politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Introducing a new tracker: the 2010 LD switchers to LAB – t

TheScreamingEagles said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Eagles, whilst that must be galling it's still good to be green.

I was a wreck yesterday afternoon because of the match.

I nearly made myself sick.

And I've got another month of this.

I just know Chelsea and or Norwich will ruin it for us.

Norwich will smash the scouse idiots by 4 or 5.
My home city will protect the proud Leeds record of having won the top flight more recently than the chirpy twongaloids.
Suarez will trip over his buck teeth and miss the World Cup, too

Scott_P said:

Monksfield said:

the chumocracy

This one?



@TelePolitics: Blog: Euan Blair for Parliament? Labour is more inbred than the North Korean politburo http://t.co/Zv5zpTH5Ae

Can we assume that both you and the Telegraph are similarly outraged and disapproving of
Nick Hurd, son of former Home Secretary Douglas, being an MP, or Bernard Jenkin, son of former cabinet minister Patrick, or Francis Maude, son of former cabinet minister Angus, or Robin Walker, son of former cabinet minister Peter, or David Prior, son of former cabinet minister Jim, or Ben Gummer, son of former cabinet minister John Selwyn ?

Perhaps following the same career as one of your parents is only a bad, evil thing when Labour people do it ?

Council estate kids dont make up much of that 50%

Twas ever thus. When I was at a Welsh comprehensive in the 1980s all of the kids in the academic stream were children of lower middle or middle middle class parents.

TheScreamingEagles said:

antifrank said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Eagles, whilst that must be galling it's still good to be green.

I was a wreck yesterday afternoon because of the match.

I nearly made myself sick.

And I've got another month of this.

I just know Chelsea and or Norwich will ruin it for us.

There is absolutely no chance of Norwich ruining it for you. They couldn't score against statues at the moment.

The Mackem Messi, Jordan Henderson is suspended, Sturridge is probably out with a hamstring strain.

Luis Suarez has only scored 7 out of our last 42 goals.

I'm worried.

All seven were at Anfield against Norwich

isam said:

@rcs1000

Yes but the state schools that supply that 50% are only available to people who live in the, usually very rich, catchment area of the existing grammar schools or 'state schools' that are 'non selective' on ability, but only select from a wealthy catchment area (the school that educates Michael Goves daughter is an example)

Council estate kids dont make up much of that 50%

One of the issues with the old grammar school system was that it heavily favoured the middle classes. I have a little bit of experience of this. Despite passing my 11+ and literally being the nearest kid to the school I did not get in originally - my place was taken by a child from a much wealthier background who lived further away. However, he ended up going private so I got in. The kid who lived second closest had to wait until the summer term before he got his place after another child who lived further away also went private.

I may be wrong, but in those local authorities where there are still grammar schools, the intake is largely middle class (ie, the number of kids on free school meals is low). If we are to introduce the grammar system again - which I think we should, in principle - then a way has to be developed to identify the children that would benefit from attending whatever their background. A better alternative might be much stricter streaming from the start within the existing comprehensive system.

What made my grammar school work for me was not the standard of the teaching - which varied from poor to mostly mediocre through to outstanding - but the level of expectation: we were expected to do nine O levels, to get good passes, to stay on for A levels and to go to university; so most of us did.

dyedwoolie said:

Mick_Pork said:

Doug ‏@doug7065 3h

MPs' expenses pay for Conservative party conference gay orgy This from the people who tell us how to run our lives! http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/470168/MPs-expenses-pay-for-Conservative-party-conference-gay-orgy …

Equality Justice ‏@Avitusparta 21h

David Cameron: 'Jesus invented the Big Society – I'm just continuing God's work' http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/david-cameron-claims-jesus-invented-the-big-society--he-is-just-continuing-gods-work-9250449.html … pic.twitter.com/GuDemQfe8j

It's the very worst sort of orgy, an ungodly gay orgy of vice and sin and evil. If only Diana were here to clear the landmines of sodomy. Snigger.

Actually the very worst sort sort of orgy are always the one's Dacre and Desmond send their 'intrepid' reporters out to find the details of when they "make their excuses and leave", if you know anything about the fun and games that happens behind the scenes at the tabloids.

Cammie also said he should be thought of as as some kind of spiritual "Dyno-Rod" so it's not as if his messianic hilarity was limited to Jesus inventing the Big Society.

As for Diana, perhaps a second rate Blair impersonator like Cammie could be 'the people's fop'?

*snigger*

isam said:

@rcs1000

Yes but the state schools that supply that 50% are only available to people who live in the, usually very rich, catchment area of the existing grammar schools or 'state schools' that are 'non selective' on ability, but only select from a wealthy catchment area (the school that educates Michael Goves daughter is an example)

Council estate kids dont make up much of that 50%

Well (and I speak as someone who is inclined to be supportive of grammar schools), the evidence that they improve the outcomes of poor children is weak. See: http://blogs.ft.com/ftdata/2012/05/21/on-grammar-schools-2/ Grammar schools have been a boon for middle class parents wanting to save on £15,000/year school fees.

Also, the study here (http://www.study.cam.ac.uk/undergraduate/publications/docs/admissionsstatistics2012.pdf, page 23) suggests that Cambridge (and I have no data on Oxford) does a pretty good job of getting people in from poorer areas.

antifrank said:

If anyone can confirm the links work (as Fluffy kindly did yesterday), I'd be much obliged. I'm a technoidiot and the chances that I've failed are high.

Works fine for me! And I found it an interesting analysis. Just one little point - is there a typo somewhere in this bit? Or is my brain not working?

"It seems inconceivable that such an important referendum result will not have a major impact. In particular, if there is a Yes vote, it seems likely that the SNP will not get a major boost in the polls. Seats that looked out of reach may suddenly become winnable."

TSE,

Suarez has stayed remarkably free of red cards and remarkably fit all season. It must be all that human flesh he eats. A warning to vegetarians?

SouthamObserver said:

isam said:

@rcs1000

Yes but the state schools that supply that 50% are only available to people who live in the, usually very rich, catchment area of the existing grammar schools or 'state schools' that are 'non selective' on ability, but only select from a wealthy catchment area (the school that educates Michael Goves daughter is an example)

Council estate kids dont make up much of that 50%

One of the issues with the old grammar school system was that it heavily favoured the middle classes. I have a little bit of experience of this. Despite passing my 11+ and literally being the nearest kid to the school I did not get in originally - my place was taken by a child from a much wealthier background who lived further away. However, he ended up going private so I got in. The kid who lived second closest had to wait until the summer term before he got his place after another child who lived further away also went private.

I may be wrong, but in those local authorities where there are still grammar schools, the intake is largely middle class (ie, the number of kids on free school meals is low). If we are to introduce the grammar system again - which I think we should, in principle - then a way has to be developed to identify the children that would benefit from attending whatever their background. A better alternative might be much stricter streaming from the start within the existing comprehensive system.

What made my grammar school work for me was not the standard of the teaching - which varied from poor to mostly mediocre through to outstanding - but the level of expectation: we were expected to do nine O levels, to get good passes, to stay on for A levels and to go to university; so most of us did.

I agree with last paragraph... What made comprehensive schooling bad for me is that it was too tempting to muck about with the cooler kids that couldn't care less about grades. I was in the top maths group with the nerds and was ripped for it!

So I mucked about and failed

The problem with the current grammar school system is that there are so few of them that house prices near them go through the roof, and only middle class and above can afford to live in the catchment area. If there were more of them, this problem would be reduced. Both my parents were council house kids that passed the 11 plus and went to Grammar/tech schools

HortenceWithering said:

Scott_P said:

Monksfield said:

the chumocracy

This one?

@TelePolitics: Blog: Euan Blair for Parliament? Labour is more inbred than the North Korean politburo http://t.co/Zv5zpTH5Ae

Can we assume that both you and the Telegraph are similarly outraged and disapproving of
Nick Hurd, son of former Home Secretary Douglas, being an MP, or Bernard Jenkin, son of former cabinet minister Patrick, or Francis Maude, son of former cabinet minister Angus, or Robin Walker, son of former cabinet minister Peter, or David Prior, son of former cabinet minister Jim, or Ben Gummer, son of former cabinet minister John Selwyn ?

Perhaps following the same career as one of your parents is only a bad, evil thing when Labour people do it ?

Nepotism is always bad. However the level of hypocrisy shown by Labour here is quite startling. Just look at the non-stop barrage of 'Etonian chums' we get directed at the blues from the reds, and then consider the make up of Labour's front bench, and their next intake of MPs.

Carnyx said:

antifrank said:

If anyone can confirm the links work (as Fluffy kindly did yesterday), I'd be much obliged. I'm a technoidiot and the chances that I've failed are high.

Works fine for me! And I found it an interesting analysis. Just one little point - is there a typo somewhere in this bit? Or is my brain not working?

"It seems inconceivable that such an important referendum result will not have a major impact. In particular, if there is a Yes vote, it seems likely that the SNP will not get a major boost in the polls. Seats that looked out of reach may suddenly become winnable."

It's a typo. Delete the word "not" when reading it (I'd started with a convoluted sentence with double negatives and obviously left one in). I'll edit it now so others aren't baffled.

F1: Domenicali replaced by Marco Mattiacci:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/27023145

I'd guess that's an interrim replacement.

"One of the issues with the old grammar school system was that it heavily favoured the middle classes."

That was not universally true, it certainly wasn't in my day. My grammar school was in Battersea and most of the pupils came, like me, from the council estates of Battersea, Wandsworth and Clapham. There were a few from wealthier backgrounds who travelled in from as far away as Worcester Park, but they were very much in the minority.

So it was possible for grammar schools to be run to the benefit of bright youngsters from modest backgrounds and if could be done once it could be done again.

Charles said:

OldKingCole said:

Financier, this answer is in somewhat random order, although I've tried to summarise at the end.

I don't like the (apparent at any rate) effect of the NHS reforms especially as they seem to apply to my local GP practice, although I agree with Dr Foxinsox that some of that is due to the Labour reforms to medical education.

I am very unhappy at continued privatisation; where can it end? There's surely nothing else that can be sold off, and I don't see a signifcant improvement in services that can't be accounted for by technology. Which would have come in anyway!

I think the constant negativity about Europe from the Tories is counter-productive. I cannot imagine that our prtners will not soon be tired (if they are not already) of our constant "will we stay, won't we stay" attitude. If the EU Parliament passed a "Make your minds up or Eff Off" resolution I wouldn't blame them!

Having said all that, I think the Labour policy on energy prices is daft; freezing prices simply holds back investment.

I don't like the Tory schools policies, although Labour's aren't much better; while I wouldn't necessarily do away with all fee paying schools immediately I would insist that all schools with any degree of Government funding are open to all. I would get rid of state supported faith schools.

Oh, and I want to see a fair electoral system, with a rationally selected second chamber.

When it all comes down to it though, I see a Tory run Britain as being governed in the interests of the fortunate, and I would rather see my country governed in the interests of all. "We're all in this together" was the most hypocritical slogan ever.

That do for a start? I'm sure you will agree with one or two points and disagree with others. Or should that be the other way round.

Honestly speaking, having read that list, I'm not sure why you are wavering. Seems to me that you are really on the left of the Labour Party. Not really Tribune left, but certainly soft left.

As I said (much) earlier having been in at the beginning of this thread, I've been off on grandparental duties, participating in the water-throwing festival that is the Thai New Year.

And, TBH Mr C, I always had the impression that much of the old Liberal Party WAS significantly to the Left of the Labour Party! It made it quite difficult in the early days of the merger! Labour, IMHO, has always had a significantly socially conservative element.

Anorak said:

private school kids receive shed-loads of coaching and exam practice which gives them the edge over state school applicants at interview/selection.

In other words, those children would not have got into Oxbridge from the state sector, because it systematically fails to develop them to their actual potential. Which is my point, exactly.

My experience of the state sector is that as long as a child is average they think they've done enough, even if they've done nothing. When you suggest otherwise - for example, when I asked my eldest's form teacher a year or two ago if she thought her good enough to get a scholarship to North London Collegiate School - they simply look at you with incomprehension and indifference.

TheWatcher said:

dyedwoolie said:

Mick_Pork said:

dyedwoolie said:

Mick_Pork said:

Doug ‏@doug7065 3h

MPs' expenses pay for Conservative party conference gay orgy This from the people who tell us how to run our lives! http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/470168/MPs-expenses-pay-for-Conservative-party-conference-gay-orgy …

Equality Justice ‏@Avitusparta 21h

David Cameron: 'Jesus invented the Big Society – I'm just continuing God's work' http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/david-cameron-claims-jesus-invented-the-big-society--he-is-just-continuing-gods-work-9250449.html … pic.twitter.com/GuDemQfe8j

It's the very worst sort of orgy, an ungodly gay orgy of vice and sin and evil. If only Diana were here to clear the landmines of sodomy. Snigger.

Actually the very worst sort sort of orgy are always the one's Dacre and Desmond send their 'intrepid' reporters out to find the details of when they "make their excuses and leave", if you know anything about the fun and games that happens behind the scenes at the tabloids.

Cammie also said he should be thought of as as some kind of spiritual "Dyno-Rod" so it's not as if his messianic hilarity was limited to Jesus inventing the Big Society.

As for Diana, perhaps a second rate Blair impersonator like Cammie could be 'the people's fop'?

*snigger*

No one can ever match the saintliness of the peoples princess.
Cams bible bashing has annoyed me intensely. Religion is for fools and the desperate.

It's no worse than the religion of Eck, where the McLord is deemed infallible, and anyone who dares questions his word, is a heretic who must be cast into the pit of sin.

All faith outside of the self is transient and doomed to disappointment.
I am the way the truth and the light, screw everyone else,

Bond_James_Bond said:

Anorak said:

private school kids receive shed-loads of coaching and exam practice which gives them the edge over state school applicants at interview/selection.

In other words, those children would not have got into Oxbridge from the state sector, because it systematically fails to develop them to their actual potential. Which is my point, exactly.

My experience of the state sector is that as long as a child is average they think they've done enough, even if they've done nothing. When you suggest otherwise - for example, when I asked my eldest's form teacher a year or two ago if she thought her good enough to get a scholarship to North London Collegiate School - they simply look at you with incomprehension and indifference.

Difficult isn't it. My elder grandchildren (ages 24 & 22) were probably not encouraged enough at any time through their school career, with the result that the younger one didn't get the degree he should have done. However the next pair (10 & 7) are getting much more pressure at primary school.
Something that will probably shock many here; both of the elder pair are anxious to do something "useful"; the elder is teaching, although she's fed up with the Govian paperwork and the demands of marking ……. works out to something like a 70 hour week for virtually all weeks of the school term …. and younger one is working in a Pupil Referral Unit

rcs1000 said:

Bond_James_Bond said:

Anorak said:

private school kids receive shed-loads of coaching and exam practice which gives them the edge over state school applicants at interview/selection.

In other words, those children would not have got into Oxbridge from the state sector, because it systematically fails to develop them to their actual potential. Which is my point, exactly.

My experience of the state sector is that as long as a child is average they think they've done enough, even if they've done nothing. When you suggest otherwise - for example, when I asked my eldest's form teacher a year or two ago if she thought her good enough to get a scholarship to North London Collegiate School - they simply look at you with incomprehension and indifference.

Why would you expect a state school form teacher to know what standard is required for a North London private school? Even at my daughter's (expensive) prep school, they seem curiously unaware of what standards are required for the various senior schools.

I'd expect it because about 50% of the children from her school (which is North London) go on to private schools, a number on academic scholarships and bursaries, including to that one. More still get into selective state schools. She should have an idea of what outcomes can be expected at 11+ based on the raw material she sees.

The school's academic reputation exists in spite of the way the school is run, not because of it. They claim credit for the efforts put in by pupils and parents while resolutely fostering the attitude that mediocrity is fine.

None of the above outcomes is supported in any way by the school. They offer no support whatever to children wanting to sit 11+; the assumption is that the local comp is good enough. There must be many kids who could and would get into these school but whose parents have no ambition for their children, and neither does the school.

edmundintokyo said:

dyedwoolie said:

People protest against governments, protesting against the opposition ought to be the sole property of W Hague 97-01

Pretty common in the first term of opposition, isn't it? Michael Foot wasn't wildly popular either, IIUC. If it hadn't been for the LibDem realignment Ed Miliband would be looking a lot like William Hague right now. But LibDems voters have realigned, and FPTP is in one of its funny moods, so he's heading for Downing Street.

At the moment, it would appear that way. But leads shrink and go into reverse.

"My experience of the state sector is that as long as a child is average they think they've done enough, even if they've done nothing."

Gaming the system is partly responsible for that attitude, at least in some schools. When my son was thirteen I became very concerned about his ability with the written word (until then, being an older father, I had accepted his teachers' assurances about the progress he was making). When I tackled the school I was told that he had reached the minimum standard expected in the SATs tests and therefore he could not expect any help, they had to concentrate on children who were struggling to get to level 4. The same occurred at GCSE, if a child was on course to get a C they were left alone to get on with things by themselves. There was no effort made to develop a child's full potential, just to get them to the lowest standard demanded by the government set targets (and, by the cringe, those standards are low).

Get out and get a job then instead of whinging on here.

Bond_James_Bond said:

rcs1000 said:

Bond_James_Bond said:

Anorak said:

private school kids receive shed-loads of coaching and exam practice which gives them the edge over state school applicants at interview/selection.

In other words, those children would not have got into Oxbridge from the state sector, because it systematically fails to develop them to their actual potential. Which is my point, exactly.

My experience of the state sector is that as long as a child is average they think they've done enough, even if they've done nothing. When you suggest otherwise - for example, when I asked my eldest's form teacher a year or two ago if she thought her good enough to get a scholarship to North London Collegiate School - they simply look at you with incomprehension and indifference.

Why would you expect a state school form teacher to know what standard is required for a North London private school? Even at my daughter's (expensive) prep school, they seem curiously unaware of what standards are required for the various senior schools.

I'd expect it because about 50% of the children from her school (which is North London) go on to private schools, a number on academic scholarships and bursaries, including to that one. More still get into selective state schools. She should have an idea of what outcomes can be expected at 11+ based on the raw material she sees.

The school's academic reputation exists in spite of the way the school is run, not because of it. They claim credit for the efforts put in by pupils and parents while resolutely fostering the attitude that mediocrity is fine.

None of the above outcomes is supported in any way by the school. They offer no support whatever to children wanting to sit 11+; the assumption is that the local comp is good enough. There must be many kids who could and would get into these school but whose parents have no ambition for their children, and neither does the school.

My son was told about a year ago, by the state primary which his son attends, that the lad, then aged 9 was a good enough singer for a somewhat prestigious choir school, but that he's have to do a rigourous academic entrance as well as pass the audition. He didn't make it (although the door is not quite closed) but there have been long discussions about which of the various Kent and Surrey secondary schools, often highly selective, the boy should move to in September. Looks like all's sorted now, but we wait to see.
How do I feel about that? Well, grandchildren passing exams is always a source of pride for grandparents, particularly as both of us went to Grammar Schools.
Very mixed feelins in some ways though. 11 year olds on 3 buses!

Scott_P said:

@stephentall: "I can find no example of a party losing an election when it is ahead on both leadership and economic competence" http://t.co/1jkAhZsnHC

Note the bit lower down where he finally gets around to counting the number of parties people are voting for nowadays...

HurstLlama said:

"My experience of the state sector is that as long as a child is average they think they've done enough, even if they've done nothing."

Gaming the system is partly responsible for that attitude, at least in some schools. When my son was thirteen I became very concerned about his ability with the written word (until then, being an older father, I had accepted his teachers' assurances about the progress he was making). When I tackled the school I was told that he had reached the minimum standard expected in the SATs tests and therefore he could not expect any help, they had to concentrate on children who were struggling to get to level 4. The same occurred at GCSE, if a child was on course to get a C they were left alone to get on with things by themselves. There was no effort made to develop a child's full potential, just to get them to the lowest standard demanded by the government set targets (and, by the cringe, those standards are low).

This is precisely the attitude of a World War One general, of course. In some areas we are breaking through so we can neglect those because they're doing fine. We need to reinforce failure instead. As long as the whole line moves forward 100 yards that's better than breaking through anywhere for 10 miles.

The fact is that bright children have special needs too, but are routinely and as of policy ignored. For this reason, you pay for private provision because what the state offers is rubbish, in the same way that you pay for private security patrols because the police don't do them, and you pay for private health care if you can, because BUPA doesn't leave you to die of starvation amid your own poo while demanding public respect and adulation.

Sean_F said:

Scott P, I was just about to post that article.

I agree that a great deal turns on whether or not the Conservatives panic, in the face of a likely third place in the European elections.

You could say the same of the LDs, they seem to be heading for a poor fourth place in the EU elections.

"The Lib Dem dilemma, then, is to decide how far to go in trying to win back people who have largely made up their minds to support Ed Miliband, and indeed only voted Lib Dem in the first place as a left-wing alternative to Labour.

The more they do so, the less success they will have with the smaller but much more biddable moderate voters, who are also open to the Conservatives, want the party to play a constructive part in government and would be unimpressed with the antics that the angry left require."

http://lordashcroftpolls.com/2013/03/what-are-the-liberal-democrats-for/

Bond_James_Bond said:

HurstLlama said:

"My experience of the state sector is that as long as a child is average they think they've done enough, even if they've done nothing."

Gaming the system is partly responsible for that attitude, at least in some schools. When my son was thirteen I became very concerned about his ability with the written word (until then, being an older father, I had accepted his teachers' assurances about the progress he was making). When I tackled the school I was told that he had reached the minimum standard expected in the SATs tests and therefore he could not expect any help, they had to concentrate on children who were struggling to get to level 4. The same occurred at GCSE, if a child was on course to get a C they were left alone to get on with things by themselves. There was no effort made to develop a child's full potential, just to get them to the lowest standard demanded by the government set targets (and, by the cringe, those standards are low).

This is precisely the attitude of a World War One general, of course. In some areas we are breaking through so we can neglect those because they're doing fine. We need to reinforce failure instead. As long as the whole line moves forward 100 yards that's better than breaking through anywhere for 10 miles.

The fact is that bright children have special needs too, but are routinely and as of policy ignored. For this reason, you pay for private provision because what the state offers is rubbish, in the same way that you pay for private security patrols because the police don't do them, and you pay for private health care if you can, because BUPA doesn't leave you to die of starvation amid your own poo while demanding public respect and adulation.

I was extremely lucky as a primary school child. Despite the school being slap-bang in the middle of a council estate, the headmistress took time out to teach the brightest 7 or 8 in each year, twice a week, in a separate group. It was a massive influence on me, and the only time between 5 and 18 when I felt that excelling was celebrated.

Also, "BUPA doesn't leave you to die of starvation amid your own poo while demanding public respect and adulation" is fantastic.

antifrank said:

I was asked today to fill out a survey on what I thought of the Ladbrokes website. It's always nice to be asked about things where I have strong opinions.

I doubt they'll be asking me after what I've written here recently about the "Magic Sign" - more's the pity.

BobaFett said:

@Dyed

Perhaps it is you with the crutch, given that you are taking solace in the one poll that shows a tight race, when that very poll has overpolled 2010 Tories by a very large margin.

Food for thought.

Perhaps, although it is in line with most of the recent Populus polling. They do account for over sampling you know.
The 'real' lead is about 3 to 5 ATM, there is slight evidence of a Miller slip, the next 3 weeks or so will show if this is a permanent shift to the 6 leads of Sunday or a knee jerk.
The lead is decreasing, polling is not static, nor is public opinion. Unless and until the trend for a smaller Labour lead reverses, it is Labour supporters who need the crutch (of Lib Dems or brazen over confidence)
Whatever the outcome, the likely unwinding of Alliance and then Lib Dem support 83-2010 will throw out many of the recent 'rules' of elections. I'd expect it to make the Tories job of being largest party slightly harder, but their job of majority slightly easier, for Labour it will redistribute their vote slightly more evenly, giving them a number of votes wasted in the South but giving them mega majorities in the metropolitan North.

Oh, I'm not taking solace. I won't until Labour are either finished as a political force, or back where they belong as the party of working men and women.

anotherDave said:

Scott_P said:

@AndrewLilico: A polls-to-GE-result model from @PeterOuld for @DPJHodges & @D_Blanchflower to argue over:http://t.co/gR9mo7ROiF

"If the support doesn’t move as expected over the next few months then the model will self-correct and respond to the new situation."

I think the UKIP prediction will be moving up from 3.9%.

I can't for the life of me see any polling factor historical or based on current variance between polls to account for 3.9%, a figure far lower than any current poll and UKIP's support has not, I think, decline by two thirds in the run up to an election. At 95% - and given you cannot win <0 seats, the effect is to make UKIP at least 19/1 to win a single seat. That's 13/10 in the bookies (which doesn't take my fancy, but you get the idea.)

A game of spot the difference even a PB Hodge would be able to spot:

Latest Poll results (date of data):

Populus 11-13 April - Labour lead 2%
Yougov 10-11 April - Labour lead 6%
Com Res 9-11 April - Labour lead 6%
Populus 9-10 April - Labour lead 1%
Yougov 9-10 April - Labour 6% lead
Opinium 8-10 April - Labour 6% lead

Who has rubbished Populus. I have just given the last six poll. One polling company has two polls that give a significantly lower Labour lead than the three companies that have done four polls giving exactly the same results.

People can make their own mind up where the real situation lies.

From the bowels of our wonderfully informed FO. Don't worry about Russia.

" Russia "does not want disorder" and its objectives remain "entirely negotiable", former British Ambassador to Russia Sir Tony Brenton has said. Sir Tony told the Today programme that, instead, Russia wants an "economically open" Ukraine in which the Russian population are "protected" through federalisation. First broadcast on BBC Radio 4's Today programme on Monday 14 April."

felix said:

compouter2 said:

Who has rubbished Populus. I have just given the last six poll. One polling company has two polls that give a significantly lower Labour lead than the three companies that have done four polls giving exactly the same results.

People can make their own mind up where the real situation lies.

Lol - even funnier seeing the grammatical errors when you rush to riposte:)

If you are going to make clever comments about grammar, best to make sure you have riposted (!!!) accurately. You do know what riposte means, don't you?

TheWatcher said:

compouter2 said:

TheWatcher said:

compouter2 said:

Tykejohnno said:

George Eaton @georgeeaton

Peter Kellner predicts Conservative victory in 2015 - as long as the Tories keep their head http://bit.ly/QlqWcT


The fundamentals favour Cameron


http://yougov.co.uk/news/2014/04/14/fundamentals-favour-cameron/

I do like it when a political bod makes a prediction and then gives caveats (OGH seems to have written the book on it ;-) ). If they turn out correct, they say ...Ah I told you so, if they don't then they say, Ah, I told you if they didn't/did do this it would all go wrong for them.

No caveats....Labour will have a working majority at the next election.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7TOgB3Smvro

The Watcher, I am fire walled so cannot see what you have just posted. I hope it was funny.

Very.

As always.

Another GE predition tory victory ;-)

UK General Election Prediction

By Peter Ould,


http://www.peter-ould.net/2014/04/14/uk-general-election-prediction/

Tykejohnno said:

Another GE predition tory victory ;-)

UK General Election Prediction

By Peter Ould,


http://www.peter-ould.net/2014/04/14/uk-general-election-prediction/

That is just the same as Rods Lambert and Butler Pony Juice method with 10000 Brighton baths simulations. Rod, I would hunt this imposter down and sue him for copyright.

Tyke - Here is your specially selected candidate for GE night.

http://andysawford.wordpress.com/

felix said:

SouthamObserver said:

felix said:

compouter2 said:

Who has rubbished Populus. I have just given the last six poll. One polling company has two polls that give a significantly lower Labour lead than the three companies that have done four polls giving exactly the same results.

People can make their own mind up where the real situation lies.

Lol - even funnier seeing the grammatical errors when you rush to riposte:)

If you are going to make clever comments about grammar, best to make sure you have riposted (!!!) accurately. You do know what riposte means, don't you?

Roflwmtita - as Corporal Jones put it - " they don't like it up em"

So you don't know what riposte means. Hint: you are probably best off not commenting on people's grammar on an internet message board.

compouter2 said:

Tykejohnno said:

Another GE predition tory victory ;-)

UK General Election Prediction

By Peter Ould,


http://www.peter-ould.net/2014/04/14/uk-general-election-prediction/

That is just the same as Rods Lambert and Butler Pony Juice method with 10000 Brighton baths simulations. Rod, I would hunt this imposter down and sue him for copyright.

Tyke - Here is your specially selected candidate for GE night.

http://andysawford.wordpress.com/

No thanks,I will be watching my own patch and hoping labour retake the seat off Galloway ;-)