politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Tories drop five seats on the spreads following the Andrew Nei

kle4 said:

Peter_the_Punter said:

bigjohnowls said:

saddened said:

melcf said:

The electoral calculus puts Wrexham, Vale of Clywd and many seats in the North as Labour in the lead by a mile. Suprising poll, recently done at Wrexham, Tories at 44 and Labour at 29. Not what I'm hearing from the ground.
Dream on, at this time in 2017, Bet fred had an 86% Tory majority!

You planning on being here next Friday? Personally, I doubt it.

Hubris dear boy keep it in check otherwise we will have to release the video of Chez Saddened at 10pm on GE day 2017!!

The thread immediately following the big bong was one of the most extraordinary in PB history. It ain't gonna happen again, but I'd advise against unbottling the champagne just yet.

I'm sure I handled the surprise with grace and proportion. But I think I'll not risk checking.

I seem to recall you having a bit of a breakdown kle4.

rcs1000 said:

melcf said:

stodge said:

melcf said:

I keep hearing this ' Corbyn is a terrorist sympathiser'.
Well, if one was a real terrorist, how would they try and harm the United Kingdom?
Let me think
- Causing misery and economic hardships for the many, not the few?
- Make tens of thousands homeless, specially single mums and children
- cause rising death rate amongst the elderly, due to cuts in social and health care
- Cause internal divisions and a near civil war among the general population, by divisive games, such as Brexit
- Cause a slump in the economy and with the falling pound, rising prises
- lastly, try and bring our centuries old United Kingdom union under threat
--- Sorry, Mr Terrorist, no vacancy for the above. Thus job has been filed, for the last 9.5 years, with excellent references. Come back in 2024

There is a valid question which is why nearly fifteen years after the 7/7/attacks, we are still seeing home-grown radicalised Islamists spreading terror in London?

Successive Governments have implemented layer upon layer of a security state with surveillance aplenty and yet we have completely failed to eradicate the root cause of the problem in any meaningful sense for all the death in Syria, Iraq and elsewhere.

I imagine Johnson and Patel will witter on about longer sentences, tougher this and harsher that but ultimately we seem no nearer ending the scourge of such terror.

The solution is more austerity and oven ready Brexit??

Austerity is the inevitable consequence of an ageing population. What we need to do is to make sure the burden is shared equitably, and to encourage people to retire ever later.

My view is we take a radical step. Shift the whole education/work life cycle by at least 2 years. So kids do not start formal school until they are 7. They take their GCSEs at 18, A levels at 20 and then go to university, graduating at 23. This means they enter the job market later. One advantage of this is that they are not trying to take important exams when they are in the middle of massive physiological and psychological changes of their middle teens. It also eases the job market so that there is more space for older people to work later at the other end.

Pulpstar said:

Andrew said:

RobD said:

Updated chart:
https://imgur.com/U7qd6Zc

Pretty graph.

Last time the polls were this stable during a campaign was 2010, and they got it pretty much spot on (result +7.2%, average of final polls 6.9)

Difference between then and now is that the Lib Dem seat count has broadly switched to the SNP count which makes it harder for Labour but easier for the Tories to get a majority

Absolutely. The Scottish bloc isn't essential to Labour when it can win decisively in England, of course, but it becomes crucial in a tight race.

The last time Labour won an English majority, before Blairism and the embrace of the Thatcherite settlement (i.e. the last convincing Old Labour victory) was in 1966.

I've just laid two big ones against Labour Majority on Betfair.

Also, tipped off my city trader friend so can't imagine the low hundreds of quids of 44s and 46s available there will last too long.

melcf said:

BluerBlue said:

melcf said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

Jason said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Stocky said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

andy3664 said:

Maybe nobody will notice, but today has been a terrible day for the Tories.

A grovelling apology by Channel 4 for doctoring a Boris speech and Sturgeon, Starmer, Abbott, Umunna and others having to make desperate attempts to delete their tweets is a bad day for the conservatives

If it`s a bad day for the Tories it`s escaped my notice.

It is interesting that nobody is talking about policy anymore. Last few days, it has all been about personality. Labour's train bribe seems to have sunk without trace. The dodgy doctor was hyping it as the biggest moment of the campaign.

I think Labour are really struggling to accept the hurt and damage they've done to some of their most loyal voters over Brexit. I also think they're struggling to accept that millions of people do not believe their notion that a government can borrow and tax the thick end of a trillion quid with out there being wider and profoundly damaging consequences to the economy.

The public have seen through Labour's brass necked bribes for the complete and utter bollocks they are.

I think Brexit has very little to do with it. It is the Corbyn factor, pure and simple.

If the Tories get a majority when they are as shit as they are it is Corbyn Wot Won It (for the Tories)

Corbyn was there in 2017, when they got 40% of votes. What has changed since then? Three Tory PMs, more austerity and a buffon with a 350 million bus? We heard the same shyte in 2017 but the Northern wall didn't crack

Last time Corbyn got most of the Remainers (undeservedly) and kept a good chunk of the Leavers (deservedly). This time he'll get most of the Remainers (deservedly), and lose most of the Leavers (deservedly). What's left for him is numerically much smaller than in 2017.

That's the difference.

So Brexit is the solution to all, simples? So a single mum in Grimsby, recent homeless with her two kids and shafted by universal credit, all thanks to Tories AND who voted leave, is automatically gonna vote Tories this time. Elementary dear Watson ??
Or many in Lincoln will vote Tory despite having a mega prik like Karl McCartney as their candidate ? Who has been involved in expenses fiddling and is generally perceived as an arrogant caunt.. if only life was so simple

And Labour is led by a Marxist terrorist bootlicker,you may have missed it but what Corbyn is proposing has been rejected across the globe with the exception of North Korea & Venezuela

bigjohnowls said:

Floater said:

bigjohnowls said:

I have received an e mail today asking Labour Members in Chesterfield to go to Bolsover and NE Derbyshire for the remainder of the Campaign.

As i am not able to walk more than about 10 paces wont be doing either but i think the former is close the latter unwinnable

Any news on when you can have treatment?

I am too difficult to operate on apparently so nothing can be done other than medication

Both Stent and Bypass option ruled out

Getting by with GTN and the blue badge though

Very sorry to hear that.

Casino_Royale said:

I've just laid two big ones against Labour Majority on Betfair.

Also, tipped off my city trader friend so can't imagine the low hundreds of quids of 44s and 46s available there will last too long.

I still dream of the 10/1 available on a Tory majority at 1am in 2015, or with Brexit or Trump at similar stages of the night. There’s no chance of any value like that again is there? We’ve been spoilt.

alb1on said:

wooliedyed said:

alb1on said:

For those confident Conservatives and despairing Socialists, news that demonstrates that the most extreme outsider can defeat the favourite. In the London Chess Classic Maxime Vachier-Lagrave beat world champion Magnus Carlsen. In the GE this would be the equivalent of the Greens winning a majority!

MVL is world number 4 and the 7th highest rated chess player of all time. He is in no way an extreme outsider
Hes been rated world number 2 at his highest

He is a good player but not even near Carlsen. Carlsen is currently on a 105 unbeaten run in classic chess. And Carlsen is even more dominant at blitz and armageddon chess than in the long version. The nature of the LCC means V-L must have won one of the games of the short variants, which is a huge upset. Carlsen smashed Caruana at these short games in the World Championship tie. You are making the mistake of looking at rankings to evaluate winning chances. This often fails in chess (Kasparov, Fischer - and Capablanca going back a century - are examples) because one player may be utterly dominant. And that is Carlsen. He even drew Gawain Jones (a world top 100 player) last year after blundering a full piece in the opening. This is the equivalent of playing tennis with your legs tied together.
To give perspective. The 100+ rating point gap between Carlsen and V-L is the equivalent of the gap between a decent grandmaster and an IM (say 500 ranking places).

Utter nonsense. Yes Carlsen is a great champion and dominant rapid player but then again in St Louis rapid and Blitz this year he finished mid table and was frankly abject for his own standards. Carlsen also lost the rapid play off against Ding (who MVL is playing in the final) in the Sinquefield cup a couple of months ago. 100 points FIDE is about 14 points difference on the English rating system which would put the odds on any game about 70/30 in favour of the higher player. My rating is about 1200 below Carlsen, so I'm not likely to beat him but MVL has every chance. Carlsen doesn't just win every tournament he turns up at, 3 this year I've mentioned he fell. His standard run is impressive (although mostly drawn of course) the last person to beat him in standard play was Mamedyarov.

MVLs win was the equivalent of Labour gain Putney this time round

Black_Rook said:

Time_to_Leave said:

Pulpstar said:

Andrew said:

RobD said:

Updated chart:
https://imgur.com/U7qd6Zc

Pretty graph.

Last time the polls were this stable during a campaign was 2010, and they got it pretty much spot on (result +7.2%, average of final polls 6.9)

Difference between then and now is that the Lib Dem seat count has broadly switched to the SNP count which makes it harder for Labour but easier for the Tories to get a majority

Probably more for 2024 than now, but it does look quite challenging for Labour to get an overall majority of one without a big Scottish recovery. One for Friday morning if we’re not all surprised by a hung Parliament I guess.

Except they may be forced to work out how to win in England again. IMHO Brexit makes Scottish secession more likely.

Fair point. My instinct is we’ll get an orderly Brexit and it won’t come to that, but it might. And if does, then that has to be a very scary prospect for Labour.

Time_to_Leave said:

Casino_Royale said:

I've just laid two big ones against Labour Majority on Betfair.

Also, tipped off my city trader friend so can't imagine the low hundreds of quids of 44s and 46s available there will last too long.

I still dream of the 10/1 available on a Tory majority at 1am in 2015, or with Brexit or Trump at similar stages of the night. There’s no chance of any value like that again is there? We’ve been spoilt.

If long odds outcomes happen once, they can happen again. The whole point of the odds is that few people expected them.

Black_Rook said:

Time_to_Leave said:

Pulpstar said:

Andrew said:

RobD said:

Updated chart:
https://imgur.com/U7qd6Zc

Pretty graph.

Last time the polls were this stable during a campaign was 2010, and they got it pretty much spot on (result +7.2%, average of final polls 6.9)

Difference between then and now is that the Lib Dem seat count has broadly switched to the SNP count which makes it harder for Labour but easier for the Tories to get a majority

Probably more for 2024 than now, but it does look quite challenging for Labour to get an overall majority of one without a big Scottish recovery. One for Friday morning if we’re not all surprised by a hung Parliament I guess.

Except they may be forced to work out how to win in England again. IMHO Brexit makes Scottish secession more likely.

Bit of an understatement there

My, totally irrelevant advice to center left labour supports is do your party a favor and vote anything but labour. Until the current lunacy is put to bed you are destined to be the permanent opposition party that is not in a position to help those they purport to do. Corbyn and his ilk need to be destroyed if your party has any hope in ever getting into power in the future. You can’t blame others as the Tory helpers Corbyn is helper in chief.

bigjohnowls said:

Time_to_Leave said:

Casino_Royale said:

I've just laid two big ones against Labour Majority on Betfair.

Also, tipped off my city trader friend so can't imagine the low hundreds of quids of 44s and 46s available there will last too long.

I still dream of the 10/1 available on a Tory majority at 1am in 2015, or with Brexit or Trump at similar stages of the night. There’s no chance of any value like that again is there? We’ve been spoilt.

I was just looking through Betfair Constituency Betting too.

Very little value left there either.

I just put a few quid (literally) on Lab in Leigh that was 1.61 and I dont believe the first YG MRP result there

To my way of thinking there’s probably an unlikely Labour or LibDem gain somewhere in the south where by chance the tactical voting falls just right. But there’s no way to second guess it.

Also sorry to here you’re are not well. Best wishes.

Sandpit said:

Casino_Royale said:

I've just laid two big ones against Labour Majority on Betfair.

Also, tipped off my city trader friend so can't imagine the low hundreds of quids of 44s and 46s available there will last too long.

That was a good spot, had been around 50 a couple of days ago. More than 2% return in a week, if anyone’s got a big bank?

I’m going mostly all-in on the Con Maj at 1.4, so long as BJ can avoid saying something really stupid in the next couple of hours.

I was musing over whether he’d find a legitimate opportunity to say “people of colour” to troll channel four. But I don’t see a market.

Peter_the_Punter said:

bigjohnowls said:

saddened said:

melcf said:

The electoral calculus puts Wrexham, Vale of Clywd and many seats in the North as Labour in the lead by a mile. Suprising poll, recently done at Wrexham, Tories at 44 and Labour at 29. Not what I'm hearing from the ground.
Dream on, at this time in 2017, Bet fred had an 86% Tory majority!

You planning on being here next Friday? Personally, I doubt it.

Hubris dear boy keep it in check otherwise we will have to release the video of Chez Saddened at 10pm on GE day 2017!!

The thread immediately following the big bong was one of the most extraordinary in PB history. It ain't gonna happen again, but I'd advise against unbottling the champagne just yet.

I was reading the thread, and had a living room full of friends watching BBC1, saying 'that can't be right, surely?'. Fun times.

Beibheirli_C said:

Time_to_Leave said:

Black_Rook said:

Time_to_Leave said:

Pulpstar said:

Andrew said:

RobD said:

Updated chart:
https://imgur.com/U7qd6Zc

Pretty graph.

Last time the polls were this stable during a campaign was 2010, and they got it pretty much spot on (result +7.2%, average of final polls 6.9)

Difference between then and now is that the Lib Dem seat count has broadly switched to the SNP count which makes it harder for Labour but easier for the Tories to get a majority

Probably more for 2024 than now, but it does look quite challenging for Labour to get an overall majority of one without a big Scottish recovery. One for Friday morning if we’re not all surprised by a hung Parliament I guess.

Except they may be forced to work out how to win in England again. IMHO Brexit makes Scottish secession more likely.

Fair point. My instinct is we’ll get an orderly Brexit and it won’t come to that, but it might. And if does, then that has to be a very scary prospect for Labour.

Even scarier for the rest of us. Do you think that perpetual Tory rule is a good thing?

People thought that Labour would never win again in 1992. The wheel turns...

Time_to_Leave said:

Sandpit said:

Casino_Royale said:

I've just laid two big ones against Labour Majority on Betfair.

Also, tipped off my city trader friend so can't imagine the low hundreds of quids of 44s and 46s available there will last too long.

That was a good spot, had been around 50 a couple of days ago. More than 2% return in a week, if anyone’s got a big bank?

I’m going mostly all-in on the Con Maj at 1.4, so long as BJ can avoid saying something really stupid in the next couple of hours.

I was musing over whether he’d find a legitimate opportunity to say “people of colour” to troll channel four. But I don’t see a market.

He’ll troll them with ‘people of talent’, repeating it at least twice and really slowly. Everyone in the audience who’s been watching the news today will laugh. Johnson’s good at using techniques like that to disarm people.

Time_to_Leave said:

Black_Rook said:

Time_to_Leave said:

Pulpstar said:

Andrew said:

RobD said:

Updated chart:
https://imgur.com/U7qd6Zc

Pretty graph.

Last time the polls were this stable during a campaign was 2010, and they got it pretty much spot on (result +7.2%, average of final polls 6.9)

Difference between then and now is that the Lib Dem seat count has broadly switched to the SNP count which makes it harder for Labour but easier for the Tories to get a majority

Probably more for 2024 than now, but it does look quite challenging for Labour to get an overall majority of one without a big Scottish recovery. One for Friday morning if we’re not all surprised by a hung Parliament I guess.

Except they may be forced to work out how to win in England again. IMHO Brexit makes Scottish secession more likely.

Fair point. My instinct is we’ll get an orderly Brexit and it won’t come to that, but it might. And if does, then that has to be a very scary prospect for Labour.

My thesis is that Scotland has not only a 45% vote in favour of independence behind it, but also a healthy majority for Remain. If Brexit occurs - orderly or not - then the "Tory Governments we didn't vote for" and the "being dragged out of Europe against our will" arguments become very pertinent. It doesn't help to answer the other big questions (about the currency, the budget deficit and the possibility of a hard border with England further down the line,) but it does make independence an easier sell.

If, on the other hand, we are surprised by another Hung Parliament then the anti-Tory bloc at Westminster gets the opportunity to hold its second EU referendum (if the EU27 permit it, which one has to assume that they would,) and Remain has an excellent chance of winning. In that case SNP votes at Westminster become crucial, the Conservative Government falls and Brexit is thwarted. With the UK dragged back into the EU, proponents of Scottish independence are then, if anything, further back than they were in 2014: Unionists will point to all the difficulties encountered during Brexit and ask why the Scottish Government believed that it was essential for the UK to stay in the EU, yet now proposes a course of action which would result in Scotland having to leave the EU and reapply for membership.

Should Brexit go ahead then the next big argument won't be about the nature of the future relationship with the EU - that's a red herring, if the sceptics are correct and the Government can't get it sorted by the end of 2020 then Boris Johnson will almost certainly go back on his word and ask to extend the transition. It'll be over the survival of the Union.

nichomar said:

My, totally irrelevant advice to center left labour supports is do your party a favor and vote anything but labour. Until the current lunacy is put to bed you are destined to be the permanent opposition party that is not in a position to help those they purport to do. Corbyn and his ilk need to be destroyed if your party has any hope in ever getting into power in the future. You can’t blame others as the Tory helpers Corbyn is helper in chief.

Your advice is not required you elected a leader that makes Corbyn look like a heavyweight

No sane Lab supporter will vote Tory Swinson except in a CON/LD marginal like Richmond

kinabalu said:

Loving that chess exchange.

A play about Fischer Spassky is on at Hampstead theatre. I hope to go see it.

Fischer was a class above but mad as a brush and very volatile. His refusal to defend his title led to him becoming something of a recluse and eventually a refugee from US justice in Iceland

Sandpit said:

Time_to_Leave said:

Sandpit said:

Casino_Royale said:

I've just laid two big ones against Labour Majority on Betfair.

Also, tipped off my city trader friend so can't imagine the low hundreds of quids of 44s and 46s available there will last too long.

That was a good spot, had been around 50 a couple of days ago. More than 2% return in a week, if anyone’s got a big bank?

I’m going mostly all-in on the Con Maj at 1.4, so long as BJ can avoid saying something really stupid in the next couple of hours.

I was musing over whether he’d find a legitimate opportunity to say “people of colour” to troll channel four. But I don’t see a market.

He’ll troll them with ‘people of talent’, repeating it at least twice and really slowly. Everyone in the audience who’s been watching the news today will laugh. Johnson’s good at using techniques like that to disarm people.

Nice to know he is good at something

wooliedyed said:

kinabalu said:

Loving that chess exchange.

A play about Fischer Spassky is on at Hampstead theatre. I hope to go see it.

Fischer was a class above but mad as a brush and very volatile. His refusal to defend his title led to him becoming something of a recluse and eventually a refugee from US justice in Iceland

And to conclude the chess, Carlsen vs Lagrave lifetime stats
Won 20, drawn 25, lost 9 (all formats) so not that unlikely an outcome, 2 to 1 against

bigjohnowls said:

Casino_Royale said:

Time_to_Leave said:

Casino_Royale said:

I've just laid two big ones against Labour Majority on Betfair.

Also, tipped off my city trader friend so can't imagine the low hundreds of quids of 44s and 46s available there will last too long.

I still dream of the 10/1 available on a Tory majority at 1am in 2015, or with Brexit or Trump at similar stages of the night. There’s no chance of any value like that again is there? We’ve been spoilt.

Yes there is.

The biggest betting opportunities are always in the opening odds, and the closing moments.

Watch the markets like a hawk between 10pm and 2am next Thursday night.

That's where the big opportunities will be.

Correct got out of the shits in 2015 to record a small profit

Won massive in 2017

Yes, that's how I won on the referendum and Trump winning. Cleaned up right after Farage conceded/US Networks edged towards calling it for Hillary.

(sorry to hear about your illness, BJO, hope you're taking it easy).

kinabalu said:

Loving that chess exchange.

A play about Fischer Spassky is on at Hampstead theatre. I hope to go see it.

Nice one, mate!

FrancisUrquhart said:

MarkLittlewood said:

My own theory, for what little it's worth, is that there aren't really many floating voters in this campaign compared to others because the issues at stake are so divisive.

I'm really struggling to imagine the sort of voter who is till weighing up whether to vote Tory, labour or Liberal. There will be some, of course, but i expect many fewer than is typical.

Differential turnout, scale of tactical voting or the polls being systematically wrong might lead to a surprise result, but most people's voting intentions have been frozen in aspic for several weeks.

The only ones I can think of are your Southern soft Tory remainer types, thinking can we really go for Boris or do we go Lib Dem. That could obviously swing 10 seats in the South.

The big factor in this GE, given how the Tories have set their campaign, is do they break the Red firewall in the Midlands and especially the North. If they don't, all those southern seats are going to make it very iffy for a majority, if they do, things could swing a lot more than UNS to the Tories.

I've covered a wide range of outcomes, so I should be up 30% on my aggregated stakes regardless of what happens.

My best result is a Tory score of 340-360 seats but I do worry if I'm too skinny on a landslide (380+ seats), and even 400+ seats.

I'll be looking at value bets there in the final few days.

@rcs1000 and threat.

I disagree. The nature of risk has changed. When the terrorist is willing (and perhaps even keen) to die while performing the terrorist action, that fundamentally changes the analysis and the risk perception. One could be standing in the middle of Trafalgar Square with only people around you and still be killed.

Black_Rook said:

Pulpstar said:

Andrew said:

RobD said:

Updated chart:
https://imgur.com/U7qd6Zc

Pretty graph.

Last time the polls were this stable during a campaign was 2010, and they got it pretty much spot on (result +7.2%, average of final polls 6.9)

Difference between then and now is that the Lib Dem seat count has broadly switched to the SNP count which makes it harder for Labour but easier for the Tories to get a majority

Absolutely. The Scottish bloc isn't essential to Labour when it can win decisively in England, of course, but it becomes crucial in a tight race.

The last time Labour won an English majority, before Blairism and the embrace of the Thatcherite settlement (i.e. the last convincing Old Labour victory) was in 1966.

Meaning the issue of Scottish votes for English laws will become massive sooner rather than later.

Time_to_Leave said:

Beibheirli_C said:

Time_to_Leave said:

Black_Rook said:

Time_to_Leave said:

Pulpstar said:

Andrew said:

RobD said:

Updated chart:
https://imgur.com/U7qd6Zc

Pretty graph.

Last time the polls were this stable during a campaign was 2010, and they got it pretty much spot on (result +7.2%, average of final polls 6.9)

Difference between then and now is that the Lib Dem seat count has broadly switched to the SNP count which makes it harder for Labour but easier for the Tories to get a majority

Probably more for 2024 than now, but it does look quite challenging for Labour to get an overall majority of one without a big Scottish recovery. One for Friday morning if we’re not all surprised by a hung Parliament I guess.

Except they may be forced to work out how to win in England again. IMHO Brexit makes Scottish secession more likely.

Fair point. My instinct is we’ll get an orderly Brexit and it won’t come to that, but it might. And if does, then that has to be a very scary prospect for Labour.

Even scarier for the rest of us. Do you think that perpetual Tory rule is a good thing?

No, why? I was just musing over how hard it might be for Labour. Sad for the country, if anything.

Just asking. I think there are some one here who think that perpetual rule by one party of the other is a Good Thing ™

Casino_Royale said:

rcs1000 said:

melcf said:

stodge said:

melcf said:

I keep hearing this ' Corbyn is a terrorist sympathiser'.
Well, if one was a real terrorist, how would they try and harm the United Kingdom?
Let me think
- Causing misery and economic hardships for the many, not the few?
- Make tens of thousands homeless, specially single mums and children
- cause rising death rate amongst the elderly, due to cuts in social and health care
- Cause internal divisions and a near civil war among the general population, by divisive games, such as Brexit
- Cause a slump in the economy and with the falling pound, rising prises
- lastly, try and bring our centuries old United Kingdom union under threat
--- Sorry, Mr Terrorist, no vacancy for the above. Thus job has been filed, for the last 9.5 years, with excellent references. Come back in 2024

There is a valid question which is why nearly fifteen years after the 7/7/attacks, we are still seeing home-grown radicalised Islamists spreading terror in London?

Successive Governments have implemented layer upon layer of a security state with surveillance aplenty and yet we have completely failed to eradicate the root cause of the problem in any meaningful sense for all the death in Syria, Iraq and elsewhere.

I imagine Johnson and Patel will witter on about longer sentences, tougher this and harsher that but ultimately we seem no nearer ending the scourge of such terror.

The solution is more austerity and oven ready Brexit??

Austerity is the inevitable consequence of an ageing population. What we need to do is to make sure the burden is shared equitably, and to encourage people to retire ever later.

One positive thing I will say about a Labour Government (possibly the only one) is that it will unwind some of the perks given to the retired/elderly and rebalance to the young a bit.

We (the Conservatives) simply can't do it as we get far too many of our votes from there.

If there are votes in it they won’t - see the Waspi bribe.

Richard_Tyndall said:

rcs1000 said:

It's remarkable how little awareness there is of how many people died in terrorist attacks across Europe in the 1970s. If you go back further in time, you find terrorism has been with us a hundred years or so.

In other words, there's no greater risk in dying in a terrorist incident now than in 2000 or 2005, and a lot less than in 1975. Yet the Internet has allowed us all to convince ourselves we're facing some unprecedented threat.

I also find it amazing how few people realise there were hundreds of terrorist bombings across the US in the 70s with many people killed. Most of them were home grown rather than foreign nationals. I only really learnt about it by watching the very excellent 'The Seventies' series recently

It's theorized that in America the crime rate went sky high due to returning Vietnam veterans and the corruption and instability associated with the war.
In Europe it was the USSR and the Saudis funding red terror and palestinian groups.

The movie Wrong is Right with Sean Connery is based on the madness of that time.

Casino_Royale said:

rcs1000 said:

Austerity is the inevitable consequence of an ageing population. What we need to do is to make sure the burden is shared equitably, and to encourage people to retire ever later.

One positive thing I will say about a Labour Government (possibly the only one) is that it will unwind some of the perks given to the retired/elderly and rebalance to the young a bit.

We (the Conservatives) simply can't do it as we get far too many of our votes from there.

No chance. Labour (especially the current iteration, but also true of the party more generally) loves creating handouts.

Winter Fuel Payment and free TV licences were both Labour bungs, and the probability of their repealing the state pension triple lock is approximately zero. We all know what happened when Theresa May proposed the dementia tax, and inheritance tax is almost uniquely despised by the electorate (because the hard-pressed middle-aged kids of well-to-do pensioners expect some reward for all those taxes they've had to pay towards the upkeep of their parents when they finally shuffle off.) And then there's the WASPI bung debacle.

You might get some novel form of property taxation that would disproportionately affect homeowners (and would, therefore, be skewed *slightly* towards the upper end of the age range) but not very much else.

BluerBlue said:

Beibheirli_C said:

Time_to_Leave said:

Black_Rook said:

Time_to_Leave said:

Pulpstar said:

Andrew said:

RobD said:

Updated chart:
https://imgur.com/U7qd6Zc

Pretty graph.

Last time the polls were this stable during a campaign was 2010, and they got it pretty much spot on (result +7.2%, average of final polls 6.9)

Difference between then and now is that the Lib Dem seat count has broadly switched to the SNP count which makes it harder for Labour but easier for the Tories to get a majority

Probably more for 2024 than now, but it does look quite challenging for Labour to get an overall majority of one without a big Scottish recovery. One for Friday morning if we’re not all surprised by a hung Parliament I guess.

Except they may be forced to work out how to win in England again. IMHO Brexit makes Scottish secession more likely.

Fair point. My instinct is we’ll get an orderly Brexit and it won’t come to that, but it might. And if does, then that has to be a very scary prospect for Labour.

Even scarier for the rest of us. Do you think that perpetual Tory rule is a good thing?

As long as Labour is this far left, abso-friggin-lutely!

Indeed so! The only way Labour win an election is by getting natural conservatives to vote for them - as Tony Blair did in ‘97.

wooliedyed said:

Fischer was a class above but mad as a brush and very volatile. His refusal to defend his title led to him becoming something of a recluse and eventually a refugee from US justice in Iceland

Yes I've read a lot on him and on the 72 match. It's one of my fascinations.

Betting Post Mark Allen snooker looks like going 3-1 down so now available at 1.46 to win.

I reckon its pretty much a certainty

dellertronic said:

Black_Rook said:

Pulpstar said:

Andrew said:

RobD said:

Updated chart:
https://imgur.com/U7qd6Zc

Pretty graph.

Last time the polls were this stable during a campaign was 2010, and they got it pretty much spot on (result +7.2%, average of final polls 6.9)

Difference between then and now is that the Lib Dem seat count has broadly switched to the SNP count which makes it harder for Labour but easier for the Tories to get a majority

Absolutely. The Scottish bloc isn't essential to Labour when it can win decisively in England, of course, but it becomes crucial in a tight race.

The last time Labour won an English majority, before Blairism and the embrace of the Thatcherite settlement (i.e. the last convincing Old Labour victory) was in 1966.

Meaning the issue of Scottish votes for English laws will become massive sooner rather than later.

Potentially yes. Two things about the devolution settlement might, ultimately, prove fatal to the Union: the way in which its initial implementation was botched, and its asymmetry. The first has already had its effect (it does much to explain the ascent of the SNP to dominance); the second might only become pivotal if the Union survives long enough for that to occur. Not a given if Brexit proceeds.

I don't support the Labour party and wouldn't vote for them, but there is one policy which they may be correct on, their suggestion that public schools should be abolished. When you reflect on the fact that after six years at Eton, Boris cannot coherently string a sentence together, and can't speak for more than 10 seconds without telling a fib, you do wonder what damage that sort of school is doing to kids. After an expensive education the poor chap is virtually unemployable, except as a politician, where lies and deceit are regarded as virtues.

LostPassword said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

rcs1000 said:

Austerity is the inevitable consequence of an ageing population. What we need to do is to make sure the burden is shared equitably, and to encourage people to retire ever later.

My view is we take a radical step. Shift the whole education/work life cycle by at least 2 years. So kids do not start formal school until they are 7. They take their GCSEs at 18, A levels at 20 and then go to university, graduating at 23. This means they enter the job market later. One advantage of this is that they are not trying to take important exams when they are in the middle of massive physiological and psychological changes of their middle teens. It also eases the job market so that there is more space for older people to work later at the other end.

That's a really interesting idea and I think we should be considering a wider range of ideas, beyond the tired range of arguments over public vs private sector and tax/spending rates.

My only worry is that it would push back the age at which people would be established and ready to start a family. Arguably the average age of first child is later than biologically ideal. Although pushing that age back further is one way to reduce the population without reducing the number of children people have.

Discouraging people from having kids until they get progressively later into life is a recipe for increasing the proportion of children that are born with disabilities. This is a topic rarely raised, because people have rightful concerns about sounding negative about the disabled and they don't want to discuss potentially embarrassing subjects (such as the decline in the quality of sperm as a man ages, or the extra costs associated with a rising percentage of disabled people in the population,) but it's pertinent nonetheless as you suggest.

We always come back to the same problem in these arguments. The best thing to do, given that resources are finite, is to make life less cushy for the old and help the young out a bit. But the old are numerous and they vote more reliably. So we get a gerontocracy.

SandyRentool said:

I'm watching the interview with Bozo on ITV. Except Bozo didn't turn up, so they are broadcasting a retrospective of the great man's career.

They will survive the Great Broadcasting Cull of 2020...

Blimey - going through my post and there's an English Democrat leaflet in there...

And one of the snipped pictures in it is this infamous one but with Farage and the wording removed....

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jun/16/nigel-farage-defends-ukip-breaking-point-poster-queue-of-migrants

franklyn said:

I don't support the Labour party and wouldn't vote for them, but there is one policy which they may be correct on, their suggestion that public schools should be abolished. When you reflect on the fact that after six years at Eton, Boris cannot coherently string a sentence together, and can't speak for more than 10 seconds without telling a fib, you do wonder what damage that sort of school is doing to kids. After an expensive education the poor chap is virtually unemployable, except as a politician, where lies and deceit are regarded as virtues.

But where would he be if he hadn't gone to Eton? Selling used cars? Living on an estate with a string of illegitimate kids? In jail? If Eton can elevate someone of such abundant mediocrity to the role of Prime Minister of the United Kingdom it must be worth the fees surely.

SandyRentool said:

BluerBlue said:

franklyn said:

I don't support the Labour party and wouldn't vote for them, but there is one policy which they may be correct on, their suggestion that public schools should be abolished. When you reflect on the fact that after six years at Eton, Boris cannot coherently string a sentence together, and can't speak for more than 10 seconds without telling a fib, you do wonder what damage that sort of school is doing to kids. After an expensive education the poor chap is virtually unemployable, except as a politician, where lies and deceit are regarded as virtues.

I don't hold a candle for Eton in particular, but I think it's fair to say that in recent years it's mostly been their lesser products who have gone into politics. The rest are happily beavering away productively in other fields.

I thought it was the Eastern Europeans beavering away in the fields?

Estonians not Etonians.

Scrapheap_as_was said:

still got it...

https://twitter.com/ExStrategist/status/1203008613884792832?s=20

Bit hard on Jeremy Hunt

IanB2 said:

Scrapheap_as_was said:

still got it...

https://twitter.com/ExStrategist/status/1203008613884792832?s=20

Bit hard on Jeremy Hunt

Indeed but I guess Labour wouldn't put him up...

BluerBlue said:

franklyn said:

I don't support the Labour party and wouldn't vote for them, but there is one policy which they may be correct on, their suggestion that public schools should be abolished. When you reflect on the fact that after six years at Eton, Boris cannot coherently string a sentence together, and can't speak for more than 10 seconds without telling a fib, you do wonder what damage that sort of school is doing to kids. After an expensive education the poor chap is virtually unemployable, except as a politician, where lies and deceit are regarded as virtues.

I don't hold a candle for Eton in particular, but I think it's fair to say that in recent years it's mostly been their lesser products who have gone into politics. The rest are happily beavering away productively in other fields.

I’ve worked with some. They were bright, charming, hard-working people. Equally, I’ve worked with some people from state schools who were lazy, unempathetic and remarkably focused on their rights. The conclusion - some people are shits. Politics attracts shits.

Scrapheap_as_was said:

Best wishes to BJO as well - he might be a Corbynite headbanger at/most times, but he's OUR Corbynite headbanger and excellent value....

+100

6.2 million. Or have we stopped counting?

OnlyLivingBoy said:

6.2 million. Or have we stopped counting?

Time for another thread on the matter re the latest viewing score!

Owen Jones alone must be good for 250,000 of them

matt said:

ReggieCide said:

Black_Rook said:

LostPassword said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

rcs1000 said:

Austerity is the inevitable consequence of an ageing population. What we need to do is to make sure the burden is shared equitably, and to encourage people to retire ever later.

My view is we take a radical step. Shift the whole education/work life cycle by at least 2 years. So kids do not start formal school until they are 7. They take their GCSEs at 18, A levels at 20 and then go to university, graduating at 23. This means they enter the job market later. One advantage of this is that they are not trying to take important exams when they are in the middle of massive physiological and psychological changes of their middle teens. It also eases the job market so that there is more space for older people to work later at the other end.

That's a really interesting idea and I think we should be considering a wider range of ideas, beyond the tired range of arguments over public vs private sector and tax/spending rates.

My only worry is that it would push back the age at which people would be established and ready to start a family. Arguably the average age of first child is later than biologically ideal. Although pushing that age back further is one way to reduce the population without reducing the number of children people have.

Discouraging people from having kids until they get progressively later into life is a recipe for increasing the proportion of children that are born with disabilities. This is a topic rarely raised, because people have rightful concerns about sounding negative about the disabled and they don't want to discuss potentially embarrassing subjects (such as the decline in the quality of sperm as a man ages, or the extra costs associated with a rising percentage of disabled people in the population,) but it's pertinent nonetheless as you suggest.

We always come back to the same problem in these arguments. The best thing to do, given that resources are finite, is to make life less cushy for the old and help the young out a bit. But the old are numerous and they vote more reliably. So we get a gerontocracy.

"Discouraging people from having kids until they get progressively later into life is a recipe for increasing the proportion of children that are born with disabilities."

From my admittedly now fairly ancient experience of the Far East, the richer folk out there seemed to avoid this problem by marrying much younger women. Problem solved?

I’m not sure that Gary Glitter is a role model.

That's a bit tenuous. He's neither Asian nor that keen on young women - too old for him. Lots of young widows around too, got their own money and just looking for fun.