politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Nighthawks is now open

Labour erases the internet shocker!!!!!

Except it would only be fair to note that the Labour Party has "erased the internet" too. Labour’s housecleaning has removed almost everything prior to the start of the current leadership, and the Wayback Machine (sorry, "the internet") is pretty empty of Labour's past as well as that of the Tories

@tim - it's no more than you and other posters have been claiming of the Tories all afternoon.

And were wrong.

You were on stronger ground with "Man cries at Funeral"!

tim said:

TheSheikofShake said:

TwistedFireStopper said:

Falkirk has the potential to be a big story, and could get serious for Milliband, if anything comes out that ties him into it.
Trouble is, Milliband appears to be a lucky politician, and I have the feeling that, for all the hyped up bad blood between the Labour and Unite leaderships, there's no real appetite to press the self destruct button.
Cameron used to be lucky once.........

It already is in Scotland.

Labour is averaging 37 or so north of the border over the last couple of weeks - a good 10 points down on where it was before this broke in June.

Even assuming that you are that Ricardohos bloke that's pretty stupid

This mornings Yougov poll with Labour on 44% in Scotland is a complete outlier of course.

Scrapheap_as_was said:

The countdown to Ed's departure has commenced.

Correctamundo - 18 months until he departs his current residence and moves in at Number 10.

@GuidoFawkes: How Much “New Evidence” Does Ed Need? http://t.co/c3wUWZdte7

Scott_P said:

@GuidoFawkes: How Much “New Evidence” Does Ed Need? http://t.co/c3wUWZdte7

It's got bad when even the BBC refer to Falkirk in a story on Union funding:

Unite still Labour's largest backer despite Falkirk row
The Unite union remains Labour's largest financial backer, new figures show, despite the fall-out from the Falkirk candidate selection row.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-24929107

Although "despite" is an interesting choice.....some might have thought "because" more appropriate.

Link 1 is quite damning. We have government by a well connected SPADocracy, who secure each others preferment into safe seats. Lets see which favourite gets parachuted into Shaun Woodwards constituency, and other tempting safe seats with the fast track to a ministry.

Today I spent an afternoon with our management consultants, teenage scribblers all, who lectured me on how to increase productivity within my own department. They based this on the sound knowledge of a day or two in the department with no real understanding of what we do and why we do it a particular way.

Nice quite sweet wet behind the ears youths that they were, I could not control my anger at their idiocies that were being lapped up by a senior management team that is well known for its failure to listen to front line clinicians. It was all I could do to keep from swearing at their plans.

My conclusion: we are bewitched by these over-ambitious, under-experienced but well presented kids, both at work and in politics. They need to be replaced by people who have done front line work, and who know what they are talking about. If we do not then we are f***ed.

Cameron demanding the mobile phone firms cut their prices.

http://goo.gl/lBXhEU

Don't hold your breath

Ominous rumblings at Lib Dem Pravda as one of their own quits after having had enough.

Lib Dem Voice compromised its independent voice with Heathrow sponsored post

http://www.libdemvoice.org/lib-dem-voice-has-been-compromised-by-the-heathrow-sponsored-post-37170.html

I fear that Calamity Clegg's ostrich faction of spinners at Lib Dem Pravda will find it even more tricky than usual to try to marginalise and silence dissent after their bedroom tax farce.

MikeSmithson said:

Cameron demanding the mobile phone firms cut their prices.

http://goo.gl/lBXhEU

Don't hold your breath

The sight of a Conservative MP, a Conservative MP, running around and interfering with a private sector......it's Marxism I tell you.

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Pork, could you elaborate?.

Nope.

tim said:

@Currystar

If all councils downsize everyone then there's no problem, no arrears and no bedroom tax collected (and no savings)

Do you seriously think anyone believes you?

I couldn't care two hoots whether people believe me, all anyone needs to do is speak to the housing needs department of any local authority or just type tenants incentive scheme into the internet for some examples. As i keep repeating LAs are desperate for family housing and will move mountains to get their hands on properties suitable for families. And yes theoretically LAs would love to move everyone under occupying accommodation (I am not talking about heavily adapted properties for disabled people) into suitably sized accommodation. Its called making good use of their housing stock. Why would a LA who are forking out 1000s per week keeping homeless families in B & B accommodation not want to move a single person occupying a 3BH to a 1BF .

Why do you always think you are so right. What experience do you have in social housing?

By the way how do you collect bedroom tax?

It's all a Tory plot!!!!!!

Unite can't be left to resist Cameron's smear campaign alone
David Cameron and the Tory press have launched a retro anti-union drive to damage Ed Miliband. But it won't fly in today's Britain

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/nov/13/unite-cameron-smear-campaign-anti-union

foxinsoxuk said:

Link 1 is quite damning. We have government by a well connected SPADocracy, who secure each others preferment into safe seats. Lets see which favourite gets parachuted into Shaun Woodwards constituency, and other tempting safe seats with the fast track to a ministry.

Today I spent an afternoon with our management consultants, teenage scribblers all, who lectured me on how to increase productivity within my own department. They based this on the sound knowledge of a day or two in the department with no real understanding of what we do and why we do it a particular way.

Nice quite sweet wet behind the ears youths that they were, I could not control my anger at their idiocies that were being lapped up by a senior management team that is well known for its failure to listen to front line clinicians. It was all I could do to keep from swearing at their plans.

My conclusion: we are bewitched by these over-ambitious, under-experienced but well presented kids, both at work and in politics. They need to be replaced by people who have done front line work, and who know what they are talking about. If we do not then we are f***ed.

All good points. It's also why I want less politicians with PPE's from Oxford in politics. It leads to paucity of ideas. Let's have more engineers and scientists in parliament - the people who actually build the world. :-)

As a matter of interest, how many medical doctors are in parliament? I know there's Sarah Woolaston and Dan Poulter, along with the independent ex-MP Richard Taylor. But how many are there in total - I must be missing some?

In fact, it would be nice to see a table of all the professions MPs had before entering parliament...

Meanwhile, in the same newspaper, the Guardian goes muckraking * digging on Falkirk Blairites:

Falkirk Labour hopeful admits paying for mass recruitment to party
Labour concern after former election strategy manager Gregor Poynton wrote single cheque for 11 new members

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/nov/13/falkirk-labour-gregor-poynton-paid-recruits

* The Daily Mail muckrakes - the Guardian investigates.

R0berts said:

What is it with PB Tories The Guardian and Falkirk?

They've gone mad.

Stick to Guido, Falkirkers!

Two articles in tomorrow's Guardian.....so far.....

CarlottaVance said:

Meanwhile, in the same newspaper, the Guardian goes muckraking * digging on Falkirk Blairites:

Falkirk Labour hopeful admits paying for mass recruitment to party
Labour concern after former election strategy manager Gregor Poynton wrote single cheque for 11 new members

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/nov/13/falkirk-labour-gregor-poynton-paid-recruits

* The Daily Mail muckrakes - the Guardian investigates.

I observe,
You dig
He muckrakes

tim said:

JosiasJessop said:

foxinsoxuk said:

Link 1 is quite damning. We have government by a well connected SPADocracy, who secure each others preferment into safe seats. Lets see which favourite gets parachuted into Shaun Woodwards constituency, and other tempting safe seats with the fast track to a ministry.

Today I spent an afternoon with our management consultants, teenage scribblers all, who lectured me on how to increase productivity within my own department. They based this on the sound knowledge of a day or two in the department with no real understanding of what we do and why we do it a particular way.

Nice quite sweet wet behind the ears youths that they were, I could not control my anger at their idiocies that were being lapped up by a senior management team that is well known for its failure to listen to front line clinicians. It was all I could do to keep from swearing at their plans.

My conclusion: we are bewitched by these over-ambitious, under-experienced but well presented kids, both at work and in politics. They need to be replaced by people who have done front line work, and who know what they are talking about. If we do not then we are f***ed.

All good points. It's also why I want less politicians with PPE's from Oxford in politics. It leads to paucity of ideas. Let's have more engineers and scientists in parliament - the people who actually build the world. :-)

As a matter of interest, how many medical doctors are in parliament? I know there's Sarah Woolaston and Dan Poulter, along with the independent ex-MP Richard Taylor. But how many are there in total - I must be missing some?

In fact, it would be nice to see a table of all the professions MPs had before entering parliament...

There are six, seven if you include Adam Werritty who I'm sure would be present at any of the Fantasist Dr Fox's procedures

He wasn't there last time I met Liam.

foxinsoxuk said:

Link 1 is quite damning. We have government by a well connected SPADocracy, who secure each others preferment into safe seats. Lets see which favourite gets parachuted into Shaun Woodwards constituency, and other tempting safe seats with the fast track to a ministry.

Today I spent an afternoon with our management consultants, teenage scribblers all, who lectured me on how to increase productivity within my own department. They based this on the sound knowledge of a day or two in the department with no real understanding of what we do and why we do it a particular way.

Nice quite sweet wet behind the ears youths that they were, I could not control my anger at their idiocies that were being lapped up by a senior management team that is well known for its failure to listen to front line clinicians. It was all I could do to keep from swearing at their plans.

My conclusion: we are bewitched by these over-ambitious, under-experienced but well presented kids, both at work and in politics. They need to be replaced by people who have done front line work, and who know what they are talking about. If we do not then we are f***ed.

Same in ed. Weird to be raising pension age and at the same time creating a climate where young, cheap teachers are the way to balance the school budget. Well, when I say 'balance the school budget', I mean free up enough cash to pay for more young, expensive managers and get more young, expensive mocksted consultants in.

JJ, I had 16 years in multinational business management and I'd run two successful small businesses, as well as three-year MRC technical IT project. On the other hand, I didn't know anyone in Parliament. I was fairly quickly moved onto the Treasury Select Committee, the Whips (who then had right of appointment) arguing that this was a good idea with business experience and mathematics, and they saw me more as a persistent nerdish questioner than someone for the front office. I didn't like it, but they might have been right. Similarly, the one GP that we had got moved swiftly to the Health Select Committee.

So I'm not sure that promotions in Parliament are the problem. It's more that most people in politics work their way up through a series of political jobs, and moving sideways from another profession is a bit unusual. That's partly because if you're successful in a profession you do earn more, with less stress - nobody monitors your private life, tries to discredit you, or openly plots to get your job. I took a 40% pay cut in 1997 and if I'm elected in 2015 I'll take another (smaller) one. You have to be very politically motivated to do it, and that might not be a good thing - perhaps we need more MPs who aren't single-minded about politics?

JosiasJessop said:

foxinsoxuk said:

Link 1 is quite damning. We have government by a well connected SPADocracy, who secure each others preferment into safe seats. Lets see which favourite gets parachuted into Shaun Woodwards constituency, and other tempting safe seats with the fast track to a ministry.

Today I spent an afternoon with our management consultants, teenage scribblers all, who lectured me on how to increase productivity within my own department. They based this on the sound knowledge of a day or two in the department with no real understanding of what we do and why we do it a particular way.

Nice quite sweet wet behind the ears youths that they were, I could not control my anger at their idiocies that were being lapped up by a senior management team that is well known for its failure to listen to front line clinicians. It was all I could do to keep from swearing at their plans.

My conclusion: we are bewitched by these over-ambitious, under-experienced but well presented kids, both at work and in politics. They need to be replaced by people who have done front line work, and who know what they are talking about. If we do not then we are f***ed.

All good points. It's also why I want less politicians with PPE's from Oxford in politics. It leads to paucity of ideas. Let's have more engineers and scientists in parliament - the people who actually build the world. :-)

As a matter of interest, how many medical doctors are in parliament? I know there's Sarah Woolaston and Dan Poulter, along with the independent ex-MP Richard Taylor. But how many are there in total - I must be missing some?

In fact, it would be nice to see a table of all the professions MPs had before entering parliament...

This is intetesting-

www.smith-institute.org.uk/file/Who-Governs-Britain.pdf

I think I read somewhere that around 90 of our current MPs have never held a significant job, outside of politics.

I think that your work outside politics is perhaps your strongest suit. It is not required to do PPE if you have mastered Diplomacy and Advanced Squad Leader!

NickPalmer said:

JJ, I had 16 years in multinational business management and I'd run two successful small businesses, as well as three-year MRC technical IT project. On the other hand, I didn't know anyone in Parliament. I was fairly quickly moved onto the Treasury Select Committee, the Whips (who then had right of appointment) arguing that this was a good idea with business experience and mathematics, and they saw me more as a persistent nerdish questioner than someone for the front office. I didn't like it, but they might have been right. Similarly, the one GP that we had got moved swiftly to the Health Select Committee.

So I'm not sure that promotions in Parliament are the problem. It's more that most people in politics work their way up through a series of political jobs, and moving sideways from another profession is a bit unusual. That's partly because if you're successful in a profession you do earn more, with less stress - nobody monitors your private life, tries to discredit you, or openly plots to get your job. I took a 40% pay cut in 1997 and if I'm elected in 2015 I'll take another (smaller) one. You have to be very politically motivated to do it, and that might not be a good thing - perhaps we need more MPs who aren't single-minded about politics?

CarlottaVance said:

Two articles in tomorrow's Guardian.....so far.....

The editor of The Guardian is a PB Tory, innit?

The train wreck that is Obamacare continues, except it's no longer abstract, it's happening. -

Sen Mary Landreu (Dem) has introduced a bill in the Senate to allow people to keep their old health care plans. Sen Diane Feinstein (Dem) has said she will support it, as has Sen Kay Hagan (Dem).

A similar bill has been introduced in the House by Rep Upton (Rep). The House bill will be up for a vote on Friday. It remains to be seen if Harry Reid will allow the bill in the senate to come to a vote. It is hard to overstate the heat that people who voted for Obamacare are hearing from their constituents who have had their plans cancelled because they are 'bad apple' insurers with 'sub-standard' plans, according to the president. The latest figure of cancellations I have seen is approaching 5 million.

So far HHS is saying that just over 100k people have 'selected' a plan - i.e. it's in their shopping basket on the web site, NOT that they have signed up and agreed to pay. Figures from the insurance companies suggest that less than half that number have, but they are unverifed.

We have no breakdown as to how many are young or old.

That is critical, as it's the young who have to sign up for this turkey to work, as they are expected to pay the lion's share of the costs of older folks..

What is even more troubling is the number of folks who have been steered to enroll in Medicaid, which has no payable premium, and is taxpayer funded. It looks like almost 400k folks have enrolled in Medicaid. The theory is that the young enrolling in Obamacare will pay for this. It looks like Obamacare will collapse under its own weight. The website problems are merely window dressing.

How has my insurance changed for next year? I am male, covered for maternity care, free conraceptives, pediatric dentistry and mental health care. Otherwise my coverage is the same as it was.

This is a truly dreadful piece of legislation for a problem which could have been solved by a simple piece of legislation - abolish pre-existing conditions and lifetime cap terminations, tort reform, and allow insurance companies to sell across state lines. Problem solved.

So now Obama is facing the fallout from his bare faced lie, repeated over and over, that "If you like your health care plan, you can keep it. Period.", and that the average family will save $2500 per year. More than half the country now think him untrustworthy. Also more than half the country want Obamacare repealed.

Especially for Bobajob, David Cameron's words from yesterday:

http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2013/11/david-cameron-milibands-labour-poses-the-same-old-danger/

‘The single biggest threat to the cost of living in this country is if our budget deficit and debts get out of control again. If interest rates and mortgage rates start to soar, the increase in cost of living will far outweigh the impact of any increase in government spending or indeed reduction in taxation.’

I'm sure I'll be quoting him regularly in the coming months.

R0berts said:

TwistedFireStopper said:

R0berts said:

TwistedFireStopper said:

JosiasJessop said:

foxinsoxuk said:

Link 1 is quite damning. We have government by a well connected SPADocracy, who secure each others preferment into safe seats. Lets see which favourite gets parachuted into Shaun Woodwards constituency, and other tempting safe seats with the fast track to a ministry.

snip

My conclusion: we are bewitched by these over-ambitious, under-experienced but well presented kids, both at work and in politics. They need to be replaced by people who have done front line work, and who know what they are talking about. If we do not then we are f***ed.

snip

In fact, it would be nice to see a table of all the professions MPs had before entering parliament...

This is intetesting-

www.smith-institute.org.uk/file/Who-Governs-Britain.pdf

I think I read somewhere that around 90 of our current MPs have never held a significant job, outside of politics.

What's a "significant job"?

Do we want more builders as MPs?

Why not? What's wrong with builders? I presume a significant job is any job that's not wanky spaddery/ PPE/bag carrying/ intern stuff. That pretty much rules out Cameron, Clegg and Milliband.

"Wanky spaddery bag carrying" exists in big business for Daddy's little gems / PPE tossers too though, to an even greater extent. Just because a job is in the private sector doesn't make it any more "proper", look at David Cameron's CV.

There's nothing wrong with builders. I just don't want Parliament full of builders, waitresses, teachers, firemen, posties, plumbers. I think the triangle heads do a better job.

What's the up with normal people, ain't we good enough for you?

Builders would be a good idea. We might get some legislation that facilitated house bouilding.

TwistedFireStopper said:

R0berts said:

TwistedFireStopper said:

JosiasJessop said:

foxinsoxuk said:

Link 1 is quite daomning. We have government by a well connected SPADocracy, who secure each others preferment into safe seats. Lets see which favourite gets parachuted into Shaun Woodwards constituency, and other tempting safe seats with the fast track to a ministry.

Today I spent an afternoon with our management consultants, teenage scribblers all, who lectured me on how to increase productivity within my own department. They based this on the sound knowledge of a day or two in the department with no real understanding of what we do and why we do it a particular way.


My conclusion: we are bewitched by these over-ambitious, under-experienced but well presented kids, both at work and in politics. They need to be replaced by people who have done front line work, and who know what they are talking about. If we do not then we are f***ed.

All good points. It's also why I want less politicians with PPE's from Oxford in politics. It leads to paucity of ideas. Let's have more engineers and scientists in parliament - the people who actually build the world. :-)

As a matter of interest, how many medical doctors are in parliament? I know there's Sarah Woolaston and Dan Poulter, along with the independent ex-MP Richard Taylor. But how many are there in total - I must be missing some?

In fact, it would be nice to see a table of all the professions MPs had before entering parliament...

This is intetesting-

www.smith-institute.org.uk/file/Who-Governs-Britain.pdf

I think I read somewhere that around 90 of our current MPs have never held a significant job, outside of politics.

What's a "significant job"?

Do we want more builders as MPs?

Why not? What's wrong with builders? I presume a significant job is any job that's not wanky spaddery/ PPE/bag carrying/ intern stuff. That pretty much rules out Cameron, Clegg and Milliband.

Can posters tone down their language, bad language, posts including those with words asterisked out, risk being deleted, repeat offenders will see their ability to instantly published revoked

I will obey.

PBModerator said:

Can posters tone down their language, bad language, posts including those with words asterisked out, risk being deleted, repeat offenders will see their ability to instantly published revoked

Bobajob said:

foxinsoxuk said:

I think that your work outside politics is perhaps your strongest suit. It is not required to do PPE if you have mastered Diplomacy and Advanced Squad Leader!

Nick also programmed a classic 80s computer game, the name of which somewhat regrettably now escapes me, but had me starstruck when he told me

Thier Finest Hour. The 1980s were a good time!

Some good news on the economy today, but unemployment levels still above pre-Crash and wages still below inflation.

Also, on the Tories' destruction of archived speeches, why did they not transfer them to the Bodlein Library at Oxford University, which does maintain the Tory Party Archive after all

Quinnipiac 2016 general election

•Chris Christie (R) 43% [36%] (40%) [37%]
•Hillary Clinton (D) 42% [49%] (46%) [45%]

•Hillary Clinton (D) 49% [50%]
•Paul Ryan (R) 40% [38%]

•Hillary Clinton (D) 49% [53%] (50%) {49%}
•Rand Paul (R) 40% [36%] (38%) {41%}

•Hillary Clinton (D) 51% [54%]
•Ted Cruz (R) 36% [31%]

PPP Maine 2016 GOP primary

•Chris Christie 27%
•Ted Cruz 14%
•Jeb Bush 12%
•Rand Paul 10%
•Paul Ryan 9%
•Marco Rubio 4%
•Bobby Jindal 2%
•Rick Santorum 1%
•Scott Walker 1%
•Someone else/Not sure 20%

PPP North Carolina 2016 GOP primary

•Chris Christie 20% (10%)
•Jeb Bush 16% (9%)
•Ted Cruz 12%
•Rand Paul 12% (6%)
•Marco Rubio 10% (21%)
•Paul Ryan 7% (12%)
•Bobby Jindal 6%
•Rick Santorum 2% (5%)
•Scott Walker 1%
•Someone else/Not sure 13% (8%)

Is it this one?
http://www.giantbomb.com/their-finest-hour-the-battle-of-britain/3030-16397/

And how does it compare to the excellent Stumovik IL2?
http://www.amazon.co.uk/UBI-Soft-IL2-Sturmovik/dp/B00005NUO0

Bobajob said:

NickPalmer said:

Bobajob said:

foxinsoxuk said:

I think that your work outside politics is perhaps your strongest suit. It is not required to do PPE if you have mastered Diplomacy and Advanced Squad Leader!

Nick also programmed a classic 80s computer game, the name of which somewhat regrettably now escapes me, but had me starstruck when he told me

Thier Finest Hour. The 1980s were a good time!

Of course - fondly remembered!

Some YouGov polling on the North and the South for The Times

3,783 adults polled between November 10 and November 12.

39% of Northern Voters said they would never Vote Tory

1 in 4 Northern Voters didn't know anyone who voted Tory

21% said the North was represented among the Tory leadership.

54% of Scots said they would never vote Tory

Significant regional variations were not found in the popularity of Tory policies.

26k benefits cap supported by 79% of Northerners, and 85% of Southerners (excluding London)

The commitment to reduce immigration to “tens of thousands” 83% support in both the North and the South

Help-to-Buy scheme was backed by 63 per cent of voters in the North and 62 per cent in the South (excluding London)

Will the Coalition contest Kevin Rudd's constituency?

Interesting piece in the Times

Labour strategists expect UKIP’s share of the vote to fall significantly at a general election and want to persuade UKIP voters to back Labour rather than voting for the Tories.

Improving the party’s message on immigration is seen as crucial.