politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Why part of my expected Diane James winnings will go on Jus

AlastairMeeks said:

The mouth says no but the eyes say...

https://twitter.com/youngvulgarian/status/776767740145172480

... and the poster in the background should say 'Coming 2nd or lower for Britain'

MarkHopkins said:

Charles said:

DavidL said:

Pulpstar said:

@DavidL I'm struggling with a Venn diagram here, can you help me out ?

Osborne fans ∩ Brexiteers

Well there's me and...ehh...several others I am sure.

If you ignore the referendum campaign then moi aussi

A number of people liked both Cameron and Osborne before their behaviour in the referendum campaign.

Yes, I can see that. I just never thought the referendum campaign was the most important thing about the Cameron/Osborne government. For me it was a marginal decision with competing arguments on both sides.

But I may have been wrong about that.

DavidL said:

CarlottaVance said:

FrankBooth said:

Something else to thank George Osborne for

Theresa May inherited a poisoned chalice. The energy world has changed utterly over the last decade as climate policy drives a massive global push for renewable power, transforming the calculus of future costs. “It looks like a contract that was written five years ago on a business case that was probably pulled together 10 years ago,” says ScottishPower.

Perhaps her lack of enthusiasm for Osborne's genius was in part driven by this?

Then she should have said no. I frankly expected her too. But she has gone along with it. Unwisely.

JM Keynes: "When the facts change I change my opinion, what do you do sir?" Or something like that.

When she initially announced her review I had very high hopes for her, it seemed like a no brainer to cancel the project. Now she seems incompetent for having a review and not cancelling it, while angering China by holding one in the first place. She's taken the pain and still lost. Baffling decision making process. Hopefully the project is at derailed in some way because it is an awful waste of money.

PlatoSaid said:

For Top Gear propah fans

http://variety.com/2016/digital/global/amazon-launch-date-jeremy-clarkson-the-grand-tour-1201862601/

ttps://youtu.be/oK0lkrtYvVs

Looks amazing can’t wait

Pro_Rata said:

Paul_Bedfordshire said:

tlg86 said:

Paul_Bedfordshire said:

Paul_Bedfordshire said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

Sandpit said:

Don't disagree with any of that. Joined up decision making would give the go-ahead to LHR and HS2 at the same time, and have the railway go to the airport.

Crossrail will I think allow direct trains from Reading to Heathrow when it opens, which will allow much better access for those without a car. Some more joined up thinking would build a massive park and ride on the route - maybe somewhere West of Maidenhead, near where the A404M crosses the train line.

Yes, and also make more use of Birmingham airport, which will be less than an hour from Euston if and when HS2 is up and running.

HS2 going to heathrow would be pointless. In most cases you would still have to get a train onto your terminal from whichever terminal the HS2 station is.

So old oak common is just as good a point and would save a fortune

Edit - old oak common because crosssrail will link from old oak common to all the heathrow terminals in a few minutes.

It's worth remembering that HS2 has made it this far partly because the Tories saw it as a logical way to oppose a third runway at Heathrow. Now they appear to be ready to bite the bullet on the third runway, perhaps HS2 isn't a done deal?

Phase 1 is needed (Euston to Crewe/Birmingham) because the government built three damn great new towns along the existing route making it overcrowded.

The rest looks to me to be a white elephant, especially the east midlands/leeds branch that will be little faster from city centres - leeds excepted - than the current route and a lot more inconvenient in the case of the east midlands.

Descoping the max speed to 180 mph would also save a lot and building an additional station near aylesbury would throw a bone to the protesters.

My fantasy HS3 (I mean real HS, not the Transpennine idea) would go from Old Oak Common under Heathrow and on to Portsmouth (ca 30min to Euston), Southampton (40), Bournemouth (55) and Exeter (85) perhap even addressing the Dawlish problem by extending to Plymouth (100mins) and incorporate an HS shuttle between Heathrow and my new airport south of Birmingham (yep, my Walter Mitty airport idea again as whichever wag called it). Could have fun with the New Forest and other AONB's though

If you wanted to solve multiple problems and avoid the New Forest and the Jurrasic Coast you could go Heathrow - Basingstoke - Soton - Portsmouth - Ryde (IoW) - Yarmouth (IoW) - Bournemouth - Yeovil - Taunton - Exeter..

Having a sensible fixed connection to the mainland might utterly transform the Isle of Wight...

felix said:

logical_song said:

felix said:

JonathanD said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

CarlottaVance said:

While the YouGov OGH reports isn't up yet, the numbers don't seem that different from the August YouGov results, where 38% favoured introducing more Grammar Schools and 23% wanted them scrapped with 17% opting for the status quo. Voters see Grammar Schools as 'improving education' and believe they are good for social mobility (net +16). So while the commentariat are united in opposition, the voters are not. Remind anyone of anything?

https://yougov.co.uk/news/2016/08/15/two-thirds-people-would-send-their-child-grammar-s/

Numbers up here

https://yougov.co.uk/news/2016/09/15/grammar-school-fans-know-theyre-worse-for-less-abl/

So its primarily the over 50s and especially the over 60s driving the push for more Grammars while those younger are opposed - so if you have school age children you're against if you don't then you are in favour.

So what - since when did older voters not count?

I think the point was that if you are over 60 you're not likely to be looking for secondary schooling for your children.

Again - so what? I've never had children but expect to pay taxes for education and be able to vote about systems. Of course if the elderly could be excluded from having to pay for education you might have a point but they aren't and you don't.

If you are affected by something you are more likely to have thought about it in detail.

What a weird argument from Philip Collins:

"Meritocracy is the last thing Britain needs"

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/comment/meritocracy-is-the-last-thing-britain-needs-nvbrk6gsv

MarkHopkins said:

Charles said:

DavidL said:

Pulpstar said:

@DavidL I'm struggling with a Venn diagram here, can you help me out ?

Osborne fans ∩ Brexiteers

Well there's me and...ehh...several others I am sure.

If you ignore the referendum campaign then moi aussi

A number of people liked both Cameron and Osborne before their behaviour in the referendum campaign.

Quite. They were doing a great job until February, when they tried to sell a lump of poo as a pot of gold.

felix said:

---
@JonathanD

Numbers up here

https://yougov.co.uk/news/2016/09/15/grammar-school-fans-know-theyre-worse-for-less-abl/

So its primarily the over 50s and especially the over 60s driving the push for more Grammars while those younger are opposed - so if you have school age children you're against if you don't then you are in favour.

---

So what - since when did older voters not count?

Those that are directly affected by the decision have a different view from those that aren't affected at all. Those that are unaffected have a valid view because they are contributing to the cost, but it is worth understanding why those that are affected think differently and what justification the rest of us have for rejecting that view. Equally the elderly and their carers might think they have a special insight into care for for the elderly.

felix said:

AlastairMeeks said:

The mouth says no but the eyes say...

https://twitter.com/youngvulgarian/status/776767740145172480

'Touch me again and I'll twist your balls off?'

Suzanne would have kneed him in the cojones when he got close.

I see Nabavi's Theorem of Bitter Winners is receiving yet more strong supporting evidence today. It really is the strangest phenomenon.

TheScreamingEagles said:

YouGov

Con 38 (-2)

Lab 31 (+2)

LD 7 (nc)

UKIP 13 (nc)

https://yougov.co.uk/news/2016/09/15/voting-intention-conservatives-38-labour-31/

5..4..3..2.1...Justin124 incoming.

Pulpstar said:

Sandpit said:

PlatoSaid said:

What are Dems doing?!

http://linkis.com/thegatewaypundit.com/kEZP1

"Harry Reid with sidekick Chuck Schumer smirking in the background tried out a new attack line on Donald Trump today.

Democrats decided the best way to defeat Donald Trump is to fat shame him.

Really? Sen Schumer should ask his young cousin Amy about fat shaming.

It is a good way to lose the vote of everyone who is overweight in the USA (Which is err... pretty much everyone)

I was thinking of this incident in particular.
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2015/02/19/amy-schumer-chubby-reaction-sexism-hollywood_n_6711070.html
Usually the liberals go mad at things like this.

tlg86 said:

logical_song said:

felix said:

logical_song said:

felix said:

JonathanD said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

CarlottaVance said:

While the YouGov OGH reports isn't up yet, the numbers don't seem that different from the August YouGov results, where 38% favoured introducing more Grammar Schools and 23% wanted them scrapped with 17% opting for the status quo. Voters see Grammar Schools as 'improving education' and believe they are good for social mobility (net +16). So while the commentariat are united in opposition, the voters are not. Remind anyone of anything?

https://yougov.co.uk/news/2016/08/15/two-thirds-people-would-send-their-child-grammar-s/

Numbers up here

https://yougov.co.uk/news/2016/09/15/grammar-school-fans-know-theyre-worse-for-less-abl/

So its primarily the over 50s and especially the over 60s driving the push for more Grammars while those younger are opposed - so if you have school age children you're against if you don't then you are in favour.

So what - since when did older voters not count?

I think the point was that if you are over 60 you're not likely to be looking for secondary schooling for your children.

Again - so what? I've never had children but expect to pay taxes for education and be able to vote about systems. Of course if the elderly could be excluded from having to pay for education you might have a point but they aren't and you don't.

If you are affected by something you are more likely to have thought about it in detail.

We've all been to school, so I think we've all thought about it. Admittedly we each only get one experience of it, but I feel far more confident talking about school and education simply because I have some grasp on what actually happens. By contrast I haven't seen a doctor in nearly 20 years and as such have little feel for the NHS and health systems.

If you have a child about to enter secondary education and you are a responsible parent you will have thought quite a lot about it. If your experience of school was over 40 years and several changes of educational policy ago, maybe less so. But then you're only being asked to answer an opinion poll question.

CarlottaVance said:

FF43 said:

FrankBooth said:

Good but depressing piece on Hinkley Point.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/09/15/hinkley-point-will-be-obsolete-before-it-even-starts-but-theresa/

Something else to thank George Osborne for. Hopefully now we won't be getting the two new Chinese spec power stations but who knows? It will create thousands of jobs in France though I'm told and the money we pay China in our energy bills for a generation won't figure on the national debt.

Probably yet another cost of Brexit - the diplomatic fallout of a rift with France and China, who will both have a big say in the post-Brexit settlement, is too high a price to pay. OTOH, there wouldn't have a been a review without Brexit and Cameron/Osborne being thrown out, so I suppose no net gain or loss.

It wouldn't exactly have had - 'BRITAIN - OPEN FOR BUSINESS' written all over it, would it?

In other circumstances, they could ride that out. Essentially Evans-Pritchard's point: what made sense ten years ago no longer does. It would annoy the French and Chinese but they would live with it.

Charles said:

FF43 said:

felix said:

---
@JonathanD

Numbers up here

https://yougov.co.uk/news/2016/09/15/grammar-school-fans-know-theyre-worse-for-less-abl/

So its primarily the over 50s and especially the over 60s driving the push for more Grammars while those younger are opposed - so if you have school age children you're against if you don't then you are in favour.

---

So what - since when did older voters not count?

Those that are directly affected by the decision have a different view from those that aren't affected at all. Those that are unaffected have a valid view because they are contributing to the cost, but it is worth understanding why those that are affected think differently and what justification the rest of us have for rejecting that view. Equally the elderly and their carers might think they have a special insight into care for for the elderly.

Don't forget that current parents will value stability in the system. They will beat the cost of disruption but not see the benefits. Older votersmay be more objective.

And will have their own, their children and possibly their grand children's experiences to reflect upon...

Charles said:

FF43 said:

felix said:

---
@JonathanD

Numbers up here

https://yougov.co.uk/news/2016/09/15/grammar-school-fans-know-theyre-worse-for-less-abl/

So its primarily the over 50s and especially the over 60s driving the push for more Grammars while those younger are opposed - so if you have school age children you're against if you don't then you are in favour.

---

So what - since when did older voters not count?

Those that are directly affected by the decision have a different view from those that aren't affected at all. Those that are unaffected have a valid view because they are contributing to the cost, but it is worth understanding why those that are affected think differently and what justification the rest of us have for rejecting that view. Equally the elderly and their carers might think they have a special insight into care for for the elderly.

Don't forget that current parents will value stability in the system. They will beat the cost of disruption but not see the benefits. Older votersmay be more objective.

Fair point. The reason why parents don't like grammar schools, and collectively they do dislike them, is that they don't want their children to go to second class schools. Proponents of grammar schools need to meet their objections on one or more of the following grounds:

1. Society only requires 20% of children to be educated to a high standard.
2. Only 20% of children are capable of being educated to a high standard.
3. Educating 20% of children to a higher standard has no effect on the remaining 80% so we might as well maximise our opportunities.

I haven't seen any of these points resolved.

Pulpstar said:

Sandpit said:

PlatoSaid said:

What are Dems doing?!

http://linkis.com/thegatewaypundit.com/kEZP1

"Harry Reid with sidekick Chuck Schumer smirking in the background tried out a new attack line on Donald Trump today.

Democrats decided the best way to defeat Donald Trump is to fat shame him.

Really? Sen Schumer should ask his young cousin Amy about fat shaming.

It is a good way to lose the vote of everyone who is overweight in the USA (Which is err... pretty much everyone)

Trump doesn't even really seem that overweight. He has a typical older male beer belly, but he's a damn sight slimmer than many Americans. The only indication of his obesity is his BMI, which is an unreliable measure anyway.

GIN1138 said:

PlatoSaid said:

Paul Brand ITV
If next UKIP leader is @DianeJames2016 then ironically that just leaves 'equality' parties Labour & Lib Dems never having had female leader

Lib's don't even have a lady MP do they?

Not even one. Someone predicted that and a certain LD poster said it was nonsense and that they would have a minimum of 35 MPs and lots of wimmin.... Clegg also never had a female LD cabinet minister either. He only had male LD cabinet ministers.

https://twitter.com/joncstone/status/776784128041742336

TheScreamingEagles said:

YouGov

Con 38 (-2)

Lab 31 (+2)

LD 7 (nc)

UKIP 13 (nc)

https://yougov.co.uk/news/2016/09/15/voting-intention-conservatives-38-labour-31/

Almost exactly the same as the general election. LDs down very slightly.

Slackbladder said:

weejonnie said:

GIN1138 said:

PlatoSaid said:

Paul Brand ITV
If next UKIP leader is @DianeJames2016 then ironically that just leaves 'equality' parties Labour & Lib Dems never having had female leader

Lib's don't even have a lady MP do they?

Opportunity knocks for a LibDem MP Gender-change operation.

Farrons got no balls already.

Soon it will be no hair either.

TheScreamingEagles said:

Jon Stone✔@joncstone - Cool sign at UKIP conference

ttps://twitter.com/joncstone/status/776784128041742336

The country would be a sadder place without the Great British eccentric - He can also spell.

''I see Nabavi's Theorem of Bitter Winners is receiving yet more strong supporting evidence today. It really is the strangest phenomenon. ''

For some people getting out of the EU isn;t an end, its a start.

Mr Dancer, our 5.9 bet is fastest in P2 so far.

Was Anna Soubry MP drunk on QT last night or was she just channeling the program she co-hosted in the early 90's - Central Weekend - Where the guests were very often "over-emotional" attention seekers, cranks and general loons?

AndyJS said:

For Hillary Clinton, it looks like the election is all about Pennsylvania. She can afford to lose Florida, Ohio, New Hampshire and Iowa as long as she holds PA.

Unless she loses (Colorado \/ Wisconsin) and Nevada (Already slightly red in the Nowcast).

We have had no polls from Pennsylvania since the Clinton Coughing Cock-up (other than a Google one that had Trump +3)

weejonnie said:

AndyJS said:

For Hillary Clinton, it looks like the election is all about Pennsylvania. She can afford to lose Florida, Ohio, New Hampshire and Iowa as long as she holds PA.

Unless she loses (Colorado \/ Wisconsin) and Nevada (Already slightly red in the Nowcast).

We have had no polls from Pennsylvania since the Clinton Coughing Cock-up (other than a Google one that had Trump +3)

Trump +3 would fit recent polling.

What will the scale of Nate Silver's meltdown be when Trump heads north of 50% in his model ?

O/T The iPhone 7 is the finest piece of engineering in human history.

This post was composed on said device.

AndyJS said:

For Hillary Clinton, it looks like the election is all about Pennsylvania. She can afford to lose Florida, Ohio, New Hampshire and Iowa as long as she holds PA.

An alternative route for Trump is to take the South, Florida, Ohio, Iowa and Arizona (all looking good on the latest polling) and then add any of the following combinations:

Colorado and Nevada.
Colorado and New Hampshire
Nevada and New Hampshire and Maine 2nd district

These combinations take him over the line without any of PA, VA, WI or MI.

Intriguingly Nevada and New Hampshire without ME2 leaves it tied at 269 ...

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/create_your_own_president_map.html

GIN1138 said:

Here's the full, glorious list of the Liberal Democrat Parliamentary Party - All 8 of them (and all men)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_Kingdom_Liberal_Democrat_MPs_2015

Bizarrely they actually have a "chief whip" - Tom Brake MP - I mean, why 8 people need to be "whipped" lord alone knows... Only in the Lib-Dems, etc.

Your point is, well, what, apart from some cheap points scoring and mischief making ?

I think you'll find the responsibilities of the Party Whip in the Commons are more than you seem to suggest or understand in terms of the business of the House.

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Sandpit, good, at this stage. I suspect the start may be the key, alas.

But 5.9 did seem oddly long.

Indeed. By the way, the market hasn't got going yet, but I'm possibly looking at a repeat of my Monaco no safety car bet. There's been a safety car every single race at Singapore, but like Monaco use of the VSC to cover marshalls on the track makes it less likely than in the past.

MarkHopkins said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

O/T The iPhone 7 is the finest piece of engineering in human history.

This post was composed on said device.

Concorde.

I once flew on Concorde.

That was overpriced for a cramped jet.

Flying first class on a decent airline is more fun that.

DavidL said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

O/T The iPhone 7 is the finest piece of engineering in human history.

This post was composed on said device.

Christ. Still paying the kids IPhone 6S contracts up.

Get yourself on to o2 refresh. New handset every year.

TheScreamingEagles said:

O/T The iPhone 7 is the finest piece of engineering in human history.

This post was composed on said device.

Don't you find the new unlocking mechanism infuriating? Also the new notifications for mail etc are way more intrusive by taking up more space. The new OS is a disappointment for me at least.

Pulpstar said:

weejonnie said:

AndyJS said:

For Hillary Clinton, it looks like the election is all about Pennsylvania. She can afford to lose Florida, Ohio, New Hampshire and Iowa as long as she holds PA.

Unless she loses (Colorado \/ Wisconsin) and Nevada (Already slightly red in the Nowcast).

We have had no polls from Pennsylvania since the Clinton Coughing Cock-up (other than a Google one that had Trump +3)

Trump +3 would fit recent polling.

What will the scale of Nate Silver's meltdown be when Trump heads north of 50% in his model ?

I think we can assume that 'peak Trump' will happen on Sunday when the weekly polls will all be post Hillary's Hurry-away Hastily Horror, then the polls will drop a bit onto a new Trump Plateau which will last until the 1st Presidential election.

Trump's victory of course will not come true.
That is we think it won't come true,
That is we hope it won't come true.
What if he wins it after all?

MTimT said:

In case no-one has posted it yet, LA Times has Trump up by 6 now, most of shift due to changes in likelihood to vote:

http://www.latimes.com/nation/politics/trailguide/la-na-trailguide-updates-donald-trump-s-lead-widens-in-daily-1473947034-htmlstory.html

Trump 47.2%
Clinton 41.3%

Makes sense, can't see many switching between the two parties, too polarized.

AndyJS said:

Verulamius said:

Interesting blog by Matt Singh http://www.ncpolitics.uk/2016/09/analysis-do-objections-to-the-boundary-review-stack-up.html/

Looks at where those 2million additional voters are geographically situated in the U.K. , and thus how it might have impacted in the boundary review.

The conclusion is that there is no material difference between Labour and Conservative constituencies in the percentage increase in additional voters. In fact the 2million might be slightly weighted towards conservative seats rather than labour seats.

Thus including the 2million additional registered voters in the bounary review is unlikely to make a material difference.

Very interesting. Shows Labour's complaints about the boundary review simply aren't supported by the evidence.

Isnt the point of the whining to try and stop the review and keep the present boundaries that strongly favour labour?

MTimT said:

AndyJS said:

For Hillary Clinton, it looks like the election is all about Pennsylvania. She can afford to lose Florida, Ohio, New Hampshire and Iowa as long as she holds PA.

An alternative route for Trump is to take the South, Florida, Ohio, Iowa and Arizona (all looking good on the latest polling) and then add any of the following combinations:

Colorado and Nevada.
Colorado and New Hampshire
Nevada and New Hampshire and Maine 2nd district

These combinations take him over the line without any of PA, VA, WI or MI.

Intriguingly Nevada and New Hampshire without ME2 leaves it tied at 269 ...

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/create_your_own_president_map.html

What you describe matches well with Nate Silver's 'winding path' diagram, which currently still has Hillary ahead, although by a smaller margin than before.
http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/?ex_cid=rrpromo

Paul_Bedfordshire said:

AndyJS said:

Verulamius said:

Interesting blog by Matt Singh http://www.ncpolitics.uk/2016/09/analysis-do-objections-to-the-boundary-review-stack-up.html/

Looks at where those 2million additional voters are geographically situated in the U.K. , and thus how it might have impacted in the boundary review.

The conclusion is that there is no material difference between Labour and Conservative constituencies in the percentage increase in additional voters. In fact the 2million might be slightly weighted towards conservative seats rather than labour seats.

Thus including the 2million additional registered voters in the bounary review is unlikely to make a material difference.

Very interesting. Shows Labour's complaints about the boundary review simply aren't supported by the evidence.

Isnt the point of the whining to try and stop the review and keep the present boundaries that strongly favour labour?

Pretty much.

Paddy Ashdown: ‘I turned to my wife and said, it’s not our country any more’

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/sep/16/paddy-ashdown-i-turned-to-my-wife-and-said-its-not-our-country-any-more?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard

TheScreamingEagles said:

MarkHopkins said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

O/T The iPhone 7 is the finest piece of engineering in human history.

This post was composed on said device.

Concorde.

I once flew on Concorde.

That was overpriced for a cramped jet.

Flying first class on a decent airline is more fun that.

I thought it was the speed that mattered on Concorde.

AndyJS said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

MarkHopkins said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

O/T The iPhone 7 is the finest piece of engineering in human history.

This post was composed on said device.

Concorde.

I once flew on Concorde.

That was overpriced for a cramped jet.

Flying first class on a decent airline is more fun that.

I thought it was the speed that mattered on Concorde.

Some of us prefer it good rather than quick.

YellowSubmarine said:

Paddy Ashdown: ‘I turned to my wife and said, it’s not our country any more’

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/sep/16/paddy-ashdown-i-turned-to-my-wife-and-said-its-not-our-country-any-more?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard

I have a bit of a soft spot for Paddy...

And I do think the 10-15 coalition was quite a good government looking back. I think they got the "politics" of being in coalition all wrong but the actual government was quite good.