politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Lord Ashcroft teases us about his latest poll of the margin
Just to note that Telegraph blogger, Dan Hodges, is an ex-LAB staffer who has never knowingly written anything that is positive about the younger Miliband.
Comments
-
Any polls tonight? (instead of two weeks Saturday!)0
-
I think the guy playing Cleggie in tonight's Labour PPB was a serial killer in series 2 of Luther!
@RodCrosby - YouGov!
0 -
FPT
5/1 Helmer you say?
"Ukip's Newark byelection candidate Roger Helmer was greeted like a celebrity as he launched his campaign to be the party's first MP – in a sign his controversial comments about rape and homosexuality appear to have had little effect on the electorate.
The 70-year-old was cheered by market traders as he visited the Nottinghamshire seat, which was vacated by former Tory Patrick Mercer after a lobbying scandal."
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/may/07/roger-helmer-cheered-launching-newark-byelection-campaign0 -
Have the marginal polls necessarily been completed?0
-
Yes.antifrank said:Have the marginal polls necessarily been completed?
0 -
I've already started working on the thread piece for publication of this poll.
It begins with thanking Lord A, then reminding everyone that the marginals poll in September 2009 showed the Tories on course to win a majority of 70.0 -
LAB drift continues in Newark, now at 4/1 with Hills.0
-
Ed doing better in the marginals than nationally goes against all my instincts (read: what I hope and believe and want to happen) but if that what the data shows, then that's what the data shows.
The Tories need to seriously up their ground game if they want to hold the line next year.0 -
One for Tap and conspiracy theorists everywhere.
Abu Hamza 'secretly worked for MI5' to 'keep streets of London safe'
Abu Hamza, the radical Islamic preacher notorious for his hate-filled sermons, was in reality working secretly with British intelligence "to keep the streets of London safe" by "cooling hotheads", his lawyer claimed in a US court.
Holding up what he said were reports from Scotland Yard, Joshua Dratel described the cleric as an "intermediary" who cooperated with MI5 and the police to try to end foreign hostage-takings and defuse tensions with the Muslim community in Britain.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/10814816/Abu-Hamza-secretly-worked-for-MI5-to-keep-streets-of-London-safe.html0 -
Mr. Eagles, with UKIP and the Scottish referendum it'll be very hard to try and predict the General Election, even though it's only a year away.
Was greatly surprised to learn today that we have locals as well as European elections. I could've sworn it was only the European election.0 -
-
"Ukip's Newark byelection candidate Roger Helmer was greeted like a celebrity as he launched his campaign to be the party's first MP – in a sign his controversial comments about rape and homosexuality appear to have had little effect on the electorate.
The 70-year-old was cheered by market traders as he visited the Nottinghamshire seat, which was vacated by former Tory Patrick Mercer after a lobbying scandal."
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/may/07/roger-helmer-cheered-launching-newark-byelection-campaign0 -
I've just seen that Labour PEB.
It's a spoof right?0 -
UKIP into 11/4 with the Hillbilly BoysStuart_Dickson said:LAB drift continues in Newark, now at 4/1 with Hills.
Helmer cheered to the rafters in Newark earlier.. according to The Guardian no less
Maybe 5/1s the bet0 -
The moment you have all been waiting for has at last arrived.
The MikeK Forecast for the May 22nd EU results:
UKIP ...... 39.3%
Labour... 25.2%
Tory ...... 18.5%
L/Dem... 5.6%
Greens... 4.0%
An IFE.... 2.7%
Others... 4.7%0 -
Suzanne Moore in the Guardian:
"Jeremy Clarkson and Ukip are not mavericks, but the bullying face of the establishment
The discussion about whether Clarkson is personally racist is a sideshow. He is part of a group seeking not only to put a brake on social progress, but to drag us backwards"
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/may/07/jeremy-clarkson-ukip-maverick-establishment-racist0 -
It's a measure of the political slant of most TV comedy that I actually quite enjoyed that PPB as a 2nd rate Harry Enfield knock off.0
-
If I were a millionaire I would have put £10K on UKIP at 5/1. (Unfortunately I'm not).isam said:
UKIP into 11/4 with the Hillbilly BoysStuart_Dickson said:LAB drift continues in Newark, now at 4/1 with Hills.
Helmer cheered to the rafters in Newark earlier.. according to The Guardian no less
Maybe 5/1s the bet0 -
Perusing my Euro election postal ballot I was amused to see there is something called the Roman Party AVE. Tempted, until I noticed the candidate is a Frenchman.
I looked up Liberty GB online, hoping they might be some sort of libertarian outfit but instead the whole website seems to be a not-so-thinly-veiled dog whistle for cryptofascists.
So I may go back to plan A and vote for Dan Hannan, Britain's third most famous Peruvian after Michael Bentine and Paddington the Bear. Although I'm a bit surprised to see Marta Andreasen still on the Tory ticket, but at no 4 she is unlikely to get in.0 -
'Scottish independence: Referendum vote details unveiled'
The chief counting officer for the referendum, Mary Pitcaithly, has instructed the country's 32 councils to send out the [polling] cards on 14 and 15 August.
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-27313337
Postal ballots will be sent between the 26th and 28th of the month.
... Because a high turn out is expected, Mrs Pitcaithly wants councils to print 120% of the required ballots for both postal voters and those who vote in person at polling stations, in case any papers get lost or damaged.
To minimise delays, councils are also being directed to appoint one polling clerk for every 800 voters eligible to cast their vote in person at the polling stations.
... Other directions include an instruction that ballot papers must be white, with one Official Mark for the whole of Scotland carried on all ballot papers.
The front of the ballot paper will bear this official security mark, while the back will carry a unique identifying number and the name of the relevant council area.
... The chief counting officer has confirmed that the count will take place overnight on Thursday 18 September and start as "soon as reasonably practicable" after the poll closes at 22:00.
In addition, she has directed that local authorities who adopt the "mini-count" method may move to the count stage before the verification process of all votes cast has finished.
This answers a query raised here at PB several months ago: would the result be announced by Holyrood constituency, by Westminster constituency, or by council area? It'll be by the 32 council areas.0 -
Didn't think the PPB was too bad. Problem was it seemed to drag and then sink into a mire of forgetfulness. Probably better than the punchbag one.0
-
Mr. Dickson, presumably certain island areas will be last to get the results confirmed? Any ETA for a potential (probable) result, aye or nay, and will the votes be counted overnight?0
-
I think I'm right in saying that that would mean zero Lib Dem MEPs? A bit unlikely, but a fun thought.MikeK said:The moment you have all been waiting for has at last arrived.
The MikeK Forecast for the May 22nd EU results:
UKIP ...... 39.3%
Labour... 25.2%
Tory ...... 18.5%
L/Dem... 5.6%
Greens... 4.0%
An IFE.... 2.7%
Others... 4.7%0 -
PP are offering 8/11 that the Lib Dems will get 4 MEPs or fewer. Looks like free money.0
-
There is no obvious reason to think that the average voter in a marginal is any different from the average voter overall. What is most obviously different about marginals is the disproportionate amount of attention they receive from the parties in the run up to the GE. If that is right, the likelihood of their voting differently from the national average depends rather little on what they think now and rather a lot on the quality of the various parties' marginal-specific campaigns in 2015. In which case polling them now is of rather little value.TheScreamingEagles said:I've already started working on the thread piece for publication of this poll.
It begins with thanking Lord A, then reminding everyone that the marginals poll in September 2009 showed the Tories on course to win a majority of 70.
Is there a flaw in that argument?
0 -
The Ashcroft polling can be applied to the constituencies where odds compilers will look again at prices so I guess we may see some changes in the marginal constituency betting markets after publication.This could mean there is some value now or on the resetting of each of the individual markets.Pre-empting such moves at the moment is betting blind.0
-
In depends on this factor.Ishmael_X said:
There is no obvious reason to think that the average voter in a marginal is any different from the average voter overall. What is most obviously different about marginals is the disproportionate amount of attention they receive from the parties in the run up to the GE. If that is right, the likelihood of their voting differently from the national average depends rather little on what they think now and rather a lot on the quality of the various parties' marginal-specific campaigns in 2015. In which case polling them now is of rather little value.TheScreamingEagles said:I've already started working on the thread piece for publication of this poll.
It begins with thanking Lord A, then reminding everyone that the marginals poll in September 2009 showed the Tories on course to win a majority of 70.
Is there a flaw in that argument?
Will the polling in April 2014 be the same as the actual votes in May 2015?0 -
You are neglecting the higher incidence of tactical voting in marginals.Ishmael_X said:
There is no obvious reason to think that the average voter in a marginal is any different from the average voter overall. What is most obviously different about marginals is the disproportionate amount of attention they receive from the parties in the run up to the GE. If that is right, the likelihood of their voting differently from the national average depends rather little on what they think now and rather a lot on the quality of the various parties' marginal-specific campaigns in 2015. In which case polling them now is of rather little value.TheScreamingEagles said:I've already started working on the thread piece for publication of this poll.
It begins with thanking Lord A, then reminding everyone that the marginals poll in September 2009 showed the Tories on course to win a majority of 70.
Is there a flaw in that argument?
A tactical vote has a higher probability of being decisive because the constituency is marginal. There is therefore a greater incentive to cast a tactical vote in marginal constituencies.0 -
End of thread... next.
Lord Ashcroft@LordAshcroft·17 secs
@MSmithsonPB Truth is, Mike, it's still in the field...0 -
Well, according to that BBC article the counts will commence pretty much straight away. The stations close at 22:00.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Dickson, presumably certain island areas will be last to get the results confirmed? Any ETA for a potential (probable) result, aye or nay, and will the votes be counted overnight?
Argyll & Bute is always the slowest to count, because of the number of islands. It usually counts Westminster votes the following day, but I think they will try to get this referendum result published in its entirety ASAP.
0 -
The way it works in the past is that the bookies first change the seat bands and result of the next election (Lab maj, Con min etc) first then move onto the individual seats last.volcanopete said:The Ashcroft polling can be applied to the constituencies where odds compilers will look again at prices so I guess we may see some changes in the marginal constituency betting markets after publication.This could mean there is some value now or on the resetting of each of the individual markets.Pre-empting such moves at the moment is betting blind.
Although I suspect some bookies will pull their entire constituency markets on the evening of the 23rd of May until they've seen and analysed this polling.0 -
Lord A has just tweeted the Marginals poll is still in the field0
-
Oooh!Scrapheap_as_was said:End of thread... next.
Lord Ashcroft@LordAshcroft·17 secs
@MSmithsonPB Truth is, Mike, it's still in the field...0 -
Mr. Dickson, cheers for that answer. Glad that's the way it's being done.
Bloody odd thought occurs to me: by the Singapore Grand Prix the UK might be starting to split apart.0 -
Isn't all political betting "blind"? Most folk see only what they want to see. Prime case study being Mark Senior.volcanopete said:The Ashcroft polling can be applied to the constituencies where odds compilers will look again at prices so I guess we may see some changes in the marginal constituency betting markets after publication.This could mean there is some value now or on the resetting of each of the individual markets.Pre-empting such moves at the moment is betting blind.
0 -
O/T - I note the policy exchange report that suggests 30% of the UK population may be a non-British minority by 2050, up from the current 14%.
Am I the only one worried about such levels of projected immigration? Even with the recent additional controls?
The only civilised response to such studies seems to be to celebrate it. But I really worry about the cohesiveness and sociocultural integrity of such a Britain. I see very few people tactfully and measuredly articulating these concerns in either mainstream politics or the media.0 -
My, my Maurice, fancy not grasping that there were to be local elections on May 22nd. Thats a grievous slip.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Eagles, with UKIP and the Scottish referendum it'll be very hard to try and predict the General Election, even though it's only a year away.
Was greatly surprised to learn today that we have locals as well as European elections. I could've sworn it was only the European election.
0 -
Not sure if this is just me (I hope I don't have another bloody problem) but on my previous refresh I got a video/audio ad playing in the middle of the screen. It was bloody obnoxious.0
-
"Above all, people are disposed to mistake predicting troubles for causing troubles and even for desiring troubles: "If only," they love to think, "if only people wouldn't talk about it, it probably wouldn't happen."Casino_Royale said:O/T - I note the policy exchange report that suggests 30% of the UK population may be a non-British minority by 2050, up from the current 14%.
Am I the only one worried about such levels of projected immigration? Even with the recent additional controls?
The only civilised response to such studies seems to be to celebrate it. But I really worry about the cohesiveness and sociocultural integrity of such a Britain. I see very few people tactfully and measuredly articulating these concerns in either mainstream politics or the media.
Perhaps this habit goes back to the primitive belief that the word and the thing, the name and the object, are identical.
At all events, the discussion of future grave but, with effort now, avoidable evils is the most unpopular and at the same time the most necessary occupation for the politician. Those who knowingly shirk it deserve, and not infrequently receive, the curses of those who come after. "0 -
Mr. K, I knew there were locals, I didn't think there were any in my particular areas.
Also, Morris (as in the dance) not Maurice (as in the thrifty Byzantine emperor deposed by Nicephorus Phocas who was himself ousted by Heraclius, amongst the most tragic of emperors).0 -
Man City 4-0
0 -
This is very true. Perhaps marginals polling simply turbocharges whatever the picture in the national polls is at the time?TheScreamingEagles said:I've already started working on the thread piece for publication of this poll.
It begins with thanking Lord A, then reminding everyone that the marginals poll in September 2009 showed the Tories on course to win a majority of 70.
During the campaign proper, when the Tories reestablish a small national poll lead, I'd expect this to be accentuated in the marginals.0 -
But doesn't that happen on both sides and therefore cancel out to some extent?AveryLP said:
You are neglecting the higher incidence of tactical voting in marginals.Ishmael_X said:
There is no obvious reason to think that the average voter in a marginal is any different from the average voter overall. What is most obviously different about marginals is the disproportionate amount of attention they receive from the parties in the run up to the GE. If that is right, the likelihood of their voting differently from the national average depends rather little on what they think now and rather a lot on the quality of the various parties' marginal-specific campaigns in 2015. In which case polling them now is of rather little value.TheScreamingEagles said:I've already started working on the thread piece for publication of this poll.
It begins with thanking Lord A, then reminding everyone that the marginals poll in September 2009 showed the Tories on course to win a majority of 70.
Is there a flaw in that argument?
A tactical vote has a higher probability of being decisive because the constituency is marginal. There is therefore a greater incentive to cast a tactical vote in marginal constituencies.
0 -
*buffs nails*Scrapheap_as_was said:End of thread... next.
Lord Ashcroft@LordAshcroft·17 secs
@MSmithsonPB Truth is, Mike, it's still in the field...0 -
'The Roman Party. AVE!' as it likes to be called but can't be on this ballot, promotes the Roman museum in Reading and says more people, especially local, should visit it. Apparantly running in every election is basically the guy's hobby. I do have a soft spot for the English eccentric, even when he's French.JohnLilburne said:Perusing my Euro election postal ballot I was amused to see there is something called the Roman Party AVE. Tempted, until I noticed the candidate is a Frenchman.
I looked up Liberty GB online, hoping they might be some sort of libertarian outfit but instead the whole website seems to be a not-so-thinly-veiled dog whistle for cryptofascists.
So I may go back to plan A and vote for Dan Hannan, Britain's third most famous Peruvian after Michael Bentine and Paddington the Bear. Although I'm a bit surprised to see Marta Andreasen still on the Tory ticket, but at no 4 she is unlikely to get in.0 -
you should watch Lawro's face on the webcast on Radio 5 as Toure just scored the 4th, Robbie Savage clapping - Lawro's face a picture............MikeSmithson said:Man City 4-0
0 -
Liverpool need to win 15-0 to in Premiership0
-
It's likely enough that the LDs have openly raised the possibility in an attempt to make holding on to any MEPs look like a success by comparison.Stuart_Dickson said:
I think I'm right in saying that that would mean zero Lib Dem MEPs? A bit unlikely, but a fun thought.MikeK said:The moment you have all been waiting for has at last arrived.
The MikeK Forecast for the May 22nd EU results:
UKIP ...... 39.3%
Labour... 25.2%
Tory ...... 18.5%
L/Dem... 5.6%
Greens... 4.0%
An IFE.... 2.7%
Others... 4.7%
On topic, I cannot think of any reason why the marginals polling more heavily to Miliband should have changed in recent months. If they were harder on the Tories when things were looking less positive, they are probably going to be less inclined to give any credit to the Tories when things start looking up, even if a recovery is so large people start feeling it properly.
0 -
If society cannot handle such changes, it was not very conhesive to begin with, so I tend to let future me worry about such things.Casino_Royale said:O/T - I note the policy exchange report that suggests 30% of the UK population may be a non-British minority by 2050, up from the current 14%.
Am I the only one worried about such levels of projected immigration? Even with the recent additional controls?
The only civilised response to such studies seems to be to celebrate it. But I really worry about the cohesiveness and sociocultural integrity of such a Britain. I see very few people tactfully and measuredly articulating these concerns in either mainstream politics or the media.0 -
Intuitively yes, but I would guess there will be a net effect which differs from voting patterns in non-marginals.Ishmael_X said:
But doesn't that happen on both sides and therefore cancel out to some extent?AveryLP said:
You are neglecting the higher incidence of tactical voting in marginals.Ishmael_X said:
There is no obvious reason to think that the average voter in a marginal is any different from the average voter overall. What is most obviously different about marginals is the disproportionate amount of attention they receive from the parties in the run up to the GE. If that is right, the likelihood of their voting differently from the national average depends rather little on what they think now and rather a lot on the quality of the various parties' marginal-specific campaigns in 2015. In which case polling them now is of rather little value.TheScreamingEagles said:I've already started working on the thread piece for publication of this poll.
It begins with thanking Lord A, then reminding everyone that the marginals poll in September 2009 showed the Tories on course to win a majority of 70.
Is there a flaw in that argument?
A tactical vote has a higher probability of being decisive because the constituency is marginal. There is therefore a greater incentive to cast a tactical vote in marginal constituencies.
A good and informed answer is beyond my competence.
I would expect OGH, Sir Roderick, TSE, Mark Senior etc. might be able to confirm the theory and, if so, quantify the effect.
0 -
Morris Dancer,
Not only are there council elections, but Shadsy has even priced up some markets! Eg:
Trafford Council
NOC 2/5
CON Control 3/1
LAB Control 6/1
Merton Council
LAB Control 1/4
NOC 3/1
CON Control 16/1
LD Control 200/1
Other councils priced up:
Hammersmith & Fulham
Croydon
Barnet
Redbridge
Stockport
0 -
Nah, we just need West Ham to beat Citeh on Sunday and we beat Newcastle, we win the title.MikeSmithson said:Liverpool need to win 15-0 to in Premiership
Though I don't hold much hope, there's no decent team that plays in Claret and Blue.0 -
I apologise Morris for a freudian slip. I always think of that name with affection it belonged to my uncle who died at Arnhem in 1944.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. K, I knew there were locals, I didn't think there were any in my particular areas.
Also, Morris (as in the dance) not Maurice (as in the thrifty Byzantine emperor deposed by Nicephorus Phocas who was himself ousted by Heraclius, amongst the most tragic of emperors).
0 -
Were you at Sweeps?Morris_Dancer said:Also, Morris (as in the dance) not Maurice (as in the thrifty Byzantine emperor deposed by Nicephorus Phocas who was himself ousted by Heraclius, amongst the most tragic of emperors).
0 -
And if an egg cannot handle being dropped, then it wasn't much use in the first place.kle4 said:
If society cannot handle such changes, it was not very conhesive to begin with, so I tend to let future me worry about such things.Casino_Royale said:O/T - I note the policy exchange report that suggests 30% of the UK population may be a non-British minority by 2050, up from the current 14%.
Am I the only one worried about such levels of projected immigration? Even with the recent additional controls?
The only civilised response to such studies seems to be to celebrate it. But I really worry about the cohesiveness and sociocultural integrity of such a Britain. I see very few people tactfully and measuredly articulating these concerns in either mainstream politics or the media.
Right?
0 -
It doesn't bother me as such, but I can understand why others think there should have been more of a debate over the years over the level of immigration being permitted.kle4 said:
If society cannot handle such changes, it was not very conhesive to begin with, so I tend to let future me worry about such things.Casino_Royale said:O/T - I note the policy exchange report that suggests 30% of the UK population may be a non-British minority by 2050, up from the current 14%.
Am I the only one worried about such levels of projected immigration? Even with the recent additional controls?
The only civilised response to such studies seems to be to celebrate it. But I really worry about the cohesiveness and sociocultural integrity of such a Britain. I see very few people tactfully and measuredly articulating these concerns in either mainstream politics or the media.0 -
Andhave City drop points against West Ham. I'm sure the former is achievable, but after some iffy results a few months ago I don't think City are likely to do the latter.MikeSmithson said:Liverpool need to win 15-0 to in Premiership
0 -
Corrected that for you.MikeSmithson said:Liverpool Norwich need to win 15-0 to stay in Premiership
0 -
I may have this wrong, but I thing Policy Exchange are talking about the share of the population of ethnic minorities, not immigrants.Casino_Royale said:O/T - I note the policy exchange report that suggests 30% of the UK population may be a non-British minority by 2050, up from the current 14%.
Am I the only one worried about such levels of projected immigration? Even with the recent additional controls?
The only civilised response to such studies seems to be to celebrate it. But I really worry about the cohesiveness and sociocultural integrity of such a Britain. I see very few people tactfully and measuredly articulating these concerns in either mainstream politics or the media.
E.g. "In the 2011 Census, only 14% of Whites identified themselves as being purely British... all other ethnic minority communities were over four times more likely to associate themselves with being British. 71% of Bangladeshis and 63% of Pakistanis considered themselves purely British."
I hardly think we have to worry about them.0 -
Mr. Lilburne, Sweeps?0
-
That would be fun. :-)MikeK said:The moment you have all been waiting for has at last arrived.
The MikeK Forecast for the May 22nd EU results:
UKIP ...... 39.3%
Labour... 25.2%
Tory ...... 18.5%
L/Dem... 5.6%
Greens... 4.0%
An IFE.... 2.7%
Others... 4.7%
0 -
Mr. K, ah, that's quite understandable.0
-
We don't expect eggs to be strong enough to survive things which have a big impact, cracking under pressure is what they are supposed to do. Societies, one would hope, are made of sterner stuff and thus more resilient than people suspect.Next said:
And if an egg cannot handle being dropped, then it wasn't much use in the first place.kle4 said:
If society cannot handle such changes, it was not very conhesive to begin with, so I tend to let future me worry about such things.Casino_Royale said:O/T - I note the policy exchange report that suggests 30% of the UK population may be a non-British inority by 2050, up from the current 14%.
Am I the only one worried about such levels of projected immigration? Even with the recent additional controls?
The only civilised response to such studies smeems to be to celebrate it. But I really worry about the cohesiveness and sociocultural integrity of such a Britain. I see very few people tactfully and measuredly articulating these concerns in either mainstream politics or the media.
Right?
0 -
Mr. kle4, certain people seem intent on dividing society as much as possible (cf Labour's vile regional assemblies idea, the Cornish minority nonsense, the Yorkshire party that stupidly wants a regional parliament etc).0
-
and tribal.Stuart_Dickson said:volcanopete said:The Ashcroft polling can be applied to the constituencies where odds compilers will look again at prices so I guess we may see some changes in the marginal constituency betting markets after publication.This could mean there is some value now or on the resetting of each of the individual markets.Pre-empting such moves at the moment is betting blind.
Isn't all political betting "blind"? Most folk see only what they want to see. Prime case study being Mark Senior.0 -
Societies will always survive in one form or another. Some form of society survived the breakdown of the Roman Empire. It's just a question of whether you value the nature of the society before the change and want to hold on to it. The vast majority of the country value British society the way it has been historically, while small a metropolitan elite that happen to control the levers of power tend not to care. Thus the rise of UKIP is explained.kle4 said:
We don't expect eggs to be strong enough to survive things which have a big impact, cracking under pressure is what they are supposed to do. Societies, one would hope, are made of sterner stuff and thus more resilient than people suspect.Next said:
And if an egg cannot handle being dropped, then it wasn't much use in the first place.kle4 said:
If society cannot handle such changes, it was not very conhesive to begin with, so I tend to let future me worry about such things.Casino_Royale said:O/T - I note the policy exchange report that suggests 30% of the UK population may be a non-British inority by 2050, up from the current 14%.
Am I the only one worried about such levels of projected immigration? Even with the recent additional controls?
The only civilised response to such studies smeems to be to celebrate it. But I really worry about the cohesiveness and sociocultural integrity of such a Britain. I see very few people tactfully and measuredly articulating these concerns in either mainstream politics or the media.
Right?0 -
True enough, and I don't support many of those moves myself, but I find myself more optimistic quite unusually about how well as a nation we could all handle major changes (we shall have to start very soon with Scotland imminently leaving). I'm more a pessimist in general, but I do think things rarely turn out as bad as the gloommongers think.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. kle4, certain people seem intent on dividing society as much as possible (cf Labour's vile regional assemblies idea, the Cornish minority nonsense, the Yorkshire party that stupidly wants a regional parliament etc).
0 -
So because our society might currently not be cohesive as it could be, we shouldn't have a concern about it potentially getting much worse?kle4 said:
If society cannot handle such changes, it was not very conhesive to begin with, so I tend to let future me worry about such things.Casino_Royale said:O/T - I note the policy exchange report that suggests 30% of the UK population may be a non-British minority by 2050, up from the current 14%.
Am I the only one worried about such levels of projected immigration? Even with the recent additional controls?
The only civilised response to such studies seems to be to celebrate it. But I really worry about the cohesiveness and sociocultural integrity of such a Britain. I see very few people tactfully and measuredly articulating these concerns in either mainstream politics or the media.
Pretty odd logic. You have a point about not worrying too much about what might happen in the future. I'd feel more comfortable about that if we had an open debate about it now.
I look at the nationality sources of immigrants on that list and note that integration has not always been a roaring success with the existing communities that we have now. I don't particularly want a Britain consisting of just multiple quasi-autonomous mono-cultural pockets, which is what I fear we would get at those levels.0 -
Sun Politics @Sun_Politics · 4s
YouGov/Sun poll tonight: Labour lead rises to three points: CON 34%, LAB 37%, LD 8%, UKIP 13%0 -
Also we do need to realise that a good percentage of the 30% not ethnically British will be third or fourth generation, and completely assimilated. This would be more true of some grojps than others.
But this is an international phenomenon. All of Europe, America and the Old commonwealth are becoming more ethnically diverse, indeed in the non EU countries the rate is much the same or higher than us.kle4 said:
We don't expect eggs to be strong enough to survive things which have a big impact, cracking under pressure is what they are supposed to do. Societies, one would hope, are made of sterner stuff and thus more resilient than people suspect.Next said:
And if an egg cannot handle being dropped, then it wasn't much use in the first place.kle4 said:
If society cannot handle such changes, it was not very conhesive to begin with, so I tend to let future me worry about such things.Casino_Royale said:O/T - I note the policy exchange report that suggests 30% of the UK population may be a non-British inority by 2050, up from the current 14%.
Am I the only one worried about such levels of projected immigration? Even with the recent additional controls?
The only civilised response to such studies smeems to be to celebrate it. But I really worry about the cohesiveness and sociocultural integrity of such a Britain. I see very few people tactfully and measuredly articulating these concerns in either mainstream politics or the media.
Right?0 -
Sun Politics @Sun_Politics
YouGov/Sun poll tonight: Labour lead rises to three points: CON 34%, LAB 37%, LD 8%, UKIP 13%
0 -
Labour lead trebles in one day!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!0
-
There goes the chance of a level outlier for another month.0
-
I agree with the Policy Exchange's report that immigrants shouldn't be considered as a single group. Please can think tanks in future work out things like contribution to the exchequer by each community? We can thus compare the value of American immigrants versus German immigrants versus Jamaican immigrants versus Bangladeshi immigrants.0
-
Quite.Socrates said:
Societies will always survive in one form or another. Some form of society survived the breakdown of the Roman Empire. It's just a question of whether you value the nature of the society before the change and want to hold on to it. The vast majority of the country value British society the way it has been historically, while small a metropolitan elite that happen to control the levers of power tend not to care. Thus the rise of UKIP is explained.kle4 said:
We don't expect eggs to be strong enough to survive things which have a big impact, cracking under pressure is what they are supposed to do. Societies, one would hope, are made of sterner stuff and thus more resilient than people suspect.Next said:
And if an egg cannot handle being dropped, then it wasn't much use in the first place.kle4 said:
If society cannot handle such changes, it was not very conhesive to begin with, so I tend to let future me worry about such things.Casino_Royale said:O/T - I note the policy exchange report that suggests 30% of the UK population may be a non-British inority by 2050, up from the current 14%.
Am I the only one worried about such levels of projected immigration? Even with the recent additional controls?
The only civilised response to such studies smeems to be to celebrate it. But I really worry about the cohesiveness and sociocultural integrity of such a Britain. I see very few people tactfully and measuredly articulating these concerns in either mainstream politics or the media.
Right?0 -
From a left-wing perspective, what was infuriating about the PPB was how the Labour party somehow seem to perceive themselves as a contrast to the two other parties, rather than inhabiting an often imperceptibly similar space. In many ways it's a shocking lack of self awareness. Two of big cards they played in it, were of policies they ultimately instituted themselves, and the Coalition merely extended - the "bedroom tax" and tuition fees. The fees issue was particularly egregious, given that Labour implemented the £3k fees as well as launched the review that was widely anticipated to recommend far higher fees. Moreover the PPB made a big play on how terrible it was the new loans would be written off after 25 years -in practice this is a massively more generous aspect of the system (since for many people income-contingent repayments will thus be terminated before peak earning years are reached) than Labour's original version.Morris_Dancer said:Didn't think the PPB was too bad. Problem was it seemed to drag and then sink into a mire of forgetfulness. Probably better than the punchbag one.
Suspect Labour are on dangerous ground with this "tax breaks for millionaires" thing. Do they really want to position themselves as the high tax party? If they are an authentically high-tax party, why is 45% now supposedly an unacceptable dodge for the well-heeled when 40% was absolutely fine for 13 years? As with tuition fees, I wonder whether this is in the category of things it's great fun to complain are terrible indications of an out-of-touch government, but not such great fun to be explicitly committed to reversing.
Also enjoyed how the Coalition "let" energy companies raise prices, as if the government is somehow in charge of all energy bills. By extension, had it been something other than energy that had gone up, presumably that would have been complained about instead, so implicitly the Labour party feel comfortable projecting that governments bear ultimately responsible for the setting of all prices. They seem far more likely to rescind this view once in office, than to perform the radical overhaul of our economic system that would be required to bring reality into correspondence with such lofty principles.0 -
0
-
Mind you I suspect it was an effective PPB in many ways (firm up the core/switchers), but it begged more questions than I feel they have answers to.
The one genuine mistake, taking the PPB on its own terms, that I felt it contained was in begging the question "what did people get in return for lower taxes on the rich?" The coalition sold that change as part of a package that included reduced income tax for low to moderate earners. A lot of people really feel that change - particularly if they recall Labour's own treatment of the equivalent bracket. When that rhetorical question was raised, I'm afraid I instantly thought "well, low earners got a tax break too" before the broadcast moved on to the VAT rise. Purely as a piece of advertising it would have been better to have cut that question out, and segued incoherently straight to the VAT bit. Risky business asking what the Romans ever did.0 -
I don't worry about it much now because I don't think it will be much of a problem, and if I am mistaken about how robust society is at this time, while I will have problems to deal with later, I clearly have bigger problems right now, that is true. What I was, inelegantly, saying, was essentially that I don't think we have a major problem now, and so I'm not engaging in the kind of soul searching that you believe we should be doing, and as such am prepared to take the chance I am wrong and deal with any problems down the line, should I be wrong about that.Casino_Royale said:
So because our society might currently not be cohesive as it could be, we shouldn't have a concern about it potentially getting much worse?kle4 said:
If society cannot handle such changes, it was not very conhesive to begin with, so I tend to let future me worry about such things.Casino_Royale said:O/T - I note the policy exchange report that suggests 30% of the UK population may be a non-British minority by 2050, up from the current 14%.
Am I the only one worried about such levels of projected immigration? Even with the recent additional controls?
The only civilised response to such studies seems to be to celebrate it. But I really worry about the cohesiveness and sociocultural integrity of such a Britain. I see very few people tactfully and measuredly articulating these concerns in either mainstream politics or the media.
Pretty odd logic. You have a point about not worrying too much about what might happen in the future. I'd feel more comfortable about that if we had an open debate about it now.
.
By all means have the debate now, that some people are very concerned shows there is at least an issue of some kind, but it will continue to be one sided I suspect because there are those who are worried and so, quite rightly, think we need to talk about it now, beforehand, and those who are not worried and so thus see no need to engage in that debate at this time.0 -
Seems plausible. I've no doubt greater friction in inevitable moving forward, but I remain optimistic about any outcome. Those who are fearful the outcome need to be heard now at least, to avoid exacerbating that fear and alienation.Socrates said:
Societies will always survive in one form or another. Some form of society survived the breakdown of the Roman Empire. It's just a question of whether you value the nature of the society before the change and want to hold on to it. The vast majority of the country value British society the way it has been historically, while small a metropolitan elite that happen to control the levers of power tend not to care. Thus the rise of UKIP is explained.kle4 said:
We don't expect eggs to be strong enough to survive things which have a big impact, cracking under pressure is what they are supposed to do. Societies, one would hope, are made of sterner stuff and thus more resilient than people suspect.Next said:
And if an egg cannot handle being dropped, then it wasn't much use in the first place.kle4 said:
If society cannot handle such changes, it was not very conhesive to begin with, so I tend to let future me worry about such things.Casino_Royale said:O/T - I note the policy exchange report that suggests 30% of the UK population may be a non-British inority by 2050, up from the current 14%.
Am I the only one worried about such levels of projected immigration? Even with the recent additional controls?
The only civilised response to such studies smeems to be to celebrate it. But I really worry about the cohesiveness and sociocultural integrity of such a Britain. I see very few people tactfully and measuredly articulating these concerns in either mainstream politics or the media.
Right?
0 -
By 2051, a significant proportion of that population will be of mixed white/non-White background. Currently, people of mixed race are all designated as ethnic minorities (prior to 2001, they were designated as either White, black or Asian), but they may not be so designated in 2051.Socrates said:I agree with the Policy Exchange's report that immigrants shouldn't be considered as a single group. Please can think tanks in future work out things like contribution to the exchequer by each community? We can thus compare the value of American immigrants versus German immigrants versus Jamaican immigrants versus Bangladeshi immigrants.
0 -
I'm deliberately trying to steer clear of race. The ethnic appearance is actually immaterial to me. It's about values, culture and whether they mutually identify with all of their fellow Britons. If not, there is danger that we get communities in cultural competition and conflict with each other, which cannot be reconciled through the ballot box.foxinsoxuk said:Also we do need to realise that a good percentage of the 30% not ethnically British will be third or fourth generation, and completely assimilated. This would be more true of some grojps than others.
But this is an international phenomenon. All of Europe, America and the Old commonwealth are becoming more ethnically diverse, indeed in the non EU countries the rate is much the same or higher than us.kle4 said:
We don't expect eggs to be strong enough to survive things which have a big impact, cracking under pressure is what they are supposed to do. Societies, one would hope, are made of sterner stuff and thus more resilient than people suspect.Next said:
And if an egg cannot handle being dropped, then it wasn't much use in the first place.kle4 said:
If society cannot handle such changes, it was not very conhesive to begin with, so I tend to let future me worry about such things.Casino_Royale said:O/T - I note the policy exchange report that suggests 30% of the UK population may be a non-British inority by 2050, up from the current 14%.
Am I the only one worried about such levels of projected immigration? Even with the recent additional controls?
The only civilised response to such studies smeems to be to celebrate it. But I really worry about the cohesiveness and sociocultural integrity of such a Britain. I see very few people tactfully and measuredly articulating these concerns in either mainstream politics or the media.
Right?
If that happens the UK demos could start to fracture as it will become increasing difficult not to be pick one over the other in public policy and legislation, and to have those decisions accepted.0 -
The last two London Mayoral elections have been heavily polarised by race. That may just be down to one candidate playing the race card relentlessly, or it may represent our electoral future.Casino_Royale said:
I'm deliberately trying to steer clear of race. The ethnic appearance is actually immaterial to me. It's about values, culture and whether they mutually identify with all of their fellow Britons. If not, there is danger that we get communities in cultural competition and conflict with each other, which cannot be reconciled through the ballot box.foxinsoxuk said:Also we do need to realise that a good percentage of the 30% not ethnically British will be third or fourth generation, and completely assimilated. This would be more true of some grojps than others.
But this is an international phenomenon. All of Europe, America and the Old commonwealth are becoming more ethnically diverse, indeed in the non EU countries the rate is much the same or higher than us.kle4 said:
We don't expect eggs to be strong enough to survive things which have a big impact, cracking under pressure is what they are supposed to do. Societies, one would hope, are made of sterner stuff and thus more resilient than people suspect.Next said:
And if an egg cannot handle being dropped, then it wasn't much use in the first place.kle4 said:
If society cannot handle such changes, it was not very conhesive to begin with, so I tend to let future me worry about such things.Casino_Royale said:O/T - I note the policy exchange report that suggests 30% of the UK population may be a non-British inority by 2050, up from the current 14%.
Am I the only one worried about such levels of projected immigration? Even with the recent additional controls?
The only civilised response to such studies smeems to be to celebrate it. But I really worry about the cohesiveness and sociocultural integrity of such a Britain. I see very few people tactfully and measuredly articulating these concerns in either mainstream politics or the media.
Right?
If that happens the UK demos could start to fracture as it will become increasing difficult not to be pick one over the other in public policy and legislation, and to have those decisions accepted.
0 -
Funny thing is the Government *was* in charge of domestic energy bills until labour deregulated in 2001/2.MyBurningEars said:
From a left-wing perspective, what was infuriating about the PPB was how the Labour party somehow seem to perceive themselves as a contrast to the two other parties, rather than inhabiting an often imperceptibly similar space. In many ways it's a shocking lack of self awareness. Two of big cards they played in it, were of policies they ultimately instituted themselves, and the Coalition merely extended - the "bedroom tax" and tuition fees. The fees issue was particularly egregious, given that Labour implemented the £3k fees as well as launched the review that was widely anticipated to recommend far higher fees. Moreover the PPB made a big play on how terrible it was the new loans would be written off after 25 years -in practice this is a massively more generous aspect of the system (since for many people income-contingent repayments will thus be terminated before peak earning years are reached) than Labour's original version.Morris_Dancer said:Didn't think the PPB was too bad. Problem was it seemed to drag and then sink into a mire of forgetfulness. Probably better than the punchbag one.
Suspect Labour are on dangerous ground with this "tax breaks for millionaires" thing. Do they really want to position themselves as the high tax party? If they are an authentically high-tax party, why is 45% now supposedly an unacceptable dodge for the well-heeled when 40% was absolutely fine for 13 years? As with tuition fees, I wonder whether this is in the category of things it's great fun to complain are terrible indications of an out-of-touch government, but not such great fun to be explicitly committed to reversing.
Also enjoyed how the Coalition "let" energy companies raise prices, as if the government is somehow in charge of all energy bills. By extension, had it been something other than energy that had gone up, presumably that would have been complained about instead, so implicitly the Labour party feel comfortable projecting that governments bear ultimately responsible for the setting of all prices. They seem far more likely to rescind this view once in office, than to perform the radical overhaul of our economic system that would be required to bring reality into correspondence with such lofty principles.0 -
Marriages between immigrants and those that lived here previously are the best hope of cohesive society in my opinionSean_F said:
By 2051, a significant proportion of that population will be of mixed white/non-White background. Currently, people of mixed race are all designated as ethnic minorities (prior to 2001, they were designated as either White, black or Asian), but they may not be so designated in 2051.Socrates said:I agree with the Policy Exchange's report that immigrants shouldn't be considered as a single group. Please can think tanks in future work out things like contribution to the exchequer by each community? We can thus compare the value of American immigrants versus German immigrants versus Jamaican immigrants versus Bangladeshi immigrants.
0 -
Why are you flying from Perth to Bangkok via Dubai?SeanT said:Greetings from the future. I am in the Emirates Lounge at Perth Airport en route Bangkok via Dubai. I can report that Thursday 8th May 2014 isn't so bad. It features free champagne.
Seems a bit long winded!0 -
I am glad the Left have got their act together for the Euros, is there any prospect of NO2EU picking up a seat anywhere? It might be a wasted vote, and their quasi-protectionist side is one of the worst aspects of economic illiteracy to blight the "right-minded", but it would be good to do something in memory of Bob Crow. Not only did he have a genuine commitment to his cause, one which was exercised with unusual effectiveness, but no man has done so much to make me get out on my own two legs and grab some exercise.0
-
Nigel Farage @Nigel_Farage 1m
Tonight is truly UKIP's Clause 4 moment0 -
Interesting Figure 7.1 from that Policy Exchange report:
English language is the most spoken at home:
Indian: ~55%
Pakistani: ~45%
Bangladeshi: ~40%
Black African: ~65%
Black Caribbean: ~95%0 -
Absolutely none I suspect, they've simply failed to make any impact on the crowded stage of minor parties. I would expect them to lose a majority of their deposits, too.MyBurningEars said:I am glad the Left have got their act together for the Euros, is there any prospect of NO2EU picking up a seat anywhere? It might be a wasted vote, and their quasi-protectionist side is one of the worst aspects of economic illiteracy to blight the "right-minded", but it would be good to do something in memory of Bob Crow. Not only did he have a genuine commitment to his cause, one which was exercised with unusual effectiveness, but no man has done so much to make me get out on my own two legs and grab some exercise.
0 -
0
-
In all seriousness I question the value of a daily poll - it really is laughable how much we hang on what is an MOE variation (I am just as guilty as the next man). Would it not be better for YouGov to do a weekly poll, ideally on a Thursday night, with a larger sample, so crossbreaks etc were at least meaningful?Next said:
Quick. Produce some more black and white PEBs. With cats.BobaFett said:Labour lead trebles in one day!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
0 -
Strange. Does he mean that he's realised UKIP have made a fundamental error, and need to change?isam said:Nigel Farage @Nigel_Farage 1m
Tonight is truly UKIP's Clause 4 moment
0 -
Nick Griffin MEP @nickgriffinmep 1m
#Ukip immigration policy: Replace Poles with Pakistanis. #BNP immigration policy: Britain's full, shut the door! pic.twitter.com/mnwc2w0TeU0 -
Another quote from that Policy Exchange report:
"I am a general practitioner in Southampton. As someone of South Asian descent I feel
privileged to have a large population of South Asian ethnic groups as part of my practice
patient list. Writing generally about this group I feel there are two clear cohorts of
differing socioeconomic levels."
Try replacing "South Asian" with "white" and see how it sounds...0 -
Yes, but The Sun offered them a contract making a daily poll after the last election and would you turn down that money/publicity if you were Peter Kelner? Precisely. You're right, but I hardly blame YG given their situation.BobaFett said:
In all seriousness I question the value of a daily poll - it really is laughable how much we hang on what is an MOE variation (I am just as guilty as the next man). Would it not be better for YouGov to do a weekly poll, ideally on a Thursday night, with a larger sample, so crossbreaks etc were at least meaningful?Next said:
Quick. Produce some more black and white PEBs. With cats.BobaFett said:Labour lead trebles in one day!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
0
