politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The polls did far better at the EU referendum than is widel

PlatoSaid said:

Y0kel said:

There is a rumour that Hillary Clinton's medical records are going to get released in the next 24-28 hours and not by Clinton campaign.

Guess which fantastic organ apparently has them....

On another note, in Europe there is what can be best described as a hell of a lot of terror and anti-terror activity. IS inspired/directed bods are getting compromised and IS knows it so its desperately trying to get its operatives to act.

So far ain't working out to well but they will get a shot in and don't forget Al Qaeda either, especially around these parts. They'd really like to get a hit in.

There's another Gufficer data dump just now according to Wikileaks

They've just posted a link to the raw data which seems to be an archive of DNC material. No idea what's in it.

williamglenn said:

PlatoSaid said:

Y0kel said:

There is a rumour that Hillary Clinton's medical records are going to get released in the next 24-28 hours and not by Clinton campaign.

Guess which fantastic organ apparently has them....

On another note, in Europe there is what can be best described as a hell of a lot of terror and anti-terror activity. IS inspired/directed bods are getting compromised and IS knows it so its desperately trying to get its operatives to act.

So far ain't working out to well but they will get a shot in and don't forget Al Qaeda either, especially around these parts. They'd really like to get a hit in.

There's another Gufficer data dump just now according to Wikileaks

They've just posted a link to the raw data which seems to be an archive of DNC material. No idea what's in it.

According to y0kel's hints, Hillary's medical records should be somewhere there.

Speedy said:

AndyJS said:

Labour targets in England and Wales using UKPR/Anthony Wells notionals:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/10EJPl37xhc_B_TkHObNrahfzZBCFU4TW8MM_QB3PaXE/edit#gid=0

If those targets are correct Labour would need a repeat of 1997 to get the slimmest of majorities.

They'd have to do better than 1997. I cannot conceive of why the necessary numbers of Conservative voters would defect to Labour under current circumstances, or those likely to be prevailing come the next election.

Good to see Lionel Shriver sticking two fingers up at identity politics on Newsnight.

Both campaigns say they will release more health info in the next few days, and I am sure they will be dull as dishwasher.

FrancisUrquhart said:

Given this vote on boundary changes isn't until at least 2018, there is a long way to go.

Very true. Hopefully May can find enough alternative safe seats for the displaced to keep the reforms on track, but I'm still not as confident about boundary change clearing the Commons as I am about grammar schools (where a meaningful amount of support could be scraped together from amongst the other parties.)

Something tells me this factored into Cameron resigning yesterday:
https://twitter.com/suttonnick/status/775806768446316544

It took Chilcot 10 years for his report and 13 years after Iraq, so to learn some of the truth 5 years after Libya is still a plus.

rcs1000 said:

kle4 said:

rcs1000 said:

Black_Rook said:

rcs1000 said:

Black_Rook said:

MarqueeMark said:

AndyJS said:

Bit of a shock — the new Southport seat would have voted as follows:

Con: 16,575
LD: 13,730
Lab: 10,300
UKIP: 8,593
Green: 1,230
Others: 992

It takes the following wards from South Ribble: Hesketh-with-Becconsall, North Meols, Tarleton.

That's a lot of anti-Tory Labour to squeeze though.

Depends on enough of the remaining Labour vote not belonging to one of the following categories:

1.

That's a lot of Labour voters who won't be available to help close the gap.

If John Pugh is the LibDem candidate, I think they'd stand

This is part of the reason why my view of the LDs prospects in the next GE is so pessimistic: the additional difficulty they have in challenging without the incumbency advantage. Your assessment of Southport seems sound, but also what about Clegg in Sheffield Hallam - up against a notional Labour majority of 4,000 and doubtless a very determined campaign to finish him off this time, do you think he'll have the fight left in him?

If they can't make any gains then that would leave them down to their last six seats: four remaining notional majorities, plus Brake and Mulholland incumbent in close marginals.

OK. I think the LibDems will get about 12% in 2020, up from 8% last time.

I think they'll win:

* 2-3 seats in South West London, where there were big Remain votes.
* Cambridge, where the seat has become rather less Labour friendly.
* Edinburgh West and North East Fife, where they comfortably gained the Holyrood seats from the SNP.

Then probably four to six of their existing seats, and maybe a couple elsewhere which gets to my 10-14 seats forecast.

Well, my recollection is you called their 2015 performance better than most, so everyone listen to rcs!

I'm quite interested in my proposed parliamentary seat in the review, as it includes several LD inclined areas that made up part of a LD seat lost in 2015, and divests itself of quite a bit of prime Tory rural heartland. I doubt it would make it competitive for the LDs, but I can see the notional Tory majority being quite a bit less than now.

I was by far the most bearish person on here, and I still wasn't bearish enough. (My friend in Cambridge Labour kept assuring me that they were going to get creamed by Julian Huppert!)

In May 2015 I did well on the seats market by betting on the principal challenger to the LDs in all their seats. I lost on 8 but won on many more. A similar strategy paid off well on UKIP too.

Perhaps put off updating your Iphone / iPad...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/2016/09/13/ios-10-launch-live-how-to-upgrade-to-apples-new-software-and-wha/

HurstLlama said:

Cyclefree said:

FPT: @HurstLlama:-

"But, but, but Herself always gives me lists of things to do around the house and always has. Not only that when she come home she is quite capable of walking round on an inspection tour to make sure I have done all that I was instructed and that I have done it thoroughly. I might also say that aside from a couple of shortish periods when I have been seriously unwell, Herself has not picked up an iron or cleaned a floor in thirty-odd years (nor, I might say, has she cooked a Sunday lunch).

So, Mrs. Free, I reject your sexist stereotyping"

Well, I wish I were married to you!

However valid your anecdote all surveys show that women, even working women still have the bulk of the responsibility for household matters.

I rarely iron but that is because I largely avoid buying clothes which need ironing. My sons iron their own shirts.

But it's not just the doing which is the issue. It's thinking about what needs doing, the planning and thinking ahead, remembering that if something has run out or is about to, it needs replacing, ensuring that not only do clothes get put in the washing machine, they get taken out and not hours later when they smell like dog blankets, etc etc. Running a house takes planning and planning takes thinking. It doesn't happen by magic.

Ah, well, planning and thinking ahead about what needs to be done/bought; well, that is Herself's job. Not for any sexist reasons, you understand, it is just that when I have tried to anticipate I have usually ended up getting told off. Much better and safer to do what I am told.

As Mr. F upthread confirms, most husbands do as they are told. We find it easier and more harmonious that way. Also we can't get shouted at for forgetting something if we haven't been told to do it or buy it. "Was that on the list, darling?"

You are making an excellent case for women running the world!

We think, we plan, we give orders, we can even read your minds even if (pace @MrTimT) you cannot read ours.

Now: about that Witney constituency.......

SimonStClare said:

BBC - A British man accused of trying to shoot US presidential candidate Donald Trump has pleaded guilty to some of the charges he faced. - He pleaded guilty to being an illegal alien in possession of a firearm and disrupting an official function.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-surrey-37357350

Interested to how / why he was an illegal alien...did he not fill an ESTA and smuggled himself in from Canada / Mexico? Or stayed in US for a long time after entering as a tourist?

Speedy said:

williamglenn said:

PlatoSaid said:

Y0kel said:

There is a rumour that Hillary Clinton's medical records are going to get released in the next 24-28 hours and not by Clinton campaign.

Guess which fantastic organ apparently has them....

On another note, in Europe there is what can be best described as a hell of a lot of terror and anti-terror activity. IS inspired/directed bods are getting compromised and IS knows it so its desperately trying to get its operatives to act.

So far ain't working out to well but they will get a shot in and don't forget Al Qaeda either, especially around these parts. They'd really like to get a hit in.

There's another Gufficer data dump just now according to Wikileaks

They've just posted a link to the raw data which seems to be an archive of DNC material. No idea what's in it.

According to y0kel's hints, Hillary's medical records should be somewhere there.

Assange was saying that he had dirt on Clinton which would finish her political career. I am sure we will know shortly whether he was telling the truth or talking out his arse.

FrancisUrquhart said:

Perhaps put off updating your Iphone / iPad...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/2016/09/13/ios-10-launch-live-how-to-upgrade-to-apples-new-software-and-wha/

I've been running the betas and it's been pretty good so far, nothing more major than the screen rotate getting stuck on the iPad for an hour. Now on the production versions with no issues. Always back up device to a computer first and download the updates through iTunes though, doing them online adds more variables to the process.

MP_SE said:

Speedy said:

williamglenn said:

PlatoSaid said:

Y0kel said:

There is a rumour that Hillary Clinton's medical records are going to get released in the next 24-28 hours and not by Clinton campaign.

Guess which fantastic organ apparently has them....

On another note, in Europe there is what can be best described as a hell of a lot of terror and anti-terror activity. IS inspired/directed bods are getting compromised and IS knows it so its desperately trying to get its operatives to act.

So far ain't working out to well but they will get a shot in and don't forget Al Qaeda either, especially around these parts. They'd really like to get a hit in.

There's another Gufficer data dump just now according to Wikileaks

They've just posted a link to the raw data which seems to be an archive of DNC material. No idea what's in it.

According to y0kel's hints, Hillary's medical records should be somewhere there.

Assange was saying that he had dirt on Clinton which would finish her political career. I am sure we will know shortly whether he was telling the truth or talking out his arse.

Only if its genuine but how do you prove it isn't. One of the key points of a front operation like this is that it can mix information with disinformation. Build some cred, spread some rumours. Its out of the Introduction to Propaganda manual.

If enough people believe the disinformation, job done.

There is an obvious implication in the Assange cult nonsense about releasing his records.

Sandpit said:

MP_SE said:

Speedy said:

williamglenn said:

PlatoSaid said:

Y0kel said:

There is a rumour that Hillary Clinton's medical records are going to get released in the next 24-28 hours and not by Clinton campaign.

Guess which fantastic organ apparently has them....

On another note, in Europe there is what can be best described as a hell of a lot of terror and anti-terror activity. IS inspired/directed bods are getting compromised and IS knows it so its desperately trying to get its operatives to act.

So far ain't working out to well but they will get a shot in and don't forget Al Qaeda either, especially around these parts. They'd really like to get a hit in.

There's another Gufficer data dump just now according to Wikileaks

They've just posted a link to the raw data which seems to be an archive of DNC material. No idea what's in it.

According to y0kel's hints, Hillary's medical records should be somewhere there.

Assange was saying that he had dirt on Clinton which would finish her political career. I am sure we will know shortly whether he was telling the truth or talking out his arse.

If he's got medical records, in breach of numerous laws, he's probably spending the rest of his life in the Ecuadorian Embassy.

Isn't he already doing that?

Also, I am guessing that the same people who backed him over previous leaks of information with public interest defence would have a hard time limbo dancing that such info on POTUS candidates is then wrong.

Is interesting how he has gone from the selfless truth teller among the liberal media with the US military stuff to be persona non grata over the Clinton / DNC stuff.

Personally if I had classified info that I thought needed to be leaked I wouldn't be wanting to go anywhere near him.

Cyclefree said:

Now: about that Witney constituency.......

You'd be an... entertaining addition to the House - go for it!

Y0kel said:

MP_SE said:

Speedy said:

williamglenn said:

PlatoSaid said:

Y0kel said:

There is a rumour that Hillary Clinton's medical records are going to get released in the next 24-28 hours and not by Clinton campaign.

Guess which fantastic organ apparently has them....

On another note, in Europe there is what can be best described as a hell of a lot of terror and anti-terror activity. IS inspired/directed bods are getting compromised and IS knows it so its desperately trying to get its operatives to act.

So far ain't working out to well but they will get a shot in and don't forget Al Qaeda either, especially around these parts. They'd really like to get a hit in.

There's another Gufficer data dump just now according to Wikileaks

They've just posted a link to the raw data which seems to be an archive of DNC material. No idea what's in it.

According to y0kel's hints, Hillary's medical records should be somewhere there.

Assange was saying that he had dirt on Clinton which would finish her political career. I am sure we will know shortly whether he was telling the truth or talking out his arse.

Only if its genuine but how do you prove it isn't. One of the key points of a front operation like this is that it can mix information with disinformation. Build some cred, spread some rumours. Its out of the Introduction to Propaganda manual.

If enough people believe the disinformation, job done.

There is an obvious implication in the Assange cult nonsense about releasing his records.

Yes, the first Guccifer leak had several documents edited before release. It's pretty clear that the Russians are beginning to l flex their muscles

NickPalmer said:

Cyclefree said:

Now: about that Witney constituency.......

You'd be an... entertaining addition to the House - go for it!

Seconded.

And Nick, are you thinking of standing again for the revised Broxtowe? I'm a Tory member who'd vote for you over Anna Sourpuss.

Sandpit said:

Allison Pearson in the DT nails the grammar school debate, as seen by middle England rather than the usual commentariat.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/family/how-dare-the-privileged-elite-tell-us-that-grammar-schools-are-b/

"Truly, there is a parallel moral universe in Britain where a person can argue passionately that grammar schools are socially divisive while sending their own sproglets to Westminster, that cradle of so many of our enlightened opinion-formers. It is scarcely credible at the start of the 21st century that the number of national newspaper columnists who went to Westminster, Eton or other private schools outnumber those of us who went to a comprehensive. How is it possible that the kind of school that serves 93 per cent of the population should be so pitifully under-represented among the ranks of those who pontificate on state education about which, to be perfectly fair, they know absolutely bugger all?

"Read my lips: it’s the grammar schools, stupid.

"No one cares about journalism, but that same dismal class discrepancy is to be found across all the professions, politics and even the starry firmament of light entertainment. Turning to the shadow cabinet, we find the comic spectacle of a group of Labour politicians who still believe in the comprehensive system, much as early man believed the Earth was flat. People like Jeremy Corbyn, John McDonnell and Diane Abbott are violently opposed to Mrs May’s grammar-school revival, though they dare not say so because – guess what? – they went to grammar schools, which got them where they are today".

They live in a fantasy world where the choice is between selective schools and comprehensive schools, whereas in the real world the choice is between selection by ability to buy a property in the catchment area of a successful school and selection by ability to pay for private education.

Those Wikileaks dumps are also a remarkably good way to spread malware.

RobD said:

Danny565 said:

Newsnight: atleast one Tory minister has vowed not to vote for the boundary changes ("pencilled in a bout of flu for the day of the vote").

I'm guessing one of the several who voted against last time, so not that bad.

As I've been saying all day on the boundaries issue, the Tory whips have got two years to square the circle, but the various carrots on offer will become big sticks to anyone who doesn't get with the program for the final vote in 2018. It's going to be considered by May as a vote of confidence, no excuses, turn up or have the whip withdrawn and be deselected. The reduction in MP numbers was in the manifesto.

Of course if you remove the 6 Yougov polls a different picture is presented.

PS - National Polls now coming out showing effect of the Clinton Collapse. Full effect won't be known for a couple of days as all are covering periods before and after so far.

AndyJS said:

Difficult to believe the LDs would be down to two seats in England under these proposals, in North Norfolk and Westmorland & Lonsdale.

I think Twickenham will be a LibDem gain (assuming that Vince isn't standing again). The London 2018 local elections should give us a good insight into whether there will be an LD revival in the capital.

rcs1000 said:

williamglenn said:

http://www.bostonglobe.com/news/politics/2016/09/13/new-poll-shows-competitive-race-maine/YNsB57jVpHmEJcJsFZRXMP/story.html

Poll showing Maine within margin of error between Clinton and Trump.

Obama won the state 56%-41% versus Romney...

I do not believe that Donald Trump will win Maine.

There have been some close polls earlier.

weejonnie said:

rcs1000 said:

williamglenn said:

http://www.bostonglobe.com/news/politics/2016/09/13/new-poll-shows-competitive-race-maine/YNsB57jVpHmEJcJsFZRXMP/story.html

Poll showing Maine within margin of error between Clinton and Trump.

Obama won the state 56%-41% versus Romney...

I do not believe that Donald Trump will win Maine.

There have been some close polls earlier.

It'd be landslide territory for Trump if he wins Maine.

PlatoSaid said:

Gabriel Debendetti
The evidence keeps piling up that the Clinton camp isn't scared — eager, even — to have the "deplorables" fight now. https://t.co/WA57oKhYo0

Well it will keep the focus off the health issue. Dead cat and all that.

justin124 said:

rcs1000 said:

AndyJS said:

Difficult to believe the LDs would be down to two seats in England under these proposals, in North Norfolk and Westmorland & Lonsdale.

I think Twickenham will be a LibDem gain (assuming that Vince isn't standing again). The London 2018 local elections should give us a good insight into whether there will be an LD revival in the capital.

I will be surprised if that happens. Pre-1997 Twickenham was a pretty safe Tory seat , and following Vince Cable's interregnum we are probably heading back to normal service being resumed.

We'll get a good indication in 2018 whether you or I is likely to be proved right.

My view is:

1. The LibDems dominate the council, and remained strong there even in 2014 when they were wiped out in other places.
2. It was one of the heaviest Remain voting constituencies in the UK.
3. Vince had the second highest swing against him of any incumbent LibDem MP
4. The Tories will have just greenlighted Heathrow expansion.
5. The LibDems will be polling 12% in 2020 rather than 8%.

I think that points to a LibDem gain.

PlatoSaid said:

Fox
Key points from @realDonaldTrump’s childcare proposals: https://t.co/F3zJ4Filnw

So the Donald has a magic money tree too! (or the Trump foundation will pay, maybe. or, Mexico, I guess)

rcs1000 said:

AndyJS said:

Difficult to believe the LDs would be down to two seats in England under these proposals, in North Norfolk and Westmorland & Lonsdale.

I think Twickenham will be a LibDem gain (assuming that Vince isn't standing again). The London 2018 local elections should give us a good insight into whether there will be an LD revival in the capital.

I hope they do win a few seats back, although I'd prefer them to be of the Norman Lamb school rather than the Tim Farron.

rcs1000 said:

justin124 said:

rcs1000 said:

AndyJS said:

Difficult to believe the LDs would be down to two seats in England under these proposals, in North Norfolk and Westmorland & Lonsdale.

I think Twickenham will be a LibDem gain (assuming that Vince isn't standing again). The London 2018 local elections should give us a good insight into whether there will be an LD revival in the capital.

I will be surprised if that happens. Pre-1997 Twickenham was a pretty safe Tory seat , and following Vince Cable's interregnum we are probably heading back to normal service being resumed.

We'll get a good indication in 2018 whether you or I is likely to be proved right.
My view is:
1. The LibDems dominate the council, and remained strong there even in 2014 when they were wiped out in other places.
2. It was one of the heaviest Remain voting constituencies in the UK.
3. Vince had the second highest swing against him of any incumbent LibDem MP
4. The Tories will have just greenlighted Heathrow expansion.
5. The LibDems will be polling 12% in 2020 rather than 8%.
I think that points to a LibDem gain.

The Conservative MP will have the first time incumbent uplift at the next GE.

Good morning all, on this incredibly hot September morning

I see the same thread is still going and so is Junckers

tlg86 said:

DecrepitJohnL said:

AndyJS said:

Sandpit said:

Allison Pearson in the DT nails the grammar school debate, as seen by middle England rather than the usual commentariat.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/family/how-dare-the-privileged-elite-tell-us-that-grammar-schools-are-b/

"Truly, there is a parallel moral universe in Britain where a person can argue passionately that grammar schools are socially divisive while sending their own sproglets to Westminster, that cradle of so many of our enlightened opinion-formers. It is scarcely credible at the start of the 21st century that the number of national newspaper columnists who went to Westminster, Eton or other private schools outnumber those of us who went to a comprehensive. How is it possible that the kind of school that serves 93 per cent of the population should be so pitifully under-represented among the ranks of those who pontificate on state education about which, to be perfectly fair, they know absolutely bugger all?

"Read my lips: it’s the grammar schools, stupid.

They live in a fantasy world where the choice is between selective schools and comprehensive schools, whereas in the real world the choice is between selection by ability to buy a property in the catchment area of a successful school and selection by ability to pay for private education.

Moving to the catchment areas of successful schools -- these will be comprehensive schools, no?

All comps are equal, but some are more equal than others. That said, one good thing about going to a comp as I did is that the wasters have no comeback on those of us who bothered to work at school. We all had the same education (supposedly) so if they are unemployable that's their problem.

The problem with comprehensives is that the wasters are in big enough numbers to influence the school culture and ruin it for everyone.

That said the 11 plus is too blunt. A promotion and reiegation system in subsequent years is needed.

Another side to this is that it is in the tory party interest to bring back grammar schools as just as broadly speaking home owners are tories vs renters who tend to vote labour....

So grammar school pupils, schooled in a culture of excellence and striving to succeed tend to be tories so the outputs of Marxist Treason Factories Comprehensives are liable to vote Labour.

Sunil_Prasannan said:

AndyJS said:

Difficult to believe the LDs would be down to two seats in England under these proposals, in North Norfolk and Westmorland & Lonsdale.

Who needs a taxi when you can make do with a tandem?

That's why UKIP are doing so badly, Carswell has to use a Unicycle.

Higher proportion of psycopaths in boardrooms than prisons:

http://dailym.ai/2clxV1j

peter_from_putney said:

Paul_Bedfordshire said:

Good morning all, on this incredibly hot September morning

I see the same thread is still going and so is Junckers

"incredibly hot morning"

Ha! I'm not sure where you are, but in this part of West Yorkshire it's decidedly cool, damp and autumnal.

At the moment Hampstead - well actually under hampstead on my way from Bedfordshire to the City

Casino_Royale said:

rcs1000 said:

TCPoliticalBetting said:

rcs1000 said:

justin124 said:

rcs1000 said:

AndyJS said:

Difficult to believe the LDs would be down to two seats in England under these proposals, in North Norfolk and Westmorland & Lonsdale.

I think Twickenham will be a LibDem gain (assuming that Vince isn't standing again). The London 2018 local elections should give us a good insight into whether there will be an LD revival in the capital.

I will be surprised if that happens. Pre-1997 Twickenham was a pretty safe Tory seat , and following Vince Cable's interregnum we are probably heading back to normal service being resumed.

We'll get a good indication in 2018 whether you or I is likely to be proved right.
My view is:
1. The LibDems dominate the council, and remained strong there even in 2014 when they were wiped out in other places.
2. It was one of the heaviest Remain voting constituencies in the UK.
3. Vince had the second highest swing against him of any incumbent LibDem MP
4. The Tories will have just greenlighted Heathrow expansion.
5. The LibDems will be polling 12% in 2020 rather than 8%.
I think that points to a LibDem gain.

The Conservative MP will have the first time incumbent uplift at the next GE.

No matter how Tania votes, she'll be tarred by her government's Heathrow decision. I reckon that'll outweigh any first term incumbency bonus.

She seems to be a perfectly lovely lady, but also wetter than a fish's wet bits.

I'm not sure about Twickenham. The LD base looks much higher than it probably is due to a personal vote for Cable, who won't be in the running next time.

Except that Dr Vince Cable had the second highest swing against him of any LibDem incumbent. And Twickenham was one of only three constituencies (Eastleigh and Eastbourne were the others) where there was a more than 15% difference between local election results and the General.

Paul_Bedfordshire said:

Good morning all, on this incredibly hot September morning

I see the same thread is still going and so is Junckers

Junckers is in his job until the Spanish (re-)elect a PP-led government, and the balance of EU leaders moves decisively against him.

When the leaders of France, Germany, Spain and Italy (as well as Poland and a bunch of other countries) say "Go!", you're dead meat.

His temporary reprieve is the result of (a) Hollande and Renzo being otherwise disposed, and (b) Spain not having a government.

Paul_Bedfordshire said:

tlg86 said:

DecrepitJohnL said:

AndyJS said:

Sandpit said:

Allison Pearson in the DT nails the grammar school debate, as seen by middle England rather than the usual commentariat.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/family/how-dare-the-privileged-elite-tell-us-that-grammar-schools-are-b/

"Truly, there is a parallel moral universe in Britain where a person can argue passionately that grammar schools are socially divisive while sending their own sproglets to Westminster, that cradle of so many of our enlightened opinion-formers. It is scarcely credible at the start of the 21st century that the number of national newspaper columnists who went to Westminster, Eton or other private schools outnumber those of us who went to a comprehensive. How is it possible that the kind of school that serves 93 per cent of the population should be so pitifully under-represented among the ranks of those who pontificate on state education about which, to be perfectly fair, they know absolutely bugger all?

"Read my lips: it’s the grammar schools, stupid.

They live in a fantasy world where the choice is between selective schools and comprehensive schools, whereas in the real world the choice is between selection by ability to buy a property in the catchment area of a successful school and selection by ability to pay for private education.

Moving to the catchment areas of successful schools -- these will be comprehensive schools, no?

All comps are equal, but some are more equal than others. That said, one good thing about going to a comp as I did is that the wasters have no comeback on those of us who bothered to work at school. We all had the same education (supposedly) so if they are unemployable that's their problem.

The problem with comprehensives is that the wasters are in big enough numbers to influence the school culture and ruin it for everyone.

That said the 11 plus is too blunt. A promotion and reiegation system in subsequent years is needed.

Another side to this is that it is in the tory party interest to bring back grammar schools as just as broadly speaking home owners are tories vs renters who tend to vote labour....

So grammar school pupils, schooled in a culture of excellence and striving to succeed tend to be tories so the outputs of Marxist Treason Factories Comprehensives are liable to vote Labour.

Exactly: the grammar school system of the 1950 to 1975 period didn't work. But that doesn't mean there aren't things we can take from it.

rcs1000 said:

Paul_Bedfordshire said:

tlg86 said:

DecrepitJohnL said:

AndyJS said:

Sandpit said:

Allison Pearson in the DT nails the grammar school debate, as seen by middle England rather than the usual commentariat.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/family/how-dare-the-privileged-elite-tell-us-that-grammar-schools-are-b/

"Truly, there is a parallel moral universe in Britain where a person can argue passionately that grammar schools are socially divisive while sending their own sproglets to Westminster, that cradle of so many of our enlightened opinion-formers. It is scarcely credible at the start of the 21st century that the number of national newspaper columnists who went to Westminster, Eton or other private schools outnumber those of us who went to a comprehensive. How is it possible that the kind of school that serves 93 per cent of the population should be so pitifully under-represented among the ranks of those who pontificate on state education about which, to be perfectly fair, they know absolutely bugger all?

"Read my lips: it’s the grammar schools, stupid.

They live in a fantasy world where the choice is between selective schools and comprehensive schools, whereas in the real world the choice is between selection by ability to buy a property in the catchment area of a successful school and selection by ability to pay for private education.

Moving to the catchment areas of successful schools -- these will be comprehensive schools, no?

All comps are equal, but some are more equal than others. That said, one good thing about going to a comp as I did is that the wasters have no comeback on those of us who bothered to work at school. We all had the same education (supposedly) so if they are unemployable that's their problem.

The problem with comprehensives is that the wasters are in big enough numbers to influence the school culture and ruin it for everyone.

That said the 11 plus is too blunt. A promotion and reiegation system in subsequent years is needed.

Another side to this is that it is in the tory party interest to bring back grammar schools as just as broadly speaking home owners are tories vs renters who tend to vote labour....

So grammar school pupils, schooled in a culture of excellence and striving to succeed tend to be tories so the outputs of Marxist Treason Factories Comprehensives are liable to vote Labour.

Exactly: the grammar school system of the 1950 to 1975 period didn't work. But that doesn't mean there aren't things we can take from it.

Agree that promotion should be very much part of any grammar school system. Relegation however, unless on account of disruptive, unruly behaviour, sounds absolutely awful and should be avoided.

Casino_Royale said:

Nevertheless he would have still had a substantial personal vote.

I don't think we can read too much into local election results - Eastleigh is a LD fiefdom.

I disagree with you on very few things, Mr Casino, but I think you're wrong here.

If Dr Cable had such a significant personal vote, why did he do so much worse than any of the other LibDem incumbents in SW London?

If Dr Cable had such a significant personal vote, why did he underperform his party's local election results so much?

If we assume that every local election votes translates into 0.8 general election votes (proportionally), you get a pretty good approximation of LibDem support.

Dr Cable got 0.58. Let us see what 2018 local election results look like. But if the LibDems gain votes in the Twickenham wards of Richmond council, and we assume something like 0.75 for the constituency, then it's very hard to see anything other than a LibDem gain in 2020. (Assuming the government goes ahead with Heathrow expansion.)

Has Mike gone on holiday again, already?

(Joke)

rcs1000 said:

Exactly: the grammar school system of the 1950 to 1975 period didn't work. But that doesn't mean there aren't things we can take from it.

grammar schools would be just fine if there was a proper commitment to making excellent schools (technical, specialist or whatever) for the not-so academic kids. You wouldn't need any selection, because everyone would self segregate into a suitable school. No parent (or few at any rate) really wants their kids suffering an unsuitable education. But there's no evidence the govt has any kind of such plans. they only seem to care about grammar schools.

edmundintokyo said:

Paul_Bedfordshire said:

Reasons to be glad of Brexit #94.

ECHR government has just ordered us to pay someone associated with the 21/7/2005 failed terrorist attack £13k for not giving him a fair trial

http://dailym.ai/2clWOtr

If you're ever accused of a crime, you'll be glad you have rights protected by the courts, like the right to a lawyer. Which AFAIK you'll still have, because Britain isn't leaving the ECHR???

It isnt - yet, but it is leaving the ECJ and repealing the human rights act - which means the ECHR will be toothless - as it is in Russia and Belarus, both of which are signed up to the ECHR.

Paul_Bedfordshire said:

edmundintokyo said:

Paul_Bedfordshire said:

Reasons to be glad of Brexit #94.

ECHR government has just ordered us to pay someone associated with the 21/7/2005 failed terrorist attack £13k for not giving him a fair trial

http://dailym.ai/2clWOtr

If you're ever accused of a crime, you'll be glad you have rights protected by the courts, like the right to a lawyer. Which AFAIK you'll still have, because Britain isn't leaving the ECHR???

It isnt - yet, but it is leaving the ECJ and repealing the human rights act - which means the ECHR will be toothless - as it is in Russia and Belarus, both of which are signed up to the ECHR.

uh-oh.

Yes and no (yo @Casino_Royale)

We are not leaving the ECHR. This means that whatever new bill of rights we come up with will incorporate its terms. Hence in UK law, generally, ECHR terms will apply which the courts will be subservient to, and unable to overturn, as with any UK law.

However, the ECtHR only has advisory capacity over UK courts. Hence on an individual basis, the UK Supreme Court has the right to ignore its judgements.

TOPPING said:

Paul_Bedfordshire said:

edmundintokyo said:

Paul_Bedfordshire said:

Reasons to be glad of Brexit #94.

ECHR government has just ordered us to pay someone associated with the 21/7/2005 failed terrorist attack £13k for not giving him a fair trial

http://dailym.ai/2clWOtr

If you're ever accused of a crime, you'll be glad you have rights protected by the courts, like the right to a lawyer. Which AFAIK you'll still have, because Britain isn't leaving the ECHR???

It isnt - yet, but it is leaving the ECJ and repealing the human rights act - which means the ECHR will be toothless - as it is in Russia and Belarus, both of which are signed up to the ECHR.

uh-oh.

Yes and no (yo @Casino_Royale)

We are not leaving the ECHR. This means that whatever new bill of rights we come up with will incorporate its terms. Hence in UK law, generally, ECHR terms will apply which the courts will be subservient to, and unable to overturn, as with any UK law.

However, the ECtHR only has advisory capacity over UK courts. Hence on an individual basis, the UK Supreme Court has the right to ignore its judgements.

That's a big assumption - IIRC it wasn't the case until Blair made it so.

Paul_Bedfordshire said:

Reasons to be glad of Brexit #94.

ECHR government has just ordered us to pay someone associated with the 21/7/2005 failed terrorist attack £13k for not giving him a fair trial

http://dailym.ai/2clWOtr

I suspect the court wanted to make a point without overturning previous convictions or rewarding terrorists directly. The police failed to follow due process when a witness incriminated himself and became a suspect. In the view of the court this jeopardised a fair trial but he was only awarded costs for bringing the case to the ECHR.