I’ve been on longer odds on IDS, so I think the value has gone in this, however long standing and outstanding PB contributor, Peter from Putney suggested this bet earlier on today, which I think is a very good option, as Chief Whip isn’t a cabinet position.
Comments
Which made me think, hold up according to the betting markets, Tories achieving that is in 2015, seems more likely than Boris standing and winning in 2016 at 5/2.
Which made me think, hold up according to the betting markets, Tories achieving that is in 2015, seems more likely than Boris standing and winning in 2016 at 5/2.
Betfair have a busy trading market where the Labour price is 1.85 - arb territory with 6/4 cons ?
Updated the thread with your input
If his defection is confirmed, Habib would be the highest ranking figure from the Alawite minority to break with Assad since the uprising against him began in 2011."
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/09/04/us-syria-crisis-defection-idUSBRE9830O420130904
What is needed is to bring in an experienced outsider with proven turnaround project management skills and give him or her overall hire and fire authority.
The Permanent Secretary at the DWP won't like it but eggs have to be broken to deliver a perfect omelette.
If Labour Party suppliers start demanding cash up front, just offer them a Co-Op Bank guarantee.
We have less debt than the Tories I believe?
http://conservativehome.blogs.com/parliament/2013/09/we-need-more-social-entrepreneurs-as-tory-mps-toby-young-must-do-his-duty.html
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/politics/5116969/Bojos-up-for-a-trio-as-mayor.html
Essentially because people can't read graphs or statements. Labour was in a lot of trouble just after Blair nearly bankrupted us in 2005. But since then we have got it together.
By the end of the next general election we will be debt free. When the Tories lose their major donations they will be screwed.
I can only guess you are a bit thick or intentionally trolling. The Co-op bank situation doesn't and won't really effect the Labour party.
"In this moment of crisis it became clear — as it does — what Mr Miliband is. A personable man (and he is a very pleasant companion), politically he is not a presence at all, he is an absence. He is Oedipal Ed, the negator of the unpopular actions of the fathers; the anti-Blair, the non-Brown. His technique for victory to is follow behind the leader, wait for a slip-up and exploit his or her mistakes. He did it to his brother. He hopes to do it to David Cameron. He is neither hunter nor prey, he is scavenger. He is a political vulture. Mission creep? His mission is all about creeping."
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/opinion/columnists/davidaaronovitch/article3860789.ece
It is just difficult trying to have a discussion with people who's only response seems to be "nah but I hear this in the press"
https://audioboo.fm/boos/1584570-it-would-be-a-disaster-if-ed-milband-became-pm-david-aaronovitch?utm_campaign=detailpage&utm_content=retweet&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twittershare
Don`t we know how the two grave-diggers tried to strip a dead spinster of her hard-earned money
Lie back and think of the nailed on yougov lead.
I don't know if it is the case that they are just a bit thick or think they are masterful rampers changing the course of history. Any ideas?
You would think for a party with under 90,000 members and one that hadn't won a majority for 21 years and has a massive popularity and liked party deficit to the Labour Party that they would be a bit more aware of Labour's significantly better long term position.
It's basic accountancy. You have debts, your funders are playing poker and your bank is in trouble. I'd call that an area for concern personally, but you seem less so. Good luck.
Conclusion. Both parties (indeed all parties) have major problems.
It's basic accountancy. We have debts. We are clearing over 2 million a year of these debts. We will be debt free by the end of this parliament. If we need a new bank (which we won't) I see now reason why a bank wouldn't want to take on a major client that would be paying then over £30 million a year and wouldn't be asking for an overdraft.
Conservatives: Over reliance on major individual funders ( some of whom might be wavering ) combined with falling membership fees.
Labour : dispute with its major union funders, large overdraft with distressed bank.
Just need to finish this Strictly Come Dancing thread one first.
I suspect people will walk a million miles or donate for Obama, Not sure they will do the same for Ed.
(only kidding!)
So much buys a poster, so much buys an election address to every house in your street.
We got quite a lot of money in, and, from a standing start, beat Labour into 3rd, in what until then had been a 55-40 Tory held seat.
National events played a very important part, of course. And I wouldn't do it for the current LibDems.
(I think mostly people visiting the site and thinking they'd come to the wrong site, and trying again to view the site)
Labour will pay off their debts about the same time that they start to pay off the national debt.
Institutional Labour Party.
Institutional Liberal Democratic Party.
Institutionalised Monster Raving Loony Party.
EDIT: describes Ed as "disastrous"
http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2013/09/02/2561371/congress-support-military-action-syria-thinkprogress-whip-count/
http://vote-2012.proboards.com/post/99821/thread
5/2 is a bit mean, but not ludicrously so.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/federal-election-2013/
http://blogs.channel4.com/factcheck/factcheck-universal-credit-scheme-aimed-people-work-work/15678?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter
http://www.xkcd.com/1258/
I was not aware that Populus were still doing phone polls, is this a cross check against their online polling, or part of a Ashcroft mega poll?
Better to have the general public fund them under threat of inprisonment whilst claiming the moral high ground.
It's also worth mentioning that Paddy Power (and perhaps others) offer odds in pennies only if you have any history of winning with them. It would seem reasonable if prices quoted in thread headers here were available to the wider market rather than just if you have a losing history.
Taxpayers and other parties are always left to deal with the debts incurred by Labour.
Like PB after a IndyRef poll.
Thanks, that makes sense given my constituency (St Albans).
I wonder whether Professor Davy has been polled as he also lives in St Albans, but I have not seen him on here recently.
Probably he's keeping quiet as a Labour supporter.
Such as "Do you think Ed Miliband is weak?" or "Are you surprised Ed Miliband stabbed the Syrian in the back over the commons vote, considering he stabbed his brother in the back?"
I'm sure most of the cash ends up going on stuff that has nothing to do with their parliamentary functions, completely against the original idea of the fund.
Probably not long until they extend it to cover the parties in government too.
Am I right in thinking that this is supposed to be a balance against the 'public interest' type publicity campaigns that a government might choose to mount? (I was aware that there was a payment that supported the opposition, but I wasn't aware it was so large, )
@tim - if they did as you say then you should keep quiet and let them waste their money shouldn't you?