A CON election majority down to a 36% chance in the betting – politicalbetting.com
A CON election majority down to a 36% chance in the betting – politicalbetting.com
We have not looked at this betting chart for some time but clearly the chances of Johnson getting a second successive majority have taken a hit in recent months and are now at their lowest point since March. There is a similar pattern in the Johnson exit date betting.
Comments
-
I think it was @CorrectHorseBattery who called Hartlepool as Peak Boris. Quite right it appears.2
-
Oh, and first too !!!!0
-
Nope. It was I.Taz said:I think it was @CorrectHorseBattery who called Hartlepool as Peak Boris. Quite right it appears.
2 -
That Labour majority figure is way too high - I really can't see how it occurs without a complete Tory collapse.
For that 16% to make sense the chance of a Tory majority needs to be about 10% not 36%.0 -
Personally I would guess as follows
Tory majority, 70%
No overall majority, 20%
Labour majority, 10%2 -
That Labour majority is starting to tempt me... but it's probably just heart over head nonsense.
In other news, the financial times unearthed this gem of a political study from 2009: https://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/59819
Key line "we find that serving in office almost doubled the wealth of Conservative MPs, but had no discernible financial benefits for Labour MPs."
1 -
I have no idea about GE24 but I doubt a labour majority is likely
I expect this to be used quite a bit
https://twitter.com/Keir_Starmer/status/657539020533145600?t=XiTEb_nxdvrX5IXcSgGyaA&s=190 -
Labour has 203 seats - to have a majority they need something like 322 (assuming Sinn Fein don't send MPs).rkrkrk said:That Labour majority is starting to tempt me... but it's probably just heart over head nonsense.
In other news, the financial times unearthed this gem of a political study from 2009: https://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/59819
Key line "we find that serving in office almost doubled the wealth of Conservative MPs, but had no discernible financial benefits for Labour MPs."
Where are those 119 seats, given Labours issues in Scotland (which previously sent 50+ labour MPs into Parliament) they just don't exist.1 -
A Tory majority may be unlikely on current polling, the Tories are still likely to win most seats however.
This is not 1992-1997. I also cannot see any other Tory leader doing any better than Boris apart from maybe Sunak but while he might have more appeal than Boris in London and the South and Scotland I don't think he would have the same appeal Boris has in the Redwall.1 -
It would need Labour to recover quite dramatically in Scotlandeek said:That Labour majority figure is way too high - I really can't see how it occurs without a complete Tory collapse.
For that 16% to make sense the chance of a Tory majority needs to be about 10% not 36%.0 -
Austria will enter a fourth nationwide lockdown from Monday for twenty days, and impose compulsory vaccination from February, as a surge in #coronavirus cases threatens to overwhelm hospitals (via Bloomberg)
https://twitter.com/darrenmccaffrey/status/1461628726777683972?s=200 -
Nope because it's incredibly easily explained - the work at Euston has already began so at least if all of it is built it won't be a complete waste of effort.Big_G_NorthWales said:I have no idea about GE24 but I doubt a labour majority is likely
I expect this to be used quite a bit
https://twitter.com/Keir_Starmer/status/657539020533145600?t=XiTEb_nxdvrX5IXcSgGyaA&s=190 -
When you are having to explain you are losingeek said:
Nope because it's incredibly easily explained - the work at Euston has already began so at least if all of it is built it won't be a complete waste of effort.Big_G_NorthWales said:I have no idea about GE24 but I doubt a labour majority is likely
I expect this to be used quite a bit
https://twitter.com/Keir_Starmer/status/657539020533145600?t=XiTEb_nxdvrX5IXcSgGyaA&s=19
1 -
Oh I think you would be very surprised there - Sunak is still seen as a champion of the people (from furlough and other schemes) in a way Boris isn't.HYUFD said:A Tory majority may be unlikely on current polling, the Tories are still likely to win most seats however.
This is not 1992-1997. I also cannot see any other Tory leader doing any better than Boris apart from maybe Sunak but while he might have more appeal than Boris in London and the South and Scotland I don't think he would have the same appeal Boris has in the Redwall.1 -
Tory majority 50%Gardenwalker said:Personally I would guess as follows
Tory majority, 70%
No overall majority, 20%
Labour majority, 10%
NOM 50%
Labour majority 0%
No Scotland, no Labour majority.1 -
Sorry, I misremembered. Fair play.IshmaelZ said:
Nope. It was I.Taz said:I think it was @CorrectHorseBattery who called Hartlepool as Peak Boris. Quite right it appears.
0 -
Fantastic value on Tory majority. A major over-reaction to the news.
My predictions would be
Increased Tory majority 20%
Smaller Tory majority 55%
NOM 20%
Labour majority 5%4 -
For once, I think that's a very fair attack on Starmer.eek said:
Nope because it's incredibly easily explained - the work at Euston has already began so at least if all of it is built it won't be a complete waste of effort.Big_G_NorthWales said:I have no idea about GE24 but I doubt a labour majority is likely
I expect this to be used quite a bit
https://twitter.com/Keir_Starmer/status/657539020533145600?t=XiTEb_nxdvrX5IXcSgGyaA&s=19
Interesting thought, how much will this subject feature in the next election. Not very much is my prediction.0 -
I’d put the chances of a Labour majority at the next election as high as Alex Hales receiving an England recall.
It would require both a Tory and SNP implosion. Can’t see both happening.
I reckon NOM is misunderestimated.2 -
FPT
BREAK: 🇦🇹Austria will enter a fourth nationwide lockdown from Monday for twenty days, and impose compulsory vaccination from February, as a surge in #coronavirus cases threatens to overwhelm hospitals (via Bloomberg)
https://twitter.com/darrenmccaffrey/status/1461628726777683972
Forget about the lockdown, what about the compulsory vaccinations? That is quite some step! How are they going to force people?0 -
I can't see an increased Tory Majority (yes Farage cost Boris seats but there will be losses) but a smaller Tory majority (ala 92) has to be the likely outcomePhilip_Thompson said:Fantastic value on Tory majority. A major over-reaction to the news.
My predictions would be
Increased Tory majority 20%
Smaller Tory majority 55%
NOM 20%
Labour majority 5%1 -
I am amused with David Herdson using the term 'populist' as a term of abuse.
Do you know what it means ?
It means when someone does something which is popular with 'people like them' instead of 'people like me'.
The 'people like them' and 'people like me' varying from individual to individual.2 -
So that lockdown for the unvaccinated didn't last very long, did it?AlistairM said:FPT
BREAK: 🇦🇹Austria will enter a fourth nationwide lockdown from Monday for twenty days, and impose compulsory vaccination from February, as a surge in #coronavirus cases threatens to overwhelm hospitals (via Bloomberg)
https://twitter.com/darrenmccaffrey/status/1461628726777683972
Forget about the lockdown, what about the compulsory vaccinations? That is quite some step! How are they going to force people?
Presumably they'll be stopping people in the street to check their credentials and arresting the unjabbed.0 -
I wouldn't go that far. I think there's much less chance of NOM and more chance of a Labour majority than zero.Mexicanpete said:
Tory majority 50%Gardenwalker said:Personally I would guess as follows
Tory majority, 70%
No overall majority, 20%
Labour majority, 10%
NOM 50%
Labour majority 0%
No Scotland, no Labour majority.
I think there's a 3/4 chance of a Tory majority, but the reason I think that if there isn't a Tory majority there's a 1/5 chance of there being a Labour majority is that for the Tories to lose their majority requires such a substantial swing that if such a swing is happening there must be a chance of it swinging even further to the point that Labour majority is suddenly back in contention.1 -
🇦🇹 The most extraordinary bit of the Austrian announcement - First country in the world to effectively make vaccinations compulsory?AlistairM said:FPT
BREAK: 🇦🇹Austria will enter a fourth nationwide lockdown from Monday for twenty days, and impose compulsory vaccination from February, as a surge in #coronavirus cases threatens to overwhelm hospitals (via Bloomberg)
https://twitter.com/darrenmccaffrey/status/1461628726777683972
Forget about the lockdown, what about the compulsory vaccinations? That is quite some step! How are they going to force people?
From Feb 1 next year all Austrians will be obliged to have both jabs. Those who refuse could face heavy fines
65% of Austrians are fully jabbed
I’m sure this will be challenged in court - maybe even the European Court of Justice…
Would compulsory vaccination be against EU law?
https://twitter.com/darrenmccaffrey/status/14616302810944225310 -
Populist at school and university was explained as politicians who try and say complex issues have simple/easy answers when they really don’t.another_richard said:I am amused with David Herdson using the term 'populist' as a term of abuse.
Do you know what it means ?
It means when someone does something which is popular with 'people like them' instead of 'people like me'.
The 'people like them' and 'people like me' varying from individual to individual.1 -
I can't see a Labour majority without SKS getting a lot more punchy and incisive as leader. I listened to him on Today this morning. I think he's improving a bit but he still answers too many questions like a lawyer not a leader.
In the absence of an obviously vastly superior alternative I think replacing him now would do more harm than good, but if he's not PM after the next GE I would replace him ASAP.
So that 16% looks a bit high to me, although I guess it's just the fat tail when you've got someone erratic like Johnson in charge of the Tories - they could completely implode and at that point SKS's dullness may not even matter. He's not unelectable, and even Corbyn, who was, almost got elected!0 -
Is he? Especially as he starts to tighten spending I am not sure that will be so much the case.eek said:
Oh I think you would be very surprised there - Sunak is still seen as a champion of the people (from furlough and other schemes) in a way Boris isn't.HYUFD said:A Tory majority may be unlikely on current polling, the Tories are still likely to win most seats however.
This is not 1992-1997. I also cannot see any other Tory leader doing any better than Boris apart from maybe Sunak but while he might have more appeal than Boris in London and the South and Scotland I don't think he would have the same appeal Boris has in the Redwall.
According to the latest Redfield and Wilton 35% of voters think Boris would be a better PM than Sunak, including 55% of 2019 Conservative voters who think that, to only 33% who think Sunak would be better. Sunak does beat Boris 40% to 21% with 2019 Labour voters and 53% to 17% with 2019 LD voters but barely any of them will vote Tory anyway next time whoever leads the Tories.
Boris also leads Starmer as best PM by 9%, Sunak only leads Starmer as best PM by 5%
https://redfieldandwiltonstrategies.com/latest-gb-voting-intention-15-november-2021/0 -
FPT - the posts on use of casual racism when young - when I was about 8-10 it was normal at school to refer to anything related to being tight fisted as "being' a jew". The P word was also just used to describe people from anywhere east of Calais except if they were a c***k or a w**. 100% of my junior school was white British. When a jewish kid started at the school and was excused morning assembly and prayers I discovered jews were a people, it wasn't just a word to describe someone being tight-fisted. A bit like when I called my mum a t*at thinking it meant 'idiot - fool-stupid' (which on reflection was bad enough).
The other racial epithets I used at the time were not intentionally racist, they were just the terms everyone used that I knew and I never thought about it - but at the same time it didn't mean we thought people from outside the village weren't inferior, they obviously were as they weren't "English" (ie like everyone else we knew). For people under 50 it might be hard to imagine a country where everybody looked the same and being 'mediterranean' was exotic but that's how it was for me.
Now, I am married to a jewish woman from Odessa, live abroad (from a UK perspective - it's home to me and England is now slowly starting to feel foreign) and spend a lot of time being the strange foreigner (outside Copenhagen there aren't many British people in Denmark).
Do I regret or feel apologetic about being a young boy in an England that now only exists in my memory?- I suppose I do, but not sure why - my intent was never bad but I certainly beleived some undoubtedly racist things at the time. But I grew, found out more about the world and over time realised there are c*nts of all creeds and colours and political leanings. I just ry these days not to be one, but am sure I fail in that for some people.9 -
Increased Tory majority as we speak is wishful thinking, although that could change (very, very unlikely I would say).Philip_Thompson said:Fantastic value on Tory majority. A major over-reaction to the news.
My predictions would be
Increased Tory majority 20%
Smaller Tory majority 55%
NOM 20%
Labour majority 5%
And your Labour majority figure is 5% too high.0 -
I suspect it’ll be part of a wider narrative about Boris Johnson not delivering on his promises.tlg86 said:
For once, I think that's a very fair attack on Starmer.eek said:
Nope because it's incredibly easily explained - the work at Euston has already began so at least if all of it is built it won't be a complete waste of effort.Big_G_NorthWales said:I have no idea about GE24 but I doubt a labour majority is likely
I expect this to be used quite a bit
https://twitter.com/Keir_Starmer/status/657539020533145600?t=XiTEb_nxdvrX5IXcSgGyaA&s=19
Interesting thought, how much will this subject feature in the next election. Not very much is my prediction.1 -
I actually drafted before the Budget a proposed thread header I was going to email into TSE for the site on why I think an increased Tory majority is possible and looking at odds and betting markets for that.eek said:
I can't see an increased Tory Majority (yes Farage cost Boris seats but there will be losses) but a smaller Tory majority (ala 92) has to be the likely outcomePhilip_Thompson said:Fantastic value on Tory majority. A major over-reaction to the news.
My predictions would be
Increased Tory majority 20%
Smaller Tory majority 55%
NOM 20%
Labour majority 5%
I feel silly sending it in right now during this maelstrom though so was waiting for it to blow over.1 -
teek said:
Labour has 203 seats - to have a majority they need something like 322 (assuming Sinn Fein don't send MPs).rkrkrk said:That Labour majority is starting to tempt me... but it's probably just heart over head nonsense.
In other news, the financial times unearthed this gem of a political study from 2009: https://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/59819
Key line "we find that serving in office almost doubled the wealth of Conservative MPs, but had no discernible financial benefits for Labour MPs."
Where are those 119 seats, given Labours issues in Scotland (which previously sent 50+ labour MPs into Parliament) they just don't exist.
To win without inroads in Scotland, Labour maybe need to be outpolling the Tories by >10 points.
They're obviously not doing that now, but it is possible come the next general election.
A lot depends on how the SNP fare in Scotland certainly. I don't claim any great knowledge of Scottish politics, but the SNP looks less united than it was in 2019, and given Labour only won 1 seat last time, it feels like hopefully there is room to improve!0 -
Odds are not just about "as we speak" though they're about what could happen. As we speak then a reduced Tory majority would be the only real game in town, but over three years things can change.Mexicanpete said:
Increased Tory majority as we speak is wishful thinking, although that could change (very, very unlikely I would say).Philip_Thompson said:Fantastic value on Tory majority. A major over-reaction to the news.
My predictions would be
Increased Tory majority 20%
Smaller Tory majority 55%
NOM 20%
Labour majority 5%
And your Labour majority figure is 5% too high.0 -
Have to admire Labour’s social media game.
A fellow Sheffield resident notes on her Facebook she’s seen an ad saying Boris Johnson is happy to give tens of billions to his mates for crap PPE and Test & Trace but not a few billions to help improve Yorkshire’s transport.1 -
Now is the perfect time to do it. Weren't you the one who tipped Rishi Sunak at 250/1?Philip_Thompson said:
I actually drafted before the Budget a proposed thread header I was going to email into TSE for the site on why I think an increased Tory majority is possible and looking at odds and betting markets for that.eek said:
I can't see an increased Tory Majority (yes Farage cost Boris seats but there will be losses) but a smaller Tory majority (ala 92) has to be the likely outcomePhilip_Thompson said:Fantastic value on Tory majority. A major over-reaction to the news.
My predictions would be
Increased Tory majority 20%
Smaller Tory majority 55%
NOM 20%
Labour majority 5%
I feel silly sending it in right now during this maelstrom though so was waiting for it to blow over.1 -
Send it in if you think it's good. It's helpful to have the current zeitgeist challenged.Philip_Thompson said:
I actually drafted before the Budget a proposed thread header I was going to email into TSE for the site on why I think an increased Tory majority is possible and looking at odds and betting markets for that.eek said:
I can't see an increased Tory Majority (yes Farage cost Boris seats but there will be losses) but a smaller Tory majority (ala 92) has to be the likely outcomePhilip_Thompson said:Fantastic value on Tory majority. A major over-reaction to the news.
My predictions would be
Increased Tory majority 20%
Smaller Tory majority 55%
NOM 20%
Labour majority 5%
I feel silly sending it in right now during this maelstrom though so was waiting for it to blow over.3 -
Trouble ahead on that one. Could be serious civil disturbance.AlistairM said:
🇦🇹 The most extraordinary bit of the Austrian announcement - First country in the world to effectively make vaccinations compulsory?AlistairM said:FPT
BREAK: 🇦🇹Austria will enter a fourth nationwide lockdown from Monday for twenty days, and impose compulsory vaccination from February, as a surge in #coronavirus cases threatens to overwhelm hospitals (via Bloomberg)
https://twitter.com/darrenmccaffrey/status/1461628726777683972
Forget about the lockdown, what about the compulsory vaccinations? That is quite some step! How are they going to force people?
From Feb 1 next year all Austrians will be obliged to have both jabs. Those who refuse could face heavy fines
65% of Austrians are fully jabbed
I’m sure this will be challenged in court - maybe even the European Court of Justice…
Would compulsory vaccination be against EU law?
https://twitter.com/darrenmccaffrey/status/14616302810944225310 -
Heart over head?Philip_Thompson said:Fantastic value on Tory majority. A major over-reaction to the news.
My predictions would be
Increased Tory majority 20%
Smaller Tory majority 55%
NOM 20%
Labour majority 5%2 -
Of course it is. Which is why the market is fluctuating for a Tory majority after the last two weeks.Philip_Thompson said:
Odds are not just about "as we speak" though they're about what could happen. As we speak then a reduced Tory majority would be the only real game in town, but over three years things can change.Mexicanpete said:
Increased Tory majority as we speak is wishful thinking, although that could change (very, very unlikely I would say).Philip_Thompson said:Fantastic value on Tory majority. A major over-reaction to the news.
My predictions would be
Increased Tory majority 20%
Smaller Tory majority 55%
NOM 20%
Labour majority 5%
And your Labour majority figure is 5% too high.
My Labour 0% is based on fact. And fact that is unlikely to change. The current direction of travel for the Tories is down, which is why your prediction of a Tory increased majority appears counter intuitive. When things change. Boris invents another vaccine, or Sunak replaces Johnson, maybe you wishful prediction will be borne out by the odds.0 -
You mean what every political party does ?Farooq said:
That's not how some people use the word. Some people take it to mean whipping up fury amongst the people against (perceived) elites in order for you to gain politically. E.g. "metropolitan elites", "coastal elites", "Jewish bankers", "luvvies", "big pharma", etc.another_richard said:I am amused with David Herdson using the term 'populist' as a term of abuse.
Do you know what it means ?
It means when someone does something which is popular with 'people like them' instead of 'people like me'.
The 'people like them' and 'people like me' varying from individual to individual.
The only differences being which people they are trying to appeal to and which 'elites' they are trying to whip up fury against.0 -
I'd suggest that isn't a good plan. I get that an opposition has to keep its powder dry on the specifics of what they'll do, but it is vital that they don't count on the government losing the next election.TheScreamingEagles said:
I suspect it’ll be part of a wider narrative about Boris Johnson not delivering on his promises.tlg86 said:
For once, I think that's a very fair attack on Starmer.eek said:
Nope because it's incredibly easily explained - the work at Euston has already began so at least if all of it is built it won't be a complete waste of effort.Big_G_NorthWales said:I have no idea about GE24 but I doubt a labour majority is likely
I expect this to be used quite a bit
https://twitter.com/Keir_Starmer/status/657539020533145600?t=XiTEb_nxdvrX5IXcSgGyaA&s=19
Interesting thought, how much will this subject feature in the next election. Not very much is my prediction.0 -
The Immortal Post of May 7Taz said:
Sorry, I misremembered. Fair play.IshmaelZ said:
Nope. It was I.Taz said:I think it was @CorrectHorseBattery who called Hartlepool as Peak Boris. Quite right it appears.
"I still think we are round about peak Johnson. Wallpapergate still has the potential to turn into a lying to the house, breaching ministerial code, resigning sort of issue. Cummings still has things to say on the 26th. SKS looks vulnerable where Johnson wants him securely in place. Vaccine gratitude wears off. A high peak is still a peak."
Wrong in every detail, right taken as a whole.3 -
By the way, @TheScreamingEagles - how are Liverpool fans tolerating this nonsense:
https://www.liverpoolfc.com/fans/fan-experience/getting-to-anfield/stadium-checklist
Make sure you allow enough time for any necessary security checks which may include random searches. Small personal bags are permitted - please ensure your bags are no larger than A5 and only one bag per person is allowed. It is advised you only bring a bag if it is absolutely essential, please see our checklist of what can/cannot be brought in to the stadium here.
Arsenal tried to do something similar at the start of the season (you could only use a clear bag purchased from the Arsenal shop for £1), but thankfully enough fans kicked off that they reverted to allowing reasonable sized rucksacks in.0 -
Report on a Polish builder in London:
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2021/nov/18/im-fully-booked-but-cant-take-on-jobs-a-builder-on-life-without-eu-workers
He laments he cannot now 'get a cousin over for a few months' and has had to raise wages.
Also wonders why young people don't want to work in construction.
Perhaps because for over a decade wages were suppressed by people getting a cousin over for a few months.
6 -
In Los Angeles, there is effectively compulsory vaccinations for those aged 12 to 17. Simply: you cannot attend a Los Angeles Unified School district school if you are unvaccinated.AlistairM said:FPT
BREAK: 🇦🇹Austria will enter a fourth nationwide lockdown from Monday for twenty days, and impose compulsory vaccination from February, as a surge in #coronavirus cases threatens to overwhelm hospitals (via Bloomberg)
https://twitter.com/darrenmccaffrey/status/1461628726777683972
Forget about the lockdown, what about the compulsory vaccinations? That is quite some step! How are they going to force people?
You also cannot go to sporting events or into restaurants or bars without a vaccination certificate.
It's a de facto ban on the unvaccinated.
But it's still not as draconian as what is proposed in Austria.0 -
For political purposes Labour need to win about 119 seats for a majority. For betting purposes it needs to win (net) 122/3 - to be at 325/6.eek said:
Labour has 203 seats - to have a majority they need something like 322 (assuming Sinn Fein don't send MPs).rkrkrk said:That Labour majority is starting to tempt me... but it's probably just heart over head nonsense.
In other news, the financial times unearthed this gem of a political study from 2009: https://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/59819
Key line "we find that serving in office almost doubled the wealth of Conservative MPs, but had no discernible financial benefits for Labour MPs."
Where are those 119 seats, given Labours issues in Scotland (which previously sent 50+ labour MPs into Parliament) they just don't exist.
This requires a Black Swan. About 26 of their top 150 targets are held by the SNP. Among their top 150 targets (statistically) are seats they will never win - Hexham for example, or Rushcliffe, or Macclesfield. All their top 150 are held by Tories or SNP.
Their Black Swan requires the following:
SNP to lose ground to Labour
The Tories to lose more or less the entire red wall
The Tories to lose seats to Labour they have never lost in modern times, including in the south - such as Basingstoke.
While Labour leading the next government is easy - it's about a 50% chance - actually winning remains out of sight for now.
0 -
Not happy, the fan groups have been liaising with the club. There kick offs for a couple of pre season friendlies were delayed because the system couldn’t cope.tlg86 said:By the way, @TheScreamingEagles - how are Liverpool fans tolerating this nonsense:
https://www.liverpoolfc.com/fans/fan-experience/getting-to-anfield/stadium-checklist
Make sure you allow enough time for any necessary security checks which may include random searches. Small personal bags are permitted - please ensure your bags are no larger than A5 and only one bag per person is allowed. It is advised you only bring a bag if it is absolutely essential, please see our checklist of what can/cannot be brought in to the stadium here.
Arsenal tried to do something similar at the start of the season (you could only use a clear bag purchased from the Arsenal shop for £1), but thankfully enough fans kicked off that they reverted to allowing reasonable sized rucksacks in.
The club have offered £2 pints and cheaper food to allow the fans to get to the ground earlier.
But the teething problems aren’t as bad as they were in July/August.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/liverpool-kick-off-delayed-breaking-21258992.amp0 -
An increased Tory majority may be counterintuitive but counterintuitive things can happen and identifying which ones can happen and why is how we identify value.Mexicanpete said:
Of course it is. Which is why the market is fluctuating for a Tory majority after the last two weeks.Philip_Thompson said:
Odds are not just about "as we speak" though they're about what could happen. As we speak then a reduced Tory majority would be the only real game in town, but over three years things can change.Mexicanpete said:
Increased Tory majority as we speak is wishful thinking, although that could change (very, very unlikely I would say).Philip_Thompson said:Fantastic value on Tory majority. A major over-reaction to the news.
My predictions would be
Increased Tory majority 20%
Smaller Tory majority 55%
NOM 20%
Labour majority 5%
And your Labour majority figure is 5% too high.
My Labour 0% is based on fact. And fact that is unlikely to change. The current direction of travel for the Tories is down, which is why your prediction of a Tory increased majority appears counter intuitive. When things change. Boris invents another vaccine, or Sunak replaces Johnson, maybe you wishful prediction will be borne out by the odds.
Labour 0% is not fact. 0% means its impossible and never say never.
With a 1997-style swing (unlikely but possible) then Labour could gain a majority via English and Welsh seats, while picking up a handful of Scottish ones. Is that likely? No. Is it possible? Yes - and if its possible its not 0%
Overturning the Tory majority is going to take such a large swing that an overshoot into Labour majority is possible.0 -
Interesting take on the Tory train set chaos by Mr Bush of the Staggers in his morning email:
"It’s true to say that what links the Conservative electoral coalition, from the wealthy pensioner who owns outright in Surrey to the young family in Derby with a Help to Buy mortgage to the retiree in social housing Hartlepool is that they are beneficiaries from the era of ultra-low interest rates and low inflation. It is also true to say that they are also, in many ways, voters who benefit in economic stagnation rather than necessarily higher growth which might mean higher inflation and therefore an end to the age of low rates.
But if you have to start, for whatever reason, eating into that coalition, be it because of inflation or because you are raising taxes, then things get gnarlier, both for households and the government. And one way to get out of that if you don’t want to go back into the single market or the customs union is to increase the economic performance of our core cities. There almost certainly isn’t a direct political cost to not doing HS2 and there probably never will be. But an indirect one? Quite possibly."0 -
Interesting that Liverpool have persisted with the policy. Arsenal folded after a couple of games! I only looked up Liverpool's policy, because I got this email from Arsenal yesterday:TheScreamingEagles said:
Not happy, the fan groups have been liaising with the club. There kick offs for a couple of pre season friendlies were delayed because the system couldn’t cope.tlg86 said:By the way, @TheScreamingEagles - how are Liverpool fans tolerating this nonsense:
https://www.liverpoolfc.com/fans/fan-experience/getting-to-anfield/stadium-checklist
Make sure you allow enough time for any necessary security checks which may include random searches. Small personal bags are permitted - please ensure your bags are no larger than A5 and only one bag per person is allowed. It is advised you only bring a bag if it is absolutely essential, please see our checklist of what can/cannot be brought in to the stadium here.
Arsenal tried to do something similar at the start of the season (you could only use a clear bag purchased from the Arsenal shop for £1), but thankfully enough fans kicked off that they reverted to allowing reasonable sized rucksacks in.
The club have offered £2 pints and cheaper food to allow the fans to get to the ground earlier.
But the teething problems aren’t as bad as they were in July/August.
We have been advised by Liverpool FC that there will be a zero-bag policy enforced (with the exception of medical bags) for supporters entering the stadium on Saturday, November 20, 2021.
There will be no bag drop/storage facility at the stadium so please avoid bringing a bag with you as you will be refused entry.
Not a problem for me as I drive to away games outside of London, but it's not great that away fans are being discriminated against in this way.
0 -
Labour only needs a 5% swing to get a hung parliament and for Starmer to become PM with SNP support.Philip_Thompson said:
An increased Tory majority may be counterintuitive but counterintuitive things can happen and identifying which ones can happen and why is how we identify value.Mexicanpete said:
Of course it is. Which is why the market is fluctuating for a Tory majority after the last two weeks.Philip_Thompson said:
Odds are not just about "as we speak" though they're about what could happen. As we speak then a reduced Tory majority would be the only real game in town, but over three years things can change.Mexicanpete said:
Increased Tory majority as we speak is wishful thinking, although that could change (very, very unlikely I would say).Philip_Thompson said:Fantastic value on Tory majority. A major over-reaction to the news.
My predictions would be
Increased Tory majority 20%
Smaller Tory majority 55%
NOM 20%
Labour majority 5%
And your Labour majority figure is 5% too high.
My Labour 0% is based on fact. And fact that is unlikely to change. The current direction of travel for the Tories is down, which is why your prediction of a Tory increased majority appears counter intuitive. When things change. Boris invents another vaccine, or Sunak replaces Johnson, maybe you wishful prediction will be borne out by the odds.
Labour 0% is not fact. 0% means its impossible and never say never.
With a 1997-style swing (unlikely but possible) then Labour could gain a majority via English and Welsh seats, while picking up a handful of Scottish ones. Is that likely? No. Is it possible? Yes - and if its possible its not 0%
Overturning the Tory majority is going to take such a large swing that an overshoot into Labour majority is possible.
Labour need a 10% swing however ie double that, for a Labour overall majority of 1 without major Labour gains in Scotland0 -
It is counterintuitive because it is at best wishful thinking on your part and at worst a guess. You work on what I would call "The Daily Express Gambit", where your wild guesses that are against the head might occasionally turn out to be right. You no doubt keep very quiet about the wild guesses that are wrong, much like the Daily Express.Philip_Thompson said:
An increased Tory majority may be counterintuitive but counterintuitive things can happen and identifying which ones can happen and why is how we identify value.Mexicanpete said:
Of course it is. Which is why the market is fluctuating for a Tory majority after the last two weeks.Philip_Thompson said:
Odds are not just about "as we speak" though they're about what could happen. As we speak then a reduced Tory majority would be the only real game in town, but over three years things can change.Mexicanpete said:
Increased Tory majority as we speak is wishful thinking, although that could change (very, very unlikely I would say).Philip_Thompson said:Fantastic value on Tory majority. A major over-reaction to the news.
My predictions would be
Increased Tory majority 20%
Smaller Tory majority 55%
NOM 20%
Labour majority 5%
And your Labour majority figure is 5% too high.
My Labour 0% is based on fact. And fact that is unlikely to change. The current direction of travel for the Tories is down, which is why your prediction of a Tory increased majority appears counter intuitive. When things change. Boris invents another vaccine, or Sunak replaces Johnson, maybe you wishful prediction will be borne out by the odds.
Labour 0% is not fact. 0% means its impossible and never say never.
With a 1997-style swing (unlikely but possible) then Labour could gain a majority via English and Welsh seats, while picking up a handful of Scottish ones. Is that likely? No. Is it possible? Yes - and if its possible its not 0%
Overturning the Tory majority is going to take such a large swing that an overshoot into Labour majority is possible.0 -
Tory majority (326+) 46%TheScreamingEagles said:I’d put the chances of a Labour majority at the next election as high as Alex Hales receiving an England recall.
It would require both a Tory and SNP implosion. Can’t see both happening.
I reckon NOM is misunderestimated.
NOM (47%)
Labour majority (326+) 7%
Tory or Tory led NOM government 47%
Labour led NOM government; 46%
Labour government 7%.0 -
But those same people then extend its usage to mean anything they don't like on the grounds that if it is popular with the masses then it must automatically be suspect. Populism is the attack line used by elitist bigots who have always had their doubts about democracy and who would much prefer it if we just let then get on and run the country without all that nasty voting business. It is the attack line of the arrogant and out of touch.Farooq said:
That's not how some people use the word. Some people take it to mean whipping up fury amongst the people against (perceived) elites in order for you to gain politically. E.g. "metropolitan elites", "coastal elites", "Jewish bankers", "luvvies", "big pharma", etc.another_richard said:I am amused with David Herdson using the term 'populist' as a term of abuse.
Do you know what it means ?
It means when someone does something which is popular with 'people like them' instead of 'people like me'.
The 'people like them' and 'people like me' varying from individual to individual.2 -
Con Majority will, I think, prove to be an amazingly generous bet at 36%. There are enormous structural advantages for the Tories, and I believe Johnson remains an asset, particularly in an election campaign.
And then, as Austria enters another lockdown, I am able to look forward to visiting my daughter in Bath. If Covid transitions to becoming primarily a foreign news story this winter that will have an impact.0 -
https://order-order.com/2021/11/19/watch-starmers-train-crash-hs2-interview/
Starmer wanted the London terminus to be at Old Oak Common.
So he's even more of an idiot than those running the show now.0 -
Interesting reflections. I'd say my upbringing was similar - my primary school was pretty much totally white, with the brief exception of Garhong, whose parents ran the Chinese takeaway. I remember we were shown a video which in my memory was titled 'don't be racist', but probably wasn't: and I remember the general chortling at use of the word 'n****r' - which had been used as a term of abuse but I don't think any of us realised had any particular meaning: we just knew it was a vaguely rude word which sounded funny in the mouth so was one of the possibilities for hurling at each other. I also think it genuinely hadn't occurred to any of us to be racist before we watched it, partially because we had no-one to be racist to, but partly because, well, it just didn't occur to us.kingbongo said:FPT - the posts on use of casual racism when young - when I was about 8-10 it was normal at school to refer to anything related to being tight fisted as "being' a jew". The P word was also just used to describe people from anywhere east of Calais except if they were a c***k or a w**. 100% of my junior school was white British. When a jewish kid started at the school and was excused morning assembly and prayers I discovered jews were a people, it wasn't just a word to describe someone being tight-fisted. A bit like when I called my mum a t*at thinking it meant 'idiot - fool-stupid' (which on reflection was bad enough).
The other racial epithets I used at the time were not intentionally racist, they were just the terms everyone used that I knew and I never thought about it - but at the same time it didn't mean we thought people from outside the village weren't inferior, they obviously were as they weren't "English" (ie like everyone else we knew). For people under 50 it might be hard to imagine a country where everybody looked the same and being 'mediterranean' was exotic but that's how it was for me.
Now, I am married to a jewish woman from Odessa, live abroad (from a UK perspective - it's home to me and England is now slowly starting to feel foreign) and spend a lot of time being the strange foreigner (outside Copenhagen there aren't many British people in Denmark).
Do I regret or feel apologetic about being a young boy in an England that now only exists in my memory?- I suppose I do, but not sure why - my intent was never bad but I certainly beleived some undoubtedly racist things at the time. But I grew, found out more about the world and over time realised there are c*nts of all creeds and colours and political leanings. I just ry these days not to be one, but am sure I fail in that for some people.1 -
Julia Hartley-Brewer
@JuliaHB1
·
24m
BREAKING: Austria to go into full lockdown on Monday as Covid surges - and jabs to be COMPULSORY from Feb.
Are you still confident that it's all over and this could never happen here? Really? Are you *sure* about that?
It never ends until we say it does
===
Well, I'm certainly not totally confident it wont happen here. But remain reasonably optimistic. I think there's less chance of a lurch in that direction with Javid than Hancock at NHS.0 -
As I've said, I don't expect it to happen, but I think there's a 20% chance. A slim chance, but still a chance.Nigel_Foremain said:
It is counterintuitive because it is at best wishful thinking on your part and at worst a guess. You work on what I would call "The Daily Express Gambit", where your wild guesses that are against the head might occasionally turn out to be right. You no doubt keep very quiet about the wild guesses that are wrong, much like the Daily Express.Philip_Thompson said:
An increased Tory majority may be counterintuitive but counterintuitive things can happen and identifying which ones can happen and why is how we identify value.Mexicanpete said:
Of course it is. Which is why the market is fluctuating for a Tory majority after the last two weeks.Philip_Thompson said:
Odds are not just about "as we speak" though they're about what could happen. As we speak then a reduced Tory majority would be the only real game in town, but over three years things can change.Mexicanpete said:
Increased Tory majority as we speak is wishful thinking, although that could change (very, very unlikely I would say).Philip_Thompson said:Fantastic value on Tory majority. A major over-reaction to the news.
My predictions would be
Increased Tory majority 20%
Smaller Tory majority 55%
NOM 20%
Labour majority 5%
And your Labour majority figure is 5% too high.
My Labour 0% is based on fact. And fact that is unlikely to change. The current direction of travel for the Tories is down, which is why your prediction of a Tory increased majority appears counter intuitive. When things change. Boris invents another vaccine, or Sunak replaces Johnson, maybe you wishful prediction will be borne out by the odds.
Labour 0% is not fact. 0% means its impossible and never say never.
With a 1997-style swing (unlikely but possible) then Labour could gain a majority via English and Welsh seats, while picking up a handful of Scottish ones. Is that likely? No. Is it possible? Yes - and if its possible its not 0%
Overturning the Tory majority is going to take such a large swing that an overshoot into Labour majority is possible.
I've got logic for why I think it is a real possibility. I might submit my draft to TSE and see if he thinks its worth publishing.0 -
From thatTaz said:
"Azeem Rafiq, the Yorkshire offspinner, has been suspended from all cricket for one month and ordered to pay costs of £500 after being found guilty of two breaches of the ECB Directive following his foul-mouthed Twitter attack on the England Under-19 coach John Abraham.
Rafiq, who captained England to a 199-run defeat in the first Test against Sri Lanka U19s, reacted to his omission from the second match at Scarborough (which England won) by firing a scathing attack on Abraham via Twitter, which read: "What a f***ing farsee ... John Abrahams is a useless ****... ECB prove it again what incompetent people are working for them!!"
And he hadn't finished there when he added: "John Abrahams is a useless w****r.""
I guess a "farsee" is a misspelt "farce", and not some racial slur I've never heard?
If this was how the guy behaved when he'd made it into the England set up, was his lack of further progression primarily down to cricket's institutional racism or was it down to his own dickishness?0 -
It is worth noting that the Conservatives do also get the tailwind of new boundaries. So, an increased majority is far from impossible.Philip_Thompson said:
I actually drafted before the Budget a proposed thread header I was going to email into TSE for the site on why I think an increased Tory majority is possible and looking at odds and betting markets for that.eek said:
I can't see an increased Tory Majority (yes Farage cost Boris seats but there will be losses) but a smaller Tory majority (ala 92) has to be the likely outcomePhilip_Thompson said:Fantastic value on Tory majority. A major over-reaction to the news.
My predictions would be
Increased Tory majority 20%
Smaller Tory majority 55%
NOM 20%
Labour majority 5%
I feel silly sending it in right now during this maelstrom though so was waiting for it to blow over.1 -
The pressure for it shouldn't happen here as we've sensibly accepted the exit wave and got much of it done before the winter.rottenborough said:Julia Hartley-Brewer
@JuliaHB1
·
24m
BREAKING: Austria to go into full lockdown on Monday as Covid surges - and jabs to be COMPULSORY from Feb.
Are you still confident that it's all over and this could never happen here? Really? Are you *sure* about that?
It never ends until we say it does
===
Well, I'm certainly not totally confident it wont happen here. But remain reasonably optimistic. I think there's less chance of a lurch in that direction with Javid than Hancock at NHS.
I doubt the government meant it, but the sleaze and rail stories have actually been brilliant in diverting attention from COVID. Is this the longest we've gone without COVID being the main story in the UK?0 -
In my view, populism is a pejorative term because it essentially means doing things that cause a knee jerk populist response, i.e. headlines for the sake of headlines. Attack migrants, blame migrants, express dislike of foreigners etc. You could argue that in Blair's early days he fitted this model, but using different targets. Populism is not the same as doing what is popular. It therefore isn't the antithesis of elitism, because often the elites (Johnson being a prime example) use populism to keep themselves in power.Richard_Tyndall said:
But those same people then extend its usage to mean anything they don't like on the grounds that if it is popular with the masses then it must automatically be suspect. Populism is the attack line used by elitist bigots who have always had their doubts about democracy and who would much prefer it if we just let then get on and run the country without all that nasty voting business. It is the attack line of the arrogant and out of touch.Farooq said:
That's not how some people use the word. Some people take it to mean whipping up fury amongst the people against (perceived) elites in order for you to gain politically. E.g. "metropolitan elites", "coastal elites", "Jewish bankers", "luvvies", "big pharma", etc.another_richard said:I am amused with David Herdson using the term 'populist' as a term of abuse.
Do you know what it means ?
It means when someone does something which is popular with 'people like them' instead of 'people like me'.
The 'people like them' and 'people like me' varying from individual to individual.
Our system of democracy is/was representative, and therefore we delegate responsibility to politicians in the hope that they will investigate the issues and do what is right, not do what they hope will get a response from the public's baser instincts.0 -
The JK Rowling cancelling by HBO is interesting. Perhaps the PB lawyer club could mull this one: could it be possible to write a licence for rights such that if the original content creator is "cancelled" or banned from events that build entirely around those content rights, then the rights licence immediately lapses and returns to the writer?
0 -
60% - Tory majority
40% - NOM
0% - Labour majority
IMO0 -
Precisely. That is indeed part of my logic.rcs1000 said:
It is worth noting that the Conservatives do also get the tailwind of new boundaries. So, an increased majority is far from impossible.Philip_Thompson said:
I actually drafted before the Budget a proposed thread header I was going to email into TSE for the site on why I think an increased Tory majority is possible and looking at odds and betting markets for that.eek said:
I can't see an increased Tory Majority (yes Farage cost Boris seats but there will be losses) but a smaller Tory majority (ala 92) has to be the likely outcomePhilip_Thompson said:Fantastic value on Tory majority. A major over-reaction to the news.
My predictions would be
Increased Tory majority 20%
Smaller Tory majority 55%
NOM 20%
Labour majority 5%
I feel silly sending it in right now during this maelstrom though so was waiting for it to blow over.
Those who don't think about things like that aren't being more clever by being so dismissive. There are multiple Rumsfeldian known knowns and known unknowns in play that we can factor into our thinking, even if there are unknown unknowns we need to be wary of.0 -
…tlg86 said:
https://order-order.com/2021/11/19/watch-starmers-train-crash-hs2-interview/
Starmer wanted the London terminus to be at Old Oak Common.
So he's even more of an idiot than those running the show now.
“Dwo Dickets for Dottingham” - give the man a Tune!
He said he was Labour leader in 2018 there - I knew 2019 was his fault!!!0 -
Led up the garden path. Looks like he never got over thisBlancheLivermore said:
From thatTaz said:
"Azeem Rafiq, the Yorkshire offspinner, has been suspended from all cricket for one month and ordered to pay costs of £500 after being found guilty of two breaches of the ECB Directive following his foul-mouthed Twitter attack on the England Under-19 coach John Abraham.
Rafiq, who captained England to a 199-run defeat in the first Test against Sri Lanka U19s, reacted to his omission from the second match at Scarborough (which England won) by firing a scathing attack on Abraham via Twitter, which read: "What a f***ing farsee ... John Abrahams is a useless ****... ECB prove it again what incompetent people are working for them!!"
And he hadn't finished there when he added: "John Abrahams is a useless w****r.""
I guess a "farsee" is a misspelt "farce", and not some racial slur I've never heard?
If this was how the guy behaved when he'd made it into the England set up, was his lack of further progression primarily down to cricket's institutional racism or was it down to his own dickishness?
“Rafiq’s county, Yorkshire, had already suspended the player indefinitely for his outburst, with Stewart Regan, the chief executive, stating: "Azeem's behaviour was totally unacceptable and the club will not tolerate it. Our professional players are role models to aspiring young cricketers and need to behave as such."0 -
Not sure this in the script
Cons +1
Labour -1
https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1461640353166077957?t=tRjLJl5zpB5Nj5PBHnxiSw&s=190 -
Good point. Case #s now way down the BBC News running order.tlg86 said:
The pressure for it shouldn't happen here as we've sensibly accepted the exit wave and got much of it done before the winter.rottenborough said:Julia Hartley-Brewer
@JuliaHB1
·
24m
BREAKING: Austria to go into full lockdown on Monday as Covid surges - and jabs to be COMPULSORY from Feb.
Are you still confident that it's all over and this could never happen here? Really? Are you *sure* about that?
It never ends until we say it does
===
Well, I'm certainly not totally confident it wont happen here. But remain reasonably optimistic. I think there's less chance of a lurch in that direction with Javid than Hancock at NHS.
I doubt the government meant it, but the sleaze and rail stories have actually been brilliant in diverting attention from COVID. Is this the longest we've gone without COVID being the main story in the UK?
0 -
Possibly the best chance of that is if they ditch Johnson, so perhaps you are right. Fair play to you, it is a fair answer.Philip_Thompson said:
As I've said, I don't expect it to happen, but I think there's a 20% chance. A slim chance, but still a chance.Nigel_Foremain said:
It is counterintuitive because it is at best wishful thinking on your part and at worst a guess. You work on what I would call "The Daily Express Gambit", where your wild guesses that are against the head might occasionally turn out to be right. You no doubt keep very quiet about the wild guesses that are wrong, much like the Daily Express.Philip_Thompson said:
An increased Tory majority may be counterintuitive but counterintuitive things can happen and identifying which ones can happen and why is how we identify value.Mexicanpete said:
Of course it is. Which is why the market is fluctuating for a Tory majority after the last two weeks.Philip_Thompson said:
Odds are not just about "as we speak" though they're about what could happen. As we speak then a reduced Tory majority would be the only real game in town, but over three years things can change.Mexicanpete said:
Increased Tory majority as we speak is wishful thinking, although that could change (very, very unlikely I would say).Philip_Thompson said:Fantastic value on Tory majority. A major over-reaction to the news.
My predictions would be
Increased Tory majority 20%
Smaller Tory majority 55%
NOM 20%
Labour majority 5%
And your Labour majority figure is 5% too high.
My Labour 0% is based on fact. And fact that is unlikely to change. The current direction of travel for the Tories is down, which is why your prediction of a Tory increased majority appears counter intuitive. When things change. Boris invents another vaccine, or Sunak replaces Johnson, maybe you wishful prediction will be borne out by the odds.
Labour 0% is not fact. 0% means its impossible and never say never.
With a 1997-style swing (unlikely but possible) then Labour could gain a majority via English and Welsh seats, while picking up a handful of Scottish ones. Is that likely? No. Is it possible? Yes - and if its possible its not 0%
Overturning the Tory majority is going to take such a large swing that an overshoot into Labour majority is possible.
I've got logic for why I think it is a real possibility. I might submit my draft to TSE and see if he thinks its worth publishing.0 -
That sounds fair but there are a few things to factor in. Johnson's performance is deteriorating fast. I saw him in his hard hat by a railway yesterday with his crooked smirk not answering the questions he was being asked. He behaved like a ten year old child. He looked like a Pierrot clown giving his last performance. It was both pitiful and patheticGardenwalker said:Personally I would guess as follows
Tory majority, 70%
No overall majority, 20%
Labour majority, 10%
Starmer by contrast can only get better. He's got a long way to go and there's plenty to work on. He particularly needs some decent writers to sharpen up his act but there are plenty of them out there and I'll be surprised if we aren't looking at a very different Starmer in six months time.
The main thing is that he looks and sounds honest. Johnson to me looks finished1 -
Electoral calculus gives Tories 320, Labour 249 on the new boundaries on that new Yougov poll.Big_G_NorthWales said:Not sure this in the script
Cons +1
Labour -1
https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1461640353166077957?t=tRjLJl5zpB5Nj5PBHnxiSw&s=19
So Boris could stay PM with DUP support
https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/fcgi-bin/usercode.py?scotcontrol=Y&CON=36&LAB=34&LIB=7&Reform=5&Green=10&UKIP=&TVCON=&TVLAB=&TVLIB=&TVReform=&TVGreen=&TVUKIP=&SCOTCON=22.3&SCOTLAB=18.3&SCOTLIB=6.3&SCOTReform=0.7&SCOTGreen=0.7&SCOTUKIP=&SCOTNAT=48.3&display=AllChanged&regorseat=(none)&boundary=2019nbbase0 -
Its certainly possible to write a licence that states if no media is published within a certain time period that the licence lapses and returns to the author.rottenborough said:The JK Rowling cancelling by HBO is interesting. Perhaps the PB lawyer club could mull this one: could it be possible to write a licence for rights such that if the original content creator is "cancelled" or banned from events that build entirely around those content rights, then the rights licence immediately lapses and returns to the writer?
Robert Jordan had such a condition on his Wheel of Time series. The licence was sold to a rather dodgy firm (that he regretted until he died) and they didn't get anywhere on dealing with it so in a rather dickish move they released a "pilot" for a first episode in the dead of night on the day of the deadline. The "pilot" was truly awful apparently but it was only done in order to prevent the licence from lapsing.0 -
Don't feel silly - an increased majority is absolutely possible. Where we may disagree is why and how that can happen. I think Boris is a liability who needs to be replaced if the Tories want that to happen.Philip_Thompson said:
I actually drafted before the Budget a proposed thread header I was going to email into TSE for the site on why I think an increased Tory majority is possible and looking at odds and betting markets for that.eek said:
I can't see an increased Tory Majority (yes Farage cost Boris seats but there will be losses) but a smaller Tory majority (ala 92) has to be the likely outcomePhilip_Thompson said:Fantastic value on Tory majority. A major over-reaction to the news.
My predictions would be
Increased Tory majority 20%
Smaller Tory majority 55%
NOM 20%
Labour majority 5%
I feel silly sending it in right now during this maelstrom though so was waiting for it to blow over.
Bin him off, make a public sweep of the worst of the corruption, ping money parcels at the right people and the right places and they can do it. Or, keep him and see their turnout drop enough to throw scores of seats over to Labour / LibDem / SNP.1 -
On the day I received my first vaccine, there had been 20 million first doses. On the day I received my second, there had been 20 million second doses.
But… on the day I received my third vaccine (this week), there had been just 13 million third doses.
If top up vaccines turn out to be a necessary tool in preventing further restrictions then that stat isn’t immediately promising.
1 -
So you're saying that none of the allegations against YCCC are true?isam said:
Led up the garden path. Looks like he never got over thisBlancheLivermore said:
From thatTaz said:
"Azeem Rafiq, the Yorkshire offspinner, has been suspended from all cricket for one month and ordered to pay costs of £500 after being found guilty of two breaches of the ECB Directive following his foul-mouthed Twitter attack on the England Under-19 coach John Abraham.
Rafiq, who captained England to a 199-run defeat in the first Test against Sri Lanka U19s, reacted to his omission from the second match at Scarborough (which England won) by firing a scathing attack on Abraham via Twitter, which read: "What a f***ing farsee ... John Abrahams is a useless ****... ECB prove it again what incompetent people are working for them!!"
And he hadn't finished there when he added: "John Abrahams is a useless w****r.""
I guess a "farsee" is a misspelt "farce", and not some racial slur I've never heard?
If this was how the guy behaved when he'd made it into the England set up, was his lack of further progression primarily down to cricket's institutional racism or was it down to his own dickishness?
“Rafiq’s county, Yorkshire, had already suspended the player indefinitely for his outburst, with Stewart Regan, the chief executive, stating: "Azeem's behaviour was totally unacceptable and the club will not tolerate it. Our professional players are role models to aspiring young cricketers and need to behave as such."0 -
Pharsi/Farsee in Punjabi means the Persian/Iranian language.BlancheLivermore said:
From thatTaz said:
"Azeem Rafiq, the Yorkshire offspinner, has been suspended from all cricket for one month and ordered to pay costs of £500 after being found guilty of two breaches of the ECB Directive following his foul-mouthed Twitter attack on the England Under-19 coach John Abraham.
Rafiq, who captained England to a 199-run defeat in the first Test against Sri Lanka U19s, reacted to his omission from the second match at Scarborough (which England won) by firing a scathing attack on Abraham via Twitter, which read: "What a f***ing farsee ... John Abrahams is a useless ****... ECB prove it again what incompetent people are working for them!!"
And he hadn't finished there when he added: "John Abrahams is a useless w****r.""
I guess a "farsee" is a misspelt "farce", and not some racial slur I've never heard?
If this was how the guy behaved when he'd made it into the England set up, was his lack of further progression primarily down to cricket's institutional racism or was it down to his own dickishness?0 -
That is actually factored in as a possibility, yes.Nigel_Foremain said:
Possibly the best chance of that is if they ditch Johnson, so perhaps you are right. Fair play to you, it is a fair answer.Philip_Thompson said:
As I've said, I don't expect it to happen, but I think there's a 20% chance. A slim chance, but still a chance.Nigel_Foremain said:
It is counterintuitive because it is at best wishful thinking on your part and at worst a guess. You work on what I would call "The Daily Express Gambit", where your wild guesses that are against the head might occasionally turn out to be right. You no doubt keep very quiet about the wild guesses that are wrong, much like the Daily Express.Philip_Thompson said:
An increased Tory majority may be counterintuitive but counterintuitive things can happen and identifying which ones can happen and why is how we identify value.Mexicanpete said:
Of course it is. Which is why the market is fluctuating for a Tory majority after the last two weeks.Philip_Thompson said:
Odds are not just about "as we speak" though they're about what could happen. As we speak then a reduced Tory majority would be the only real game in town, but over three years things can change.Mexicanpete said:
Increased Tory majority as we speak is wishful thinking, although that could change (very, very unlikely I would say).Philip_Thompson said:Fantastic value on Tory majority. A major over-reaction to the news.
My predictions would be
Increased Tory majority 20%
Smaller Tory majority 55%
NOM 20%
Labour majority 5%
And your Labour majority figure is 5% too high.
My Labour 0% is based on fact. And fact that is unlikely to change. The current direction of travel for the Tories is down, which is why your prediction of a Tory increased majority appears counter intuitive. When things change. Boris invents another vaccine, or Sunak replaces Johnson, maybe you wishful prediction will be borne out by the odds.
Labour 0% is not fact. 0% means its impossible and never say never.
With a 1997-style swing (unlikely but possible) then Labour could gain a majority via English and Welsh seats, while picking up a handful of Scottish ones. Is that likely? No. Is it possible? Yes - and if its possible its not 0%
Overturning the Tory majority is going to take such a large swing that an overshoot into Labour majority is possible.
I've got logic for why I think it is a real possibility. I might submit my draft to TSE and see if he thinks its worth publishing.0 -
From that poll.Big_G_NorthWales said:Not sure this in the script
Cons +1
Labour -1
https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1461640353166077957?t=tRjLJl5zpB5Nj5PBHnxiSw&s=19
Which of the following do you think would make the best Prime Minister? (17-18 Nov)
Keir Starmer: 30% (+1 from 10-11 Nov)
Boris Johnson: 28% (+1)
Not sure: 37%0 -
Apparently beacuse he is now Leader of the Labour Party anything he believed and fought for before the date he was elected Leader is now irrelevant and he can now have completely opposable views to the ones he had a couple of years ago because he can attack the Government with these new views.tlg86 said:https://order-order.com/2021/11/19/watch-starmers-train-crash-hs2-interview/
Starmer wanted the London terminus to be at Old Oak Common.
So he's even more of an idiot than those running the show now.1 -
As per reply to Morris on previous thread where I put that originally..TheScreamingEagles said:
Pharsi/Farsee in Punjabi means the Persian/Iranian language.BlancheLivermore said:
From thatTaz said:
"Azeem Rafiq, the Yorkshire offspinner, has been suspended from all cricket for one month and ordered to pay costs of £500 after being found guilty of two breaches of the ECB Directive following his foul-mouthed Twitter attack on the England Under-19 coach John Abraham.
Rafiq, who captained England to a 199-run defeat in the first Test against Sri Lanka U19s, reacted to his omission from the second match at Scarborough (which England won) by firing a scathing attack on Abraham via Twitter, which read: "What a f***ing farsee ... John Abrahams is a useless ****... ECB prove it again what incompetent people are working for them!!"
And he hadn't finished there when he added: "John Abrahams is a useless w****r.""
I guess a "farsee" is a misspelt "farce", and not some racial slur I've never heard?
If this was how the guy behaved when he'd made it into the England set up, was his lack of further progression primarily down to cricket's institutional racism or was it down to his own dickishness?
I thought that, and that the Zoroastrian Persian Mumbai community are the Parsis which is from the same source, but couldn't imagine how it could be linked to John Abraham of England U19s..
There's a Bollywood actor called John Abraham whose mother is a Keralan Parsi, but it can't be that!0 -
Labour's problem remains Scotland. They simply can't win enough seats south of the wall to win a majority without it being a landslide win for them. I know those happen now and then but its not an obvious play to sit and wait to win swathes of leafy England again.Farooq said:
I don't agree with this at all. It's hardly a black swan when it happened 16 years ago, and 20 years ago, and 24 years ago.algarkirk said:
For political purposes Labour need to win about 119 seats for a majority. For betting purposes it needs to win (net) 122/3 - to be at 325/6.eek said:
Labour has 203 seats - to have a majority they need something like 322 (assuming Sinn Fein don't send MPs).rkrkrk said:That Labour majority is starting to tempt me... but it's probably just heart over head nonsense.
In other news, the financial times unearthed this gem of a political study from 2009: https://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/59819
Key line "we find that serving in office almost doubled the wealth of Conservative MPs, but had no discernible financial benefits for Labour MPs."
Where are those 119 seats, given Labours issues in Scotland (which previously sent 50+ labour MPs into Parliament) they just don't exist.
This requires a Black Swan. About 26 of their top 150 targets are held by the SNP. Among their top 150 targets (statistically) are seats they will never win - Hexham for example, or Rushcliffe, or Macclesfield. All their top 150 are held by Tories or SNP.
Their Black Swan requires the following:
SNP to lose ground to Labour
The Tories to lose more or less the entire red wall
The Tories to lose seats to Labour they have never lost in modern times, including in the south - such as Basingstoke.
While Labour leading the next government is easy - it's about a 50% chance - actually winning remains out of sight for now.
Fortunes change very quickly in politics, and it's very easy to imagine events that could precipitate such a changeover. Remember, Labour got where they are today. It's hardly beyond the realm of imagination to think the Conservatives can land themselves in a similar situation. A couple of white swans is easily enough to tip the electoral see-saw the other way.
They need Scotland. And I cannot see how they get it back, at least not yet. All political parties falter eventually, but I don't see how the SNP landslide reverses bigly within the next 2 years.1 -
Looks like it is nailed on for Mr/Ms N SureTheScreamingEagles said:
From that poll.Big_G_NorthWales said:Not sure this in the script
Cons +1
Labour -1
https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1461640353166077957?t=tRjLJl5zpB5Nj5PBHnxiSw&s=19
Which of the following do you think would make the best Prime Minister? (17-18 Nov)
Keir Starmer: 30% (+1 from 10-11 Nov)
Boris Johnson: 28% (+1)
Not sure: 37%0 -
One wonders whether the next PM may come from outside the current Cabinet. Hunt I know is the obvious such candidate. But what about a Tugendhat? Or is there a young buck waiting in the wings? Or a grey beard outside of Cabinet I’ve forgotten about?RochdalePioneers said:
Don't feel silly - an increased majority is absolutely possible. Where we may disagree is why and how that can happen. I think Boris is a liability who needs to be replaced if the Tories want that to happen.Philip_Thompson said:
I actually drafted before the Budget a proposed thread header I was going to email into TSE for the site on why I think an increased Tory majority is possible and looking at odds and betting markets for that.eek said:
I can't see an increased Tory Majority (yes Farage cost Boris seats but there will be losses) but a smaller Tory majority (ala 92) has to be the likely outcomePhilip_Thompson said:Fantastic value on Tory majority. A major over-reaction to the news.
My predictions would be
Increased Tory majority 20%
Smaller Tory majority 55%
NOM 20%
Labour majority 5%
I feel silly sending it in right now during this maelstrom though so was waiting for it to blow over.
Bin him off, make a public sweep of the worst of the corruption, ping money parcels at the right people and the right places and they can do it. Or, keep him and see their turnout drop enough to throw scores of seats over to Labour / LibDem / SNP.0 -
Thanks. So licence lapse is a thing.Philip_Thompson said:
Its certainly possible to write a licence that states if no media is published within a certain time period that the licence lapses and returns to the author.rottenborough said:The JK Rowling cancelling by HBO is interesting. Perhaps the PB lawyer club could mull this one: could it be possible to write a licence for rights such that if the original content creator is "cancelled" or banned from events that build entirely around those content rights, then the rights licence immediately lapses and returns to the writer?
Robert Jordan had such a condition on his Wheel of Time series. The licence was sold to a rather dodgy firm (that he regretted until he died) and they didn't get anywhere on dealing with it so in a rather dickish move they released a "pilot" for a first episode in the dead of night on the day of the deadline. The "pilot" was truly awful apparently but it was only done in order to prevent the licence from lapsing.
I was thinking along the lines of authors building self-defence from cancelling culture into future contracts. i.e. if I get cancelled by any organization that uses my contents rights then they immediate lapse back to me.
I guess legally one would need a strong definition of "cancelled". I suspect not being invited to the 20th anniversary celebration of the thing you created would count.0 -
"I find it hard to envisage a significant Tory recovery under the current leadership."
It's this which is the killer blow for the tories currently. It's nothing to do with Boris Johnson's morality: most of us are only too aware that he isn't fit to be Prime Minister, isn't fit to lead his party, and cannot organise a piss up in brewery.
In short, he doesn't have the capacity to lead his party to another victory. In peaceful meandering times he'd probably have got away with it for two or even three terms. With everything which has gone on he's been exposed in two or three years.
The Conservative Party has a straightforward choice. Soldier on with Bojo and lose the next General Election, which they will, and leave power under another 1997-type pall that will take them two decades to recover from.
Or ditch the clown and at least have a chance. But doing that will also risk internecine warfare of the type which rarely plays out well with the electorate.
1 -
Yet you seem strangely unbothered that the government has promised something 60 times and then changed its mind. Will we get a series of posts criticising them as well?NerysHughes said:
Apparently beacuse he is now Leader of the Labour Party anything he believed and fought for before the date he was elected Leader is now irrelevant and he can now have completely opposable views to the ones he had a couple of years ago because he can attack the Government with these new views.tlg86 said:https://order-order.com/2021/11/19/watch-starmers-train-crash-hs2-interview/
Starmer wanted the London terminus to be at Old Oak Common.
So he's even more of an idiot than those running the show now.1 -
That wasn't my argument.NerysHughes said:
Apparently beacuse he is now Leader of the Labour Party anything he believed and fought for before the date he was elected Leader is now irrelevant and he can now have completely opposable views to the ones he had a couple of years ago because he can attack the Government with these new views.tlg86 said:https://order-order.com/2021/11/19/watch-starmers-train-crash-hs2-interview/
Starmer wanted the London terminus to be at Old Oak Common.
So he's even more of an idiot than those running the show now.
HS2 in already being built - so given that you may as well get on with it and build it properly.
Your argument really, doesn't work when Camden is (as Leon has pointed out on here before) already an HS2 building site...0 -
Had a good week this week, things definitely looking brighter8
-
Boris' Tories have rather more piles of dung to explain away.Big_G_NorthWales said:
When you are having to explain you are losingeek said:
Nope because it's incredibly easily explained - the work at Euston has already began so at least if all of it is built it won't be a complete waste of effort.Big_G_NorthWales said:I have no idea about GE24 but I doubt a labour majority is likely
I expect this to be used quite a bit
https://twitter.com/Keir_Starmer/status/657539020533145600?t=XiTEb_nxdvrX5IXcSgGyaA&s=190 -
Interesting. Starmer would now make the best Prime Minister 30/28. Voters are showing imagination. That has to be bad news for JohnsonBig_G_NorthWales said:Not sure this in the script
Cons +1
Labour -1
https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1461640353166077957?t=tRjLJl5zpB5Nj5PBHnxiSw&s=190 -
Good to hear that, take careCorrectHorseBattery said:Had a good week this week, things definitely looking brighter
1 -
Maybe I'll write my own and we'll see if we have the same reasoning.Philip_Thompson said:
I actually drafted before the Budget a proposed thread header I was going to email into TSE for the site on why I think an increased Tory majority is possible and looking at odds and betting markets for that.eek said:
I can't see an increased Tory Majority (yes Farage cost Boris seats but there will be losses) but a smaller Tory majority (ala 92) has to be the likely outcomePhilip_Thompson said:Fantastic value on Tory majority. A major over-reaction to the news.
My predictions would be
Increased Tory majority 20%
Smaller Tory majority 55%
NOM 20%
Labour majority 5%
I feel silly sending it in right now during this maelstrom though so was waiting for it to blow over.
Tory splits over recent missteps by Johnson are currently to the fore, but I don't think more fundamental splits within Labour have gone away.1 -
That would be a good result for the Conservatives, obviously depending whom it is. The less they are connected to the dishonesty and laziness of the Johnson brand the better.moonshine said:
One wonders whether the next PM may come from outside the current Cabinet. Hunt I know is the obvious such candidate. But what about a Tugendhat? Or is there a young buck waiting in the wings? Or a grey beard outside of Cabinet I’ve forgotten about?RochdalePioneers said:
Don't feel silly - an increased majority is absolutely possible. Where we may disagree is why and how that can happen. I think Boris is a liability who needs to be replaced if the Tories want that to happen.Philip_Thompson said:
I actually drafted before the Budget a proposed thread header I was going to email into TSE for the site on why I think an increased Tory majority is possible and looking at odds and betting markets for that.eek said:
I can't see an increased Tory Majority (yes Farage cost Boris seats but there will be losses) but a smaller Tory majority (ala 92) has to be the likely outcomePhilip_Thompson said:Fantastic value on Tory majority. A major over-reaction to the news.
My predictions would be
Increased Tory majority 20%
Smaller Tory majority 55%
NOM 20%
Labour majority 5%
I feel silly sending it in right now during this maelstrom though so was waiting for it to blow over.
Bin him off, make a public sweep of the worst of the corruption, ping money parcels at the right people and the right places and they can do it. Or, keep him and see their turnout drop enough to throw scores of seats over to Labour / LibDem / SNP.0 -
But I think the Tories should go for him on OOC. I know the public can really only handle quite simple ideas, but I think the idea of terminating it six miles from the centre of London should be fairly obvious to the public what an idiot Starmer is.eek said:
That wasn't my argument.NerysHughes said:
Apparently beacuse he is now Leader of the Labour Party anything he believed and fought for before the date he was elected Leader is now irrelevant and he can now have completely opposable views to the ones he had a couple of years ago because he can attack the Government with these new views.tlg86 said:https://order-order.com/2021/11/19/watch-starmers-train-crash-hs2-interview/
Starmer wanted the London terminus to be at Old Oak Common.
So he's even more of an idiot than those running the show now.
HS2 in already being built - so given that you may as well get on with it and build it properly.
Your argument really, doesn't work when Camden is (as Leon has pointed out on here before) already an HS2 building site...0 -
Chuckle. You might not like Boris Johnson. But you’re getting into amateur fiction territory to explain how you think Starmer will get a +100 seat 1997 style majority.Heathener said:"I find it hard to envisage a significant Tory recovery under the current leadership."
It's this which is the killer blow for the tories currently. It's nothing to do with Boris Johnson's morality: most of us are only too aware that he isn't fit to be Prime Minister, isn't fit to lead his party, and cannot organise a piss up in brewery.
In short, he doesn't have the capacity to lead his party to another victory. In peaceful meandering times he'd probably have got away with it for two or even three terms. With everything which has gone on he's been exposed in two or three years.
The Conservative Party has a straightforward choice. Soldier on with Bojo and lose the next General Election, which they will, and leave power under another 1997-type pall that will take them two decades to recover from.
Or ditch the clown and at least have a chance. But doing that will also risk internecine warfare of the type which rarely plays out well with the electorate.2 -
"@patrickkmaguire
Not much meaningful change in this week's YouGov poll for The Times – Tories regain a negligible lead
CON 36 (+1)
LAB 34 (-1)
LIB DEM 7 (-1)
GREEN 10 (nc)
REF UK 5 (+1)
CON 2019 now Labour: 4 per cent
CON 2019 now undecided: 17 per cent (-5 on last week)"
https://twitter.com/patrickkmaguire/status/14616109889695457301
