politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Ipsos Mori issues index for September is out

TheWatcher said:

isam said:

Scott_P said:

@patrickwintour: Air strikes sanctioned 524 v 43

I doubt Alan Henning will be alive this time tomorrow

You don't think they've already murdered all the captives in one go, and release the footage one by one?

I really wouldn't know

Putting my PB one upmanship wally hat on, that wouldn't make any difference to what I said, but that would be a prickish thing to say....

His wife received audio of him begging for his life to be spared, earlier this week, but I suppose that could have been old as well though

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/alan-henning-kidnapping-family-receives-audio-file-of-hostage-pleading-for-his-life-9751914.html

If he isn't dead already, his chances of survival just took a massive hit anyway. Same for Cantlie

volcanopete said:

I thought Ukip weren't part of The Establishment or the Political Class they keep banging on about but it seems they are.Nigel says is policy.So if Nigel says Douglas Carswell will not be his successor,that's policy in the world of this new kind of politics that's led by bankers and is very totalitarian and authoritarian.More perhaps a kind of monarchy with Nigel as king.Bow to the great King Nigel,peasants.Trust me,I'm a banker.

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/09/26/nigel-farage-ukip-leadership_n_5888710.html?utm_hp_ref=uk-politics&ir=UK+Politics

And of course Farage said nothing of the kind. He simply said he didn't think it would happen and it was more likely his successor would be a woman.

But please don't let simple things like facts get in the way of your little rant.

SimonStClare said:

Government wins Iraq vote by 524 to 43 - a majority of 481.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2014/sep/26/mps-debate-and-vote-on-air-strikes-against-islamic-state-politics-live-blog?CMP=twt_gu

How depressing.

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. 56, good to hear.

Mr. 565, I'd rather get blown up than star in a jihadist propaganda video getting my head cut off by a maniac. [Of course, I'd prefer neither happening, but in a forced choice that'd be my answer].

Hmm, when you put it like that Mr Dancer, I think I'd agree with you.

Based on what we do know about IS, - there's no diplomatic solution with barbarous fanatics.

Itajai said:

Scott_P said:

@PickardJE: Labour MP Rushanara Ali has resigned from the party's front bench in order to vote against military action in Iraq.

The Labourite Warsi. Wonder if she was promoted on merit too?

Pathetic

Think it was on PB I first heard the phrase "This time it will be different" mocked...

Oh well, the heir to Blair is true his word

What does every Muslim terrorist give as his reasons for killing innocent British people again?

Mr. Isam, the capture and beheading of the previous British captive preceded military action.

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Cameron really is the heir to Blair!

He certainly is, Cap'n Doc. He has just got us involved in another war for which there is no plan, no victory conditions, no end point, no exit strategy.

@felix

'Another touchy lefty comment about ed's speech? Accept it was crap and move on.'

Did you see Andrew Rawnsley taking the piss last night on This Week?

Labour rebels..
Diane Abbott Graham Allen Anne Begg Ronnie Campbell Martin Caton Katy Clark Ian Davidson Paul Flynn Stephen Hepburn..plus.

more Labour rebels..Kate Hoey Kelvin Hopkins Sian James Mark Lazraowicz John Mc Donnell Iain McKenzie Austin Mitchell Grahame Morris...plus

and...George Mudie Linda Riordan Barry Sheerman Dennis Skinner Graham Stringer Mike wood Jeremy Corbyn (Teller)

Via Tweets from Paul Waugh.

one Lib Dem -Julian Huppert

Bomber Cameron...what is it about being PM and losing your marbles.

http://images.amcnetworks.com/ifc.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/dr-strangelove-stanley-kubrick-2.jpg

dr_spyn said:

one Lib Dem -Julian Huppert

I saw Adrian Sanders listed on Twitter as having voted against as well.

There are hundreds of British Muslims fighting for Isil in Syria and Iraq... How many are there here that are in touch with them and ready to cause havoc now?

Itajai said:

Rexel56 said:

Itajai said:

Scott_P said:

@PickardJE: Labour MP Rushanara Ali has resigned from the party's front bench in order to vote against military action in Iraq.

The Labourite Warsi. Wonder if she was promoted on merit too?

Pathetic

Boo hoo hoo!

Keep crying, might dilute the bile a bit...

SDLP (3): Mark Durkan Alasdair McDonnell Margaret Ritchie

PC (2): Jonathan Edwards Hywel Williams

Respect (1): George Gallway

SNP (5 and teller): Stewart Hosie Angus Roberton Mike Weir Eilidh Whiteford Angus Brendan McNeill Mike Wishart (Teller)

Green:Caroline Lucas

listed on Guido. http://order-order.com/2014/09/26/the-noes-to-the-left/

Plato said:

I know of Mr Bacon and Mr Reckless - the others I can't recall at all.

dr_spyn said:

Tory MPs who voted No: Richard Bacon
John Baron
Gordon Henderson
Adam Holloway
Nigel Mills
Mark Reckless

Baron and Henderson are high on the kipper hit list, and now they can do it under the pretence of voting against bombing Iraq again

HurstLlama said:

Iain Duncan Smith MP ‏@IDS_MP 13m
We have decided to commemorate the 100th anniversary of the war to end all wars with a war. Excellent.

If he disagreed why did he vote in favour?

TheWatcher said:

isam said:

There are hundreds of British Muslims fighting for Isil in Syria and Iraq... How many are there here that are in touch with them and ready to cause havoc now?

Do you seriously think this vote will make any difference as to whether these lunatics wreak havoc?

If they can do something, they will.

Actually I do. I think it is more likely that London will see a terrorist attack than if parliament had voted against the bombing. Not saying it is going to happen, just that it's more likely

dr_spyn said:

Tory MPs who voted No: Richard Bacon
John Baron
Gordon Henderson
Adam Holloway
Nigel Mills
Mark Reckless

The countdown starts, we have now a shortlist of possible UKIP defectors, lets see who and when from this list will defect.
Is the "defect to UKIP" betting market still down?

Surely no-one is pushing the line in the last tweet any more? 'Crime statistics bear little relation to actual crime rates' would be a more accurate statement.

Mr. Isam, we'd probably have less chance of terrorist attack by ISIS if we changed the UK to an Islamic theocracy.

I don't think our enemies should dictate our policy.

Hold on to your handbags

Raheem Kassam (@RaheemJKassam)
26/09/2014 17:40
Senior kippers are briefing against one another on the Luxury Tax "policy". One tells me it's not going in manifesto. Other says it will.

CarlottaVance said:

isam said:

TheWatcher said:

isam said:

There are hundreds of British Muslims fighting for Isil in Syria and Iraq... How many are there here that are in touch with them and ready to cause havoc now?

Do you seriously think this vote will make any difference as to whether these lunatics wreak havoc?

If they can do something, they will.

Actually I do. I think it is more likely that London will see a terrorist attack than if parliament had voted against the bombing. Not saying it is going to happen, just that it's more likely

So do you think Britain should not become involved?

I thought Tories were meant to be pragmatists. What is to be gained practically from throwing money away on a meaningless conflict against this Saudi-sponsored bogeyman?

Those who voted Nos


Abbott, Ms Diane
Ali, Rushanara
Allen, Mr Graham
Bacon, Mr Richard (Con)
Baron, Mr John (Con)
Begg, Dame Anne
Campbell, Mr Ronnie
Caton, Martin
Clark, Katy
Davidson, Mr Ian
Durkan, Mark (SDLP)
Edwards, Jonathan (Plaid)
Flynn, Paul
Galloway, George (Respect)
Henderson, Gordon (Con)
Hepburn, Mr Stephen
Hoey, Kate
Holloway, Mr Adam (Con)
Hopkins, Kelvin
Hosie, Stewart (SNP)
Huppert, Dr Julian (LD)
James, Mrs Siân C.
Lazarowicz, Mark
Lucas, Caroline (Green)
MacNeil, Mr Angus Brendan (SNP)
McDonnell, Dr Alasdair (SDLP)
McDonnell, John
McKenzie, Mr Iain
Mills, Nigel (Con)
Mitchell, Austin
Morris, Grahame M. (Easington)
Mudie, Mr George
Reckless, Mark (Con)
Riordan, Mrs Linda
Ritchie, Ms Margaret (SDLP)
Robertson, Angus (SNP)
Sheerman, Mr Barry
Skinner, Mr Dennis
Stringer, Graham
Weir, Mr Mike (SNP)
Whiteford, Dr Eilidh (SNP)
Williams, Hywel (Plaid)
Wood, Mike

Tellers for the Noes:
Jeremy Corbyn
Pete Wishart (SNP)

Plato said:

Interesting perspective from the Adam Smith Institute re UKIP policy. They aren't happy bunnies. Given they're free-wheeling marketeers - this is quite strong stuff.

IMO, the issue of a lack of integration/foreign cultures imported wholesale is the real problem. Just as an aside, I shop online at Tesco. There are oodles of Polish groceries available. Only described in Polish. When I worked in Reading, there were oodles of shops that talked an entirely different language - it made Leicester seem fairly British in comparison.

I'm all for enjoying other culture stuff [and shopped a lot at a huge Chinese supermarket back in the early 80s outside Newcastle] - but not when it dominates any significant part of a postcode, or changes our fundamental way of life for the local British residents.

Here's what the ASI has to say about Ukip policy, and immigration in general:

"UKIP’s line on immigration is intellectually and morally bankrupt. Despite what UKIP claims, immigration is good for virtually everyone in society, rich and poor alike. The evidence is clear that even low-skilled immigration only hurts low-skilled native wages temporarily, and does not affect the number of jobs available to natives at all. The reason for this is that immigrants demand services as well as supplying them: every job taken by an immigrant also means a new job will be created to supply him or her with their needs.

"Opposing immigration is economically no different to 19th Century-style trade protectionism – the only difference is where the people we’re trading with are. Economists, left and right, agree that trade makes everyone richer, and immigration just allows us to trade with more people more often at home. One of the best things about the EU has been the guarantee of free movement between member states; to throw that away would be an economic catastrophe. If UKIP's priority is to leave the EU, it is vital that they maintain open borders with the EU..."

>> blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jameskirkup/100287887/ukip-vs-the-free-market-britains-immigration-debate-gets-interesting/

Unfortunately the Adam Smith Institute are arguing for uncontrolled immigration, something that is as daft as an idea as no immigration at all. It undermines any serious points they might have to make.

Controlled immigration designed to benefit the UK is a necessity. Uncontrolled immigration is just plain daft.

I suppose the ASI would also be supporting the consequences of such uncontrolled immigration such as we have seen today with other EU countries claiming millions in benefit payments for their own unemployed.

Plato said:

"UKIP’s line on immigration is intellectually and morally bankrupt. Despite what UKIP claims, immigration is good for virtually everyone in society, rich and poor alike. The evidence is clear that even low-skilled immigration only hurts low-skilled native wages temporarily, and does not affect the number of jobs available to natives at all. The reason for this is that immigrants demand services as well as supplying them: every job taken by an immigrant also means a new job will be created to supply him or her with their needs.

"Opposing immigration is economically no different to 19th Century-style trade protectionism – the only difference is where the people we’re trading with are. Economists, left and right, agree that trade makes everyone richer, and immigration just allows us to trade with more people more often at home. One of the best things about the EU has been the guarantee of free movement between member states; to throw that away would be an economic catastrophe. If UKIP's priority is to leave the EU, it is vital that they maintain open borders with the EU..."

>> blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jameskirkup/100287887/ukip-vs-the-free-market-britains-immigration-debate-gets-interesting/

They seem to forget that UKIP are for controlling our own borders. If the economy needs immigration, that means we can have more immigration. If it needs less, we can have less. If we need unskilled, we can get unskilled. If we need specific skills, we can get specific skills. Whether immigration as a concept is beneficial or not beneficial is neither here nor there; this is about control. An example of how stupid this argument is, are the limits that the EU can set on immigration into the EU. If immigration is such a panacea, it is theoretically conceivable that the EU could therefore be limiting immigration into the UK and thus damaging its economy. ASI are just saying what their patrons want to hear.

isam said:

Hold on to your handbags

Raheem Kassam (@RaheemJKassam)
26/09/2014 17:40
Senior kippers are briefing against one another on the Luxury Tax "policy". One tells me it's not going in manifesto. Other says it will.

Handbags at dusk.

Hugh said:

isam said:

Think it was on PB I first heard the phrase "This time it will be different" mocked...

Oh well, the heir to Blair is true his word

What does every Muslim terrorist give as his reasons for killing innocent British people again?

I remember many people making the same arguments against the insane Bush-Blair wars that caused all this in the first place.

Usually to be shouted down as "excusing terrorism" by Tory shills and the Rightwing press, many of whom are no doubt on here now cheerleading the latest war.

Unfortunately, we were right and the warmongering cheerleaders catastrophically wrong.

However.... this does feel different. This mob are so insane, will anyone really convert to their cause out of sympathy if we bomb em? I doubt it.

Yeah I instinctively want harm to come to ISIL, but just don't see that we are going to make a massive difference anyway. In East London there are already people waving ISIL flags, and they don't need more encouragement.

Put it this way, if we didn't do anything, not if nobody did anything, just if the UK stayed out of it, what would be the downside?

Mr. Isam, those over here waving such flags should be confronted, not appeased.

Your argument against involvement could be applied to the Americans and French and so on.

Just an aside: why was the Iraqi army so bloody awful? When they fought they lost, and when they ran they left behind a shitload of top-line military equipment. It's not like the Americans gave them handguns, they had tons of gear.

Cheers, Miss Plato. He's a secondary character so I'm not sure how much he'll be developed.

Edited extra bit: I agree more of a plan is needed and we should've had it by now.

But doing nothing will only allow ISIS to regroup and enjoy more success. We cannot allow that to happen.

manofkent2014 said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Plato said:

Interesting perspective from the Adam Smith Institute re UKIP policy. They aren't happy bunnies. Given they're free-wheeling marketeers - this is quite strong stuff.

IMO, the issue of a lack of integration/foreign cultures imported wholesale is the real problem. Just as an aside, I shop online at Tesco. There are oodles of Polish groceries available. Only described in Polish. When I worked in Reading, there were oodles of shops that talked an entirely different language - it made Leicester seem fairly British in comparison.

I'm all for enjoying other culture stuff [and shopped a lot at a huge Chinese supermarket back in the early 80s outside Newcastle] - but not when it dominates any significant part of a postcode, or changes our fundamental way of life for the local British residents.

Here's what the ASI has to say about Ukip policy, and immigration in general:

>> blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jameskirkup/100287887/ukip-vs-the-free-market-britains-immigration-debate-gets-interesting/

Unfortunately the Adam Smith Institute are arguing for uncontrolled immigration, something that is as daft as an idea as no immigration at all. It undermines any serious points they might have to make.

Controlled immigration designed to benefit the UK is a necessity. Uncontrolled immigration is just plain daft.

I suppose the ASI would also be supporting the consequences of such uncontrolled immigration such as we have seen today with other EU countries claiming millions in benefit payments for their own unemployed.

Indeed the only difference between UKIP and the EU's approach to immigration is scale. The EU want to limit immigration into the EU based on need whilst allowing free movement within the EU. UKIP want to limit immigration into the UK based on need whilst allowing free movement of labour within the UK.. The principle is identical and those who criticise UKIP should equally be critical of the EU and basically virtually every other major economic power around the globe because they all place similar restrictions on immigration


That's how I see it, I'm glad you said that.

The uk is like a mini EU, except we all speak the same language, are small enough to make a single currency work without resentment and steeped In enough history for it to feel natural rather than forced

I can never understand how pro EU people are so hostile to the idea of controlled immigration but are ok with the EU limits on non EU members! it's the same thing!

Really it's big state vs small state that is the argument

Mr. Llama, didn't watch much of the debate, only snippet I caught was Hain being a cock by seeming surprised the PM reserved the right to commit to military action if the situation was urgent without convening Parliament for a debate and vote first.

Troops on the ground (in Iraq, as that's what the vote was on) will likely be Peshmerga. I remain puzzled, as per below, as how/why the Iraqi army wasn't any use.

Morris_Dancer said:

Just an aside: why was the Iraqi army so bloody awful? When they fought they lost, and when they ran they left behind a shitload of top-line military equipment. It's not like the Americans gave them handguns, they had tons of gear.

Because it was disbanded after the Irag invasion and had never fully recovered? Because a number of Sunnis in it were a 5th column (who abandoned the army and joined with ISIS)? Because they're actually not that catastrophic (the tide has seemed to be turning for some time), but we're encouraged to believe they are to soften us to military action? Take your pick.

Reverse willy waving?

Rob Ford (Britain) (@robfordmancs)
26/09/2014 19:03
Random thought: are Labour inflating threat from UKIP in Heywood so they can spin a mediocre by-elec performance as a successful fightback?

Rob Ford (Britain) (@robfordmancs)
26/09/2014 19:03
Hard otherwise to explain surreal situation in which Labour are playing up UKIP prospects in an election while UKIP play them down

Luckyguy1983 said:

With regard to proposals for 'luxury' taxes etc. -ie 'how to squeeze more money out of rich Russians', surely what to do is try and get them to pay more tax by doing more taxable activity, rather than increasing the taxes on the activity they already do.

'Damn the rich they are not buying enough shoes and handbags'