politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Corporeal looks at electoral precedent
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Corporeal looks at electoral precedent
(On a follow up tweet they noted that it should read no majority government, Wilson’s calling of a swift 2nd election in 1974 produced a small uptick for him).
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Opening prices for UKIP
Clacton 4/6
Rochester 1/2
And people on here said Conservatives were the value in Clacton
A few people even said Labour were 'though the middle' value, I believe.
Nadine Dorries MP ✔ @NadineDorriesMP
@OwenJones84 I am not defecting
Anything that gives Ukip the mo is useful for them, more so than a byelection win.
Will we see polls for Rochester & Strood, or are Tory -> UKIP defections seen as old hat by those with the money to fund publicly available opinion polls?
The last time an Opposition won a majority after one term in Opposition (having lost the previous election) was in 1880. Gladstone...
So the history suggests in order of likelihood.
i) Con maj
ii) HP
iii) Lab maj
What did they expect?
(Edit: and I should add the coalition has been more mature and successful than I considered possible when it was formed).
Owen Jones ✔ @OwenJones84
@NadineDorriesMP you're not? we made a pact to defect together! you've landed me right in it!!
Well, you could argue that normal "two-party" politics did return after WWII, it's just that the non-Tory party was Labour and not Liberal. A similar thing could be happening now. The current two-party politics is breaking down, but it's possible that "normal" service will be resumed when things settle down again, in a few decades time, perhaps.
As to which two parties would be left standing in a 2045 general election I wouldn't dare hazard a guess, but if we still have FPTP it is quite possible that a two-party paradigm will have re-established itself.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2773553/Now-White-Dee-threatens-defect-UKIP-Benefits-Street-star-tells-Tory-conference-IDS-touch-real-world.html
If they want to maximise their GE2015 vote, they should go with a 4-word manifesto;
"Feck 'em, vote UKIP"
People not wanting revolution, but feeling like they are best placed to gain more by electing from the wings rather than the centre where compromise/capitulation will come sooner.
Alistair Burt ✔ @AlistairBurtMP
If anymore MPs want to go, go now will you, and not cause this cynically calculated pain to the Party workers who got you to Parliament?
Retweeted by Zac Goldsmith
As a forty-something, I find this attitude curious. Whilst the country has problems, I would rather be alive now than at any time in the past. Give me the Britain of 2014 over that of 1984, 1954 or 1924.
And we all - including political parties - need to work to ensure that 2044 is better than 2014.
In today's Populus Labour take 36% of the 2010 Lib Dems, but UKIP and Conservatives combined take 24% - so only a 3:2 ratio in Labour's favour. Given Labour's piss-poor record in by-elections in this Parliament it probably puts them third - again - in a seat that they really should be able to win in a good year/by-election.
It would certainly aid the May 2015 Vote UKIP/Get Labour cause if Labour win.
http://rt.com/news/190564-mass-graves-three-osce/
After continual shelling of residential areas of Donetsk by Kiev government forces the Novorussian Armed Forces are seeking to dislodge them from the Donetsk airport.
http://uk.reuters.com/article/2014/09/29/ukraine-crisis-attack-idUKL6N0RU1G120140929
Elswehere Kiev government forces have abandoned a number of positions in the Donbass leaving behind heavy equipment sorely needed by the rebels. NAF now able to muster circa 20k soldiers with Kiev able to muster only 35-40k with many of their elite units and equipment significantly degraded. Offensive capabilities remain limited and any offensive runs the risk of a counter offensive which would see further NAF gains. Novorossiya is beginning to take shape as an independent state with a military well capable of protecting itself.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/monkey-cage/wp/2014/09/16/ukraines-breakaway-region-is-becoming-a-de-facto-country/
In the rear support for the war party led by Lyashko continues to drop with Poroshenko set to win a sizeable majority. Fully 32% plan to boycott the parliamentary election, 3% to spoil the ballot, 5% to vote for pro-Russian parties which most likely won't be allowed on the ballot (CPU, PR), and another 3% to vote for Tihipko's "Strong Ukraine". Less than 60% plan to vote in Eastern and Southern Ukraine (obviously this excludes Crimea and the Donbass which are de facto liberated now). In the government controlled areas of Donbass, 23.5% are planning to participate in the October election. Very poor considering the intensive propaganda of the Kiev media. The natives are getting restless with promised Western economic assistance proving so far to be empty promises.
There are flights of fancy from the BOO brigade, but perhaps the BOI lot need to buck up.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jSOfQ7tgTLg
Awful for the brand.
Benefits Street Dee votes UKIP.
I daresay my gay friends would rather be living today then in 1954. And most women will be better off as well.
I'd approach it differently (because I think it is low probability, but want to keep the upside myself!)
So I'd say , for an investment that I could lose everything, I'd want a 20% + return on equity on an annualised basis.
Which means I'd need a 10% return between now and the election (taking that as the cut off).
So I'd offer you 7-1. But I'm sure you will find someone on betfair who will offer better odds.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-25949029
I think 2015 will be similar to 2005, where only 62 changed hands. 1997 and 2010 were not normal as a government had been in power for quite awhile, so those who wanted a change went out to vote.
John Redwood (BBC conference blog)
If [business leaders] don’t understand that now they will find those of us organising the ‘get out’ campaign will then make life difficult for them by making sure that their customers, their employees and their shareholders who disagree with them - and there will be a lot who disagree with them - will be expressing their views very forcefully and will be destablising their corporate governance.
This is absolutely crucial that these people get this. That it will be deeply disruptive to their businesses, and maybe even to their own tenure of their jobs, if a chief executive with a handful of shares thinks he can put the voice of a multi-national corporation behind a highly intense political argument in one country in which they operate.
It would be extremely foolish and we must make sure they have to pay a very dear economic and financial price were they to try that ill-judged thing.
The "post-war" period ended in 1974, according to most psephologists.
The question now might be is whether we are moving from a three-party to a four-party system.
Follow
Told by a normally reliable source another Tory UKIP defection is imminent. Stand by your beds.
1:31 PM - 29 Sep 2014
Any markets up?
We would be as well climbing into bed at this rate?
One could argue that given the speed of technological and medical advance in countries outside the UK it is very easy - indeed preferable - to separate them from the general trends in society and governance.
I would agree that there have been some societal improvements that I would not change. But overall I believe our society is much poorer in terms of the relationship between the Government and the populace than it has been in the past and that the trend is going in entirely the wrong direction.
As an aside I also believe it is unsustainable and the sort of welfare state model that currently exists cannot last in the medium term.
Jim Sillars ('SNP no.2') and Redwood on the same page, for probably the only time in both their lives.
2015 Decide or Decline
The Tories' bizarre penchant for cryptic slogans continues
The 1980s are my favourite decade. Then again, they were my childhood and teens.
"self-governing" led to all sorts of abuses; Saville and other child abuse being small examples. We expect government to deal with all sorts of ills, and complain when they do not, yet want to be a more self-governing society?
As for expecting life to get better: perhaps those feelings were based on an unrealistic view of the world, and especially Britain's place on it. The last few years may have caused reality to crash into many people's consciousnesses.
But leaving that aside: will my son's life be 'better' than my own? I think so, given he avoids the obvious health and other problems that can bedevil us. He will certainly have more opportunities than I ever did, and I came from a loving, reasonably well-off family. He will probably live longer (if the trend continues), and I can see few reasons why he might not be at least as happy as I am, if not happier.
But 'better' is such an awful word to use; it means different things to everyone.
(Question to knowledgeable posters: is it?)
Time to ring David Herdson.
Indeed. Which is why I never set much stall by "precedent" stats. There was a great cartoon at the Potus 2012 election which I think Antifrank sourced which poked fun at this brilliantly.
I wish I could put my finger on it.
"Alistair Burt, the former Foreign Office minister, says John Redwood’s comment is so extreme he thinks Redwood can’t really have said it."
Dave will be most upset.
But I doubt I will convince you about the rest, or you me.
http://xkcd.com/1122/
'Ukip, the SNP and the risks of parliamentary paralysis'
http://tinyurl.com/l7sq7cl
- The state told me how much foreign exchange I was allowed to buy
- The state told me how much of a mortgage I was allowed
- The state told my employer how much it could pay its employees
- The state told my employer what prices it could charge its customers
- The state insisted I'd have to join a particular trade union to work in a given industry
- The state told me that I could only buy not only telecoms services, but even telecoms equipment, only through the state monopoly industy
There are many more such examples. We actually live in a much freer society than at any time in living memory. The Maggie revolution was stunning, but the achievements are of course taken for granted now even by those who claim to despise her.
Was it ? What did Big Society mean then? Picking up your own dog poo?
The Mirror's bang to rights. Apparently the photos used in their stingentrapment were of a Swedish model, used without permission.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/sep/29/swedish-model-did-not-permit-sunday-mirror-use-photo-brooks-newmark
"Philip Davies, Tory MP for Shipley, West Yorkshire, said: "This is absolutely scandalous and yet another example of the racket enjoyed by European politicians and bureaucrats."
I don't think he meant you Nige
Ta.
Looking at the 'no's to action in Syria I would narrow it down to 3 possibles:
Gordon Henderson - Sittingbourne
Adam Holloway - Gravesham
John Baron - Basildon and Billericay
Think UKIP could win a defection by-election in any of these 3 constituencies.
How many times have the electorate been able to choose a Coalition at the ballot box? Coalitions are generally the creature of political parties back room stitch-ups. They are not mentioned let alone detailed in manifestos and therefore they are not chosen by the people. Already there seems to be some lazy expedience creeping in here.
As is lumping together alliances and coalitions. To me an alliance is a long term agreement of two groups with similar outlooks forming a partnership for mutual benefit (e.g. Ulster Unionists, Scottish Unionists, National Liberals and English Conservatives) .One knows before the election that these parties will work together generally after the election and you will find that there are clear demarcation lines such as locale between them.
SImilarly, lumping in two periods of National Government which were enforced by World War and involved the suspension of democracy hardly bare any resemblance to what one might call a 'coalition' in normal times.
A coalition on the other hand to me is two parties who directly opposed each other in the general election who through a lack of a definitive result through expedience do a deal to form the government. Unlike alliances, voters have little or no advanced warning of a coalition and what its nature and policy offering will be. Unlike National government there are no extenuating circumstances of an extreme National Security nature to justify the suspension of democracy. The three forms of government are very different and should not be lumped together.
A better sense of how voters view coalitions is how many true coalitions have survived beyond one term?
It seems to me though that Coalitions come about as a result of the destabilisation of the political landscape by new political factors such as the rise of the Labour Party at the end of the Victorian/ Industrial Revolution consensus at the start of the 20th Century. Similarly this latest incarnation of coalition is driven by the potential end of the Post War Consensus and the rise of new parties in it's wake.
Now none of these factors are higlighted in the article and suggest to me that the assertion quoted above doesn't really stand up to any scrutiny at all. I tend to agree with Disraeli. I do not think people like coalition for the simple reason they have no way to judge its potential in advance or stop it from happening should it occur!
Whilst I may have libertarian tendencies I would suggest that lumping together alliances, national government and coalitions in the same category is one 'liberty' too far!
'And coming up after Pointless, Decide or Decline.....where Conservative MPs face their careers ending if they can't decide to agree with David Cameron quickly enough...
the ToriesPB.com to Guido"Nope. I guessed at the answer then, and I'm still guessing now.
Cameron didn't have the balls to stick with it, a la Miliband and Blue Labour
I would say UKIP are a combo of both, that's why I vote for them. I liked both ideas at the time