Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Guest Slot: Rod Crosby: The bell tolls for Labour and Milib

1246

Comments

  • Options
    edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,166
    On topic, could Rod or someone give us an update on what by-election swingback is currently showing? That model was pretty good.
  • Options
    AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Important news — counting of votes in Tower Hamlets is set to resume at 6:30pm.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,753
    Why do I not believe this is going to be this easy?

    Firstly, I am suspicious of changes in methodology by pollsters over time corrupts the data. Were Labour ever really as far ahead as their polling indicated? Were the tories? When you have so few data points this is important and the impression I get is that after each major election the pollsters try to work out what adjustments are likely to make themselves more accurate the next time. As they should.

    Secondly, I do wonder about swingback in a situation where Labour never got much of a swing in the first place. As the recent elections have demonstrated those frustrated or disappointed with the government have looked elsewhere. I suspect the Labour vote is "harder" as a result and will change less.

    Thirdly, no matter how dorky or bizarre Ed has been the polling has moved at a glacial rate. This is because normal people (who do not spend their lives on PB) pay even less attention than we think. It is also further evidence of Labour resilience. Labour supporters are far more easily motivated by being against the tories than they are for, well pretty much anything.

    Fourthly, the benefits of the recovery for most people are going to be slight. For the 30m with jobs and the other milllions of retired the increase in employment is something that happens to someone else. The fall in real incomes has happened to them. And in many cases the newly employed are not that grateful being pushed into low paid employment with limited prospects and security.

    Fifthly, the client state that Brown invented to give Labour a permanent advantage is still with us. It has been trimmed at the edges but a party promising tax cuts and welfare cuts finds the playing field immeasurably more tipped against them than it was in Thatcher's day. In work benefits has massively extended the client state.

    Sixthly, and most importantly, my pessimism has been endemic ever since Sir Alex Ferguson was thoughtless enough to retire. I want to believe. Help my unbelief.
  • Options
    wumperwumper Posts: 35
    This is the silliest column i have read in many a long year, i trust you will come on here and apologise when you have been proved wrong as you are going to be. WOEFUL
  • Options
    HurstLlamaHurstLlama Posts: 9,098
    SeanT said:

    taffys said:

    The rest are immigrants from elsewhere.

    It's hard to square the notion that London is a poorer city when its very,very difficult to buy a property in any london borough, even a studio flat, for less than 180,000.

    London is not a poorer city. It is a much richer city than it was. But as has always been the case it does have areas in which there is extreme poverty. Some of these are the same as they have always been. Others are new. But areas that were once poor no longer are. There was never and there is not a deliberate policy to impoverish London.

    You are correct of course London has always been a city with poor and rich areas. Over the decades some of these have changed and that will continue to happen. Taken as a whole the aggregate wealth of London is now much higher than it was when I was growing up there, but the disparities in wealth are also so much greater. So what?

    I notice that neither of us chose to live there. You, I believe from your posts on here, chose to live in Warwickshire and I am in Sussex.
    To enjoy London you need to be young or rich, or both (and being single helps).

    Married ageing man moves out of London is not a striking headline, and says absolutely nothing about London.
    If that bit about married aging man was aimed at me, you are very much mistaken. I left when I was 18 and joined the army, I just never went back to live. Over the decades since all the rest of my extended family have left too, the last by death a few years ago.

    Now, you say that London is best enjoyed by the young, rich and single and I wouldn't disagree (Hong Kong is the same in my day, but you didn't need to be quite so rich). Families routinely moving out is also nothing terribly new. However, your contention that neither factor says anything about London, is nonsense. Of course, they say a lot about London.
  • Options
    MrJonesMrJones Posts: 3,523
    antifrank said:

    MrJones said:

    antifrank said:

    MrJones said:

    antifrank said:

    The idea that London hasn't gentrified since the 1980s is possibly the most bonkers suggestion on pb this year.

    London as a whole has gentrified?
    If you need to ask the question, you're not going to believe what is an incredibly obvious answer.
    I know the answer. Look in the backstreets.
    The backstreets of much of London are now occupied by yuppies. It's not so long ago that mews were the second rate accommodation lived in by those who couldn't afford proper houses. The same is happening now over a much wider area. 30 years ago, no one at all lived in the backstreets of Shoreditch and Hoxton. Inner east London (from Brick Lane to Bethnal Green to Hackney to Dalston to Leyton) is gentrifying at a dizzying speed. Our intrepid reporter from the trenches of NW1 has confirmed the same for that area. Longstanding residents of Brixton are complaining that the cultural heritage of that area is being lost with gentrification.

    You're missing one of the great global success stories of the last few decades. People come from right round the world to get richer in London. And not just from poorer countries. London is France's sixth biggest city. It's Sweden's fourth biggest city. I'm sure I could go round other first world countries with similar statistics.

    Open your eyes.
    My eyes see family homes turned into 5-6 flats plus some more in what used to be the back gardens.
  • Options
    SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    @antifrank

    42% of children in Kensington and Chelsea are from low income families. Kensington and Chelsea. Try going to the World's End estate and say the backstreets are benefitting from gentrification. Using the area around Silicon Roundabout as an example just shows how out of touch you are.
  • Options
    Peter_the_PunterPeter_the_Punter Posts: 13,521
    Socrates said:

    antifrank said:

    The idea that London hasn't gentrified since the 1980s is possibly the most bonkers suggestion on pb this year.

    Been round Wembley or Croydon recently?
    Yes, I was in Wemnbley on Sunday.

    Place was full of people from Rotherham. Isn't it time something was done about it?

  • Options
    Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,039
    wumper said:

    This is the silliest column i have read in many a long year, i trust you will come on here and apologise when you have been proved wrong as you are going to be. WOEFUL

    There's been a marked increase of this sort of post on here recently, mostly from new posters. It's not really adding to the debate, but the phenomenon is fascinating nonetheless.
  • Options
    MrJonesMrJones Posts: 3,523

    MrJones said:

    Neil said:

    MrJones said:

    Neil said:

    MrJones said:


    People can choose their option. London and the other big cities are trending to complete dominance by Labour because:

    a) they're rich, prosperous multiculti and happy

    or

    b) the political class have been importing poverty on a massive scale and so far it's been concentrated in the cities

    In some ways I'm impressed that even after the BNP got absolutely trounced last week you're still plugging away anyway. More power to you.
    The Tories are being squeezed out of London because the majority of London are getting more prosperous?
    I'll have whatever you're having.
    You've no answer because this spin that the Tories are being squeezed out of London because of growing prosperity** is obvious nonsense.

    **except at the top
    I would have thought that the middle-earning families who want to own their own home are being squeezed out of London is self-evident (best part of £200K for a flat someone said up-thread). Such people are a significant chunk of the Conservative vote, so perhaps the idea is not so preposterous.

    A few months ago someone on here linked to a map which was colour coded by home ownership-type (owned, privately rented, social housing). Unfortunately I can't find it now, ifanyone still has the link please could they share it.
    "Such people are a significant chunk of the Conservative vote, so perhaps the idea is not so preposterous."

    I'd say they were the core.

    My main point is for those Con voters who think importing 100,000s of unskilled workers will work out in their interests in the long term. Look at London.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,753

    I have more than one card, so I asked them for details and told them the order wasn't from me and could they tell me the card so I could investigate the security breach?

    Just to eliminate one possibility, how did you contact Fon and what makes you confident that it was really Fon who you were talking to?
    Good point. They should be giving you the credit card details not the other way around.

  • Options
    taffystaffys Posts: 9,753
    edited May 2014
    '''42% of children in Kensington and Chelsea are from low income families. Kensington and Chelsea.'''

    I'd have thought that even run down estates are under huge pressure from developers and the upwardly mobile, given where prices are.

    You often see old tower blocks taking on a chrysalis of scaffolding, only to emerge private flats.
  • Options
    TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633

    wumper said:

    This is the silliest column i have read in many a long year, i trust you will come on here and apologise when you have been proved wrong as you are going to be. WOEFUL

    There's been a marked increase of this sort of post on here recently, mostly from new posters. It's not really adding to the debate, but the phenomenon is fascinating nonetheless.
    I blame the advertisers ;)

    Dan Hodges ‏@DPJHodges 23m
    Blimey. Know it's a guest slot, but this is still Political Betting http://politicalbetting.com/
  • Options
    RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737

    On topic, could Rod or someone give us an update on what by-election swingback is currently showing? That model was pretty good.

    A Labour win by 2.03%, pretty far from this projection! (^_-)

    But swingback lost a lot of its predictive power in 2010. I blame the TV debates...
  • Options
    AnorakAnorak Posts: 6,621

    wumper said:

    This is the silliest column i have read in many a long year, i trust you will come on here and apologise when you have been proved wrong as you are going to be. WOEFUL

    There's been a marked increase of this sort of post on here recently, mostly from new posters. It's not really adding to the debate, but the phenomenon is fascinating nonetheless.
    I quite like the handle though: "wumper". Presumably from the sound he (or she) will make striking the floor when Labour lose...
  • Options
    GeoffMGeoffM Posts: 6,071

    wumper said:

    This is the silliest column i have read in many a long year, i trust you will come on here and apologise when you have been proved wrong as you are going to be. WOEFUL

    There's been a marked increase of this sort of post on here recently, mostly from new posters. It's not really adding to the debate, but the phenomenon is fascinating nonetheless.
    I suspect a goodly proportion of the IP addys will show up as sock-puppets of regular posters. The more savvy ones will have used proxy servers to disguise that.

    You are right - a most interesting development indeed.

  • Options
    RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737

    wumper said:

    This is the silliest column i have read in many a long year, i trust you will come on here and apologise when you have been proved wrong as you are going to be. WOEFUL

    There's been a marked increase of this sort of post on here recently, mostly from new posters. It's not really adding to the debate, but the phenomenon is fascinating nonetheless.
    Gives me a warm glow when posts like that appear...
  • Options
    AnorakAnorak Posts: 6,621
    GeoffM said:

    wumper said:

    This is the silliest column i have read in many a long year, i trust you will come on here and apologise when you have been proved wrong as you are going to be. WOEFUL

    There's been a marked increase of this sort of post on here recently, mostly from new posters. It's not really adding to the debate, but the phenomenon is fascinating nonetheless.
    I suspect a goodly proportion of the IP addys will show up as sock-puppets of regular posters. The more savvy ones will have used proxy servers to disguise that.

    You are right - a most interesting development indeed.

    Really? It's not as if there's anything to 'win' by having a sock-puppet army. I can't imagine a more pointless use of one's time.
  • Options
    edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,166
    DavidL said:

    I have more than one card, so I asked them for details and told them the order wasn't from me and could they tell me the card so I could investigate the security breach?

    Just to eliminate one possibility, how did you contact Fon and what makes you confident that it was really Fon who you were talking to?
    Good point. They should be giving you the credit card details not the other way around.

    TBF there may be some legitimate reasons not to want to give the minimum-wage people at the call centre free access to the whole database full of credit card information, so it's not _necessarily_ suspicious that they have to ask him for at least part of it, but it's at least worth checking...
  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    Vince Cable has disowned Lord Oakeshott. Any cock crowing heard yet?
  • Options
    TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    Anorak said:

    wumper said:

    This is the silliest column i have read in many a long year, i trust you will come on here and apologise when you have been proved wrong as you are going to be. WOEFUL

    There's been a marked increase of this sort of post on here recently, mostly from new posters. It's not really adding to the debate, but the phenomenon is fascinating nonetheless.
    I quite like the handle though: "wumper". Presumably from the sound he (or she) will make striking the floor when Labour lose...
    WUM :

    Wind
    Up
    Merchant

  • Options
    edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,166
    RodCrosby said:

    On topic, could Rod or someone give us an update on what by-election swingback is currently showing? That model was pretty good.

    A Labour win by 2.03%, pretty far from this projection! (^_-)

    But swingback lost a lot of its predictive power in 2010. I blame the TV debates...
    I thought it was pretty awesome getting us into the general ballpark from a long way out - how far off was it again?
  • Options
    AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    edited May 2014

    Wildly O/T: I've been the subject of a mysterious sting and can't work out who benefits. I have BT broadband, which includes access to BT's wifi hotspots. BT's wifi partner Fon informed my email addresss that they'd charged me £21 "to my credit card" to upgrade me to cheap global access to wifi hotspots. I might in principle be up for that, but I've not actually ordered it. I have more than one card, so I asked them for details and told them the order wasn't from me and could they tell me the card so I could investigate the security breach? They said they'd refund the payment to my card, but as it was at one remove they didn't know what my card was.

    Wtf? First, how does someone benefit (except Fon, who I presume are not villains) by charging a random person to upgrade? Second, how does Fon refund the money without knowing what the card is?

    Nick

    It is possible you might have authorised payment when clicking yes to this option when accessing a wifi service overseas. Easy to do, say, in an Amsterdam café after consuming one too many 'coffee'.

    If this happened then you may also have given your prior consent to the use of a nominated payment card when setting up or "registering for" a parent service, e.g. BT Broadband or something like Apple App Store. Fon could be using the parent as its payment agent.
  • Options
    TheWatcherTheWatcher Posts: 5,262
    Anorak said:

    GeoffM said:

    wumper said:

    This is the silliest column i have read in many a long year, i trust you will come on here and apologise when you have been proved wrong as you are going to be. WOEFUL

    There's been a marked increase of this sort of post on here recently, mostly from new posters. It's not really adding to the debate, but the phenomenon is fascinating nonetheless.
    I suspect a goodly proportion of the IP addys will show up as sock-puppets of regular posters. The more savvy ones will have used proxy servers to disguise that.

    You are right - a most interesting development indeed.

    Really? It's not as if there's anything to 'win' by having a sock-puppet army. I can't imagine a more pointless use of one's time.
    Probably the Scouser..
  • Options
    Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,039
    norman smith ‏@BBCNormanS 36s

    Vince Cable turns on his former ally Lord Oakeshott - "His actions are inexcusable and unacceptable"


    He does seem like a thoroughly disagreeable sort - and one who's never been elected to anything, to boot.
  • Options
    RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737
    If we do a Monte Carlo (10,000) we have this...

    https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/13331381/Locals.PNG
  • Options
    ToryJimToryJim Posts: 3,670
    @SkyNewsBreak: Vince cable reveals Lord Oakeshott commissioned poll on chances of Nick #Clegg losing Commons seat and calls actions "totally inexcusable"

  • Options
    TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633

    norman smith ‏@BBCNormanS 36s

    Vince Cable turns on his former ally Lord Oakeshott - "His actions are inexcusable and unacceptable"


    He does seem like a thoroughly disagreeable sort - and one who's never been elected to anything, to boot.

    Any relation to Isobel the journo ?
  • Options
    AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815

    RodCrosby said:

    On topic, could Rod or someone give us an update on what by-election swingback is currently showing? That model was pretty good.

    A Labour win by 2.03%, pretty far from this projection! (^_-)

    But swingback lost a lot of its predictive power in 2010. I blame the TV debates...
    I thought it was pretty awesome getting us into the general ballpark from a long way out - how far off was it again?
    Won't a Tory win in Newark alter the swingback model outcome towards the Cons?

  • Options
    Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,039
    TGOHF said:

    norman smith ‏@BBCNormanS 36s

    Vince Cable turns on his former ally Lord Oakeshott - "His actions are inexcusable and unacceptable"


    He does seem like a thoroughly disagreeable sort - and one who's never been elected to anything, to boot.

    Any relation to Isobel the journo ?
    Third cousin: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matthew_Oakeshott,_Baron_Oakeshott_of_Seagrove_Bay
  • Options
    TheWatcherTheWatcher Posts: 5,262
    edited May 2014
    ToryJim said:

    @SkyNewsBreak: Vince cable reveals Lord Oakeshott commissioned poll on chances of Nick #Clegg losing Commons seat and calls actions "totally inexcusable"

    Yellow on Yellow incoming. Most interesting indeed, as Cable distances himself from his friend.
  • Options
    GeoffMGeoffM Posts: 6,071
    Anorak said:

    GeoffM said:

    wumper said:

    This is the silliest column i have read in many a long year, i trust you will come on here and apologise when you have been proved wrong as you are going to be. WOEFUL

    There's been a marked increase of this sort of post on here recently, mostly from new posters. It's not really adding to the debate, but the phenomenon is fascinating nonetheless.
    I suspect a goodly proportion of the IP addys will show up as sock-puppets of regular posters. The more savvy ones will have used proxy servers to disguise that.

    You are right - a most interesting development indeed.

    Really? It's not as if there's anything to 'win' by having a sock-puppet army. I can't imagine a more pointless use of one's time.
    You'd be very surprised at how some people use their time. I admin a very large site where I can see in the logs that some people are literally (in the correct sense of the word) arguing with themselves. A sock-puppet army doesn't even always march together.

    Mike Smithson himself has used at least two sock puppets in the past specifically to chivvy along debate when it's been quiet. They were mentioned a few months ago in the context of a wider thread-drift sparked by discussion of Lousie Mensch's contributions here.

  • Options
    edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,166
    AveryLP said:

    RodCrosby said:

    On topic, could Rod or someone give us an update on what by-election swingback is currently showing? That model was pretty good.

    A Labour win by 2.03%, pretty far from this projection! (^_-)

    But swingback lost a lot of its predictive power in 2010. I blame the TV debates...
    I thought it was pretty awesome getting us into the general ballpark from a long way out - how far off was it again?
    Won't a Tory win in Newark alter the swingback model outcome towards the Cons?

    Not necessarily - Con start with a huge lead there, so there could be a seriously big two-party swing - IIUC bigger than the current by-election average - and they'd still hold the seat.
  • Options
    RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737

    RodCrosby said:

    On topic, could Rod or someone give us an update on what by-election swingback is currently showing? That model was pretty good.

    A Labour win by 2.03%, pretty far from this projection! (^_-)

    But swingback lost a lot of its predictive power in 2010. I blame the TV debates...
    I thought it was pretty awesome getting us into the general ballpark from a long way out - how far off was it again?
    Central forecast of a 1.73% Tory lead. At least it got the winner right!
  • Options
    ToryJimToryJim Posts: 3,670

    ToryJim said:

    @SkyNewsBreak: Vince cable reveals Lord Oakeshott commissioned poll on chances of Nick #Clegg losing Commons seat and calls actions "totally inexcusable"

    Yellow on Yellow incoming. Most interesting indeed, as Cable distances himself from his friend.
    This squabbling will do far more harm than a quick mercy killing of Clegg.
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 41,118
    Sadiq Khan writes an open letter to UKIP supporters

    Reminds me of the scene in the Anthony Hopkins version of Mutiny on the Bounty, when he tries to make a deal to avoid being thrown overboard, causing Fletcher Christian to scream in exasperation

    "WHY ARE YOU BEING SO DAMNED REASONABLE NOW?"

    "Take immigration. In the past, we were too quick to dismiss concerns about immigration, or even worse - accused people of prejudice.

    We all remember Gillian Duffy. We were wrong. We are sorry."

    http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/478076/We-were-wrong-we-are-sorry-Senior-Labour-MP-Sadiq-Khan-pens-open-letter-to-Ukip-voters
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,020
    edited May 2014

    ToryJim said:

    @SkyNewsBreak: Vince cable reveals Lord Oakeshott commissioned poll on chances of Nick #Clegg losing Commons seat and calls actions "totally inexcusable"

    Yellow on Yellow incoming. Most interesting indeed, as Cable distances himself from his friend.
    Actually, in the face of horrendous losses, apart from the usual suspects/useful idiots (yes, you, Oakeshott & Opik) the Lib Dems are showing commendable fortitude under fire - in contrast to others [cough]Tories[/cough] who panic at much lower levels of pain.....

  • Options
    NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,384
    edited May 2014
    DavidL said:

    I have more than one card, so I asked them for details and told them the order wasn't from me and could they tell me the card so I could investigate the security breach?

    Just to eliminate one possibility, how did you contact Fon and what makes you confident that it was really Fon who you were talking to?
    Good point. They should be giving you the credit card details not the other way around.

    I looked up the BT website and found the link to Fon's website. That part has to be kosher. They weren't asking me for the card info - their (email) reply said the refund was in progress, they merely didn't know the card to which it was being refunded.

    Wtf? First, how does someone benefit (except Fon, who I presume are not villains) by charging a random person to upgrade? Second, how does Fon refund the money without knowing what the card is?

    Has the £21 actually been charged to your card? It sounds more like the upgrade has been applied to the wrong account.

    I don't know. I have half a dozen cards, most of them rarely used. I'll have to wait for the next statements.

    Avery's solution might be right - I've done a lot of travelling lately, and might have clicked on a "yes" at some point. What's puzzled me was that whoever it was apparently knew both my email address and my card number.

    Oh well - thanks all for pondering with me.

    DavidL - where should I send the £10 to BetterTogether? To you or to their website?
  • Options
    Scrapheap_as_wasScrapheap_as_was Posts: 10,061
    I can't believe we've taken another Saints man.... I don't think he'll be quite as good for us as Bale was...
  • Options
    RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737

    AveryLP said:

    RodCrosby said:

    On topic, could Rod or someone give us an update on what by-election swingback is currently showing? That model was pretty good.

    A Labour win by 2.03%, pretty far from this projection! (^_-)

    But swingback lost a lot of its predictive power in 2010. I blame the TV debates...
    I thought it was pretty awesome getting us into the general ballpark from a long way out - how far off was it again?
    Won't a Tory win in Newark alter the swingback model outcome towards the Cons?

    Not necessarily - Con start with a huge lead there, so there could be a seriously big two-party swing - IIUC bigger than the current by-election average - and they'd still hold the seat.
    If the Labour and Lib vote collapses tactically for UKIP, there could be a swing to the Tories while they lose the seat!

    viz

    UKIP 45 (+41.2)
    Con 41 (-12.9)
    Lab 7 (-15.2)
    LD 7 (-13.0)

    Swing from Lab to Con 1.15%
  • Options
    GrandioseGrandiose Posts: 2,323
    This is a vital period. UKIP were up in the pre-election period, and the Tories closed the gap from 4-5% to ~2%. How much of that was because of the election is unclear, as is how many people stay with their European party even if so. By the summer we should have a pretty good picture of the direction of travel.
  • Options
    wumperwumper Posts: 35
    To explain why this column is so far from the truth. Back in 2012 the govt. made a series of pathetic decisions culminating in the omnishambles budget. I live in a highly conservative area and their supporters here are disgusted. People will forgive governments for many things but draw the line at incompetence because besides looking amateurish the govt. made us look chumps abroad.
    To win the next election they need to poll a lot better but they have reached their ceiling in votes because normal people will not vote for incompetence.
  • Options
    TheWatcherTheWatcher Posts: 5,262
    Photo? Photos.

    The one of Eck kicking the ball is really 'special'.
  • Options
    RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737
    wumper said:

    To explain why this column is so far from the truth. Back in 2012 the govt. made a series of pathetic decisions culminating in the omnishambles budget. I live in a highly conservative area and their supporters here are disgusted. People will forgive governments for many things but draw the line at incompetence because besides looking amateurish the govt. made us look chumps abroad.
    To win the next election they need to poll a lot better but they have reached their ceiling in votes because normal people will not vote for incompetence.

    And so they're voting for Milichump in huge numbers instead? Look at the figures, man!
  • Options
    MrJonesMrJones Posts: 3,523
    isam said:

    Sadiq Khan writes an open letter to UKIP supporters

    Reminds me of the scene in the Anthony Hopkins version of Mutiny on the Bounty, when he tries to make a deal to avoid being thrown overboard, causing Fletcher Christian to scream in exasperation

    "WHY ARE YOU BEING SO DAMNED REASONABLE NOW?"

    "Take immigration. In the past, we were too quick to dismiss concerns about immigration, or even worse - accused people of prejudice.

    We all remember Gillian Duffy. We were wrong. We are sorry."

    http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/478076/We-were-wrong-we-are-sorry-Senior-Labour-MP-Sadiq-Khan-pens-open-letter-to-Ukip-voters

    interestink
  • Options
    David_EvershedDavid_Evershed Posts: 6,506

    Time for Clegg to act tough and expel Oakeshott from the Lib Dems. Oakeshott puts himself forward on TV as close to Vince Cable and is constantly sniping at Lib Dem policy.

    Now that even Vince Cable is saying Oakeshott's actions are inexcusable, the party can throw him out.

    Oakshott is only yellow in that he wanted to keep secret he had commissioned a poll about alternative Lib Dem leaders as part of his anti Clegg campaign.
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,020

    Photo? Photos.

    The one of Eck kicking the ball is really 'special'.
    I see a career in the Rockettes beckoning if things don't go to plan in September.....

  • Options
    ToryJimToryJim Posts: 3,670
    @LBC: Ken Livingstone tells @IainDale that the Labour leadership should invite Lutfur Rahmann back into the party. #TowerHamlets

    I loathe Livingstone and this makes me loathe him more
  • Options
    GaiusGaius Posts: 227
    ToryJim said:

    ToryJim said:

    @SkyNewsBreak: Vince cable reveals Lord Oakeshott commissioned poll on chances of Nick #Clegg losing Commons seat and calls actions "totally inexcusable"

    Yellow on Yellow incoming. Most interesting indeed, as Cable distances himself from his friend.
    This squabbling will do far more harm than a quick mercy killing of Clegg.
    But if Clegg won't do the decent thing, how else are they going to force him out?

  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 24,012
    wumper said:

    To explain why this column is so far from the truth. Back in 2012 the govt. made a series of pathetic decisions culminating in the omnishambles budget. I live in a highly conservative area and their supporters here are disgusted. People will forgive governments for many things but draw the line at incompetence because besides looking amateurish the govt. made us look chumps abroad.
    To win the next election they need to poll a lot better but they have reached their ceiling in votes because normal people will not vote for incompetence.

    Oh you do spoil us Mr wumper.

    You want to debate competence levels based on Blair govt v Cameron govt ? Lead on.
  • Options
    dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,291
    The Sage of Twickers seems to have lost some friends at the BBC.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-27587439

    Not one of his more flattering shots.
  • Options
    DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    SeanT said:

    OFF topic. Do we have any Brazilian travel experts?

    I've just been offered a travel gig to go see Rio de Janeiro then the Pantanal. Trouble is it's in about a week, so it disrupts stuff.

    Is the Pantanal as amazing as they say? Worth the disruption? Or is it just a bunch of oversized guinea pigs in a puddle?

    I've heard Rio is definitely over-rated.

    The World Cup starts in Brazil in about a fortnight. I know nothing about the Pantanal but would observe that in general South American fauna is less interesting to the uninformed than African owing to the lack of giraffes, lions and elephants which is what most of us expect from "wildlife".
  • Options
    compouter2compouter2 Posts: 2,371
    You know how serious an article is when the author of it describes Miliband as Milichump in the comments section. What next Liebore.....Zanulabour. Jeesh!
  • Options
    TheWatcherTheWatcher Posts: 5,262

    Photo? Photos.

    The one of Eck kicking the ball is really 'special'.
    I see a career in the Rockettes beckoning if things don't go to plan in September.....

    Or Riverdance.
  • Options
    dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,291
    Electoral Commission wakes up.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-27585346

    Tower Hamlets being looked at.
  • Options
    jayfdeejayfdee Posts: 618
    Fantastic picture of weird Ed in the header,this and bacon butties etc,at least Dave looks statesman like.
  • Options
    AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    SeanT said:

    OFF topic. Do we have any Brazilian travel experts?

    I've just been offered a travel gig to go see Rio de Janeiro then the Pantanal. Trouble is it's in about a week, so it disrupts stuff.

    Is the Pantanal as amazing as they say? Worth the disruption? Or is it just a bunch of oversized guinea pigs in a puddle?

    I've heard Rio is definitely over-rated.

    Apparently they hate people speaking Spanish to them.
  • Options
    NeilNeil Posts: 7,983

    You know how serious an article is when the author of it describes Miliband as Milichump in the comments section. What next Liebore.....Zanulabour. Jeesh!

    The author was a *lot* more accurate about when crossover would happen than you were though.

  • Options
    DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    dr_spyn said:

    The Sage of Twickers seems to have lost some friends at the BBC.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-27587439

    Not one of his more flattering shots.

    Looks OK, and it would not surprise me to see him in Quirke, the BBC's new drama starring Gabriel Byrne.
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/p01437nb/quirke-1-christine-falls
  • Options
    compouter2compouter2 Posts: 2,371
    Neil said:

    You know how serious an article is when the author of it describes Miliband as Milichump in the comments section. What next Liebore.....Zanulabour. Jeesh!

    The author was a *lot* more accurate about when crossover would happen than you were though.

    I take it your his official arse kisser?
  • Options
    CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    O/T

    Yay! Just exchanged on a crappy investment that has been the bane of my life since I took it over from my sister 2 years ago.
  • Options
    jayfdeejayfdee Posts: 618
    ToryJim said:

    ToryJim said:

    @SkyNewsBreak: Vince cable reveals Lord Oakeshott commissioned poll on chances of Nick #Clegg losing Commons seat and calls actions "totally inexcusable"

    Yellow on Yellow incoming. Most interesting indeed, as Cable distances himself from his friend.
    This squabbling will do far more harm than a quick mercy killing of Clegg.
    If tis to be done tis best done quickly.
    Yes the Sqabbling is probably unstoppable now.

  • Options
    ToryJimToryJim Posts: 3,670
    Gaius said:

    ToryJim said:

    ToryJim said:

    @SkyNewsBreak: Vince cable reveals Lord Oakeshott commissioned poll on chances of Nick #Clegg losing Commons seat and calls actions "totally inexcusable"

    Yellow on Yellow incoming. Most interesting indeed, as Cable distances himself from his friend.
    This squabbling will do far more harm than a quick mercy killing of Clegg.
    But if Clegg won't do the decent thing, how else are they going to force him out?

    But this feels like the execution of Margaret Pole, which took 10 strokes of the axe to actually get the head off.
  • Options
    NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    edited May 2014

    Neil said:

    You know how serious an article is when the author of it describes Miliband as Milichump in the comments section. What next Liebore.....Zanulabour. Jeesh!

    The author was a *lot* more accurate about when crossover would happen than you were though.

    I take it your his official arse kisser?
    Euw. You're terrible, Compouter2.
  • Options
    compouter2compouter2 Posts: 2,371
    Neil said:

    Neil said:

    You know how serious an article is when the author of it describes Miliband as Milichump in the comments section. What next Liebore.....Zanulabour. Jeesh!

    The author was a *lot* more accurate about when crossover would happen than you were though.

    I take it your his official arse kisser?
    Euw. You're terrible, Compouter2.
    I have read what he has been doing to his other half, god knows what he does to you ;-)
  • Options
    AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    "What is going on in Tower Hamlets? Three days after the counting began, the borough has yet to return a complete set of results from Thursday’s elections. Counting for the Bromley South ward has been stopped for a second time today, resuming in the morning. Tower Hamlets Council explained in a statement ‘the result is looking very close in this ward and accuracy is of paramount concern’. Few would probably have noticed, were it not for Tower Hamlets holding up the rest of London announcing its results for the European elections."

    http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2014/05/tower-hamlets-londons-rotten-borough/
  • Options
    SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    AndyJS said:

    "What is going on in Tower Hamlets? Three days after the counting began, the borough has yet to return a complete set of results from Thursday’s elections. Counting for the Bromley South ward has been stopped for a second time today, resuming in the morning. Tower Hamlets Council explained in a statement ‘the result is looking very close in this ward and accuracy is of paramount concern’. Few would probably have noticed, were it not for Tower Hamlets holding up the rest of London announcing its results for the European elections."

    http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2014/05/tower-hamlets-londons-rotten-borough/

    The the poll is very close, yet the turnout was twice what it was last time, in a borough with a history of voting fraud. For God's sake...
  • Options
    AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    My cunning plan was to visit Brazil a couple of months after the World Cup, when hopefully there'll be a lot of five star hotel rooms available for very reasonable prices.
  • Options
    TCPoliticalBettingTCPoliticalBetting Posts: 10,819
    edited May 2014
    jayfdee said:

    ToryJim said:

    ToryJim said:

    @SkyNewsBreak: Vince cable reveals Lord Oakeshott commissioned poll on chances of Nick #Clegg losing Commons seat and calls actions "totally inexcusable"

    Yellow on Yellow incoming. Most interesting indeed, as Cable distances himself from his friend.
    This squabbling will do far more harm than a quick mercy killing of Clegg.
    If tis to be done tis best done quickly.
    Yes the Squabbling is probably unstoppable now.
    From the LDV members survey today.
    Clegg is now a dead man walking.
    "48% of party members dissatisfied with their leader’s performance."
    http://www.libdemvoice.org/exclusive-poll-54-of-lib-dem-members-want-nick-clegg-to-stay-as-leader-40408.html
  • Options
    SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    isam said:

    Sadiq Khan writes an open letter to UKIP supporters

    Reminds me of the scene in the Anthony Hopkins version of Mutiny on the Bounty, when he tries to make a deal to avoid being thrown overboard, causing Fletcher Christian to scream in exasperation

    "WHY ARE YOU BEING SO DAMNED REASONABLE NOW?"

    "Take immigration. In the past, we were too quick to dismiss concerns about immigration, or even worse - accused people of prejudice.

    We all remember Gillian Duffy. We were wrong. We are sorry."

    http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/478076/We-were-wrong-we-are-sorry-Senior-Labour-MP-Sadiq-Khan-pens-open-letter-to-Ukip-voters

    It's one thing to say you were wrong, or you're sorry, or that you understand people's concerns, but words are just words. If they want anyone to believe them, they need to tell us WHAT ARE THEY GOING TO DO ABOUT IT?

    I'm still waiting for a promise to actually reduce immigration from Labour. Because so far the silence is deafening.
  • Options
    wumperwumper Posts: 35
    Rod Crosby, i now know where you are coming from when you cannot have the common decency of addressing Miliband by his correct name but descend into the gutter with your obvious bias.
    You cannot ignore the fact that the Tories are polling badly because of incompetence. When you compare their woeful economic policies to the last government there is no contest although you must be one of those indoctrinated in the mantra "it is all Labour's fault" but i am afraid the facts (not lies) do not stack up to your beliefs.
    Do yourself a favour and do a little bit of research and the truth will become enlightening to you.
  • Options
    kierankieran Posts: 77
    Quick comment on the ICM poll of Sheffield Hallam. Some people have been making the point that they directly contradict the local election results.

    Interestingly though they asked a specific local election voting intention question which resulted in:

    LD 32 Lab 26 Con 18

    That means they underestimated the LDs by 6, overestimated Lab by 2 and overestimated Con by 8 (although I understand they did not put up a candidate in every ward making comparisons difficult).

    Their GE poll result was Lab 33 Con 24 LD 23.

    If their GE poll was out in the same way as their LE poll it would read Lab 31 LD 29 Con 16.

    Of course the ultimate sample was only 269 so all of this is ridiculously speculative.

    Clegg is obviously favourite to hold on here but this poll definitely indicates that it *could* be a closer run thing than everyone thought.
  • Options
    Bond_James_BondBond_James_Bond Posts: 1,939
    OK so I reckon based on Rod's musings, my own perceptive insights into the blazers, and as tweaked by Baxter, the 2015GE result will be:

    CON 39%, 329 seats
    LAB 31%, 263 seats
    LIB 17%, 30 seats
    UKIP 5.50%, 0 seats
    SNIT 2.26% 9 seats
    MIN 0.89%, 19 seats

    which feels oddly plausible.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 92,772

    jayfdee said:

    ToryJim said:

    ToryJim said:

    @SkyNewsBreak: Vince cable reveals Lord Oakeshott commissioned poll on chances of Nick #Clegg losing Commons seat and calls actions "totally inexcusable"

    Yellow on Yellow incoming. Most interesting indeed, as Cable distances himself from his friend.
    This squabbling will do far more harm than a quick mercy killing of Clegg.
    If tis to be done tis best done quickly.
    Yes the Squabbling is probably unstoppable now.
    From the LDV members survey today.
    Clegg is now a dead man walking.
    "48% of party members dissatisfied with their leader’s performance."
    http://www.libdemvoice.org/exclusive-poll-54-of-lib-dem-members-want-nick-clegg-to-stay-as-leader-40408.html
    He's been a political zombie for awhile, now has just been the first time there will be no further chances for Clegg to show the decline has been addressed, or even reduced, so it's time for the knives to come out. If enough senior figures speak in his support publicly, when he makes the decision 'voluntarily' no-one need feel like they were too nasty or that a civil war is needed.
  • Options
    AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited May 2014
    In the local elections in Sheffield Hallam the Tories didn't contest 2 of the 5 wards, seemingly to make things easier for the LDs. It worked in one of the wards, but in the other Labour won anyway.
  • Options
    SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    taffys said:

    '''42% of children in Kensington and Chelsea are from low income families. Kensington and Chelsea.'''

    I'd have thought that even run down estates are under huge pressure from developers and the upwardly mobile, given where prices are.

    You often see old tower blocks taking on a chrysalis of scaffolding, only to emerge private flats.

    I accept they may be beginning to happen now, but even then, does that mean we're not importing poverty? The local councils still have to house them somewhere. Just because London starts exporting them to Luton or Slough or wherever doesn't make it a bad policy.
  • Options
    NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,384
    SeanT said:

    OFF topic. Do we have any Brazilian travel experts?

    I've just been offered a travel gig to go see Rio de Janeiro then the Pantanal. Trouble is it's in about a week, so it disrupts stuff.

    Is the Pantanal as amazing as they say? Worth the disruption? Or is it just a bunch of oversized guinea pigs in a puddle?

    I've heard Rio is definitely over-rated.

    I'm no kind of Brazilian expert, but didn't feel Rio was anything special from the viewpoint of interacting with people - like London, it's full of people busily minding their own business, and indifferent to the tourists winding their way amongst them looking for that festive spirit. Obviously carnival time is different.

    Personally I liked Lima best of the half dozen Latin cities I visited - poor but colourful, busy but (amazingly) polite, serious but friendly.

  • Options
    TCPoliticalBettingTCPoliticalBetting Posts: 10,819
    edited May 2014

    Time for Clegg to act tough and expel Oakeshott from the Lib Dems........

    You want Clegg the man who was err... tough on Rennard and err... tough on Hancock to mete out a tough punishment on Oakshott?

    Truly a victory of hope over experience.
  • Options
    SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    wumper said:

    Rod Crosby, i now know where you are coming from when you cannot have the common decency of addressing Miliband by his correct name but descend into the gutter with your obvious bias.
    You cannot ignore the fact that the Tories are polling badly because of incompetence. When you compare their woeful economic policies to the last government there is no contest although you must be one of those indoctrinated in the mantra "it is all Labour's fault" but i am afraid the facts (not lies) do not stack up to your beliefs.
    Do yourself a favour and do a little bit of research and the truth will become enlightening to you.

    Appalling astroturfing. 2/10.
  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 24,012
    edited May 2014
    wumper said:

    Rod Crosby, i now know where you are coming from when you cannot have the common decency of addressing Miliband by his correct name but descend into the gutter with your obvious bias.
    You cannot ignore the fact that the Tories are polling badly because of incompetence. When you compare their woeful economic policies to the last government there is no contest although you must be one of those indoctrinated in the mantra "it is all Labour's fault" but i am afraid the facts (not lies) do not stack up to your beliefs.
    Do yourself a favour and do a little bit of research and the truth will become enlightening to you.

    You might like to debate this with the author, he's on thread atm.

    http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/seanthomas/100240679/exclusive-labour-1997-2010-was-the-worst-government-ever-and-this-is-why/

    I'll get some cider.
  • Options
    dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,291

    Photo? Photos.

    The one of Eck kicking the ball is really 'special'.
    Eck practices his goose step.
  • Options
    Bond_James_BondBond_James_Bond Posts: 1,939
    edited May 2014
    isam said:

    corporeal said:

    isam said:

    corporeal said:

    The poll by Ashcroft is UKIP surging on back of Euros victory, will recede. Betting tip: Sell high on UKIP if the prices move much.

    Thats been a surefire way of losing money in the last year or so.

    Ever heard of a rebase?
    At 17%? And Greens on 7%?

    Not at that level.

    And UKIP actually finished at the lower end of their polling range at the Euros.

    Yes but the betting markets arent under or over 17% are they?

    You have to add on 1% to UKIPs EU score for AIFE

    People have been saying what you just said for the last year

    A year ago UKIP to poll less than 10% was 1/6 with Ladbrokes, now it is 11/10

    UKIP to win a seat at the GE was 5/2 now its 4/6

    UKIP to outpoll the Cons in the EUros was 11/10 a year ago, it was 1/7 last week

    There is no argument in betting terms that UKIP opposing has been a route to the poorhouse in the last 12 months


    No you don't. I voted AIFE to take the piss and it seems to have worked, because it cost nasty Nige a seat in the south west. Nige's mask then slipped and he told Guido he wanted to close down the electoral commission.

    Result! And I won't be voting for any of the JPF, PFJ, PPFJ or CfaFG in 2015. And not just because they're splitters.
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 41,118

    isam said:

    corporeal said:

    isam said:

    corporeal said:

    The poll by Ashcroft is UKIP surging on back of Euros victory, will recede. Betting tip: Sell high on UKIP if the prices move much.

    Thats been a surefire way of losing money in the last year or so.

    Ever heard of a rebase?
    At 17%? And Greens on 7%?

    Not at that level.

    And UKIP actually finished at the lower end of their polling range at the Euros.

    Yes but the betting markets arent under or over 17% are they?

    You have to add on 1% to UKIPs EU score for AIFE

    People have been saying what you just said for the last year

    A year ago UKIP to poll less than 10% was 1/6 with Ladbrokes, now it is 11/10

    UKIP to win a seat at the GE was 5/2 now its 4/6

    UKIP to outpoll the Cons in the EUros was 11/10 a year ago, it was 1/7 last week

    There is no argument in betting terms that UKIP opposing has been a route to the poorhouse in the last 12 months


    No you don't. I voted AIFE to take the piss and it seems to have worked, because it cost nasty Nige a seat in the south west. Nige's mask then slipped and he told Guido he wanted to close down the electoral commission.

    Result! And I won't be voting for any of the JPF, PFJ, PPFJ or CfaFG in 2015. And not just because they're splitters.
    Oh well, we won!
  • Options
    oxfordsimonoxfordsimon Posts: 5,832
    wumper said:

    Rod Crosby, i now know where you are coming from when you cannot have the common decency of addressing Miliband by his correct name but descend into the gutter with your obvious bias.
    You cannot ignore the fact that the Tories are polling badly because of incompetence. When you compare their woeful economic policies to the last government there is no contest although you must be one of those indoctrinated in the mantra "it is all Labour's fault" but i am afraid the facts (not lies) do not stack up to your beliefs.
    Do yourself a favour and do a little bit of research and the truth will become enlightening to you.

    Really? Oh dear. Please do try harder to keep up... with reality.

    Yes people come on here to have a bit of fun as well as some detailed discussions. But setting up a profile for this? *shakes head*
  • Options
    GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 21,080
    wumper said:

    Rod Crosby, i now know where you are coming from when you cannot have the common decency of addressing Miliband by his correct name but descend into the gutter with your obvious bias.
    You cannot ignore the fact that the Tories are polling badly because of incompetence. When you compare their woeful economic policies to the last government there is no contest although you must be one of those indoctrinated in the mantra "it is all Labour's fault" but i am afraid the facts (not lies) do not stack up to your beliefs.
    Do yourself a favour and do a little bit of research and the truth will become enlightening to you.

    Is this another parody post?
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 92,772
    edited May 2014
    ToryJim said:

    @LBC: Ken Livingstone tells @IainDale that the Labour leadership should invite Lutfur Rahmann back into the party. #TowerHamlets

    I loathe Livingstone and this makes me loathe him more

    I suppose to Livingstone if someone is a winner, that is all that matters?
  • Options
    EastwingerEastwinger Posts: 351
    wumper said:

    Rod Crosby, i now know where you are coming from when you cannot have the common decency of addressing Miliband by his correct name but descend into the gutter with your obvious bias.
    You cannot ignore the fact that the Tories are polling badly because of incompetence. When you compare their woeful economic policies to the last government there is no contest although you must be one of those indoctrinated in the mantra "it is all Labour's fault" but i am afraid the facts (not lies) do not stack up to your beliefs.
    Do yourself a favour and do a little bit of research and the truth will become enlightening to you.

    This is so obviously a spoof.
  • Options
    AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    First hand account of the goings on at the Tower Hamlets count:

    http://vote-2012.proboards.com/post/164587/thread
  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    I love the way that Kippers seek simply to co-opt the votes cast for another party by assuming that their voters were stupid Kippers.

    Though that does beg the question of just how stupid you have to be to not even get to Kipper level.
  • Options
    wumperwumper Posts: 35
    Rod Crosby, if that is the best reply you can muster up then you had better go back to the drawing board and try again.
    The good Lord only knows why you were invited to post such a pathetic column in the first place
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 41,118
    edited May 2014
    antifrank said:

    I love the way that Kippers seek simply to co-opt the votes cast for another party by assuming that their voters were stupid Kippers.

    Though that does beg the question of just how stupid you have to be to not even get to Kipper level.

    Wasnt that what OGH banged on about for about a month before the election? I dont remember you pulling him up on it?

    If I thought they were all accidental votes, I would have said add on 1.5%
  • Options
    RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737
    wumper said:

    Rod Crosby, i now know where you are coming from when you cannot have the common decency of addressing Miliband by his correct name but descend into the gutter with your obvious bias.

    Bias?

    For four years, 2006-2010 (obviously before you were born), I endured near daily bombardment here, accused of being a Labour shill, when I resolutely predicted a hung parliament and no chance of a Tory majority.

    So it's all water off a duck's back for me...
  • Options
    ToryJimToryJim Posts: 3,670
    kle4 said:

    ToryJim said:

    @LBC: Ken Livingstone tells @IainDale that the Labour leadership should invite Lutfur Rahmann back into the party. #TowerHamlets

    I loathe Livingstone and this makes me loathe him more

    I suppose to Livingstone if someone is a winner, that is all that matters?
    Hmm.
  • Options
    anotherDaveanotherDave Posts: 6,746
    Re: number of UKIP target seats.
    Writing in the Express, Patrick O'Flynn says:
    "But now we face an even bigger challenge; to get Ukip MPs into the House of Commons next year in good numbers so we can make sure that whoever is in government you finally get that referendum on EU membership."

    http://www.express.co.uk/comment/expresscomment/478364/Patrick-O-Flynn-talks-his-decision-to-stand-for-Ukip
  • Options
    GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 21,080
    I hear Vince has disowned Lord Oakeshott - Any chance the Lib's will kick him out?
  • Options
    EastwingerEastwinger Posts: 351
    wumper said:

    Rod Crosby, if that is the best reply you can muster up then you had better go back to the drawing board and try again.
    The good Lord only knows why you were invited to post such a pathetic column in the first place

    Perhaps you'd like to bet against Rod's predictions. Many thought he was wrong last time and said so in no uncertain terms. They ended up with egg on their faces.

    Listen to Rod, you might learn something and also win some money.
This discussion has been closed.