Skip to content

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Will UKIP outpoll the Lib Dems at the 2015 General Election

SystemSystem Posts: 12,683
edited November 2013 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Will UKIP outpoll the Lib Dems at the 2015 General Election

With  less than 18 months to go until the general election, it is worth reviewing that markets that both William Hill and Ladbrokes have on Which party will receive the most votes in the next UK General Election? The Lib Dems or UKIP.

Read the full story here


«13

Comments

  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 80,113
    No idea, nice 100% book on the matter though.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,894
    Good afternoon, everyone.

    I don't think they will.

    Right now it's much easier to say you'll vote UKIP than the Lib Dems. Come the actual vote some saying they'll back UKIP will vote for another party, and I think the Lib Dems will be bolstered by tactical votes.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 80,113
    My guess would be the value is with the 7/4 simply based on the fact that it is Ladbrokes offering top price 4/7 on the other side. Shadsy tends to know his stuff.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 80,113
    edited November 2013
    7-4 looking like a marginally good value loser to me the more I look at it. No bet !
  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 7,382
    Michael Gove takes the battle into the Tories 20th most vulnerable seat to Labour - in secret!

    He has a cunning plan.

    http://www.bedfordshire-news.co.uk/News/Minister-Gove-arrives-under-cover-of-darkness-20131129183208.htm
  • NextNext Posts: 826
    Average deficit to LibDems from online polls = -3.5%

    Average deficit to LibDems from phone polls = 0%.

  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 7,382
    One thing's for sure. Even if UKIP has the highest vote share they will be miles behind the LDs in in terms of seats
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 56,384
    No.
  • NextNext Posts: 826
    MikeSmithson said:

    One thing's for sure. Even if UKIP has the highest vote share they will be miles behind the LDs in in terms of seats

    Maybe LibDems and UKIP should form an alliance to campaign for PR?
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 56,384
    Are there any odds on the Lib Dems getting more than twice the UKIP vote? I can see UKIP about 7% and the Lib Dems comfortably over 14%, if below 20%.

    Given the odds on simply beating UKIP those kind of odds would be more interesting.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 80,113
    MikeSmithson said:

    One thing's for sure. Even if UKIP has the highest vote share they will be miles behind the LDs in in terms of seats

    Only the Lib Dems can finish third under FPTP ;)
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 10,026
    Next said:

    MikeSmithson said:

    One thing's for sure. Even if UKIP has the highest vote share they will be miles behind the LDs in in terms of seats

    Maybe LibDems and UKIP should form an alliance to campaign for PR?
    Are the Lib Dems still in favour of PR? I thought they were now all for defending their corner of England under FPTP?


  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Candidates selected so far for GE2015:

    Con: 149
    Lab: 242
    LD: 71
    UKIP: 61

    https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0At91c3wX1Wu5dFkzTjFrRmJRN3F6ODBTTEs4NGFhcUE#gid=0
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    In 2010 UKIP didn't outpoll the LDs in a single constituency.

    The closest they came was as follows:

    LD margin over UKIP:

    Dudley North: 799
    Na h-Eileanan an Iar: 1,097
    Ynys Môn: 1,391
    Glasgow East: 1,408
    Thurrock: 1,511
    Dagenham & Rainham: 2,237
    Glasgow North East: 2,262
    Boston & Skegness: 2,290
    Barking: 2,419
    Walsall South: 2,431
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 10,026
    Perhaps we could have a thread on the strange death of Tory Sheffield Hallam? Allegedly one of the wealthiest seats in the country but no longer true blue. I don't know how the boundaries have changed but here's the Tory GE vote share:

    1950 - 65%
    1951 - 71%
    1955 - 66%
    1959 - 63%
    1964 - 55%
    1966 - 51%
    1970 - 61%
    1974 - 49%
    1974 - 49%
    1979 - 55%
    1983 - 51%
    1987 - 46%
    1992 - 45%
    1997 - 33%
    2001 - 31%
    2005 - 30%
    2010 - 23%

    Looks like the rot really set in after 1979, though John Major managed to stop the bleeding temporarily in 1992.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Frank — to be pedantic the Tories received 24% in 2010 to the nearest whole number.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    UKIP share by constituency, 2010:

    https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0At91c3wX1Wu5dDZoVmdlVXBEQVNvcUNfR294UXo0S3c&usp=drive_web#gid=0
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 10,026
    AndyJS said:

    Frank — to be pedantic the Tories received 24% in 2010 to the nearest whole number.

    Yep. 23.54%. Wiki only gave one decimal place. I've never understood why it's 'proper' to round up .5 rather than round it down. Can only be convention.
  • RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737
    No chance. I'd hazard the LDs will obtain at least twice as many votes as UKIP...
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    FrankBooth said:

    Perhaps we could have a thread on the strange death of Tory Sheffield Hallam? Allegedly one of the wealthiest seats in the country but no longer true blue. I don't know how the boundaries have changed but here's the Tory GE vote share:

    1950 - 65%
    1951 - 71%
    1955 - 66%
    1959 - 63%
    1964 - 55%
    1966 - 51%
    1970 - 61%
    1974 - 49%
    1974 - 49%
    1979 - 55%
    1983 - 51%
    1987 - 46%
    1992 - 45%
    1997 - 33%
    2001 - 31%
    2005 - 30%
    2010 - 23%

    Looks like the rot really set in after 1979, though John Major managed to stop the bleeding temporarily in 1992.

    A bit like Scotland. In Scotland, the Tories got over 50% of the votes. Today, even the Shires don't vote for the "English" party !
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited November 2013
    FrankBooth said:

    AndyJS said:

    Frank — to be pedantic the Tories received 24% in 2010 to the nearest whole number.

    Yep. 23.54%. Wiki only gave one decimal place. I've never understood why it's 'proper' to round up .5 rather than round it down. Can only be convention.
    It's nothing to do with convention. If the value is higher than 23.50% it's rounded up, if it's less it's rounded down. Or if you're dealing with 3 decimal places, 23.500%, etc.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,709
    edited November 2013
    AndyJS said:

    FrankBooth said:

    AndyJS said:

    Frank — to be pedantic the Tories received 24% in 2010 to the nearest whole number.

    Yep. 23.54%. Wiki only gave one decimal place. I've never understood why it's 'proper' to round up .5 rather than round it down. Can only be convention.
    It's nothing to do with convention. If the value is higher than 23.50% it's rounded up, if it's less it's rounded down. Or if you're dealing with 3 decimal places, 23.500%, etc.
    But why is 23.50000... rounded up, it's not symmetric.
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 10,026
    AndyJS said:

    FrankBooth said:

    AndyJS said:

    Frank — to be pedantic the Tories received 24% in 2010 to the nearest whole number.

    Yep. 23.54%. Wiki only gave one decimal place. I've never understood why it's 'proper' to round up .5 rather than round it down. Can only be convention.
    It's nothing to do with convention. If the value is higher than 23.50% it's rounded up, if it's less it's rounded down. Or if you're dealing with 3 decimal places, 23.500%, etc.
    We were always taught that you round up .5 rather than down. So 1.235 to 3 significant figures is 1.24.
  • FormerToryOrangeFormerToryOrange Posts: 112
    RodCrosby said:

    No chance. I'd hazard the LDs will obtain at least twice as many votes as UKIP...

    Correct, UKIP will not exceed 8% (6 or 7 is a more realistic prospect). The Lib Dems are likely to do a lot better than current polls suggest, I'd say they'll be somewhere between 15 and 20. So if UKIP are at the top end of their realistic range and the Libs at the bottom end of theirs, then UKIP may get more than half the Libdem share, but more likely the Libdems will more than double UKIP's.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 80,113
    The tricky question is should -17.5 be rounded to -17 or -18 ?
  • GeoffMGeoffM Posts: 6,071
    RobD said:

    AndyJS said:

    FrankBooth said:

    AndyJS said:

    Frank — to be pedantic the Tories received 24% in 2010 to the nearest whole number.

    Yep. 23.54%. Wiki only gave one decimal place. I've never understood why it's 'proper' to round up .5 rather than round it down. Can only be convention.
    It's nothing to do with convention. If the value is higher than 23.50% it's rounded up, if it's less it's rounded down. Or if you're dealing with 3 decimal places, 23.500%, etc.
    But why is 23.50000... rounded up, it's not symmetric.
    The equal halves are 0.000-0.499 and 0.500 ->0.999

  • RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737
    Another Blundellsands stunner this afternoon...
    http://www.titanictown.plus.com/sunset1.jpg
    http://www.titanictown.plus.com/sunset2.jpg
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,709
    GeoffM said:



    The equal halves are 0.000-0.499 and 0.500 ->0.999

    They aren't equal halves because the equivalent of 0.000-0.499 is 0.500-1.000
    The two unequal halves are 0.001-0.499 (rounded down to 0.000), and 0.500-0.999 rounded up to (1.000)
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited November 2013
    Cliff Dixon selected for UKIP in Hayes & Harlington. He contested the seat in 2010 for the English Democrats. UKIP didn't stand in 2010, although the ED, BNP and NF all did polling a combined 6%:

    www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=650103515041643&id=245183862200279

    twitter.com/EngPatriot/status/406211649360519168

    UKIP have also selected Andrew Fairfoull in Warrington North:

    twitter.com/UKIPbevand7/status/406194699981307904
  • FormerToryOrangeFormerToryOrange Posts: 112
    RobD said:

    GeoffM said:



    The equal halves are 0.000-0.499 and 0.500 ->0.999

    They aren't equal halves because the equivalent of 0.000-0.499 is 0.500-1.000
    The two unequal halves are 0.001-0.499 (rounded down to 0.000), and 0.500-0.999 rounded up to (1.000)
    RobD, you're wrong, sorry. If you take 3 decimal places as an example, there are 1000 possible decimals after each interger. x.000 - x.499 (500 decimals), x.500 - x.999 (500 decimals).
  • Gerry_ManderGerry_Mander Posts: 621
    RobD said:

    GeoffM said:



    The equal halves are 0.000-0.499 and 0.500 ->0.999

    They aren't equal halves because the equivalent of 0.000-0.499 is 0.500-1.000
    The two unequal halves are 0.001-0.499 (rounded down to 0.000), and 0.500-0.999 rounded up to (1.000)
    Look at what you have written
    0.000-0.499 is 500 units (of 0.001)
    0.500-1.000 is 501 units

    To get the same number of units, you need (as originally stated)
    0.000-0.499
    0.500-0.999
  • MrJonesMrJones Posts: 3,523
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/conservative/10485742/Tim-Yeo-dropped-as-Tory-MP-by-local-party.html

    "The committee cleared him of wrong-doing and he returned to his post last month. "

    Seems MPs have a different idea on what the minimum standard of behaviour should be.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    RodCrosby said:

    Another Blundellsands stunner this afternoon...
    http://www.titanictown.plus.com/sunset1.jpg
    http://www.titanictown.plus.com/sunset2.jpg

    Nice windfarm in the background.
  • MrJonesMrJones Posts: 3,523
    The consequences of mass immigration since New Labour opened the borders were camouflaged from most people by the giant credit bubble (1998-2008) which the political class are pretending never happened. People basing their Ukip predictions on past behaviour need to take into account the deflationary spiral caused by that credit bubble and not just here but in Europe as well. This doesn't mean Ukip will do well as all sorts of things could trip them up only that whatever happens is likely to be much more *erratic* than in recent history.
  • jayfdeejayfdee Posts: 618
    AndyJS said:

    RodCrosby said:

    Another Blundellsands stunner this afternoon...
    http://www.titanictown.plus.com/sunset1.jpg
    http://www.titanictown.plus.com/sunset2.jpg

    Nice windfarm in the background.
    Wow stunning pic,but even more so,I am amazed that tall marker structure is still there,I used to play around it 50 years ago. Rod you may remember we used to call the foreshore here the "Erosion" due to all the destroyed houses.

  • RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737
    edited November 2013
    jayfdee said:

    AndyJS said:

    RodCrosby said:

    Another Blundellsands stunner this afternoon...
    http://www.titanictown.plus.com/sunset1.jpg
    http://www.titanictown.plus.com/sunset2.jpg

    Nice windfarm in the background.
    Wow stunning pic,but even more so,I am amazed that tall marker structure is still there,I used to play around it 50 years ago. Rod you may remember we used to call the foreshore here the "Erosion" due to all the destroyed houses.

    I remember it being called that, but I think the destruction stopped in the 1930s with the building of a breakwater for the River Alt, and a sea wall was later built using rubble from bombed Bootle!
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/alancookson/3756155410/

    I was told the original mile marker was the mast of the German battleship Derfflinger, scuttled at Scapa Flow. Crosby Council bought it from the salvagers...
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,422
    Yeo going unmourned in the Telegraph:

    http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/damianthompson/100248436/tim-yeo-deselected-rejoice-just-rejoice/

    Very sad news from Glasgow with 8 dead - but given the circumstances, could have been orders of magnitude worse....
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,709
    edited November 2013
    Gerry_Mander said:



    Look at what you have written
    0.000-0.499 is 500 units (of 0.001)
    0.500-1.000 is 501 units

    To get the same number of units, you need (as originally stated)
    0.000-0.499
    0.500-0.999

    We are talking about rounding up and down, therefore you don't need to include 0.000 as it is not rounded. The wikipedia rounding article is quite helpful on this (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rounding#Round_half_up)

    "If it were not for the 0.5 fractions, the roundoff errors introduced by the round to nearest method would be symmetric: for every fraction that gets rounded up (such as 0.268), there is a complementary fraction (namely, 0.732) that gets rounded down by the same amount. When rounding a large set of numbers with random fractional parts, these rounding errors would statistically compensate each other, and the expected (average) value of the rounded numbers would be equal to the expected value of the original numbers.

    However, the round half up tie-breaking rule is not symmetric, as the fractions that are exactly 0.5 always get rounded up. This asymmetry introduces a positive bias in the roundoff errors. For example, if the fraction of y consists of three random decimal digits, then the expected value of q will be 0.0005 higher than the expected value of y. For this reason, round-to-nearest with the round half up rule is also (ambiguously) known as asymmetric rounding."
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 40,054
    My son played his first game of rugby today since he jacked in the idea of going pro. He was puffing a bit after a month of doing very little training, but he played well, his side one and he had a great time. It was so good to see him actually enjoying it all again.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,709
    FormerToryOrange said:



    RobD, you're wrong, sorry. If you take 3 decimal places as an example, there are 1000 possible decimals after each interger. x.000 - x.499 (500 decimals), x.500 - x.999 (500 decimals).

    It's not known as asymmetric rounding for nothing.
  • Stuart_DicksonStuart_Dickson Posts: 3,557
    FrankBooth said:

    Since we're discussing Scotland, I really do think more attention should be paid to England only polling. The latest ICM had Lab 41 Con 31 LD 12 UKIP 12 Green 3. Given England makes up the vast majority of the sample we can consider it fairly accurate.

    For Scotland it was Lab 32 Con 14 LD 2 SNP 48 UKIP 3 Green 2.

    Baxter could do with having separate England and Scotland swing models.

    Don't let Mark Senior see that. The poor wee pet will work himself into a tizzy. Scottish Lib Dems on just 2% ?? No no no no no. ICM will swiftly lose their "gold-standard" status in Lib Dem circles.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited November 2013
    Two LD candidates from 2010 have been reselected to fight the same seats again in 2015:

    Leeds North East: Aqila Choudhry

    http://www.yorkshireeveningpost.co.uk/news/latest-news/top-stories/leeds-charity-boss-bids-again-for-house-of-commons-1-6279153

    East Surrey: David Lee

    twitter.com/gaugeopinion/status/406755937614307328

    Con MP Henry Bellingham has been reselected as candidate for NW Norfolk:

    twitter.com/SWNCA/status/405829353659199489

  • AndreaParma_82AndreaParma_82 Posts: 4,714
    A 18 year old chap (I think he's a chap..Ollie...) selected by Bath CLP
  • Stuart_DicksonStuart_Dickson Posts: 3,557
    I suspect that there might be a good poll for the No side tonight, because Yes has just lengthened significantly over at Betfair. Now 6 was 5.5 earlier.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,709
    Stuart_Dickson said:

    I suspect that there might be a good poll for the No side tonight, because Yes has just lengthened significantly over at Betfair. Now 6 was 5.5 earlier.

    How liquid is the market, it could have taken £10 to shift it that far.
  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 7,382
    edited November 2013
    MrJones said:

    The consequences of mass immigration since New Labour opened the borders were camouflaged from most people by the giant credit bubble (1998-2008) which the political class are pretending never happened. People basing their Ukip predictions on past behaviour need to take into account the deflationary spiral caused by that credit bubble and not just here but in Europe as well. This doesn't mean Ukip will do well as all sorts of things could trip them up only that whatever happens is likely to be much more *erratic* than in recent history.

    Immigration=Good for the economy
    Anti-Immigration=Bad for the economy

    What do you want to do - impoverish the nation?

    See this from ex-Cameron advisor

    http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/nov/29/end-gutter-debate-britains-immigration-policy


  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited November 2013
    Obligatory photo of the Labour selection winner in Hexham Liam Carr:

    twitter.com/bobthehuskyman/status/406830607579504640
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,789
    Quite hard to predict as UKIP could yet either implode or explode, depending on events. At presnet I'd think it ought to be 2-1 against, but I'd hate to bet on it.

    Thanks to JJ for the good wishes and info about St Ives, which is indeed a very pretty place and full of seagulls, my favourite bird (locals are less enthusiastic about them). I'm staying at the Organic Panda because it's close to the station and the hospital, but it's great if you're into greenery (perhaps Tim Yeo should come here for a break - four kinds of milk for a start) and really nice people too.

    My uncle is in the British stiff upper lip 'tis-only-a-flesh-wound tradition - he has a broken hip, broken pelvis, and two broken legs, but says he's fine really, the walking frame is jolly good and everyone is being kind. He's going home Tuesday, full recovery expected by April. A UKIP voter (former Penzance executive member), he takes things as he finds them and says all three NHS hospitals locally have been terrific, nice Indian and Spanish nurses as well as locals, and if there are NHS problems he feels they've not reached Cornwall. But I suspect the place would need to be burning down before he complained.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    "David Boothroyd
    ‏@220_d_92_20
    Congratulations to Nik Slingsby on his selection as Labour candidate for Cities of London and Westminster!"

    twitter.com/220_d_92_20/status/406838247550382080
  • Stuart_DicksonStuart_Dickson Posts: 3,557
    RobD said:

    Stuart_Dickson said:

    I suspect that there might be a good poll for the No side tonight, because Yes has just lengthened significantly over at Betfair. Now 6 was 5.5 earlier.

    How liquid is the market, it could have taken £10 to shift it that far.
    Pretty liquid. GBP 57,670 matched and rising very fast now.

    By the way, that 6 has just gone.

    But point taken about the £10 stake. If you look at the £100 stake level and above, the prices are:

    Yes 5.3
    No 1.19
  • GeoffMGeoffM Posts: 6,071
    RobD said:

    Gerry_Mander said:



    Look at what you have written
    0.000-0.499 is 500 units (of 0.001)
    0.500-1.000 is 501 units

    To get the same number of units, you need (as originally stated)
    0.000-0.499
    0.500-0.999

    We are talking about rounding up and down, therefore you don't need to include 0.000 as it is not rounded. The wikipedia rounding article is quite helpful on this (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rounding#Round_half_up)

    "If it were not for the 0.5 fractions, the roundoff errors introduced by the round to nearest method would be symmetric: for every fraction that gets rounded up (such as 0.268), there is a complementary fraction (namely, 0.732) that gets rounded down by the same amount. When rounding a large set of numbers with random fractional parts, these rounding errors would statistically compensate each other, and the expected (average) value of the rounded numbers would be equal to the expected value of the original numbers.

    However, the round half up tie-breaking rule is not symmetric, as the fractions that are exactly 0.5 always get rounded up. This asymmetry introduces a positive bias in the roundoff errors. For example, if the fraction of y consists of three random decimal digits, then the expected value of q will be 0.0005 higher than the expected value of y. For this reason, round-to-nearest with the round half up rule is also (ambiguously) known as asymmetric rounding."
    Up to a point, Lord Copper.

    You've quoted one part of one version of one article on rounding which backs your point. The article itself has other takes on the issue too ... and that's before you hit the References or the search engines. It's probably safe to say that there are views on the matter.

    I suspect that there are centuries old quasi-religious schisms between warring tribes of mathematicians on the subject.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,709
    GeoffM said:


    Up to a point, Lord Copper.

    You've quoted one part of one version of one article on rounding which backs your point. The article itself has other takes on the issue too ... and that's before you hit the References or the search engines. It's probably safe to say that there are views on the matter.

    I suspect that there are centuries old quasi-religious schisms between warring tribes of mathematicians on the subject.

    I quoted the section of the article discussing the rounding method we were using below, where 0.5 is rounded up, which is assymmetric.

    God I can't believe I'm discussing mathematical minutiae on a political forum on a saturday night LOL! Time to go out and get a drink.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 40,054
    If the Ashcroft marginal polling turns out to be a reasonable reflection of what happens in 2015, but UKIP still get more votes overall than the LDs, we are surely looking at a very big (landslide) Labour majority. And that really is hard to believe.

    All of which is a very roundabout way of saying the LDs will get a lot more votes than UKIP.
  • Stark_DawningStark_Dawning Posts: 10,409
    MikeSmithson said:



    See this from ex-Cameron advisor

    http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/nov/29/end-gutter-debate-britains-immigration-policy



    'there is a fallacy among Conservatives [...] that they failed to win outright the last election because they were too soft on immigration...'

    That's a new one on me. Has any Tory ever stated that it was immigration that cost them an overall majority at the last election? Anyway, the tone of the article is the familiar one of the plebs not knowing what's good for them.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited November 2013
    Nearly everyone agrees a certain amount of immigration is a good thing. The question is how much: 20,000 a year would be acceptable to about 90% of people. 200,000 is unacceptable to 90%.
  • TomsToms Posts: 2,478
    edited November 2013
    I visualise a cartoon---
    a UKIP tail wagging a Lib Dem dog while Tweedledee and Tweedledum look on with mad hilarity.*
    *nb, take any permutation that suits.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 123,774
    Tonight's polling

    I'm expecting the following polls

    1) Opinium for The Observer

    2) YouGov for The Sunday Times

    3) ICM Wisdom polling for The Sunday Telegraph
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    SouthamObserver said:

    If the Ashcroft marginal polling turns out to be a reasonable reflection of what happens in 2015, but UKIP still get more votes overall than the LDs, we are surely looking at a very big (landslide) Labour majority. And that really is hard to believe.

    All of which is a very roundabout way of saying the LDs will get a lot more votes than UKIP.

    Unless UKIP win a lot more votes from former Labour supporters than most are expecting.
  • GeoffMGeoffM Posts: 6,071
    edited November 2013
    AndyJS said:

    Nearly everyone agrees a certain amount of immigration is a good thing. The question is how much: 20,000 a year would be acceptable to about 90% of people. 200,000 is unacceptable to 90%.

    Nearly everyone? That's a broad statement. Do you mean simply numbers incoming, or balanced by those leaving?

  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 123,774
    Spurs fans, look away now.

    I've just bet on Spurs beating Manchester United tomorrow
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    GeoffM said:

    AndyJS said:

    Nearly everyone agrees a certain amount of immigration is a good thing. The question is how much: 20,000 a year would be acceptable to about 90% of people. 200,000 is unacceptable to 90%.

    Nearly everyone? That's a broad statement. Do you mean simply numbers incoming, or balanced by those leaving?

    Net.

    I say nearly everyone because in the 70s and 80s immigration was running at about 20,000 a year a lot of the time and no-one seemed to mind.
  • MrJonesMrJones Posts: 3,523
    MikeSmithson said:

    MrJones said:

    The consequences of mass immigration since New Labour opened the borders were camouflaged from most people by the giant credit bubble (1998-2008) which the political class are pretending never happened. People basing their Ukip predictions on past behaviour need to take into account the deflationary spiral caused by that credit bubble and not just here but in Europe as well. This doesn't mean Ukip will do well as all sorts of things could trip them up only that whatever happens is likely to be much more *erratic* than in recent history.

    Immigration=Good for the economy
    Anti-Immigration=Bad for the economy

    What do you want to do - impoverish the nation?

    See this from ex-Cameron advisor

    http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/nov/29/end-gutter-debate-britains-immigration-policy


    long answer

    Immigration increases total output (GDP) because there's more people but at the same time it drives down or keeps wages stagnant so the end result is all that extra output goes to the employers.

    It's a con.

    That's before you take into account the deflationary effect (imo) of driving down wages which (with a time delay) eats away that extra GDP so you're basically on a treadmill getting faster all the time.

    short answer

    So where are the economic benefits then? Inner London in particular has had the most immigration so should be much better off than before it started yes?
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 123,774
    edited November 2013
    The strange death of Tory Sheffield Hallam?

    What has happened is that the seat has become more public sector (there's two big universities in Sheffield, but not in the boundaries of Sheffield Hallam the seat) interestingly one of the Unis is called Sheffield Hallam.

    Ironically, one of the things that will help Nick Clegg in Sheffield Hallam the seat, is his vote on tuition fees, because in the seat there's quite a few university top bods and lecturers.

    And they were enthusiastically in favour of tuition fees going up
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 47,089
    NickPalmer said:

    Quite hard to predict as UKIP could yet either implode or explode, depending on events. At presnet I'd think it ought to be 2-1 against, but I'd hate to bet on it.

    Thanks to JJ for the good wishes and info about St Ives, which is indeed a very pretty place and full of seagulls, my favourite bird (locals are less enthusiastic about them). I'm staying at the Organic Panda because it's close to the station and the hospital, but it's great if you're into greenery (perhaps Tim Yeo should come here for a break - four kinds of milk for a start) and really nice people too.

    My uncle is in the British stiff upper lip 'tis-only-a-flesh-wound tradition - he has a broken hip, broken pelvis, and two broken legs, but says he's fine really, the walking frame is jolly good and everyone is being kind. He's going home Tuesday, full recovery expected by April. A UKIP voter (former Penzance executive member), he takes things as he finds them and says all three NHS hospitals locally have been terrific, nice Indian and Spanish nurses as well as locals, and if there are NHS problems he feels they've not reached Cornwall. But I suspect the place would need to be burning down before he complained.

    Good to hear he's feeling confident and on the mend (I generally find the former really helps with the latter).

    I don't know if you'll get the chance, but it's worth a little walk west, either along the clifftop or inland paths. I love that area passionately. Too many people spend their time in the town, Tate, harbour, and Hayle areas (although they are lovely).

    Then again, I love rough terrain more than sandy beaches. ;-)

    As a matter of interest, how did you find the train journey?
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,338
    Clear picture of backgrounds of SW MPs via Bath Chronicle.

    http://www.westerndailypress.co.uk/Social-mobility-region-s-MPs-educated/story-20088879-detail/story.html
  • perdixperdix Posts: 1,806
    MrJones said:

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/conservative/10485742/Tim-Yeo-dropped-as-Tory-MP-by-local-party.html

    "The committee cleared him of wrong-doing and he returned to his post last month. "

    Seems MPs have a different idea on what the minimum standard of behaviour should be.


    MPs giving a soft verdict on Yeo probably hoped that the same would apply to them in similar circumstances.

  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,338
    St Ives Church has a holy water overflow pipe.

    http://darylwaller.com/holy-water-overflow/

    For some reason it always amuses me. Hope your uncle in on the mend Dr Palmer.
  • GeoffMGeoffM Posts: 6,071
    AndyJS said:

    GeoffM said:

    AndyJS said:

    Nearly everyone agrees a certain amount of immigration is a good thing. The question is how much: 20,000 a year would be acceptable to about 90% of people. 200,000 is unacceptable to 90%.

    Nearly everyone? That's a broad statement. Do you mean simply numbers incoming, or balanced by those leaving?

    Net.

    I say nearly everyone because in the 70s and 80s immigration was running at about 20,000 a year a lot of the time and no-one seemed to mind.
    Cheers for the clarification - appreciated. Agreed that 20k net wouldn't attract much mainstream comment.

  • CarolaCarola Posts: 1,805
    Via The Poke:

    Black Friday in context. (via Reddit) pic.twitter.com/ifIKO4idth
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    UKIP beating the Lib Dems in vote share looks like a 5/1 shot to me, and that might be on the mean side. So shadsy's 4/7 on the Lib Dems looks very tempting.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    The strange death of Tory Sheffield Hallam?

    What has happened is that the seat has become more public sector (there's two big universities in Sheffield, but not in the boundaries of Sheffield Hallam the seat) interestingly one of the Unis is called Sheffield Hallam.

    Ironically, one of the things that will help Nick Clegg in Sheffield Hallam the seat, is his vote on tuition fees, because in the seat there's quite a few university top bods and lecturers.

    And they were enthusiastically in favour of tuition fees going up

    The other side of the coin is the Tories' ability to win seats like Thurrock, Cannock Chase and Sherwood where they used to weigh the Labour vote at the same time as the Tories used to win Hallam easily.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited November 2013
    "Thailand protests: One killed by gunfire at clashes"

    At least one person has been killed and three wounded by gunfire after clashes broke out between rival protesters in the Thai capital Bangkok.
    People heading to a pro-government rally were attacked by students, and later shots were fired.
    Saturday is the seventh day of protests aiming to unseat the government of Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra":

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-25168326

    http://www.economist.com/blogs/banyan/2013/11/thailands-protests
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,789
    Thanks to Dr Spyn for the good wishes - will watch out for the holy water...
    JosiasJessop said:



    Good to hear he's feeling confident and on the mend (I generally find the former really helps with the latter).

    I don't know if you'll get the chance, but it's worth a little walk west, either along the clifftop or inland paths. I love that area passionately. Too many people spend their time in the town, Tate, harbour, and Hayle areas (although they are lovely).

    Then again, I love rough terrain more than sandy beaches. ;-)

    As a matter of interest, how did you find the train journey?

    Many thanks, JJ. No visits allowed in the morning so I have the time free, will try to explore. The train was fine if tedious (over 5 hours) - I've always found Great Western pretty good. For a journey of that length not having wifi is a big mnus point for me, but I expect I'm in the minority on that route - everyone else seemed to be families.

  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 123,774
    Wales fail to beat Australia again.

    England beat Australia regularly.

    The Lions only won in Australia thanks to England.
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 10,026
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Wales fail to beat Australia again.

    England beat Australia regularly.

    The Lions only won in Australia thanks to England.

    LOL. It's a funny thing though. Wales beat England easily earlier this year and dominated the Lions side in the final test. But England do better on their own against the southern hemisphere sides.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 123,774
    FrankBooth said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Wales fail to beat Australia again.

    England beat Australia regularly.

    The Lions only won in Australia thanks to England.

    LOL. It's a funny thing though. Wales beat England easily earlier this year and dominated the Lions side in the final test. But England do better on their own against the southern hemisphere sides.
    England made sure they didn't peak too soon for the World Cup
  • Life_ina_market_townLife_ina_market_town Posts: 2,319
    edited November 2013
    If anyone's interested, the High Speed Rail (London - West Midlands) Bill has been published in two volumes (I, II). As a hybrid bill, the government are going to have to devote a hell of a lot of parliamentary time to this if they want to see it on the statute book any time soon. The Crossrail Act 2008, for example, was first introduced in the 2004-2005 session.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 55,931
    Evening everyone, shocked to see so many deaths in the helicopter crash, it wasn't clear if there were reports of any fatalities at all in the small hours.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 123,774
    Toby Helm ‏@tobyhelm 2m

    Labour lead at 7% in new Opinium/Observer poll. And surge for Ukip. Labour 35 (-2), Tories 28 (n/c), Ukip 19 (+3), Libs 8 (-1).
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 123,774
    Just for a bit of fun

    Baxtering that Opinium poll leads to

    Con 229

    Lab 368

    LD 25

    UKIP 0

    Lab Majority of 86

  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    If UKIP get 19% nationally they would almost certainly pick up a couple of seats, probably Boston and Thanet South.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    What odds? Must be long!

    More importantly from Leicester City a very convincing win and we are top of the league!
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Spurs fans, look away now.

    I've just bet on Spurs beating Manchester United tomorrow

  • RogerRoger Posts: 21,066
    Re the new Observer poll.

    Isn't it extraordinary that a party of loonys and closet racists led by a vulgarian should be within eight points of the Party of Churchill and Thatcher after a five year re-branding that included the most outlandish and expensive publicity stunts ever conceived by a political party?

    If they were a public company with shareholders they'd have fired their MD their entire board and their ad agency.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 55,931
    edited November 2013
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Toby Helm ‏@tobyhelm 2m

    Labour lead at 7% in new Opinium/Observer poll. And surge for Ukip. Labour 35 (-2), Tories 28 (n/c), Ukip 19 (+3), Libs 8 (-1).

    Opinium/The Sunil on Sunday:

    Tory/UKIP 47%
    Progressives 43%
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 123,774
    foxinsoxuk said:

    What odds? Must be long!

    More importantly from Leicester City a very convincing win and we are top of the league!

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Spurs fans, look away now.

    I've just bet on Spurs beating Manchester United tomorrow

    Not as long as I was hoping for, 9/5 with Ladbrokes
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 123,774
    Roger said:

    Re the new Observer poll.

    Isn't it extraordinary that a party of loonys and closet racists led by a vulgarian should be within eight points of the Party of Churchill and Thatcher after a five year re-branding that included the most outlandish and expensive publicity stunts ever conceived by a political party?

    If they were a public company with shareholders they'd have fired their MD their entire board and their ad agency.

    Roger, you're reading far too much into Opinium, with the Gold Standard, the Tories lead UKIP by 20%
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Off to see Gravity. Hope it's as good as people say.
  • stjohnstjohn Posts: 1,914
    One more chance for PBers to solve my topical xword clue. Answer at 10 pm if no one solves it.

    Tim Yeo is cut in half (6)
  • FormerToryOrangeFormerToryOrange Posts: 112
    MikeSmithson said:

    MrJones said:

    The consequences of mass immigration since New Labour opened the borders were camouflaged from most people by the giant credit bubble (1998-2008) which the political class are pretending never happened. People basing their Ukip predictions on past behaviour need to take into account the deflationary spiral caused by that credit bubble and not just here but in Europe as well. This doesn't mean Ukip will do well as all sorts of things could trip them up only that whatever happens is likely to be much more *erratic* than in recent history.

    Immigration=Good for the economy
    Anti-Immigration=Bad for the economy

    What do you want to do - impoverish the nation?

    See this from ex-Cameron advisor

    http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/nov/29/end-gutter-debate-britains-immigration-policy


    4 legs good 2 legs bad, right Mike?
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,180
    stjohn said:

    One more chance for PBers to solve my topical xword clue. Answer at 10 pm if no one solves it.

    Tim Yeo is cut in half (6)

    Moiety.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 123,774
    Abby Clancy is going to win Strictly.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 21,066
    Bravo Felix!!
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,180
    Roger said:

    Bravo Felix!!

    De nada!
  • anothernickanothernick Posts: 3,591
    Roger said:

    Re the new Observer poll.

    Isn't it extraordinary that a party of loonys and closet racists led by a vulgarian should be within eight points of the Party of Churchill and Thatcher after a five year re-branding that included the most outlandish and expensive publicity stunts ever conceived by a political party?

    If they were a public company with shareholders they'd have fired their MD their entire board and their ad agency.

    Not surprising that UKIP is up this week. Immigration has been in the news. UKIP always gains if the other parties remind us of their policy failures on immigration.
  • FormerToryOrangeFormerToryOrange Posts: 112
    AndyJS said:

    If UKIP get 19% nationally they would almost certainly pick up a couple of seats, probably Boston and Thanet South.

    Nobody knows what the impact would be of UKIP getting 19% at the GE. If they did they would almost certainly be in double figures in terms of seats. Uniform swing models are more or less worthless at the best of times, even more so in a situation when one party increases its support by a factor of more than 6.

    In reality, of course, UKIP will get less than half that figure, and will be lucky to win 1 seat. There are 3 seats where UKIP have an outside chance (less than 25% chance in each, but on a good night could win any or all of them). These are, in order of likelihood, South Thanet, Boston & Skegness and Castle Point.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 21,066
    edited November 2013
    @Eagle. You suggested a thread on what music Labour should choose for their victory march in 2015. Having listened to Ed's Desert Island Discs and dismissing them all (with damages) I've gone for this. Directed by Tony Kaye and sung by Johnny Cash
    http://www.metacafe.com/watch/1045024/johnny_cash_gods_gonna_cut_you_down/
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,789
    SeanT said:


    The lack of wifi on British trains is pitiful. Great Western don't even have wifi in First Class. Dreadful.

    ->Yes, though they've got some sort of entertainment system instead, like an airline. Maybe they know their customers. East Midlands Trains wifi is now pretty good - free in first, £4 in standard.

    If you get a chance do the clifftop walk out of St Ives to Zennor and beyond - it is absolutely extroardinary - from picturesque fishing town to primordial Celtic earthscape in a few hundred yards - haunted and gorgeous.

    As you approach Zennor church you will see strange field hedges made of boulders. According to historian Oliver Rackham those are 4000 years old, and are, he believes, the world's oldest human artefacts still being used for their original purpose.

    West Penwith - the area around Zennor - is just magnificently brooding.

    Thanks! I'd forgotten this was your home territory - wish I was here longer now. Why don't you write a Cornish thriller for a change of pace? "Knox returns to the sinister roots of his ancestral past", etc.?

    We should wait for YG before we get too excited about the UKIP 19% - my guess is it will be something boring like 37/31/12/8. But yes, Cameron talking worriedly and ineffectively about immigration reminds people to vote UKIP instead of the intended purpose. That UKIP>LD bet on the last thread is looking a bit better now.

  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,338
    @SeanT Must have done that walk at Zennor about 6 years ago. Second the comments re landscape.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 28,257
    FrankBooth said:

    Perhaps we could have a thread on the strange death of Tory Sheffield Hallam? Allegedly one of the wealthiest seats in the country but no longer true blue. I don't know how the boundaries have changed but here's the Tory GE vote share:

    1950 - 65%
    1951 - 71%
    1955 - 66%
    1959 - 63%
    1964 - 55%
    1966 - 51%
    1970 - 61%
    1974 - 49%
    1974 - 49%
    1979 - 55%
    1983 - 51%
    1987 - 46%
    1992 - 45%
    1997 - 33%
    2001 - 31%
    2005 - 30%
    2010 - 23%

    Looks like the rot really set in after 1979, though John Major managed to stop the bleeding temporarily in 1992.

    You'll find plenty of discussion on the relevant page at UKPR.

    But the bottom line is that Sheffield Hallam has few private sector working class (the demographic which has trended rightwards) and lots of public sector middle class (the group which has trended leftwards).

    The other, and much less mentioned, side of this coin is that nearby seats such as Derbyshire NE, Don Valley and Penistone are now winnable for the Conservatives for the first time ever and indeed will need to be won if the Conservatives are to regain power in 2020.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,894
    Good evening, everyone.

    Mr. Eagles, that's impossible. A man here assured me somebody called Gumede would win.

    Incidentally, as a result of your comment I went to check the prices. The SCD market is off, presumably because it's halfway through TV coverage and some will have inside knowledge, but there is a next James Bond market up. Idris Elba is third up, though his price was suspended.

    That'd be interesting. I think it's unreasonable to alter a character's demography where it's an inherent part of the role (Othello, for example), but I don't think being white is part of Bond's identity (unlike being a man and being British). I doubt it'll happen, though.
This discussion has been closed.

© Vanilla Keystone Theme 2025