politicalbetting
Home› General

Howdy, Stranger!

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

Sign In Register

Categories

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » LAB moves to 11 percent lead in first of tonight’s polls

SystemSystem Posts: 11,691
edited October 2013 in General

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » LAB moves to 11 percent lead in first of tonight’s polls

This post will be updated as other polling news comes in

Read the full story here


«13

Comments

  • Options
    JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    Titters
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,989
    I'm unconvinced by this poll. Con 27 and UKIP 17 does not seem right.
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,777
    Are "Others" -4? Curious......
  • Options
    Stuart_DicksonStuart_Dickson Posts: 3,557
    Nothing to see here. Move along now.
  • Options
    saddenedsaddened Posts: 2,245
    This will be fun.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,983
    JackW said:

    Titters

    I missed your McARSE. Would you to restate it? Ta
  • Options
    Stuart_DicksonStuart_Dickson Posts: 3,557
    saddened said:

    This will be fun.

    I'm looking forward to their lame explanations more than usual.
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,508
    Morris_Dancer said:

    I'm unconvinced by this poll. Con 27 and UKIP 17 does not seem right.

    Combined Con + UKIP scores this week

    Opinium = 44%

    Ipsos-Mori = 45%

    ICM = 46%

    YouGov = 45%

    TNS BMRB = 47%

    Populus =42%
  • Options
    Stuart_DicksonStuart_Dickson Posts: 3,557
    RobD said:

    JackW said:

    Titters

    I missed your McARSE. Would you to restate it? Ta
    Summary:

    Britannia Rools.

    Scots Cower.
  • Options
    hucks67hucks67 Posts: 758
    edited October 2013
    Polling average shows a 4-5% lead for Labour. I can't see any reason for UKIP being at 17%, which has obviously lowered the Tory result. Unless people did not like Boris and George trying to sell the UK to China. Older people I suspect would not like this and this may cause some Tories to switch to UKIP.
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,777
    Stuart_Dickson said:

    saddened said:

    This will be fun.

    I'm looking forward to their lame explanations more than usual.
    Which party is a significant part of "others" (-4)?
  • Options
    JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    RobD said:

    JackW said:

    Titters

    I missed your McARSE. Would you to restate it? Ta
    Use it or lose it !!

    But as I've had a good chortle at this poll ....

    Yes 39.5% .. No 60.5%

  • Options
    Stuart_DicksonStuart_Dickson Posts: 3,557
    CarlottaVance said:

    Stuart_Dickson said:

    saddened said:

    This will be fun.

    I'm looking forward to their lame explanations more than usual.
    Which party is a significant part of "others" (-4)?
    I look forward to you presenting us with the Scottish sub-sample when the tables are published.

    You will doubtless be mauled by Mark Walter the Softie Senior.
  • Options
    JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    Stuart_Dickson said:

    RobD said:

    JackW said:

    Titters

    I missed your McARSE. Would you to restate it? Ta
    Summary:

    Britannia Rools.

    Scots Cower.
    Only SNP wallers need "cower". Most Scots favour the Union.

  • Options
    hucks67hucks67 Posts: 758
    Think Cameron will need to do more on energy prices, as Labour are looking to be more on the side of consumers. Even if this is not the case, some people will look at their current situation and will not be interested in what happened 5 years ago, when Ed M brought in some of these green measures which increased bills.
  • Options
    Stuart_DicksonStuart_Dickson Posts: 3,557
    edited October 2013
    JackW said:

    RobD said:

    JackW said:

    Titters

    I missed your McARSE. Would you to restate it? Ta
    Use it or lose it !!

    But as I've had a good chortle at this poll ....

    Yes 39.5% .. No 60.5%

    Number of respondents to the Opinium Survey: 1000

    Number of respondents to Jack's McARSE: 1

    Members of the Market Research Society: Opinium

    Not a Member of the Market Research Society: Jack

    Member of the BPC: Opinium

    Not a member of the BPC: Jack

    It is quite obvious which finding is worth a chortle, and it is not the Opinium survey.
  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    There is no inherent reason why Opinium should be wrong and, for example, MORI should be right.
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,777
    Stuart_Dickson said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    Stuart_Dickson said:

    saddened said:

    This will be fun.

    I'm looking forward to their lame explanations more than usual.
    Which party is a significant part of "others" (-4)?
    I look forward to you presenting us with the Scottish sub-sample when the tables are published.

    You will doubtless be mauled by Mark Walter the Softie Senior.
    It's not a question of sub samples - "others" have seen their support fall by nearly a third.....

    Which poll is OGH comparing this against? The previous Observer one? The Opinium site is nowhere near as easy to navigate as YouGov....
  • Options
    TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    How many seats do Ukip get on 17% ?
  • Options
    SMukeshSMukesh Posts: 1,650
    edited October 2013
    Labour lead firming up due to higher energy prices and inadequate coalition response?

    Should probably wait for all 3 polls to see the trend.
  • Options
    Stuart_DicksonStuart_Dickson Posts: 3,557
    JackW said:

    Stuart_Dickson said:

    RobD said:

    JackW said:

    Titters

    I missed your McARSE. Would you to restate it? Ta
    Summary:

    Britannia Rools.

    Scots Cower.
    Only SNP wallers need "cower". Most Scots favour the Union.

    I'll have to wait until the Chief Counting Officer announces the result before I'll know if most Scots favour the Union or not. Not sure why you think that you know the result before a single vote has been cast.
  • Options
    AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    antifrank said:

    There is no inherent reason why Opinium should be wrong and, for example, MORI should be right.

    No, but there are very good reasons for claiming Opinium's findings are inconsistent with those of its peers.

  • Options
    MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053
    Every party +2 except the Tories. Will Others dissapear up JackW's ARSE?
  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    AveryLP said:

    antifrank said:

    There is no inherent reason why Opinium should be wrong and, for example, MORI should be right.

    No, but there are very good reasons for claiming Opinium's findings are inconsistent with those of its peers.

    That still doesn't mean that they are wrong.
  • Options
    Stuart_DicksonStuart_Dickson Posts: 3,557
    CarlottaVance said:

    Stuart_Dickson said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    Stuart_Dickson said:

    saddened said:

    This will be fun.

    I'm looking forward to their lame explanations more than usual.
    Which party is a significant part of "others" (-4)?
    I look forward to you presenting us with the Scottish sub-sample when the tables are published.

    You will doubtless be mauled by Mark Walter the Softie Senior.
    It's not a question of sub samples - "others" have seen their support fall by nearly a third.....

    Which poll is OGH comparing this against? The previous Observer one? The Opinium site is nowhere near as easy to navigate as YouGov....
    Of course the "Others" finding is heavily dependent on sub-samples: the Scottish and Welsh sub-samples to be precise.
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,508
    TGOHF said:

    How many seats do Ukip get on 17% ?

    Zero.

    This poll Baxter'd

    Con 213

    Lab 381

    LD 30

    Kippers 0 (Zero)
  • Options
    AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    antifrank said:

    AveryLP said:

    antifrank said:

    There is no inherent reason why Opinium should be wrong and, for example, MORI should be right.

    No, but there are very good reasons for claiming Opinium's findings are inconsistent with those of its peers.

    That still doesn't mean that they are wrong.
    I didn't claim it did, but it does increase the probablility that they are wrong.

  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,777
    Stuart_Dickson said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    Stuart_Dickson said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    Stuart_Dickson said:

    saddened said:

    This will be fun.

    I'm looking forward to their lame explanations more than usual.
    Which party is a significant part of "others" (-4)?
    I look forward to you presenting us with the Scottish sub-sample when the tables are published.

    You will doubtless be mauled by Mark Walter the Softie Senior.
    It's not a question of sub samples - "others" have seen their support fall by nearly a third.....

    Which poll is OGH comparing this against? The previous Observer one? The Opinium site is nowhere near as easy to navigate as YouGov....
    Of course the "Others" finding is heavily dependent on sub-samples: the Scottish and Welsh sub-samples to be precise.
    I'll wait to see the tables before pontificating - but do carry on.....
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    edited October 2013
    That result will be a highlight of next year. Popcorn time as PB Nats go apoplectic.

    Pity really, as I would quite like to see Independent Scotland, though it seems most Scots are Unionists.

    Perhaps if Alex got the Franchise for the Election extended to England he would reach his goal.
    Stuart_Dickson said:

    JackW said:

    Stuart_Dickson said:

    RobD said:

    JackW said:

    Titters

    I missed your McARSE. Would you to restate it? Ta
    Summary:

    Britannia Rools.

    Scots Cower.
    Only SNP wallers need "cower". Most Scots favour the Union.

    I'll have to wait until the Chief Counting Officer announces the result before I'll know if most Scots favour the Union or not. Not sure why you think that you know the result before a single vote has been cast.
  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    AveryLP said:

    antifrank said:

    AveryLP said:

    antifrank said:

    There is no inherent reason why Opinium should be wrong and, for example, MORI should be right.

    No, but there are very good reasons for claiming Opinium's findings are inconsistent with those of its peers.

    That still doesn't mean that they are wrong.
    I didn't claim it did, but it does increase the probablility that they are wrong.

    That is incorrect in logic (though it may well be true in practice).
  • Options
    MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053
    But the main fact is that UKIP is not going away, and is quietly gaining strength and adherants.
    Those who tought that UKIP would falter or fade away after the conference season are totally wrong.
  • Options
    JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    @Stuart_Dickson

    Why you pay so much heed to my ARSE is thus quite a mystery.

    However It's clear you simply can't resist to temptation to sniff around it and have a good feel. But I bear you no ill will as like other past critics you will simply come to admire and adore it.
  • Options
    BobajobBobajob Posts: 1,536
    Evening comrades - let the hilarity commence.

    Energy bills even the subject of gags on Strictly Come Dancing.

    It's a revolution, daaarling.

  • Options
    Stuart_DicksonStuart_Dickson Posts: 3,557
    edited October 2013
    foxinsoxuk said:

    That result will be a highlight of next year. Popcorn time as PB Nats go apoplectic.

    Pity really, as I would quite like to see Independent Scotland, though it seems most Scots are Unionists.

    Perhaps if Alex got the Franchise for the Election extended to England he would reach his goal.

    Stuart_Dickson said:

    JackW said:

    Stuart_Dickson said:

    RobD said:

    JackW said:

    Titters

    I missed your McARSE. Would you to restate it? Ta
    Summary:

    Britannia Rools.

    Scots Cower.
    Only SNP wallers need "cower". Most Scots favour the Union.

    I'll have to wait until the Chief Counting Officer announces the result before I'll know if most Scots favour the Union or not. Not sure why you think that you know the result before a single vote has been cast.
    Why on earth would I, or any other SNP poster, "go apoplectic"? I and my colleagues are absolutely delighted that our fellow countrymen finally get to have their say on the defining topic of Scottish public life over the last 50 years. Whether they say Yes or No is far less important than the fact that they get to have their say at all.
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    Yes dear, I believe you.

    Getting your excuses in early?
    Stuart_Dickson said:

    foxinsoxuk said:

    That result will be a highlight of next year. Popcorn time as PB Nats go apoplectic.

    Pity really, as I would quite like to see Independent Scotland, though it seems most Scots are Unionists.

    Perhaps if Alex got the Franchise for the Election extended to England he would reach his goal.

    Stuart_Dickson said:

    JackW said:

    Stuart_Dickson said:

    RobD said:

    JackW said:

    Titters

    I missed your McARSE. Would you to restate it? Ta
    Summary:

    Britannia Rools.

    Scots Cower.
    Only SNP wallers need "cower". Most Scots favour the Union.

    I'll have to wait until the Chief Counting Officer announces the result before I'll know if most Scots favour the Union or not. Not sure why you think that you know the result before a single vote has been cast.
    Why on earth would I, or any other SNP poster, "go apoplectic"? I and my colleagues are absolutely delighted that our fellow countrymen finally get to have their say on the defining topic of Scottish public life over the last 50 years. Whether they say Yes or No is far less important than the fact that they get to have their say at all.
  • Options
    MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    TGOHF said:

    How many seats do Ukip get on 17% ?

    Zero.

    This poll Baxter'd

    Con 213

    Lab 381

    LD 30

    Kippers 0 (Zero)
    You will find TSE, that in the end your famous Baxter calculations for seats will be seen to be a fable and truly Kippered.
  • Options
    AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    antifrank said:

    AveryLP said:

    antifrank said:

    AveryLP said:

    antifrank said:

    There is no inherent reason why Opinium should be wrong and, for example, MORI should be right.

    No, but there are very good reasons for claiming Opinium's findings are inconsistent with those of its peers.

    That still doesn't mean that they are wrong.
    I didn't claim it did, but it does increase the probablility that they are wrong.

    That is incorrect in logic (though it may well be true in practice).

    You say tomayto. I say tomahto.
    You deduce. I induce.

    Time to call the whole thing off?

  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,508
    MikeK said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    TGOHF said:

    How many seats do Ukip get on 17% ?

    Zero.

    This poll Baxter'd

    Con 213

    Lab 381

    LD 30

    Kippers 0 (Zero)
    You will find TSE, that in the end your famous Baxter calculations for seats will be seen to be a fable and truly Kippered.
    My famous Baxter calculations?

    What are you going on about?

    Be bold, name the seats you think UKIP will win if they poll 17% in a general election.
  • Options
    Stuart_DicksonStuart_Dickson Posts: 3,557
    MikeK said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    TGOHF said:

    How many seats do Ukip get on 17% ?

    Zero.

    This poll Baxter'd

    Con 213

    Lab 381

    LD 30

    Kippers 0 (Zero)
    You will find TSE, that in the end your famous Baxter calculations for seats will be seen to be a fable and truly Kippered.
    I doubt it. Baxter has been repeatedly ridiculed since he started up his maths project many moons ago. But the funny thing is, he is always in the right ballpark. It is really quite an amazing feat.

    If Baxter says that UKIP need approx x percent to get x numbers of seats, then Baxter is probably right.
  • Options
    MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053
    David Coburn UKIP ‏@DavidCoburnUKip
    Takes a trip to China for #Osborne to realise Britain has "defeatist" attitude - but Lib/Lab/Con caused it http://dailym.ai/15R2QuW

    Ever since 1945 Britain has been ruled by parties with a defeatist agenda. Time for a change.
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    Stuart is right. UKIP will put Milliband in Number 10, and Ed Balls in Number 11.
    Stuart_Dickson said:

    MikeK said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    TGOHF said:

    How many seats do Ukip get on 17% ?

    Zero.

    This poll Baxter'd

    Con 213

    Lab 381

    LD 30

    Kippers 0 (Zero)
    You will find TSE, that in the end your famous Baxter calculations for seats will be seen to be a fable and truly Kippered.
    I doubt it. Baxter has been repeatedly ridiculed since he started up his maths project many moons ago. But the funny thing is, he is always in the right ballpark. It is really quite an amazing feat.

    If Baxter says that UKIP need approx x percent to get x numbers of seats, then Baxter is probably right.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,989
    Mr. K, you think Thatcher had a defeatist agenda?
  • Options
    MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 7,382
    The ComRes poll out at 7.30pm - very different from Opinium
  • Options
    Stuart_DicksonStuart_Dickson Posts: 3,557
    foxinsoxuk said:

    Yes dear, I believe you.

    Getting your excuses in early?

    Stuart_Dickson said:

    foxinsoxuk said:

    That result will be a highlight of next year. Popcorn time as PB Nats go apoplectic.

    Pity really, as I would quite like to see Independent Scotland, though it seems most Scots are Unionists.

    Perhaps if Alex got the Franchise for the Election extended to England he would reach his goal.

    Stuart_Dickson said:

    JackW said:

    Stuart_Dickson said:

    RobD said:

    JackW said:

    Titters

    I missed your McARSE. Would you to restate it? Ta
    Summary:

    Britannia Rools.

    Scots Cower.
    Only SNP wallers need "cower". Most Scots favour the Union.

    I'll have to wait until the Chief Counting Officer announces the result before I'll know if most Scots favour the Union or not. Not sure why you think that you know the result before a single vote has been cast.
    Why on earth would I, or any other SNP poster, "go apoplectic"? I and my colleagues are absolutely delighted that our fellow countrymen finally get to have their say on the defining topic of Scottish public life over the last 50 years. Whether they say Yes or No is far less important than the fact that they get to have their say at all.
    Not at all. The key defining feature of the Scottish National Party is that we respect the will of the Scottish people as expressed at the ballot box. We are the only one of the major parties to do so. The Labour, Conservative and Liberal Democrat parties all believe that the will of the British people takes precedence over the will of the Scots.

    Privatisation of the Royal Mail being only the latest in a very long list of examples.
  • Options
    MrJonesMrJones Posts: 3,523
    hucks67 said:

    Polling average shows a 4-5% lead for Labour. I can't see any reason for UKIP being at 17%, which has obviously lowered the Tory result. Unless people did not like Boris and George trying to sell the UK to China. Older people I suspect would not like this and this may cause some Tories to switch to UKIP.

    The BBC version of reality isn't true. There are plenty of reasons for UKIP to be around 15-20% all the time with dips during media lulls.
  • Options
    MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053
    @Stuart_Dickson
    @TheScreamingEagles

    Now lads, no frothing at the mouth, no apoplexy on PB, please.
    I think that UKIP will gain even more of a share than 17%. Now I told you no frothing............
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @JohnRentoul: Lab lead down to 3: ComRes split-sample poll for @indyonsunday & Sunday Mirror comparing Cam v EdM with Con v Lab http://t.co/EVtpDgDk4N
  • Options
    GrandioseGrandiose Posts: 2,323
    I think Baxter's calculator because it is based on previous election vote distribution (which in UKIP's case was even because it was low) overestimates the percentage vote required to win seats.

    However I don't believe that opinion polls accurately represent the number of people who would vote UKIP tomorrow and certainly not 2015. You can tell this from the wide variety of UKIP figures currently being recorded for the different pollsters. I would posit, for the reasons I've mentioned before, that UKIP's nowcast support is no more than 10%.
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,508
    MikeK said:

    @Stuart_Dickson
    @TheScreamingEagles

    Now lads, no frothing at the mouth, no apoplexy on PB, please.
    I think that UKIP will gain even more of a share than 17%. Now I told you no frothing............

    MikeK said:

    @Stuart_Dickson
    @TheScreamingEagles

    Now lads, no frothing at the mouth, no apoplexy on PB, please.
    I think that UKIP will gain even more of a share than 17%. Now I told you no frothing............

    Frothing?

    Why, did someone mention Muslims to you again?

    Tell us more about that yougov babysitter poll again?
  • Options
    AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    Tweets suggesting ComRes showing Labour lead narrowing to 3%
  • Options
    MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053
    Morris_Dancer said:

    Mr. K, you think Thatcher had a defeatist agenda?

    No. An exeption; but her ministers did and acted against Thatcher, undermining her at every chance. In the end they knifed her. Thats your Tory party.
  • Options
    MrJonesMrJones Posts: 3,523
    Stuart_Dickson said:

    MikeK said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    TGOHF said:

    How many seats do Ukip get on 17% ?

    Zero.

    This poll Baxter'd

    Con 213

    Lab 381

    LD 30

    Kippers 0 (Zero)
    You will find TSE, that in the end your famous Baxter calculations for seats will be seen to be a fable and truly Kippered.
    I doubt it. Baxter has been repeatedly ridiculed since he started up his maths project many moons ago. But the funny thing is, he is always in the right ballpark. It is really quite an amazing feat.

    If Baxter says that UKIP need approx x percent to get x numbers of seats, then Baxter is probably right.
    If a party's core support is coming out of the socio-economic middle (or just to the right of that ) rather than out of either the top or bottom then the logic of it is completely different to the normal pattern.
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,508
    Comres the gold standard tonight.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,989
    A 3% lead sounds like a a blue-friendly margin of error.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,989
    Mr. K, not my party at all. I still plan on voting UKIP at the euros (again).
  • Options
    MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053
    Even ComRes gives UKIP 16% today:
    Con 32% (+4)
    Lab 35% (-1)
    UKIP 16% (-1)
    LD 9% (-1)
    Others 8% (-1)
  • Options
    MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053
    Morris_Dancer said:

    Mr. K, not my party at all. I still plan on voting UKIP at the euros (again).

    Thats very nice and am pleased to learn it. Be brave and continue to vote UKIP in 2015.

  • Options
    MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 7,382
    Header revised to include ComRes
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,989
    Mr. K, that's a shade patronising. Furthermore, voting UKIP in this constituency is out of the question. It's effectively Balls Vs the Conservatives. For the good of all Britain (well, possibly excepting Scotland) I'm bound to vote for the blues as the only realistic hope of unseating the vile Balls.
  • Options
    MrJonesMrJones Posts: 3,523
    edited October 2013
    tim said:

    MikeK said:

    Morris_Dancer said:

    Mr. K, you think Thatcher had a defeatist agenda?

    No. An exeption; but her ministers did and acted against Thatcher, undermining her at every chance. In the end they knifed her. Thats your Tory party.
    Thatcher believed in free movement of labour, sad little Englanders don't
    Free movement of labour between countries on a similar economic level evens out. Free movement of labour between countries on very different economic levels - courtesy of europhiles - is at first economic warfare on the bottom 1/3 of the population then eventually the middle 2/3 then finally all but the top 5% or maybe even 1%.

  • Options
    GrandioseGrandiose Posts: 2,323
    tim said:

    MikeK said:

    Morris_Dancer said:

    Mr. K, you think Thatcher had a defeatist agenda?

    No. An exeption; but her ministers did and acted against Thatcher, undermining her at every chance. In the end they knifed her. Thats your Tory party.
    Thatcher believed in free movement of labour, sad little Englanders don't
    When it came to it, Thatcher only had to think about the then members of what is now the EU, leaving her free to be flexible about her views when she left Number 10. Not sure she's the peg to hang the free movement of persons on.

  • Options
    MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053
    edited October 2013
    Morris_Dancer said:

    Mr. K, that's a shade patronising. Furthermore, voting UKIP in this constituency is out of the question. It's effectively Balls Vs the Conservatives. For the good of all Britain (well, possibly excepting Scotland) I'm bound to vote for the blues as the only realistic hope of unseating the vile Balls.

    Sorry you feel I'm patronising you. That is not the case - just my bad syntax - and I apologise.
    However I still think that all votes for UKIP will count. To me Labour and Tory are two sides of the same coin.
  • Options
    MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 7,382
    Grandiose said:

    tim said:

    MikeK said:

    Morris_Dancer said:

    Mr. K, you think Thatcher had a defeatist agenda?

    No. An exeption; but her ministers did and acted against Thatcher, undermining her at every chance. In the end they knifed her. Thats your Tory party.
    Thatcher believed in free movement of labour, sad little Englanders don't
    When it came to it, Thatcher only had to think about the then members of what is now the EU, leaving her free to be flexible about her views when she left Number 10. Not sure she's the peg to hang the free movement of persons on.

    Keeping immigration up is GOOD for the economy.

    Cutting immigration is BAD

    Get that into your head



  • Options
    MrJonesMrJones Posts: 3,523
    MrJones said:

    If a party's core support is coming out of the socio-economic middle (or just to the right of that ) rather than out of either the top or bottom then the logic of it is completely different to the normal pattern.

    That doesn't mean they'll win any seats just that the logic isn't the same.
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @georgeeaton: ComRes poll shows that Labour has large lead on living standards and Tories large lead on the economy. Same trend as Romney vs. Obama.
  • Options
    GrandioseGrandiose Posts: 2,323
    MikeSmithson said:

    Grandiose said:

    tim said:

    MikeK said:

    Morris_Dancer said:

    Mr. K, you think Thatcher had a defeatist agenda?

    No. An exeption; but her ministers did and acted against Thatcher, undermining her at every chance. In the end they knifed her. Thats your Tory party.
    Thatcher believed in free movement of labour, sad little Englanders don't
    When it came to it, Thatcher only had to think about the then members of what is now the EU, leaving her free to be flexible about her views when she left Number 10. Not sure she's the peg to hang the free movement of persons on.

    Keeping immigration up is GOOD for the economy.

    Cutting immigration is BAD

    Get that into your head



    My head?

    I believe in the four freedoms of the European Union.

    It's the others you need to convince.

    Tim wanted to set up Thatcher as a blue to peg the idea to because it made for a better attack line. I get the idea behind that but it's not wholly accurate.
  • Options
    FluffyThoughtsFluffyThoughts Posts: 2,420
    Ergo: Labour are Shytes (or Scots).

    Clever puntahs will be looking to arb movements from Labour trolls to Tory diehards. Sadly I do not have a functional market to play with (nor a sober brain-cell).

    :relax-and-larf:
  • Options
    MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053
    Tonights polls point and arrow at the L/Dems that are fast losing support. If they fall to 6/7% thay have no hopes of being in any government of the future.
  • Options
    MrJonesMrJones Posts: 3,523
    Large areas of London where people won't report crimes up to and including the gang-rape of their children for fear of retaliation from those gangs

    http://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/boys-quizzed-over-500-rapes-a-year-by-gangs-8335165.html

    More slaves in London than at any time since the Romans

    http://www.lbc.co.uk/hundreds-forced-to-slavery-every-day-in-london-79833

    If the BBC told the truth there'd be no debate about this at all.
  • Options
    RogerRoger Posts: 18,891
    @Tim

    "Thatcher believed in free movement of labour, sad little Englanders don't"

    Are you are suggesting Thatcher wasn't a 'sad little Englander"?

  • Options
    Stuart_DicksonStuart_Dickson Posts: 3,557
    edited October 2013
    BetVictor and Betway become the latest bookies to slash their LAB prices for the Dunfermline by-election.

    Best LAB price is now Ladbrokes with 2/7.

    William Hill suspended their prices 3 hours ago, but their SNP price was 4/1. (The Coral price is still available: 3/1.)

    The Lib Dems, who held this seat until the 2011 general election, are at 89/1 with Betfair.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,989
    Mr. K, no problem. It's easy to get wires cross online as emotions don't travel well with text.

    Were this constituency different I might consider voting UKIP, but I fear the party's electoral approach (broad but shallow support, rather than a focused approach to win some seats) makes this unlikely in the foreseeable future.
  • Options
    AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    Roger said:

    @Tim

    "Thatcher believed in free movement of labour, sad little Englanders don't"

    Are you are suggesting Thatcher wasn't a 'sad little Englander"?

    Not another vulgarian, Roger?

  • Options
    GrandioseGrandiose Posts: 2,323
    edited October 2013
    MrJones said:

    Large areas of London where people won't report crimes up to and including the gang-rape of their children for fear of retaliation from those gangs

    http://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/boys-quizzed-over-500-rapes-a-year-by-gangs-8335165.html

    More slaves in London than at any time since the Romans

    http://www.lbc.co.uk/hundreds-forced-to-slavery-every-day-in-london-79833

    If the BBC told the truth there'd be no debate about this at all.

    There are unfortunate crimes that occur. Human trafficking is now easier than in the past so we have to ever vigilante.

    But neither of your sources back up either of your statements and I'm not inclined to believe the hyperbole neither in respect of the present nor seeing the past through rose-tinted spectacles either. Sexual offences and underground trafficking of all sorts have always been under the radar and not reported to the police.
  • Options
    TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    LDs in the mire but Cable's car crash conference and post float surge in RM has coincided with no rumblings about Clegg - how strange...
  • Options
    MrJonesMrJones Posts: 3,523
    Grandiose said:

    MrJones said:

    Large areas of London where people won't report crimes up to and including the gang-rape of their children for fear of retaliation from those gangs

    http://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/boys-quizzed-over-500-rapes-a-year-by-gangs-8335165.html

    More slaves in London than at any time since the Romans

    http://www.lbc.co.uk/hundreds-forced-to-slavery-every-day-in-london-79833

    If the BBC told the truth there'd be no debate about this at all.

    There are unfortunate crimes that occur. Human trafficking is now easier than in the past so we have to ever vigilante.

    But neither of your sources back up either of your statements and I'm not inclined to believe the hyperbole neither in respect of the present nor seeing the past through rose-tinted spectacles either. Sexual offences and underground trafficking of all sorts have always been under the radar and not reported to the police.
    Progress.
  • Options
    SMukeshSMukesh Posts: 1,650
    Morris_Dancer said:

    Mr. K, no problem. It's easy to get wires cross online as emotions don't travel well with text.

    Were this constituency different I might consider voting UKIP, but I fear the party's electoral approach (broad but shallow support, rather than a focused approach to win some seats) makes this unlikely in the foreseeable future.

    The Tories put everything in to try to defeat Balls in 2010 and failed.

    This time the winning margin for Balls would be more than 10000.
  • Options
    RichardNabaviRichardNabavi Posts: 3,413
    One has to wonder at the sanity of voters who think Labour would 'keep prices down generally'. The risk of high inflation after 2015 under a Labour government, especially a weak one in a hung parliament, is a very real danger.
  • Options
    BobajobBobajob Posts: 1,536
    RichardNabavi said:

    One has to wonder at the sanity of voters who think Labour would 'keep prices down generally'. The risk of high inflation after 2015 under a Labour government, especially a weak one in a hung parliament, is a very real danger.

    The risk of spiralling energy prices is a very real danger under a Tory government, as they refuse to have a crack at them.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/energy/9490712/Energy-companies-overcharge-customers-by-600m.html
  • Options
    RogerRoger Posts: 18,891
    One says 3% the other 11%. I think we should wait for Yougov to adjudicate
  • Options
    FluffyThoughtsFluffyThoughts Posts: 2,420
    edited October 2013
    Hilarious Post: Part Trois!

    http://politicalbetting.vanillaforums.com/discussion/comment/147132/#Comment_147132
    That was the response here in May 2005 when I said get on Obama at 50/1.
    What ever happened to your "Cameron next out of the Cabinet: 150-1" bet OG...?

    I made money on the first two Ashes Tests ( as positied on here for grown-ups) but - sensibly - decided that the rest of the series was as predictable as a Yorkshire-lawyer's music taste! *

    Betting is an art and your "brushstrokes" are better then most. And then we have our Swedish folk and their predictions...! **

    * Apart from "sad" that is.
    ** Better than the Bermondsey Bog-trotter's (but that is a low bar, innit)!
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @JPonpolitics: My guest on Pienaar's Politics tomorrow morning from 10 on @bbc5live will be @AlexSalmond.
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,508
    Bobajob said:

    RichardNabavi said:

    One has to wonder at the sanity of voters who think Labour would 'keep prices down generally'. The risk of high inflation after 2015 under a Labour government, especially a weak one in a hung parliament, is a very real danger.

    The risk of spiralling energy prices is a very real danger under a Tory government, as they refuse to have a crack at them.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/energy/9490712/Energy-companies-overcharge-customers-by-600m.html
    From your piece

    In 2009, Ofgem dropped the investigation into Scottish Power and SSE, the owner of Southern Electric, after concluding that the chances of a successful prosecution were “low”. The companies strongly deny breaking any rules.

    Now remind me, who was in power in 2009?

    Specifically, who was Energy Secretary in 2009?

    I'll give you a clue, his name rhymes with Ed Miliband.
  • Options
    RogerRoger Posts: 18,891

    "Not another vulgarian, Roger?"

    'Fraid so Avery. Now don't pretend you can't spot them at least as quickly as me
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,508
    Roger said:

    One says 3% the other 11%. I think we should wait for Yougov to adjudicate

    Roger, everyone knows, TNS BMRB are the gold standard
  • Options
    RogerRoger Posts: 18,891
    edited October 2013
    @Eagle

    I thought the Gold Standard was that obscure three man band based in the Shetlands so favoured by the SNP that showed Nationalists neck and neck with Unionists. Something like joegoebbelsresearch.com
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,508
    How deluded is Charles Walker and the rest?

    David Cameron in the line of fire over pay rise for MPs

    Tory heavyweights call on PM to risk public anger and agree 11% salary hike for members

    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/oct/20/david-cameron-mps-pay-rise
  • Options
    GeoffMGeoffM Posts: 6,071
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    How deluded is Charles Walker and the rest?
    David Cameron in the line of fire over pay rise for MPs
    Tory heavyweights call on PM to risk public anger and agree 11% salary hike for members
    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/oct/20/david-cameron-mps-pay-rise

    Doesn't Cameron still earn less than Brown did because of the latter's scorched earth policy extending even to a salary cut for the PM in his final year?

  • Options
    FluffyThoughtsFluffyThoughts Posts: 2,420
    Roger said:

    I thought the Gold Standard was that obscure three man band based in the Shetlands so favoured by the SNP that showed Nationalists neck and neck with Unionists.

    Wodger,

    Please do not gargle when posting. It has no Listermint © mint-fresh breathe....

    :try-using-some-punctuation-or-summinck:

  • Options
    Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 49,346
    Comres = outlier!
    Opinium = good!
  • Options
    AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    edited October 2013
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    How deluded is Charles Walker and the rest?

    David Cameron in the line of fire over pay rise for MPs

    Tory heavyweights call on PM to risk public anger and agree 11% salary hike for members

    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/oct/20/david-cameron-mps-pay-rise

    "The cost of politics should go down, not up. And MPs' pay shouldn't go up while public sector pay is rightly being constrained."

    The No. 10 spokesman is absolutely right.

    MPs blew their chances of a corrective salary rise when they rejected the culling of MP numbers.

    But I still think an outright dismissal of the IPSA recommendations is unlikely. A deferral of the decision to the next parliament is Cameron's most likely response.
  • Options
    RogerRoger Posts: 18,891
    edited October 2013
    "How deluded is Charles Walker and the rest?"

    I think they should take it. At least they'd start looking professional and motivated by the need to make a living like everyone else.Not just seduced by the perks and glamour as it appears now.
  • Options
    TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 7,362
    Sunil_Prasannan said:



    Comres = outlier!

    Opinium = good!

    Comres = About right.

    Opinium = Deluded.

  • Options
    AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    Comres = outlier!
    Opinium = good!

    Comrade = Wrong!
    Opinion on PB = Right!

  • Options
    MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 7,382
    Meanwhile in the only news that really matters Burnley extend their lead at the top of the championship. Our best start to a season since 1897
  • Options
    SMukeshSMukesh Posts: 1,650
    Roger said:

    "How deluded is Charles Walker and the rest?"

    I think they should take it. At least they'd start looking professional and motivated by the need to make a living like everyone else.Not just seduced by the perks and glamour as it appears now.

    Agreed.For a 24/7 job,75 grand is cheap.
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,851
    MikeSmithson said:

    Grandiose said:

    tim said:

    MikeK said:

    Morris_Dancer said:

    Mr. K, you think Thatcher had a defeatist agenda?

    No. An exeption; but her ministers did and acted against Thatcher, undermining her at every chance. In the end they knifed her. Thats your Tory party.
    Thatcher believed in free movement of labour, sad little Englanders don't
    When it came to it, Thatcher only had to think about the then members of what is now the EU, leaving her free to be flexible about her views when she left Number 10. Not sure she's the peg to hang the free movement of persons on.

    Keeping immigration up is GOOD for the economy.

    Cutting immigration is BAD

    Get that into your head



    I don't know why you think that.

  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,983
    Sean_F said:



    I don't know why you think that.

    Isn't it to do with expanding the tax base? Someone has to pay for OGHs pension ;-)
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,851
    tim said:

    MikeK said:

    Morris_Dancer said:

    Mr. K, you think Thatcher had a defeatist agenda?

    No. An exeption; but her ministers did and acted against Thatcher, undermining her at every chance. In the end they knifed her. Thats your Tory party.
    Thatcher believed in free movement of labour, sad little Englanders don't
    Did she? Where do you get that extraordinary notion from?
  • Options
    Tim_BTim_B Posts: 7,669
    College Game Day was in Clemson this morning, just up I-85.It was Game Day's second visit in 6 weeks. They haven't visited the same place twice in a season for a decade. The game is huge - #5 Florida State vs #3 Clemson. It was electric there. Go Tigers!!

    Somewhere in Clemson is a Top Gear fan, as I saw a large sign saying "Sammy Watkins is The Stig."
This discussion has been closed.