BNP in some ways - an unsettling combination of xenophobia and truculent economic protectionism. At least Nick Griffin confessed to the BNP's Leftism eventually; Farage is still peddling the line that he's for the free market. His deception must be exposed!

    Your problem is that the establishment parties don't support the free market either.

    They support corportism, the alliance of big government and big business.

    Now Farage can certainly be critcised on the free market issue but he sounds like he sympathises with the problems the average person faces.

    Cameron, Clegg and Miliband though sound like they're on the side of the powerful who are ripping off and ordering about the average person - business power for Cameron, EU power for Clegg and statist power for Miliband.
    More chip-on-the-shoulder stuff worthy of a Labour activist. The government tries to promote small business as potentially the creators of most jobs and the businesses of the future. See recent tax changes. But large business has the firepower to invest in a big way and to particularly sell overseas.

    More incompetant cheerleading.

    This government knows fck all about small business - the new pensions legislation is just the most recent example of piling on more costs and regulations.

    As to 'large business' that's the most obsequious case of forelock tugging I've seen in years.
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    Pulpstar said:

    AndyJS said:
    Tough road to overall majority for Miliband tbh.
    Is Norwich North the tipping point or is High Peak ?
  • smithersjones2013smithersjones2013 Posts: 740
    edited January 2014

    Interesting discussion on the previous thread. Despite Farage's claim to be the last Thatcherite, UKIP are starting to remind me of the BNP in some ways - an unsettling combination of xenophobia and truculent economic protectionism. At least Nick Griffin confessed to the BNP's Leftism eventually; Farage is still peddling the line that he's for the free market. His deception must be exposed!

    Your problem is that the establishment parties don't support the free market either.

    They support corportism, the alliance of big government and big business.

    Now Farage can certainly be critcised on the free market issue but he sounds like he sympathises with the problems the average person faces.

    Cameron, Clegg and Miliband though sound like they're on the side of the powerful who are ripping off and ordering about the average person - business power for Cameron, EU power for Clegg and statist power for Miliband.
    Indeed, I've always found the slavish adherence to the "free market" rather perverse given just about every time the Government acts it somehow will impinge on free market principles and also that the eventual outcome in the free market given market evolution and the predatory nature of business lends itself to over-centralisation, diseconomies of scale, monopoly and cartel conditions and corporatism.

    These days I would tend to advocate aspiring towards the "perfect market" as a better aspiration to have. Unlike the free market that doesn't either conveniently overlook government's perpetual intervention in markets or actually exclude their intervention.

  • perdix said:

    Interesting discussion on the previous thread. Despite Farage's claim to be the last Thatcherite, UKIP are starting to remind me of the BNP in some ways - an unsettling combination of xenophobia and truculent economic protectionism. At least Nick Griffin confessed to the BNP's Leftism eventually; Farage is still peddling the line that he's for the free market. His deception must be exposed!

    Your problem is that the establishment parties don't support the free market either.

    They support corportism, the alliance of big government and big business.

    Now Farage can certainly be critcised on the free market issue but he sounds like he sympathises with the problems the average person faces.

    Cameron, Clegg and Miliband though sound like they're on the side of the powerful who are ripping off and ordering about the average person - business power for Cameron, EU power for Clegg and statist power for Miliband.
    More chip-on-the-shoulder stuff worthy of a Labour activist. The government tries to promote small business as potentially the creators of most jobs and the businesses of the future. See recent tax changes. But large business has the firepower to invest in a big way and to particularly sell overseas.

    Yep the government's energy policies have helped every small business in the country.
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    Any PBer can match Andy's Labour target list against Mike's analysis where Battersea was the first one , at No.89 , he found where Tories were favourites to win.

    Since I live in Surbiton, I am not in any position to comment. However, I will say Davey is safe and Labour will still probably double their votes.
  • SMukeshSMukesh Posts: 1,759
    Pulpstar said:

    AndyJS said:
    Tough road to overall majority for Miliband tbh.
    He needs to win 70 of those seats to win OM.Very much possible if UKIP do well and Lib Dems don`t.

    It`s interesting to see in how many seats the Tories just scraped through last time.
  • surbiton said:

    Any PBer can match Andy's Labour target list against Mike's analysis where Battersea was the first one , at No.89 , he found where Tories were favourites to win.

    Since I live in Surbiton, I am not in any position to comment. However, I will say Davey is safe and Labour will still probably double their votes.

    Are you one of the switchers or will you vote LD again ?
  • 'Now Farage can certainly be critcised on the free market issue but he sounds like he sympathises with the problems the average person faces.'

    'Sounds like' being the operative words.

    I doubt that privately educated, wealthy commodities trader Nigel feels the pain of 'ordinary' people, just like the other party leaders and politicians.

    I doubt it as well.

    But as the CammyCleggyMilly alternatives clearly don't give a toss about the 'ordinary person' Farage is shooting at an open goal.

    And when Farage does his 'bloke in a pub' routine it looks genuine - contrast with the obvious condescending fakeness of the photostunts of CammyCleggyMilly.
  • TheWatcherTheWatcher Posts: 5,262
    'And when Farage does his 'bloke in a pub' routine it looks genuine'

    He's certainly a great actor - all part of being a politician.
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    @ScottP

    Isaid "I give up!" Because you were being so fussy, and said I'd leave you to decide the terms ... And now you've got worse!

    You're not Mr Logic from viz are you?

    Assuming there are three leader debates as there was last time, one on sky, one on the Beeb and one on itv, I'd like £100@9/4 thatFarage is one of the leaders debating on one of them...

    just have it if you want or notif you don't, this isn't difficult!
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,963
    Mr. Richard, I'm not sure the 'give a toss' point is valid; I think the issue is that they genuinely cannot put themselves in such a person's shoes. Energy prices is a perfect example. For all Comrade Miliband's shrieking about high prices, when he was Secretary of State for Energy he said, basically, it was a price worth paying.

    If you're a millionaire frontbencher who has converted to warmism then it's easy to say a few hundred quid a year more to save the world is a bargain. But if you're a sceptic (or undecided) and are finding things a bit difficult an extra couple of hundred pounds on energy bills is very significant.
  • 'And when Farage does his 'bloke in a pub' routine it looks genuine'

    He's certainly a great actor - all part of being a politician.

    Farage is comfortable in his own skin and about his background.
    EdM and Cameron appear tortured by theirs.
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118

    Interesting discussion on the previous thread. Despite Farage's claim to be the last Thatcherite, UKIP are starting to remind me of the BNP in some ways - an unsettling combination of xenophobia and truculent economic protectionism. At least Nick Griffin confessed to the BNP's Leftism eventually; Farage is still peddling the line that he's for the free market. His deception must be exposed!

    There is no deception,. You are just too fixed in your own world view to even try to understand what he is saying.

    Neither xenophobia nor protectionism form part of UKIPs agenda. The idea is that we trade with the wider world rather than being trapped within a protectionist bloc that suffocates our free trade whilst allowing other countries within the bloc to dominate European trade by fixing the rules to prevent real competition.

    We can always tell when the Tories start to get desperate when they throw around the old BNP-lite accusations.
    Isnt suggesting we have free movement of labour and trade deals with Europeans while demanding visas from Africans and Asians more racist? Imagine the BNP suggested that!

    The lack of self awareness amongst the closed minds is staggering
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    On a uniform swing, Labour will win:

    13 seats if swing <1%

    17 seats if swing, >1% and <2%

    17 seats if swing >2% and <3%

    11 seats if swing > 3% and <4%

    10 seats if swing > 4% and < 4.66%
    -----------------------

    5 seats if swing > 4.66% and < 5%.

    The 68th Labour target seat is High Peak, 55th from the Tories.

  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    isam said:

    Interesting discussion on the previous thread. Despite Farage's claim to be the last Thatcherite, UKIP are starting to remind me of the BNP in some ways - an unsettling combination of xenophobia and truculent economic protectionism. At least Nick Griffin confessed to the BNP's Leftism eventually; Farage is still peddling the line that he's for the free market. His deception must be exposed!

    There is no deception,. You are just too fixed in your own world view to even try to understand what he is saying.

    Neither xenophobia nor protectionism form part of UKIPs agenda. The idea is that we trade with the wider world rather than being trapped within a protectionist bloc that suffocates our free trade whilst allowing other countries within the bloc to dominate European trade by fixing the rules to prevent real competition.

    We can always tell when the Tories start to get desperate when they throw around the old BNP-lite accusations.
    Isnt suggesting we have free movement of labour and trade deals with Europeans while demanding visas from Africans and Asians more racist? Imagine the BNP suggested that!

    The lack of self awareness amongst the closed minds is staggering
    I don't see how that could be racist ? We have treaty obligations . Stopping Roma's coming in would be racist or allowing white Zimbabweans preference over other Zimbabwean's would be racist.
  • SMukeshSMukesh Posts: 1,759
    Above 70,these are some of the seats that Labour will do well,IMO

    Finchley and Golders Green-90,Redcar-92,Redditch-102,Portsmouth North-114.

    Labour might do well in the Reading seats due to high ethnic minority population.

    Labour will do badly in the Kent marginals.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,410
    SMukesh said:

    Above 70,these are some of the seats that Labour will do well,IMO

    Finchley and Golders Green-90,Redcar-92,Redditch-102,Portsmouth North-114.

    Labour might do well in the Reading seats due to high ethnic minority population.

    Labour will do badly in the Kent marginals.

    All aboard the Kent UKIP 2015 train :D
  • TheWatcherTheWatcher Posts: 5,262

    Interesting discussion on the previous thread. Despite Farage's claim to be the last Thatcherite, UKIP are starting to remind me of the BNP in some ways - an unsettling combination of xenophobia and truculent economic protectionism. At least Nick Griffin confessed to the BNP's Leftism eventually; Farage is still peddling the line that he's for the free market. His deception must be exposed!

    There is no deception,. You are just too fixed in your own world view to even try to understand what he is saying.

    Neither xenophobia nor protectionism form part of UKIPs agenda. The idea is that we trade with the wider world rather than being trapped within a protectionist bloc that suffocates our free trade whilst allowing other countries within the bloc to dominate European trade by fixing the rules to prevent real competition.

    We can always tell when the Tories start to get desperate when they throw around the old BNP-lite accusations.
    'Neither xenophobia nor protectionism form part of UKIPs agenda.'

    So, you're up for free trade, and free movement of people?
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,567
    edited January 2014
    surbiton said:

    On a uniform swing, Labour will win:

    13 seats if swing <1%

    17 seats if swing, >1% and <2%

    17 seats if swing >2% and <3%

    11 seats if swing > 3% and <4%

    10 seats if swing > 4% and < 4.66%
    -----------------------

    5 seats if swing > 4.66% and < 5%.

    The 68th Labour target seat is High Peak, 55th from the Tories.

    So to reach largest party, Labour needs a swing of slightly less than 2% from what we managed under Gordon.

    It is, I think, generally accepted that if that happened, the LibDems would be likely to switch, rather than struggle on in partnership with a defeated Tory party (in the same way, TBF, that it would have been hard for them to form a coalition with a defeated Labour party in 2010).

    2%, 16 months from next Thursday.

    Tick, tock...

  • surbiton said:

    On a uniform swing, Labour will win:

    13 seats if swing <1%

    17 seats if swing, >1% and <2%

    17 seats if swing >2% and <3%

    11 seats if swing > 3% and <4%

    10 seats if swing > 4% and < 4.66%
    -----------------------

    5 seats if swing > 4.66% and < 5%.

    The 68th Labour target seat is High Peak, 55th from the Tories.

    So to reach largest party, Labour needs a swing of slightly less than 2% from what we managed under Gordon.

    It is, I think, generally accepted that if that happened, the LibDems would be likely to switch, rather than struggle on in partnership with a defeated Tory party (in the same way, TBF, that it would have been hard for them to form a coalition with a defeated Labour party in 2010).

    2%, 16 months from next Thursday.

    Tick, tock...

    Since Brown lost power you've taken to denigrating him. He was better than EdM as you will discover come 2015.
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    surbiton said:

    isam said:

    Interesting discussion on the previous thread. Despite Farage's claim to be the last Thatcherite, UKIP are starting to remind me of the BNP in some ways - an unsettling combination of xenophobia and truculent economic protectionism. At least Nick Griffin confessed to the BNP's Leftism eventually; Farage is still peddling the line that he's for the free market. His deception must be exposed!

    There is no deception,. You are just too fixed in your own world view to even try to understand what he is saying.

    Neither xenophobia nor protectionism form part of UKIPs agenda. The idea is that we trade with the wider world rather than being trapped within a protectionist bloc that suffocates our free trade whilst allowing other countries within the bloc to dominate European trade by fixing the rules to prevent real competition.

    We can always tell when the Tories start to get desperate when they throw around the old BNP-lite accusations.
    Isnt suggesting we have free movement of labour and trade deals with Europeans while demanding visas from Africans and Asians more racist? Imagine the BNP suggested that!

    The lack of self awareness amongst the closed minds is staggering
    I don't see how that could be racist ? We have treaty obligations . Stopping Roma's coming in would be racist or allowing white Zimbabweans preference over other Zimbabwean's would be racist.
    I don't think it is racist either, what I'm saying is if UKIP had thought it up, I reckon everyone else would cry racism, and that stopping mass immigration via open borders is even less racist, particularly as race doesn't come into it
  • fitalassfitalass Posts: 4,320
    edited January 2014
    Your right, Farage's 'bloke in a pub' routine does look all too genuine. But unfortunately for UKIP, it doesn't give Farage any gravitas when it comes to projecting himself as a party Leader who wants to be taken seriously in domestic politics. And it certainly doesn't send out a message that either he or UKIP are particularly interested in the hard graft of an election campaign either! I do wonder if the constant pictures, interviews, and even the various footage of him being either holed up or being bundled out of various public houses in the latter months of last year hasn't impacted on the decline of his own personal polling, as well as that of UKIP.

    'Now Farage can certainly be critcised on the free market issue but he sounds like he sympathises with the problems the average person faces.'

    'Sounds like' being the operative words.

    I doubt that privately educated, wealthy commodities trader Nigel feels the pain of 'ordinary' people, just like the other party leaders and politicians.

    I doubt it as well.

    But as the CammyCleggyMilly alternatives clearly don't give a toss about the 'ordinary person' Farage is shooting at an open goal.

    And when Farage does his 'bloke in a pub' routine it looks genuine - contrast with the obvious condescending fakeness of the photostunts of CammyCleggyMilly.
  • MarkSeniorMarkSenior Posts: 4,699
    SMukesh said:

    Above 70,these are some of the seats that Labour will do well,IMO

    Finchley and Golders Green-90,Redcar-92,Redditch-102,Portsmouth North-114.

    Labour might do well in the Reading seats due to high ethnic minority population.

    Labour will do badly in the Kent marginals.

    Strangely , since 2010 , Labour have made little progress in local elections in the wards making up Portsmouth North , the party that has been making gains from the Conservatives is the Lib Dems .
  • TheWatcherTheWatcher Posts: 5,262
    edited January 2014

    surbiton said:

    On a uniform swing, Labour will win:

    13 seats if swing <1%

    17 seats if swing, >1% and <2%

    17 seats if swing >2% and <3%

    11 seats if swing > 3% and <4%

    10 seats if swing > 4% and < 4.66%
    -----------------------

    5 seats if swing > 4.66% and < 5%.

    The 68th Labour target seat is High Peak, 55th from the Tories.

    So to reach largest party, Labour needs a swing of slightly less than 2% from what we managed under Gordon.

    It is, I think, generally accepted that if that happened, the LibDems would be likely to switch, rather than struggle on in partnership with a defeated Tory party (in the same way, TBF, that it would have been hard for them to form a coalition with a defeated Labour party in 2010).

    2%, 16 months from next Thursday.

    Tick, tock...

    Calm down.

    It's still over a year until the electorate decide whether or not to let you back on the expenses gravy train.
  • SMukeshSMukesh Posts: 1,759

    SMukesh said:

    Above 70,these are some of the seats that Labour will do well,IMO

    Finchley and Golders Green-90,Redcar-92,Redditch-102,Portsmouth North-114.

    Labour might do well in the Reading seats due to high ethnic minority population.

    Labour will do badly in the Kent marginals.

    Strangely , since 2010 , Labour have made little progress in local elections in the wards making up Portsmouth North , the party that has been making gains from the Conservatives is the Lib Dems .
    Has there been a by-election since the shipping yard was scrapped few months ago?
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118

    'Now Farage can certainly be critcised on the free market issue but he sounds like he sympathises with the problems the average person faces.'

    'Sounds like' being the operative words.

    I doubt that privately educated, wealthy commodities trader Nigel feels the pain of 'ordinary' people, just like the other party leaders and politicians.

    I doubt it as well.

    But as the CammyCleggyMilly alternatives clearly don't give a toss about the 'ordinary person' Farage is shooting at an open goal.

    And when Farage does his 'bloke in a pub' routine it looks genuine - contrast with the obvious condescending fakeness of the photostunts of CammyCleggyMilly.

    Private education and wealth aren't a problem if you show you can understand public feeling. The problem Miliband, Clegg and Cameron have is that they don't know anything other than the Westminster bubble.

    Combine that with their wealth, education etc and you've got the recipe for the public to consider them out of touch
  • fitalass said:

    Your right, Farage's 'bloke in a pub' routine does look all too genuine. But unfortunately for UKIP, it doesn't give Farage any gravitas when it comes to projecting himself as a party Leader who wants to be taken seriously in domestic politics. And it certainly doesn't send out a message that either he or UKIP are particularly interested in the hard graft of an election campaign either! I do wonder if the constant pictures, interviews, and even the various footage of him being either holed up or being bundled out of various public houses in the latter months of last year hasn't impacted on the decline of his own personal polling, as well as that of UKIP.

    'Now Farage can certainly be critcised on the free market issue but he sounds like he sympathises with the problems the average person faces.'

    'Sounds like' being the operative words.

    I doubt that privately educated, wealthy commodities trader Nigel feels the pain of 'ordinary' people, just like the other party leaders and politicians.

    I doubt it as well.

    But as the CammyCleggyMilly alternatives clearly don't give a toss about the 'ordinary person' Farage is shooting at an open goal.

    And when Farage does his 'bloke in a pub' routine it looks genuine - contrast with the obvious condescending fakeness of the photostunts of CammyCleggyMilly.
    Farage doesn't need gravitas, all he has to do is make himself the beneficiary of other people's disgruntlement.

    But as you regard gravitas as so important perhaps you can tell us if Cameron showed any gravitas at the Mandela tribute ?

    Or for that matter in a dozen fake photostunts ?
  • MarkSeniorMarkSenior Posts: 4,699
    SMukesh said:

    SMukesh said:

    Above 70,these are some of the seats that Labour will do well,IMO

    Finchley and Golders Green-90,Redcar-92,Redditch-102,Portsmouth North-114.

    Labour might do well in the Reading seats due to high ethnic minority population.

    Labour will do badly in the Kent marginals.

    Strangely , since 2010 , Labour have made little progress in local elections in the wards making up Portsmouth North , the party that has been making gains from the Conservatives is the Lib Dems .
    Has there been a by-election since the shipping yard was scrapped few months ago?
    Fair comment , no , we shall see if there is any impact in May , but I suspect that inherent weakness in the local Labour Party organisation in Portsmouth ( why there is this weakness compared to say Southampton I don't know ) will stop them capitalising on the situation .
  • fitalass said:

    Your right, Farage's 'bloke in a pub' routine does look all too genuine. But unfortunately for UKIP, it doesn't give Farage any gravitas when it comes to projecting himself as a party Leader who wants to be taken seriously in domestic politics. And it certainly doesn't send out a message that either he or UKIP are particularly interested in the hard graft of an election campaign either! I do wonder if the constant pictures, interviews, and even the various footage of him being either holed up or being bundled out of various public houses in the latter months of last year hasn't impacted on the decline of his own personal polling, as well as that of UKIP.

    Interesting you should say that. I month or so back I had a chat with an elderly relative. This man was a UKIP supporter years before it was fashionable. The subject moved on to politics and to my astonishment his exact words were: 'I'm starting to go off Farage. Every time I see him now he's on the p*ss.' Farage the performance is starting to consume Farage the man, to the extent that I wonder if Farage himself now knows which is real and which is artifice.
  • HortenceWitheringHortenceWithering Posts: 145
    edited January 2014

    surbiton said:

    On a uniform swing, Labour will win:

    13 seats if swing <1%

    17 seats if swing, >1% and <2%

    17 seats if swing >2% and <3%

    11 seats if swing > 3% and <4%

    10 seats if swing > 4% and < 4.66%
    -----------------------

    5 seats if swing > 4.66% and < 5%.

    The 68th Labour target seat is High Peak, 55th from the Tories.

    So to reach largest party, Labour needs a swing of slightly less than 2% from what we managed under Gordon.

    It is, I think, generally accepted that if that happened, the LibDems would be likely to switch, rather than struggle on in partnership with a defeated Tory party (in the same way, TBF, that it would have been hard for them to form a coalition with a defeated Labour party in 2010).

    2%, 16 months from next Thursday.

    Tick, tock...

    Since Brown lost power you've taken to denigrating him. He was better than EdM as you will discover come 2015.
    Is that a prediction that Labour under Miliband will get less than 29% of the vote ? If not, how are you defining "better than" ?
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,469

    fitalass said:

    Your right, Farage's 'bloke in a pub' routine does look all too genuine. But unfortunately for UKIP, it doesn't give Farage any gravitas when it comes to projecting himself as a party Leader who wants to be taken seriously in domestic politics. And it certainly doesn't send out a message that either he or UKIP are particularly interested in the hard graft of an election campaign either! I do wonder if the constant pictures, interviews, and even the various footage of him being either holed up or being bundled out of various public houses in the latter months of last year hasn't impacted on the decline of his own personal polling, as well as that of UKIP.

    'Now Farage can certainly be critcised on the free market issue but he sounds like he sympathises with the problems the average person faces.'

    'Sounds like' being the operative words.

    I doubt that privately educated, wealthy commodities trader Nigel feels the pain of 'ordinary' people, just like the other party leaders and politicians.

    I doubt it as well.

    But as the CammyCleggyMilly alternatives clearly don't give a toss about the 'ordinary person' Farage is shooting at an open goal.

    And when Farage does his 'bloke in a pub' routine it looks genuine - contrast with the obvious condescending fakeness of the photostunts of CammyCleggyMilly.
    Farage doesn't need gravitas, all he has to do is make himself the beneficiary of other people's disgruntlement.

    But as you regard gravitas as so important perhaps you can tell us if Cameron showed any gravitas at the Mandela tribute ?

    Or for that matter in a dozen fake photostunts ?
    I'd suggest from a western viewpoint, nothing that went on at the Mandela memorial service would be seen as fitting or full of gravitas. But that's the way they do it. And do you really think Mandela would have objected?

    It was also long. Very, very long.

    When it comes to other things, Cameron's shown some class. Look at the way he handled the Hillsborough inquiry findings, or the apology for Bloody Sunday.
  • fitalassfitalass Posts: 4,320
    Worth a read.
    John Redwood's blog - The past had its battles too
  • audreyanneaudreyanne Posts: 1,376
    edited January 2014
    In many ways the closest 2015 parallel is to 1983. Why so?

    1979 saw the end of a Labour Gov't who had mucked up the economy. The swing from Lab to Cons was 5.2%.
    2010 saw the end of a Labour Gov't who had mucked up the economy. The swing from Lab to Cons was 5%

    1983 saw the swing trend continue, this despite the Cons having dipped after 1979 and Mrs T brought in her cuts. By the time of the 1983 election the swing from Lab to Cons was 4%, enough to give a landslide.

    If in 2015 the Cons continue the same swing of 4% as in 1983 they will have a landslide.

    There are some significant parallels, including an unelectable left-wing leader who opposes cuts. Perhaps the biggest difference is the share of the LibDems in 2010, the very thing which prevented the Cons majority. Mr Smithson is, in one sense, right to point to their importance. But as they fade in 2015 it would be a big mistake to over-estimate how much they now matter. Cameron has also failed to have a Falklands war to boost his ratings. However, those points aside the underlying trend is there.

    Only a fool would describe the potential of a Conservative outright win as 'wishful thinking'.
  • saddenedsaddened Posts: 2,245

    fitalass said:

    Your right, Farage's 'bloke in a pub' routine does look all too genuine. But unfortunately for UKIP, it doesn't give Farage any gravitas when it comes to projecting himself as a party Leader who wants to be taken seriously in domestic politics. And it certainly doesn't send out a message that either he or UKIP are particularly interested in the hard graft of an election campaign either! I do wonder if the constant pictures, interviews, and even the various footage of him being either holed up or being bundled out of various public houses in the latter months of last year hasn't impacted on the decline of his own personal polling, as well as that of UKIP.

    'Now Farage can certainly be critcised on the free market issue but he sounds like he sympathises with the problems the average person faces.'

    'Sounds like' being the operative words.

    I doubt that privately educated, wealthy commodities trader Nigel feels the pain of 'ordinary' people, just like the other party leaders and politicians.

    I doubt it as well.

    But as the CammyCleggyMilly alternatives clearly don't give a toss about the 'ordinary person' Farage is shooting at an open goal.

    And when Farage does his 'bloke in a pub' routine it looks genuine - contrast with the obvious condescending fakeness of the photostunts of CammyCleggyMilly.

    Or for that matter in a dozen fake photostunts ?
    True Cameron could never match a plane crash on election day.
  • audreyanneaudreyanne Posts: 1,376

    fitalass said:

    Your right, Farage's 'bloke in a pub' routine does look all too genuine. But unfortunately for UKIP, it doesn't give Farage any gravitas when it comes to projecting himself as a party Leader who wants to be taken seriously in domestic politics. And it certainly doesn't send out a message that either he or UKIP are particularly interested in the hard graft of an election campaign either! I do wonder if the constant pictures, interviews, and even the various footage of him being either holed up or being bundled out of various public houses in the latter months of last year hasn't impacted on the decline of his own personal polling, as well as that of UKIP.

    'Now Farage can certainly be critcised on the free market issue but he sounds like he sympathises with the problems the average person faces.'

    'Sounds like' being the operative words.

    I doubt that privately educated, wealthy commodities trader Nigel feels the pain of 'ordinary' people, just like the other party leaders and politicians.

    I doubt it as well.

    But as the CammyCleggyMilly alternatives clearly don't give a toss about the 'ordinary person' Farage is shooting at an open goal.

    And when Farage does his 'bloke in a pub' routine it looks genuine - contrast with the obvious condescending fakeness of the photostunts of CammyCleggyMilly.
    Farage doesn't need gravitas, all he has to do is make himself the beneficiary of other people's disgruntlement.

    But as you regard gravitas as so important perhaps you can tell us if Cameron showed any gravitas at the Mandela tribute ?

    Or for that matter in a dozen fake photostunts ?
    And do you really think Mandela would have objected?

    .
    Mandela would have loved the selfie moment. All it showed me was how out of touch the British tabloids are, and how they misunderstood Mandela.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,624

    In many ways the closest 2015 parallel is to 1983. Why so?

    1979 saw the end of a Labour Gov't who had mucked up the economy. The swing from Lab to Cons was 5.2%.
    2010 saw the end of a Labour Gov't who had mucked up the economy. The swing from Lab to Cons was 5%

    1983 saw the swing trend continue, this despite the Cons having dipped after 1979 and Mrs T brought in her cuts. By the time of the 1983 election the swing from Lab to Cons was 4%, enough to give a landslide.

    If in 2015 the Cons continue the same swing of 4% as in 1983 they will have a landslide.

    There are some significant parallels, including an unelectable left-wing leader who opposes cuts. Perhaps the biggest difference is the share of the LibDems in 2010, the very thing which prevented the Cons majority. Mr Smithson is, in one sense, right to point to their importance. But as they fade in 2015 it would be a big mistake to over-estimate how much they now matter. Cameron has also failed to have a Falklands war to boost his ratings. However, those points aside the underlying trend is there.

    Only a fool would describe the potential of a Conservative outright win as 'wishful thinking'.

    In 1983, the left was split between a loony left Labour Party, and a only moderately insane Alliance. The right was united,

    In 2005, the left is "unsplit", with the Liberal Democrats down to a 'rump' 10% or so. The right, on the other hand, is split between UKIP and the Conservatives

    But other than that, your analogy is spot on.
  • audreyanneaudreyanne Posts: 1,376
    edited January 2014
    rcs1000 said:

    In many ways the closest 2015 parallel is to 1983. Why so?

    1979 saw the end of a Labour Gov't who had mucked up the economy. The swing from Lab to Cons was 5.2%.
    2010 saw the end of a Labour Gov't who had mucked up the economy. The swing from Lab to Cons was 5%

    1983 saw the swing trend continue, this despite the Cons having dipped after 1979 and Mrs T brought in her cuts. By the time of the 1983 election the swing from Lab to Cons was 4%, enough to give a landslide.

    If in 2015 the Cons continue the same swing of 4% as in 1983 they will have a landslide.

    There are some significant parallels, including an unelectable left-wing leader who opposes cuts. Perhaps the biggest difference is the share of the LibDems in 2010, the very thing which prevented the Cons majority. Mr Smithson is, in one sense, right to point to their importance. But as they fade in 2015 it would be a big mistake to over-estimate how much they now matter. Cameron has also failed to have a Falklands war to boost his ratings. However, those points aside the underlying trend is there.

    Only a fool would describe the potential of a Conservative outright win as 'wishful thinking'.

    In 1983, the left was split between a loony left Labour Party, and a only moderately insane Alliance. The right was united,

    In 2005, the left is "unsplit", with the Liberal Democrats down to a 'rump' 10% or so. The right, on the other hand, is split between UKIP and the Conservatives

    But other than that, your analogy is spot on.
    Actually I think you've unwittingly aided my point. In 2015 the left will certainly not be united. They aren't now. Milliband's brand of leftism is unpopular, and Balls is toast. They are far from united. Remember that there is very little 'electoral' arc-lighting at the moment because everyone knows there's no election. Just wait until the lights are switched on Labour.

    As for the right, they most certainly were NOT united until the Falklands War. Thatcher was massively disliked by the right and the left, and the rumblings of discontent against her, sometimes borne of misogyny, rumbled on until the fissures nearly ruptured the whole party.
  • saddened said:

    fitalass said:

    Your right, Farage's 'bloke in a pub' routine does look all too genuine. But unfortunately for UKIP, it doesn't give Farage any gravitas when it comes to projecting himself as a party Leader who wants to be taken seriously in domestic politics. And it certainly doesn't send out a message that either he or UKIP are particularly interested in the hard graft of an election campaign either! I do wonder if the constant pictures, interviews, and even the various footage of him being either holed up or being bundled out of various public houses in the latter months of last year hasn't impacted on the decline of his own personal polling, as well as that of UKIP.

    'Now Farage can certainly be critcised on the free market issue but he sounds like he sympathises with the problems the average person faces.'

    'Sounds like' being the operative words.

    I doubt that privately educated, wealthy commodities trader Nigel feels the pain of 'ordinary' people, just like the other party leaders and politicians.

    I doubt it as well.

    But as the CammyCleggyMilly alternatives clearly don't give a toss about the 'ordinary person' Farage is shooting at an open goal.

    And when Farage does his 'bloke in a pub' routine it looks genuine - contrast with the obvious condescending fakeness of the photostunts of CammyCleggyMilly.

    Or for that matter in a dozen fake photostunts ?
    True Cameron could never match a plane crash on election day.
    Cameron had already had a campaign crash before Farage's irrelevant idiocy.

    And I think telling other people to ride a bike so that the roads are empty for those with chauffer driven limos was rather more politically damaging.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,624

    Interesting discussion on the previous thread. Despite Farage's claim to be the last Thatcherite, UKIP are starting to remind me of the BNP in some ways - an unsettling combination of xenophobia and truculent economic protectionism. At least Nick Griffin confessed to the BNP's Leftism eventually; Farage is still peddling the line that he's for the free market. His deception must be exposed!

    There is no deception,. You are just too fixed in your own world view to even try to understand what he is saying.

    Neither xenophobia nor protectionism form part of UKIPs agenda. The idea is that we trade with the wider world rather than being trapped within a protectionist bloc that suffocates our free trade whilst allowing other countries within the bloc to dominate European trade by fixing the rules to prevent real competition.

    We can always tell when the Tories start to get desperate when they throw around the old BNP-lite accusations.
    Richard, neither xenophobia nor protectionism nor banning the Burkha nor opposing gay marriage is part of your vision of UKIP.

    You are a genuine libertarian. And with the exception of my belief in open borders, you and I share most of our political beliefs.

    The party that best suited your policies in 2010 was UKIP. I don't believe that is true in 2015. I believe that UKIP will increasingly walk the populist line advocated by some, and which you have consistently opposed. At some point you will need to choose between being a BOO Conservative (of whom there are many), or a liberal UKIPper (of whom there are increasingly few).
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,624

    rcs1000 said:

    In many ways the closest 2015 parallel is to 1983. Why so?

    1979 saw the end of a Labour Gov't who had mucked up the economy. The swing from Lab to Cons was 5.2%.
    2010 saw the end of a Labour Gov't who had mucked up the economy. The swing from Lab to Cons was 5%

    1983 saw the swing trend continue, this despite the Cons having dipped after 1979 and Mrs T brought in her cuts. By the time of the 1983 election the swing from Lab to Cons was 4%, enough to give a landslide.

    If in 2015 the Cons continue the same swing of 4% as in 1983 they will have a landslide.

    There are some significant parallels, including an unelectable left-wing leader who opposes cuts. Perhaps the biggest difference is the share of the LibDems in 2010, the very thing which prevented the Cons majority. Mr Smithson is, in one sense, right to point to their importance. But as they fade in 2015 it would be a big mistake to over-estimate how much they now matter. Cameron has also failed to have a Falklands war to boost his ratings. However, those points aside the underlying trend is there.

    Only a fool would describe the potential of a Conservative outright win as 'wishful thinking'.

    In 1983, the left was split between a loony left Labour Party, and a only moderately insane Alliance. The right was united,

    In 2005, the left is "unsplit", with the Liberal Democrats down to a 'rump' 10% or so. The right, on the other hand, is split between UKIP and the Conservatives

    But other than that, your analogy is spot on.
    Actually I think you've unwittingly aided my point. In 2015 the left will certainly not be united. They aren't now. Milliband's brand of leftism is unpopular, and Balls is toast. They are far from united. Remember that there is very little 'electoral' arc-lighting at the moment because everyone knows there's no election. Just wait until the lights are switched on Labour.

    As for the right, they most certainly were NOT united until the Falklands War. Thatcher was massively disliked by the right and the left, and the rumblings of discontent against her, sometimes borne of misogyny, rumbled on until the fissures nearly ruptured the whole party.
    The Alliance got 25% in 1983, the vast bulk of which were leftist voters. (Go back and read the Alliance manifesto from 1983. They were just a continental socialist party without the truly loony left. No offence, father.) Are you forecasting the left wing voters will flock to Mr Clegg's LibDems? I agree it would - all other things being equal - be good for the Conservative party. But I do not believe it is a likely outcome.
  • MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053
    Good Evening all.

    Funny that! I mean it's funny, and to the other parties a bit scary, that UKIP/Farage is today, 4th January 2014, the main talking point on this thread (and many, many, others) on PB.

    A year ago, the very name UKIP would have brought smiles and sniggers from the vast majority of posters, here.

    How times have changed!
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,469
    MikeK said:

    Good Evening all.

    Funny that! I mean it's funny, and to the other parties a bit scary, that UKIP/Farage is today, 4th January 2014, the main talking point on this thread (and many, many, others) on PB.

    A year ago, the very name UKIP would have brought smiles and sniggers from the vast majority of posters, here.

    How times have changed!

    UKIP and its supporters still produce many, many sniggers.

    After all, we had the Godfrey Bloom hilarity, perhaps the funniest moment of the political year.
  • fitalass said:

    Your right, Farage's 'bloke in a pub' routine does look all too genuine. But unfortunately for UKIP, it doesn't give Farage any gravitas when it comes to projecting himself as a party Leader who wants to be taken seriously in domestic politics. And it certainly doesn't send out a message that either he or UKIP are particularly interested in the hard graft of an election campaign either! I do wonder if the constant pictures, interviews, and even the various footage of him being either holed up or being bundled out of various public houses in the latter months of last year hasn't impacted on the decline of his own personal polling, as well as that of UKIP.

    'Now Farage can certainly be critcised on the free market issue but he sounds like he sympathises with the problems the average person faces.'

    'Sounds like' being the operative words.

    I doubt that privately educated, wealthy commodities trader Nigel feels the pain of 'ordinary' people, just like the other party leaders and politicians.

    I doubt it as well.

    But as the CammyCleggyMilly alternatives clearly don't give a toss about the 'ordinary person' Farage is shooting at an open goal.

    And when Farage does his 'bloke in a pub' routine it looks genuine - contrast with the obvious condescending fakeness of the photostunts of CammyCleggyMilly.
    Farage doesn't need gravitas, all he has to do is make himself the beneficiary of other people's disgruntlement.

    But as you regard gravitas as so important perhaps you can tell us if Cameron showed any gravitas at the Mandela tribute ?

    Or for that matter in a dozen fake photostunts ?
    I'd suggest from a western viewpoint, nothing that went on at the Mandela memorial service would be seen as fitting or full of gravitas. But that's the way they do it. And do you really think Mandela would have objected?

    It was also long. Very, very long.

    When it comes to other things, Cameron's shown some class. Look at the way he handled the Hillsborough inquiry findings, or the apology for Bloody Sunday.
    It's fitalass who thinkgs gravitas is so important.

    I merely pointed out that Cameron lacks it as well.

    I will agree that Cameron has a certain style when apologising.

    Apologising for mistakes by others that is, he doesn't show the same interest in apologising for his own cockups.

    And he has an unfortunate tendancy to obsequious grovelling to people he is insecure about. Hence embarrasments from 'junior partner in 1940' to the attempt to bomb Syria.
  • In many ways the closest 2015 parallel is to 1983. Why so?

    1979 saw the end of a Labour Gov't who had mucked up the economy. The swing from Lab to Cons was 5.2%.
    2010 saw the end of a Labour Gov't who had mucked up the economy. The swing from Lab to Cons was 5%

    1983 saw the swing trend continue, this despite the Cons having dipped after 1979 and Mrs T brought in her cuts. By the time of the 1983 election the swing from Lab to Cons was 4%, enough to give a landslide.

    If in 2015 the Cons continue the same swing of 4% as in 1983 they will have a landslide.

    There are some significant parallels, including an unelectable left-wing leader who opposes cuts. Perhaps the biggest difference is the share of the LibDems in 2010, the very thing which prevented the Cons majority. Mr Smithson is, in one sense, right to point to their importance. But as they fade in 2015 it would be a big mistake to over-estimate how much they now matter. Cameron has also failed to have a Falklands war to boost his ratings. However, those points aside the underlying trend is there.

    Only a fool would describe the potential of a Conservative outright win as 'wishful thinking'.

    So a Conservative majority of 144 in 2015 then ? Only on PB ! And you finish your post by calling other people fools. Priceless.
  • corporealcorporeal Posts: 2,549

    Mr. Richard, I'm not sure the 'give a toss' point is valid; I think the issue is that they genuinely cannot put themselves in such a person's shoes. Energy prices is a perfect example. For all Comrade Miliband's shrieking about high prices, when he was Secretary of State for Energy he said, basically, it was a price worth paying.

    If you're a millionaire frontbencher who has converted to warmism then it's easy to say a few hundred quid a year more to save the world is a bargain. But if you're a sceptic (or undecided) and are finding things a bit difficult an extra couple of hundred pounds on energy bills is very significant.

    Iirc weren't government taxes on energy bills primarily used to fund better insulation projects etc and as such produced on average, lower bills overall?
  • rcs1000 said:

    In many ways the closest 2015 parallel is to 1983. Why so?

    1979 saw the end of a Labour Gov't who had mucked up the economy. The swing from Lab to Cons was 5.2%.
    2010 saw the end of a Labour Gov't who had mucked up the economy. The swing from Lab to Cons was 5%

    1983 saw the swing trend continue, this despite the Cons having dipped after 1979 and Mrs T brought in her cuts. By the time of the 1983 election the swing from Lab to Cons was 4%, enough to give a landslide.

    If in 2015 the Cons continue the same swing of 4% as in 1983 they will have a landslide.

    There are some significant parallels, including an unelectable left-wing leader who opposes cuts. Perhaps the biggest difference is the share of the LibDems in 2010, the very thing which prevented the Cons majority. Mr Smithson is, in one sense, right to point to their importance. But as they fade in 2015 it would be a big mistake to over-estimate how much they now matter. Cameron has also failed to have a Falklands war to boost his ratings. However, those points aside the underlying trend is there.

    Only a fool would describe the potential of a Conservative outright win as 'wishful thinking'.

    In 1983, the left was split between a loony left Labour Party, and a only moderately insane Alliance. The right was united,

    In 2005, the left is "unsplit", with the Liberal Democrats down to a 'rump' 10% or so. The right, on the other hand, is split between UKIP and the Conservatives

    But other than that, your analogy is spot on.
    Looking for parallels between now and the early 1980s can produce some worrying facts for Conservative supporters:

    Three years into the 1979 government the Conservatives received a 40% vote at the local election. At the next general election they reached 42%.

    Three years into the 2010 government the Conservatives received a 26% vote at the local elections. At the next general election they reached ...

  • smithersjones2013smithersjones2013 Posts: 740
    edited January 2014
    If in 2015 the Cons continue the same swing of 4% as in 1983 they will have a landslide.

    So hands up all those who think that the Tories will lead Labour by 15 points in May 2015?

    Nice to see some 'gravitas' on the thread.........
  • UKIP and its supporters still produce many, many sniggers.

    Well you're not going to change the characteristics that have made the Tories so beloved of the whole nation when they are so integral to their public image now are you?
  • richardDoddrichardDodd Posts: 5,472
    Crosby must have dozens of pics of Farage with a drink in one hand and a ciggie or cigar in the other.."Would you want this man in charge"
  • MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053
    rcs1000 said:

    Interesting discussion on the previous thread. Despite Farage's claim to be the last Thatcherite, UKIP are starting to remind me of the BNP in some ways - an unsettling combination of xenophobia and truculent economic protectionism. At least Nick Griffin confessed to the BNP's Leftism eventually; Farage is still peddling the line that he's for the free market. His deception must be exposed!

    There is no deception,. You are just too fixed in your own world view to even try to understand what he is saying.

    Neither xenophobia nor protectionism form part of UKIPs agenda. The idea is that we trade with the wider world rather than being trapped within a protectionist bloc that suffocates our free trade whilst allowing other countries within the bloc to dominate European trade by fixing the rules to prevent real competition.

    We can always tell when the Tories start to get desperate when they throw around the old BNP-lite accusations.
    Richard, neither xenophobia nor protectionism nor banning the Burkha nor opposing gay marriage is part of your vision of UKIP.

    You are a genuine libertarian. And with the exception of my belief in open borders, you and I share most of our political beliefs.

    The party that best suited your policies in 2010 was UKIP. I don't believe that is true in 2015. I believe that UKIP will increasingly walk the populist line advocated by some, and which you have consistently opposed. At some point you will need to choose between being a BOO Conservative (of whom there are many), or a liberal UKIPper (of whom there are increasingly few).
    It's remarkable how completely wrong about UKIP and it's members you are, rcs1000. The vast majority of Kippers I have met in the flesh, and on line, are libertarian. I am one. The UKIP web site is too, and so are the twitter feeds I read. True there are always some that go off the deep end from time to time, but that's true of any party.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,469



    It's fitalass who thinkgs gravitas is so important.

    I merely pointed out that Cameron lacks it as well.

    I will agree that Cameron has a certain style when apologising.

    Apologising for mistakes by others that is, he doesn't show the same interest in apologising for his own cockups.

    And he has an unfortunate tendancy to obsequious grovelling to people he is insecure about. Hence embarrasments from 'junior partner in 1940' to the attempt to bomb Syria.

    Show me a single politician who you can't criticise in similar ways. Miliband can, Farage can; indeed, it's probably hardest in Clegg's case.

    I'm amazed that anybody would want to be a politician. They're criticised for not being one of us, and they're criticised when they do behave like the rest of us (even to the extent of being slated by idiots for crying at a funeral).
  • Crosby must have dozens of pics of Farage with a drink in one hand and a ciggie or cigar in the other.."Would you want this man in charge"

    Churchillian.

  • smithersjones2013smithersjones2013 Posts: 740
    edited January 2014

    Crosby must have dozens of pics of Farage with a drink in one hand and a ciggie or cigar in the other.."Would you want this man in charge"

    Yes it would make an interesting counterpoint to the Bullingdon boy who championed Minimum Alcohol Pricing. The "One rule for you and another for us". "Don't do as we do do as we say" line should work very well for the Tories. It always has in the past.



  • anotherDaveanotherDave Posts: 6,746

    Crosby must have dozens of pics of Farage with a drink in one hand and a ciggie or cigar in the other.."Would you want this man in charge"

    The UKIP PPB in 2013 had Mr Farage sitting in a pub with a pint of beer in front of him.



  • richardDoddrichardDodd Posts: 5,472
    MDC..not many people, regardless of political loyalty, can afford to get blown out at the boozer these days..he obviously can, and does..it might just p*ss a few of them off.
  • audreyanneaudreyanne Posts: 1,376

    In many ways the closest 2015 parallel is to 1983. Why so?

    1979 saw the end of a Labour Gov't who had mucked up the economy. The swing from Lab to Cons was 5.2%.
    2010 saw the end of a Labour Gov't who had mucked up the economy. The swing from Lab to Cons was 5%

    1983 saw the swing trend continue, this despite the Cons having dipped after 1979 and Mrs T brought in her cuts. By the time of the 1983 election the swing from Lab to Cons was 4%, enough to give a landslide.

    If in 2015 the Cons continue the same swing of 4% as in 1983 they will have a landslide.

    There are some significant parallels, including an unelectable left-wing leader who opposes cuts. Perhaps the biggest difference is the share of the LibDems in 2010, the very thing which prevented the Cons majority. Mr Smithson is, in one sense, right to point to their importance. But as they fade in 2015 it would be a big mistake to over-estimate how much they now matter. Cameron has also failed to have a Falklands war to boost his ratings. However, those points aside the underlying trend is there.

    Only a fool would describe the potential of a Conservative outright win as 'wishful thinking'.

    So a Conservative majority of 144 in 2015 then ? Only on PB ! And you finish your post by calling other people fools. Priceless.
    More priceless is anyone posting using the word 'priceless'. Do you wear plus fours?

    The serious issue is, as I mentioned, the status of the third party, or fourth if you think UKIP will continue to hold up under scrutiny. In 1979 they only polled 13%, in 2010 23%.

    Do I think an outright Conservative win is possible? Yes. Might they continue a 4% swing from Labour? Absolutely.
  • MDC..not many people, regardless of political loyalty, can afford to get blown out at the boozer these days..he obviously can, and does..it might just p*ss a few of them off.

    So having a pint is 'getting blown out'? Interesting.......

  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 43,343
    isam said:

    'Now Farage can certainly be critcised on the free market issue but he sounds like he sympathises with the problems the average person faces.'

    'Sounds like' being the operative words.

    I doubt that privately educated, wealthy commodities trader Nigel feels the pain of 'ordinary' people, just like the other party leaders and politicians.

    I doubt it as well.

    But as the CammyCleggyMilly alternatives clearly don't give a toss about the 'ordinary person' Farage is shooting at an open goal.

    And when Farage does his 'bloke in a pub' routine it looks genuine - contrast with the obvious condescending fakeness of the photostunts of CammyCleggyMilly.

    Private education and wealth aren't a problem if you show you can understand public feeling. The problem Miliband, Clegg and Cameron have is that they don't know anything other than the Westminster bubble.

    Combine that with their wealth, education etc and you've got the recipe for the public to consider them out of touch
    Just wondering, is it to do with not having served in the armed forces during the wars or under National Service? It was not perfect - the services were, and for all I know still are, infamous for the officers vs Other Ranks chasm - but at least the officers were dragged out of their comfortable cocoon and got to know the rest of the world. IIRC Callaghan and Thatcher were more or less the last of that generation (well, not her but certainly much of her cabinet and her Archbish of Canterbury).
  • smithersjones2013smithersjones2013 Posts: 740
    edited January 2014
    Yeah Nigel could have a big problem with all those pictures of him with a pint in hand:

    http://tinyurl.com/owre5fv

    As far as I know though at least Nige hasn't left any of his kids in the pub......
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,469

    Yeah Nigel could have a big problem with all those pictures of him with a pint in hand:

    http://tinyurl.com/owre5fv

    Amusingly, if you enter 'Miliband pint beer' into Google Images, you get pictures of Farage:
    https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=miliband+pint+beer&espv=210&es_sm=93&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=8EzIUtL0JomO7AbepoG4CQ&ved=0CAkQ_AUoAQ&biw=1680&bih=924
  • Yeah Nigel could have a big problem with all those pictures of him with a pint in hand:

    http://tinyurl.com/owre5fv

    Amusingly, if you enter 'Miliband pint beer' into Google Images, you get pictures of Farage:
    https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=miliband+pint+beer&espv=210&es_sm=93&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=8EzIUtL0JomO7AbepoG4CQ&ved=0CAkQ_AUoAQ&biw=1680&bih=924
    I didn't think Miliband was old enough to drink!
  • In many ways the closest 2015 parallel is to 1983. Why so?

    1979 saw the end of a Labour Gov't who had mucked up the economy. The swing from Lab to Cons was 5.2%.
    2010 saw the end of a Labour Gov't who had mucked up the economy. The swing from Lab to Cons was 5%

    1983 saw the swing trend continue, this despite the Cons having dipped after 1979 and Mrs T brought in her cuts. By the time of the 1983 election the swing from Lab to Cons was 4%, enough to give a landslide.

    If in 2015 the Cons continue the same swing of 4% as in 1983 they will have a landslide.

    There are some significant parallels, including an unelectable left-wing leader who opposes cuts. Perhaps the biggest difference is the share of the LibDems in 2010, the very thing which prevented the Cons majority. Mr Smithson is, in one sense, right to point to their importance. But as they fade in 2015 it would be a big mistake to over-estimate how much they now matter. Cameron has also failed to have a Falklands war to boost his ratings. However, those points aside the underlying trend is there.

    Only a fool would describe the potential of a Conservative outright win as 'wishful thinking'.

    So a Conservative majority of 144 in 2015 then ? Only on PB ! And you finish your post by calling other people fools. Priceless.
    More priceless is anyone posting using the word 'priceless'. Do you wear plus fours?

    The serious issue is, as I mentioned, the status of the third party, or fourth if you think UKIP will continue to hold up under scrutiny. In 1979 they only polled 13%, in 2010 23%.

    Do I think an outright Conservative win is possible? Yes. Might they continue a 4% swing from Labour? Absolutely.
    Priceless indeed.
    Are you taking bets on this Conservative landslide ?
  • corporealcorporeal Posts: 2,549
    Carnyx said:

    isam said:

    'Now Farage can certainly be critcised on the free market issue but he sounds like he sympathises with the problems the average person faces.'

    'Sounds like' being the operative words.

    I doubt that privately educated, wealthy commodities trader Nigel feels the pain of 'ordinary' people, just like the other party leaders and politicians.

    I doubt it as well.

    But as the CammyCleggyMilly alternatives clearly don't give a toss about the 'ordinary person' Farage is shooting at an open goal.

    And when Farage does his 'bloke in a pub' routine it looks genuine - contrast with the obvious condescending fakeness of the photostunts of CammyCleggyMilly.

    Private education and wealth aren't a problem if you show you can understand public feeling. The problem Miliband, Clegg and Cameron have is that they don't know anything other than the Westminster bubble.

    Combine that with their wealth, education etc and you've got the recipe for the public to consider them out of touch
    Just wondering, is it to do with not having served in the armed forces during the wars or under National Service? It was not perfect - the services were, and for all I know still are, infamous for the officers vs Other Ranks chasm - but at least the officers were dragged out of their comfortable cocoon and got to know the rest of the world. IIRC Callaghan and Thatcher were more or less the last of that generation (well, not her but certainly much of her cabinet and her Archbish of Canterbury).
    Searching back, of PMs. Wilson wasn't in the forces, neither was Douglas-Home (or anyone from Thatcher onwards).
    Heath was, Macmillan, Eden, Attlee, Churchill all were. Chamberlain wasn't.

    I think a lot of it is just the amount of scrutiny they're under now, they're worried about saying anything that could be twisted negatively or into a gaffe. So they stay obsessively on script, and that's never human.

    Alongside that, of course plenty of politicians of the past were thought out of touch.
  • richardDoddrichardDodd Posts: 5,472
    edited January 2014
    SJ 2013 You dont appear to know much about the effects of repetetive negative imagery in Politics.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,469
    corporeal said:

    Carnyx said:

    isam said:

    'Now Farage can certainly be critcised on the free market issue but he sounds like he sympathises with the problems the average person faces.'

    'Sounds like' being the operative words.

    I doubt that privately educated, wealthy commodities trader Nigel feels the pain of 'ordinary' people, just like the other party leaders and politicians.

    I doubt it as well.

    But as the CammyCleggyMilly alternatives clearly don't give a toss about the 'ordinary person' Farage is shooting at an open goal.

    And when Farage does his 'bloke in a pub' routine it looks genuine - contrast with the obvious condescending fakeness of the photostunts of CammyCleggyMilly.

    Private education and wealth aren't a problem if you show you can understand public feeling. The problem Miliband, Clegg and Cameron have is that they don't know anything other than the Westminster bubble.

    Combine that with their wealth, education etc and you've got the recipe for the public to consider them out of touch
    Just wondering, is it to do with not having served in the armed forces during the wars or under National Service? It was not perfect - the services were, and for all I know still are, infamous for the officers vs Other Ranks chasm - but at least the officers were dragged out of their comfortable cocoon and got to know the rest of the world. IIRC Callaghan and Thatcher were more or less the last of that generation (well, not her but certainly much of her cabinet and her Archbish of Canterbury).
    Searching back, of PMs. Wilson wasn't in the forces, neither was Douglas-Home (or anyone from Thatcher onwards).
    Heath was, Macmillan, Eden, Attlee, Churchill all were. Chamberlain wasn't.

    I think a lot of it is just the amount of scrutiny they're under now, they're worried about saying anything that could be twisted negatively or into a gaffe. So they stay obsessively on script, and that's never human.

    Alongside that, of course plenty of politicians of the past were thought out of touch.
    Exactly, the media's glare too often rips the character out of our politicians. A few notable ones manage to succeed despite a rather interesting disposition: Boris and Ken are two who can get away with things that would ruin any other politician. Alan Clark was another one from the recent past.

    I'm not sure Farage has that touch. But then again, neither do the other leaders.

    Sadly, I'm not sure that they make very good politicians, at least at the top level.
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,300
    edited January 2014
    Wilson worked in the Civil Service during the war.

    RAF Museum states he had tried to join up, but was directed into the Civil Service, became Director of Economics and Statistics at the Ministry of Fuel and Power 1943–44.

    http://www.nationalcoldwarexhibition.org/the-cold-war/biographies/harold-wilson/
  • rcs1000 said:

    In many ways the closest 2015 parallel is to 1983. Why so?

    1979 saw the end of a Labour Gov't who had mucked up the economy. The swing from Lab to Cons was 5.2%.
    2010 saw the end of a Labour Gov't who had mucked up the economy. The swing from Lab to Cons was 5%

    1983 saw the swing trend continue, this despite the Cons having dipped after 1979 and Mrs T brought in her cuts. By the time of the 1983 election the swing from Lab to Cons was 4%, enough to give a landslide.

    If in 2015 the Cons continue the same swing of 4% as in 1983 they will have a landslide.

    There are some significant parallels, including an unelectable left-wing leader who opposes cuts. Perhaps the biggest difference is the share of the LibDems in 2010, the very thing which prevented the Cons majority. Mr Smithson is, in one sense, right to point to their importance. But as they fade in 2015 it would be a big mistake to over-estimate how much they now matter. Cameron has also failed to have a Falklands war to boost his ratings. However, those points aside the underlying trend is there.

    Only a fool would describe the potential of a Conservative outright win as 'wishful thinking'.

    In 1983, the left was split between a loony left Labour Party, and a only moderately insane Alliance. The right was united,

    In 2005, the left is "unsplit", with the Liberal Democrats down to a 'rump' 10% or so. The right, on the other hand, is split between UKIP and the Conservatives

    But other than that, your analogy is spot on.
    Looking for parallels between now and the early 1980s can produce some worrying facts for Conservative supporters:

    Three years into the 1979 government the Conservatives received a 40% vote at the local election. At the next general election they reached 42%.

    Three years into the 2010 government the Conservatives received a 26% vote at the local elections. At the next general election they reached ...

    Looking at the elections in the 80's can produce some worrying facts for both parties. In 1979 the two major parties accounted for 61% of the electorate's votes, in 1983 they accounted for 51% of the vote and in 1987 they accounted for 55% of the vote. Since the start of the 21st Century the collective vote for Labour and Conservative has never exceeded 42% of the electorate's votes. I wouldn't be surprised if it slipped below 40% in 2015.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,894
    Josias Home was in hospital after spinal surgery during the war and is widely rumoured to be the basis of the man mentioned in the Queen's speech
  • smithersjones2013smithersjones2013 Posts: 740
    edited January 2014

    SJ 2013 You dont appear to know much about the effects of repetetive negative imagery in Politics.

    Well that's assuming that seeing a picture of a politician drinking a pint is considered as negative imagery. I'm not sure it is and I'm not sure the political establishment in the West consider it so either

    http://tinyurl.com/pn7f8u8

    Frankly to labour the point seems rather puritanical really.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,624
    MikeK said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Interesting discussion on the previous thread. Despite Farage's claim to be the last Thatcherite, UKIP are starting to remind me of the BNP in some ways - an unsettling combination of xenophobia and truculent economic protectionism. At least Nick Griffin confessed to the BNP's Leftism eventually; Farage is still peddling the line that he's for the free market. His deception must be exposed!

    There is no deception,. You are just too fixed in your own world view to even try to understand what he is saying.

    Neither xenophobia nor protectionism form part of UKIPs agenda. The idea is that we trade with the wider world rather than being trapped within a protectionist bloc that suffocates our free trade whilst allowing other countries within the bloc to dominate European trade by fixing the rules to prevent real competition.

    We can always tell when the Tories start to get desperate when they throw around the old BNP-lite accusations.
    Richard, neither xenophobia nor protectionism nor banning the Burkha nor opposing gay marriage is part of your vision of UKIP.

    You are a genuine libertarian. And with the exception of my belief in open borders, you and I share most of our political beliefs.

    The party that best suited your policies in 2010 was UKIP. I don't believe that is true in 2015. I believe that UKIP will increasingly walk the populist line advocated by some, and which you have consistently opposed. At some point you will need to choose between being a BOO Conservative (of whom there are many), or a liberal UKIPper (of whom there are increasingly few).
    It's remarkable how completely wrong about UKIP and it's members you are, rcs1000. The vast majority of Kippers I have met in the flesh, and on line, are libertarian. I am one. The UKIP web site is too, and so are the twitter feeds I read. True there are always some that go off the deep end from time to time, but that's true of any party.
    I'm basing my views on those expressed by most of the UKIP supporters on this board. When another_richard talks of stopping "the 1%" from buying at Chinese wage rates, and selling at Western prices and paying Monaco tax rates, he doesn't sound very libertarian.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,894
    Viewcode (previous thread) But it was not an invasion as William was invited over by the nation's sovereign parliament and only came over with its support. The English Civil War determined that it was Parliament and not the monarchy who were the ultimate rulers of the nation
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,410

    rcs1000 said:

    In many ways the closest 2015 parallel is to 1983. Why so?

    1979 saw the end of a Labour Gov't who had mucked up the economy. The swing from Lab to Cons was 5.2%.
    2010 saw the end of a Labour Gov't who had mucked up the economy. The swing from Lab to Cons was 5%

    1983 saw the swing trend continue, this despite the Cons having dipped after 1979 and Mrs T brought in her cuts. By the time of the 1983 election the swing from Lab to Cons was 4%, enough to give a landslide.

    If in 2015 the Cons continue the same swing of 4% as in 1983 they will have a landslide.

    There are some significant parallels, including an unelectable left-wing leader who opposes cuts. Perhaps the biggest difference is the share of the LibDems in 2010, the very thing which prevented the Cons majority. Mr Smithson is, in one sense, right to point to their importance. But as they fade in 2015 it would be a big mistake to over-estimate how much they now matter. Cameron has also failed to have a Falklands war to boost his ratings. However, those points aside the underlying trend is there.

    Only a fool would describe the potential of a Conservative outright win as 'wishful thinking'.

    In 1983, the left was split between a loony left Labour Party, and a only moderately insane Alliance. The right was united,

    In 2005, the left is "unsplit", with the Liberal Democrats down to a 'rump' 10% or so. The right, on the other hand, is split between UKIP and the Conservatives

    But other than that, your analogy is spot on.
    Looking for parallels between now and the early 1980s can produce some worrying facts for Conservative supporters:

    Three years into the 1979 government the Conservatives received a 40% vote at the local election. At the next general election they reached 42%.

    Three years into the 2010 government the Conservatives received a 26% vote at the local elections. At the next general election they reached ...

    Looking at the elections in the 80's can produce some worrying facts for both parties. In 1979 the two major parties accounted for 61% of the electorate's votes, in 1983 they accounted for 51% of the vote and in 1987 they accounted for 55% of the vote. Since the start of the 21st Century the collective vote for Labour and Conservative has never exceeded 42% of the electorate's votes. I wouldn't be surprised if it slipped below 40% in 2015.
    Everyone's model (Crosby, JackW,Fisher), predictions and past precedent (Difficult to swing towards Gov't/Incumbency bonus) are accomodated by NOM winning in 2015.

  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,410
    Whens the Yougov out btw :?
  • Pulpstar said:

    rcs1000 said:

    In many ways the closest 2015 parallel is to 1983. Why so?

    1979 saw the end of a Labour Gov't who had mucked up the economy. The swing from Lab to Cons was 5.2%.
    2010 saw the end of a Labour Gov't who had mucked up the economy. The swing from Lab to Cons was 5%

    1983 saw the swing trend continue, this despite the Cons having dipped after 1979 and Mrs T brought in her cuts. By the time of the 1983 election the swing from Lab to Cons was 4%, enough to give a landslide.

    If in 2015 the Cons continue the same swing of 4% as in 1983 they will have a landslide.

    There are some significant parallels, including an unelectable left-wing leader who opposes cuts. Perhaps the biggest difference is the share of the LibDems in 2010, the very thing which prevented the Cons majority. Mr Smithson is, in one sense, right to point to their importance. But as they fade in 2015 it would be a big mistake to over-estimate how much they now matter. Cameron has also failed to have a Falklands war to boost his ratings. However, those points aside the underlying trend is there.

    Only a fool would describe the potential of a Conservative outright win as 'wishful thinking'.

    In 1983, the left was split between a loony left Labour Party, and a only moderately insane Alliance. The right was united,

    In 2005, the left is "unsplit", with the Liberal Democrats down to a 'rump' 10% or so. The right, on the other hand, is split between UKIP and the Conservatives

    But other than that, your analogy is spot on.
    Looking for parallels between now and the early 1980s can produce some worrying facts for Conservative supporters:

    Three years into the 1979 government the Conservatives received a 40% vote at the local election. At the next general election they reached 42%.

    Three years into the 2010 government the Conservatives received a 26% vote at the local elections. At the next general election they reached ...

    Looking at the elections in the 80's can produce some worrying facts for both parties. In 1979 the two major parties accounted for 61% of the electorate's votes, in 1983 they accounted for 51% of the vote and in 1987 they accounted for 55% of the vote. Since the start of the 21st Century the collective vote for Labour and Conservative has never exceeded 42% of the electorate's votes. I wouldn't be surprised if it slipped below 40% in 2015.
    Everyone's model (Crosby, JackW,Fisher), predictions and past precedent (Difficult to swing towards Gov't/Incumbency bonus) are accomodated by NOM winning in 2015.

    I'm still leaning toward a Labour Majority but it wouldn't surprise me if it ended up with NOM.

This discussion has been closed.