politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » No Overall Majority now an even hotter favourite for GE15
Comments
-
I did some analysis based on the size of incumbency bonus and various swings. For a uniform 5% incumbency bonus, the Lib Dems should do around 10-14 seats better than a UNS would imply:MikeSmithson said:
Any seat that Lord A had the LDs within 5% will probably go yellow. Lord A doesn't mention candidates' names and the polling I've seen oes shows this is a major factor.
Against LAB Simon Hughes and possibly Lynne Featherstone will hold on as will Cambridge.
Watford is an LD gain and there's an outside chance of Oxwab.
Incumbents standing again against the Tories will do okay. Where there's new candidate it will be different.
Finally watch Burnley. Individuals matter enormously and the incumbent is very strong.
http://numbercruncheruk.blogspot.co.uk/2014/10/the-lib-dem-incumbency-bonus-how-many.html
Though obviously there'll be local variations...0 -
[The city is famous to military historians though]
Always the infamous criticism of PB - Not enough historical military references...0 -
By the way what do you feel about the piece in the Sunday People saying MPs would be able to claim the Mansion Tax on expenses. Good news for Ed .0
-
Please ignore him, he seems to be over-refreshed this afternoon.PrinceofTaranto said:
Well you have to start somewhere.If you all find it so pathetic I don't think I'll bother - I thought this site wanted to encourage new participants or is it an old lags only affair?JBriskin said:
YOU HAVE 10 POSTS AND HAVE MANAGED TO PATHETICALLY REFERENCE NPXNP AS WELL AS CONFIRMED TEAM CASIO MEMBER SUNIL IN ONE POSTPrinceofTaranto said:
Sorry what is very poor? The fact she was there or that I have asked a question?JBriskin said:
I would say to this - SHITEPrinceofTaranto said:So apparently Anna Soubry was at the anti- Indian Kashmir rally at Trafalgar Square today. Any idea how many Indian voters there are in Broxtowe she has just lost?
But since we are all aspiring writers here I will merely say-
Very Poor
You'll probably manage to wind us all up within a few months and be PB Star.
Have fun
0 -
Very good - apparently you're allowed here.PrinceofTaranto said:By the way what do you feel about the piece in the Sunday People saying MPs would be able to claim the Mansion Tax on expenses. Good news for Ed .
Ed Is Crap
0 -
Dr. Parma, ah ha! [Sorry, I should've perhaps checked myself but I thought you might know off the top of your head].
The city where Pyrrhus was twice king (taking a liberal view of such things), and where Hannibal was thwarted, claiming the city but unable to conquer the citadel which commanded the vital harbour. Also, one of many Greek-founded cities west of Greece, alongside Marseilles (as it now is) and Syracuse.
Mr. Briskin, it may thrill you to note that I've managed to work references to certain figures of classical history into both my Saxon & Khan short stories (which are set in modern day Britain).
Or it may not. But I've done it anyway.0 -
Wishful thinking.Paul_Mid_Beds said:
Agree that his what his polls indicate. However, I think that Labour will collapse once the election nears and people have to make a decision, just as in 1992, look at Ed and decide "Not you mate", a lot of those will go to UKIP.MikeSmithson said:
And UKIP is not going to spit the CON vote as is shown very sharply in Lord A's extensive poll. Ignore at your peril my friend.Paul_Mid_Beds said:Equally possible as I see it is a pathetically small Conservative majority due to the Labour vote being split 1983 style by UKIP.
The tories have a "hold on to nurse for fear of something worse" advantage as a lot of people will allow their wallet to vote for them (those with assets/money to lose if Labour come in and implode the economy or implement a hard left economic agenda with wealth taxes etc, or just if they fear whether they are economically competent.
In such a situation UKIP will start picking up more Labour than tory voters in marginals and will produce a 1983 situation, handing the tories a disproportionate number of seats.
If the Tories do get a majority though, be afraid be very afraid. Once they implement things like Beecroft they will be exceptionally unpopular.
0 -
Mike Smithson has been prophesying that Dave has had it by looking at polls most especially 2010 Lib Dems. It may have been plausible at the time , but now its all up for grabs. Mike Smithson never factored in how dire the Labour front bench is, led by a man who come across as a bit weird (to put it mildly).JohnO said:
Have you any evidence, I mean any evidence at all, that Anna Soubry has "given up"?MikeSmithson said:
I think Anna Soubry has already given up. Nick P will be back with reasonable margin. Lord A had 45% 2010 LDs switching to him and he's done a huge amount on the ground.JBriskin said:
I would say to this - SHITEPrinceofTaranto said:So apparently Anna Soubry was at the anti- Indian Kashmir rally at Trafalgar Square today. Any idea how many Indian voters there are in Broxtowe she has just lost?
But since we are all aspiring writers here I will merely say-
Very Poor
Like Nick the candidates in 10 of LAB's top 40 targets are retreads. It'll be interesting to see if they still have an incumbency benefit.
All bets are off, any outcome is possible.. forget the 2010 LD's as the be all and end all.0 -
Is Khan the Star trek Khan?Morris_Dancer said:Dr. Parma, ah ha! [Sorry, I should've perhaps checked myself but I thought you might know off the top of your head].
The city where Pyrrhus was twice king (taking a liberal view of such things), and where Hannibal was thwarted, claiming the city but unable to conquer the citadel which commanded the vital harbour. Also, one of many Greek-founded cities west of Greece, alongside Marseilles (as it now is) and Syracuse.
Mr. Briskin, it may thrill you to note that I've managed to work references to certain figures of classical history into both my Saxon & Khan short stories (which are set in modern day Britain).
Or it may not. But I've done it anyway.
0 -
Hang On???? Modern Day Britain???? You'll be betting on Lewis next.Morris_Dancer said:Dr. Parma, ah ha! [Sorry, I should've perhaps checked myself but I thought you might know off the top of your head].
The city where Pyrrhus was twice king (taking a liberal view of such things), and where Hannibal was thwarted, claiming the city but unable to conquer the citadel which commanded the vital harbour. Also, one of many Greek-founded cities west of Greece, alongside Marseilles (as it now is) and Syracuse.
Mr. Briskin, it may thrill you to note that I've managed to work references to certain figures of classical history into both my Saxon & Khan short stories (which are set in modern day Britain).
Or it may not. But I've done it anyway.
0 -
It really shows that I didn't study Latin at school. But that's interesting.
Nowadays better known because they have a pollutting big company!Morris_Dancer said:Dr. Parma, ah ha! [Sorry, I should've perhaps checked myself but I thought you might know off the top of your head].
The city where Pyrrhus was twice king (taking a liberal view of such things), and where Hannibal was thwarted, claiming the city but unable to conquer the citadel which commanded the vital harbour. Also, one of many Greek-founded cities west of Greece, alongside Marseilles (as it now is) and Syracuse.
Mr. Briskin, it may thrill you to note that I've managed to work references to certain figures of classical history into both my Saxon & Khan short stories (which are set in modern day Britain).
Or it may not. But I've done it anyway.0 -
That was from my September PB polling average piece. The relevant bits are:Pulpstar said:
Just which seats are the Lib Dems going to lose though ?rcs1000 said:
That's my view too.anotherDave said:Surely the collapse of the LDs makes another hung parliament less rather than more likely?
The Independent's article on Conservative Party funds being directed towards defence rather than target seats suggests a Labour majority.
So far, it has been an unprofitable one.
Tory targets:
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/2015guide/conservative-targets/
I think it would be fair to hand all Lib Dem targets down to Berwick Upon Tweed (Not Norwich South or Bradford East though) and not Sutton and Cheam.
I make that 12 gains.
Looking at Labour's list I make it 11 gains for them.
UKIP Gain 10 seats say - 8 Tory 2 Labour
SNP gain 3 Labour perhaps ? (The Lib Dem seats surely drop more easily than the Labour targets)
So Con + 12
Lab + 11
Con -8
Lab -2
Lab -3
Yields a start point of Con +4; Lab -6 from the 2010 totals.
The main contradiction in my mind at the moment is the local Lib Dem strength in in particular the SW which made these gains TRICKY for the Tories, and the appalling Lib Dem national numbers.
I think @David Herdson of this parish said that in order for the Lib Dems to hold some seats they'd need to lose 6 out of 7 votes elsewhere, which he thought inconceivable. Perhaps it isn't.
The first thing to note is that the polls are a bit contradictory. While the national figures suggest a catastrophic meltdown, the Ashcroft constituency polling suggests not only that the Lib Dems are retaining strength where it matters but when voters are asked to think about their local situation – as they will be next April and May – the Lib Dem share improves further.
That’s vitally important for them because put simply, the national polls have to be wrong if they’re to keep a coachload of MPs rather than a minibus-full; there simply aren’t enough votes to go round otherwise. For example, if the Lib Dems did receive the 7.6% they scored in last month’s average, then on the same size turnout and electorate as in 2010 (to keep things simple), this would be about 2.26m votes. By contrast, their combined vote in the 57 seats they won last time was 1.23m. It’s inconceivable that they could keep the great majority of those while losing five votes in six elsewhere. Of course, if polls worded along national lines are understating them in their own seats (and perhaps elsewhere), then the overall figure will also be low. Still, that doesn’t explain the drop since April at a time when local campaigning should be having the opposite effect.0 -
It's certainly a tricky one, Pulpstar.Pulpstar said:I'm not really tempted to add to NOM at odds on.
NOM rests on a fairly delicate equilibrium. It could easily swing into a decisive majority either way, but then it could just as easily swing into hung territory so deeply that the price collapses. It really depends on what happens between now and the GE.
Like Mike, I've a green book on the main events. There's nothing particularly clever about this. A green book usually denotes you've traded good value bets for bad ones. In doing so, you've accepted a small but certain profit in preference to a potentially bigger but riskier one.
On the whole, I'm an NOM man because I think the most likely trends over the remaining life of the Government are an increase in the vote percentages for UKIP, SNP, Greens, Others, and possibly the LDs. I would expect Labour and Conservative to lose support.
That would almost certainly give you NOM, but I wouldn't bet heavily on it because there are numerous perfectly plausible scenarios which would change the outlook dramatically - e.g., a UKIP or LD collapse.
I'm definitely keeping stakes small at present.0 -
Michael Fallon says the east coast is "swamped" with migrants...
" are the conservatives trying to outkip Ukip?
http://news.sky.com/story/1360747/are-the-conservatives-trying-to-out-ukip-ukip0 -
Nah. Given she was always likely to be a dead woman walking (her majority was only a few hundred) she's small fry. The one I'd nominate as public enemy number one would be her neighbour Ken Clarke by a sundry mile. He is the epitome of everything that is wrong with the liberal elite (clearly Soubry picked up some tips from him). Sadly there is little or no chance of humiliating him.PrinceofTaranto said:
From a UKIP point of view Anna Soubry I believe is public enemy number one after the Farage QT affair. What I am not sure is what they will do to help get her out but if they have anything to do with it I also think she will be a goner .MikeSmithson said:
I think Anna Soubry has already given up. Nick P will be back with reasonable margin. Lord A had 45% 2010 LDs switching to him and he's done a huge amount on the ground.JBriskin said:
I would say to this - SHITEPrinceofTaranto said:So apparently Anna Soubry was at the anti- Indian Kashmir rally at Trafalgar Square today. Any idea how many Indian voters there are in Broxtowe she has just lost?
But since we are all aspiring writers here I will merely say-
Very Poor
Like Nick the candidates in 10 of LAB's top 40 targets are retreads. It'll be interesting to see if they still have an incumbency benefit.0 -
Wiki quoted "under seige" this morning - as the good man IX says - just ignore me!!!isam said:Michael Fallon says the east coast is "swamped" with migrants...
" are the conservatives trying to outkip Ukip?
http://news.sky.com/story/1360747/are-the-conservatives-trying-to-out-ukip-ukip
0 -
Dr. Parma, alas, I didn't take Latin at school either (I wanted to but the way the selection system was set up I had to pick either that, classical civilisation or German, and I wanted all three).
Mildly amused that you know more about British politics than me but I perhaps know bits of Italian history with which you're unfamiliar.
Mr. Briskin, writing about modern day things was difficult. I'm more comfortable with the third century BC, or fantasyland with dragons and frisky elves. [And no, Khan is an British chap called Khan].
On-topic (ish): I think no overall majority is the single likeliest result. Scotland will be very interesting. Labour are going downhill fast but the SNP need very significant swings, it seems, to make more than a handful of gains.0 -
@MikeSmithson
Hmm
Bets against the Lib Dems:
SNP – Inverness Bairn SNP 18.29 3.75
Seat winner Inverness SNP 6 5
Brent Central Labour 80.15 1.2222222222
Bradford East Labour 40.07 1.125
Solihull Tory 100 1.3333333333
St Ives Tory 11.79 2.25
Lib Dem Deposits Loss > 150 10 4.5
UKIP Eastleigh UKIP 18.54 4.5
Bermondsey & Old Southwark Labour 15 2.875
Bets for the Lib Dems:
Over 32.5 seats 20 1.8333333333
Lib Dem Seat bands 41-50 20 4.5
Inverness Bairn LD 32.92 2.5
Sutton and Cheam LD 10 1.8333333333
Eastleigh Lib Dem 50 1.6666666667
I have a fair idea that 41-50 seats is a loser, but the 32.5 seats is fascinating. It feels like a loser with the national poll numbers but when you look at the individual seats...
Bermondsey and Old Southwark was recommended by Peter From Putney iirc...0 -
Morris_Dancer
yes, I bet you know about Italian classic history than me0 -
Gareth Thomas MP (@GarethThomasMP)
26/10/2014 17:52
Osborne knew in January UK faced a higher EU Bill but said nothing...Makes Cameron's outrage seem a little synthetic telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews…0 -
Morris you genuinely terrify me in many ways-Morris_Dancer said:Dr. Parma, alas, I didn't take Latin at school either (I wanted to but the way the selection system was set up I had to pick either that, classical civilisation or German, and I wanted all three).
Mildly amused that you know more about British politics than me but I perhaps know bits of Italian history with which you're unfamiliar.
Mr. Briskin, writing about modern day things was difficult. I'm more comfortable with the third century BC, or fantasyland with dragons and frisky elves. [And no, Khan is an British chap called Khan].
On-topic (ish): I think no overall majority is the single likeliest result. Scotland will be very interesting. Labour are going downhill fast but the SNP need very significant swings, it seems, to make more than a handful of gains.
However - to you, and to the lurkers, my pseudonym comes from a Philip K Dick book - and references a fictional African American President...
0 -
But Sky doesn't mention this bit does it:isam said:Michael Fallon says the east coast is "swamped" with migrants...
" are the conservatives trying to outkip Ukip?
http://news.sky.com/story/1360747/are-the-conservatives-trying-to-out-ukip-ukip
However, in a sign of the growing split in the Conservative Party over immigration, Mr Fallon’s comments were immediately undermined by Liz Truss, the Environment Minister, who said that foreign workers are needed to ensure that Britain’s farming industry remains competitive.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/11188602/Towns-in-the-UK-are-swamped-by-EU-migrants-Cabinet-minister-warns.html
As Truss is an ex Libdem Cameroon its a classic story of divided Tories once again.0 -
Mr. Briskin, must confess I have not read anything by Philip K Dick.
And yes, I am terrifying.
Mr. 2014, worth also pointing out her job covers farming and the seasonal work is largely done by immigrant labour.0 -
Douglas Carswell once wrote that: "I know of a farm in Essex (not in my constituency, I might add) that has for years depended on Bulgarian students to help gather in the harvest. Each year they come over, work hard, and return to Bulgaria. Without them, the farm would not cope. However unfashionable it might be to point this out, it needs pointing out."manofkent2014 said:
But Sky doesn't mention this bit does it:isam said:Michael Fallon says the east coast is "swamped" with migrants...
" are the conservatives trying to outkip Ukip?
http://news.sky.com/story/1360747/are-the-conservatives-trying-to-out-ukip-ukip
However, in a sign of the growing split in the Conservative Party over immigration, Mr Fallon’s comments were immediately undermined by Liz Truss, the Environment Minister, who said that foreign workers are needed to ensure that Britain’s farming industry remains competitive.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/11188602/Towns-in-the-UK-are-swamped-by-EU-migrants-Cabinet-minister-warns.html
As Truss is an ex Libdem Cameroon its a classic story of divided Tories once again.
I suspect the answer is to draw a line between a level of uncontrolled immigration, benefit tourism, and so on, and the immigration necessary to sustain certain parts of the economy. But that is an answer both to Mr Carswell's membership of UKIP and of the difference between Liz Truss and Michael Fallon.0 -
I said this had Osborne's fingerprints all over it.isam said:Gareth Thomas MP (@GarethThomasMP)
26/10/2014 17:52
Osborne knew in January UK faced a higher EU Bill but said nothing...Makes Cameron's outrage seem a little synthetic telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews…
He is far too clever for his own good I think.0 -
The last time I gave a top ten list PB was off-topic for about 12 hours...Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Briskin, must confess I have not read anything by Philip K Dick.
0 -
Sheffield Brightside and Hillsborough Labour: Harry Harpham
Former NUM rep at Clipstone Colliery during the strike
David Blunkett's agent
researcher for Blunkett
Sheffield Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Homes and Neighbourhoods
www.harryharpham.com/0 -
Serious admission of omission Mr D.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Briskin, must confess I have not read anything by Philip K Dick.
0 -
Analysing the 2014 local election results, John Curtice thought the LD incumbency theory failed to match the data.david_herdson said:That was from my September PB polling average piece. The relevant bits are:
The first thing to note is that the polls are a bit contradictory. While the national figures suggest a catastrophic meltdown, the Ashcroft constituency polling suggests not only that the Lib Dems are retaining strength where it matters but when voters are asked to think about their local situation – as they will be next April and May – the Lib Dem share improves further.
That’s vitally important for them because put simply, the national polls have to be wrong if they’re to keep a coachload of MPs rather than a minibus-full; there simply aren’t enough votes to go round otherwise. For example, if the Lib Dems did receive the 7.6% they scored in last month’s average, then on the same size turnout and electorate as in 2010 (to keep things simple), this would be about 2.26m votes. By contrast, their combined vote in the 57 seats they won last time was 1.23m. It’s inconceivable that they could keep the great majority of those while losing five votes in six elsewhere. Of course, if polls worded along national lines are understating them in their own seats (and perhaps elsewhere), then the overall figure will also be low. Still, that doesn’t explain the drop since April at a time when local campaigning should be having the opposite effect.
"...on average the drop in the Lib-Dem vote in wards located in the constituency of an incumbent Lib-Dem MP was, at 13 points, much the same as elsewhere."
http://www.ippr.org/juncture/messages-from-the-voters-the-2014-local-and-european-elections0 -
Tories addicted to maintaining a low wage economy... the classic mentality of people who can only envision a stratified society. I'm sure all those millions on low wages facing ever more competition from the flood of unskilled labour will be happy to know it's worth it so that rich landowners can make more profit off their land.manofkent2014 said:
But Sky doesn't mention this bit does it:isam said:Michael Fallon says the east coast is "swamped" with migrants...
" are the conservatives trying to outkip Ukip?
http://news.sky.com/story/1360747/are-the-conservatives-trying-to-out-ukip-ukip
However, in a sign of the growing split in the Conservative Party over immigration, Mr Fallon’s comments were immediately undermined by Liz Truss, the Environment Minister, who said that foreign workers are needed to ensure that Britain’s farming industry remains competitive.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/11188602/Towns-in-the-UK-are-swamped-by-EU-migrants-Cabinet-minister-warns.html
As Truss is an ex Libdem Cameroon its a classic story of divided Tories once again.0 -
Mr. Pulpstar, that's an awfully long time.
It depends, though, whether the knowledge of a higher bill was knowledge of a recalculation and the assumption was a tidying up of a few million, or knowledge of a £1.7bn bill.
Congratulations, incidentally, on a highly probable triumph at Diplomacy.0 -
I thought Anna Soubry was retiring?0
-
Thanks, Hoepfully it will be this year, but I'm assuming best play by my opponents...Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Pulpstar, that's an awfully long time.
It depends, though, whether the knowledge of a higher bill was knowledge of a recalculation and the assumption was a tidying up of a few million, or knowledge of a £1.7bn bill.
Congratulations, incidentally, on a highly probable triumph at Diplomacy.0 -
Nah, she was reselected in 2013 and I'm not aware of any changes since then.Itajai said:I thought Anna Soubry was retiring?
http://bramcotetoday.org.uk/2013/07/02/anna-soubry-re-selected/0 -
Mr. Mark, I have some staggering blind spots.
Mr. Socrates, a lack of social mobility can be appealing if you're already at the top. It's been remarked here many times that the huge level of immigration is bad if you're at the lower end and handy if you're at the top. It depresses wages for many, but cuts costs of carpentry and conservatories for those with cash to burn.
The overuse of the race card (Roche deserves a slap with an enormo-haddock for the euracism nonsense) has meant there hasn't been a proper debate, and the membership of the EU means we can't do anything about a lot of migration, unless we leave.0 -
So, Liz Truss is a Tory who used to be LibDem. Carswell is UKIP and used to be Tory.manofkent2014 said:
But Sky doesn't mention this bit does it:isam said:Michael Fallon says the east coast is "swamped" with migrants...
" are the conservatives trying to outkip Ukip?
http://news.sky.com/story/1360747/are-the-conservatives-trying-to-out-ukip-ukip
However, in a sign of the growing split in the Conservative Party over immigration, Mr Fallon’s comments were immediately undermined by Liz Truss, the Environment Minister, who said that foreign workers are needed to ensure that Britain’s farming industry remains competitive.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/11188602/Towns-in-the-UK-are-swamped-by-EU-migrants-Cabinet-minister-warns.html
As Truss is an ex Libdem Cameroon its a classic story of divided Tories once again.
And they agree with each other. Everyone happy except Farage?0 -
You keep misinterpreting the LD 2014 local election results , no doubt John Curtice did also .anotherDave said:
Analysing the 2014 local election results, John Curtice thought the LD incumbency theory failed to match the data.david_herdson said:That was from my September PB polling average piece. The relevant bits are:
The first thing to note is that the polls are a bit contradictory. While the national figures suggest a catastrophic meltdown, the Ashcroft constituency polling suggests not only that the Lib Dems are retaining strength where it matters but when voters are asked to think about their local situation – as they will be next April and May – the Lib Dem share improves further.
That’s vitally important for them because put simply, the national polls have to be wrong if they’re to keep a coachload of MPs rather than a minibus-full; there simply aren’t enough votes to go round otherwise. For example, if the Lib Dems did receive the 7.6% they scored in last month’s average, then on the same size turnout and electorate as in 2010 (to keep things simple), this would be about 2.26m votes. By contrast, their combined vote in the 57 seats they won last time was 1.23m. It’s inconceivable that they could keep the great majority of those while losing five votes in six elsewhere. Of course, if polls worded along national lines are understating them in their own seats (and perhaps elsewhere), then the overall figure will also be low. Still, that doesn’t explain the drop since April at a time when local campaigning should be having the opposite effect.
"...on average the drop in the Lib-Dem vote in wards located in the constituency of an incumbent Lib-Dem MP was, at 13 points, much the same as elsewhere."
http://www.ippr.org/juncture/messages-from-the-voters-the-2014-local-and-european-elections
If in the LD wards in constituency seats the vote fell from 55 to 42% then the fall may well be the same as in a non constituency ward where it fell from 20 to 7% say but it is substantially a better performance .0 -
Delighted to see, for the first time I've ever noticed, Southampton are a shorter price to win the league (250/1 from 400/1 last week), than they are to be relegated (500/1 from 250/1 last week, all prices from ladbrokes), and now 6/1 to finish top 4 (shorter than the 7/1 on traitorous pig Pochettino's Spurs)0
-
@JBriskinJBriskin said:
YOU HAVE 10 POSTS AND HAVE MANAGED TO PATHETICALLY REFERENCE NPXNP AS WELL AS CONFIRMED TEAM CASIO MEMBER SUNIL IN ONE POSTPrinceofTaranto said:
Sorry what is very poor? The fact she was there or that I have asked a question?JBriskin said:
I would say to this - SHITEPrinceofTaranto said:So apparently Anna Soubry was at the anti- Indian Kashmir rally at Trafalgar Square today. Any idea how many Indian voters there are in Broxtowe she has just lost?
But since we are all aspiring writers here I will merely say-
Very Poor
You'll probably manage to wind us all up within a few months and be PB Star.
Have fun
WTF is TEAM CASIO?0 -
How about the Hammers?JonnyJimmy said:Delighted to see, for the first time I've ever noticed, Southampton are a shorter price to win the league (250/1 from 400/1 last week), than they are to be relegated (500/1 from 250/1 last week, all prices from ladbrokes), and now 6/1 to finish top 4 (shorter than the 7/1 on traitorous pig Pochettino's Spurs)
0 -
The old crops rotting in the field without immigrants canard is a very old one. Classic example of immigration suppressing potential productivity gains, low wage versus high wage economy.Grandiose said:
Douglas Carswell once wrote that: "I know of a farm in Essex (not in my constituency, I might add) that has for years depended on Bulgarian students to help gather in the harvest. Each year they come over, work hard, and return to Bulgaria. Without them, the farm would not cope. However unfashionable it might be to point this out, it needs pointing out."manofkent2014 said:
But Sky doesn't mention this bit does it:isam said:Michael Fallon says the east coast is "swamped" with migrants...
" are the conservatives trying to outkip Ukip?
http://news.sky.com/story/1360747/are-the-conservatives-trying-to-out-ukip-ukip
However, in a sign of the growing split in the Conservative Party over immigration, Mr Fallon’s comments were immediately undermined by Liz Truss, the Environment Minister, who said that foreign workers are needed to ensure that Britain’s farming industry remains competitive.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/11188602/Towns-in-the-UK-are-swamped-by-EU-migrants-Cabinet-minister-warns.html
As Truss is an ex Libdem Cameroon its a classic story of divided Tories once again.
I suspect the answer is to draw a line between a level of uncontrolled immigration, benefit tourism, and so on, and the immigration necessary to sustain certain parts of the economy. But that is an answer both to Mr Carswell's membership of UKIP and of the difference between Liz Truss and Michael Fallon.
http://anepigone.blogspot.co.uk/2007/09/advances-in-farm-mechanization-seen-as.html
http://www.elpasotimes.com/news/ci_5463510
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/robots-revolutionize-farming-ease-labor-woes-142756655.html
I think UKIP will regret letting Carswell save his skin by jumping ship to them.
0 -
I have a shelf of one bookcase for his books and similar works.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Briskin, must confess I have not read anything by Philip K Dick.
Highly recommended in small doses but gets repetitive in his themes.
JBriskin's name comes from The Crack In Space (or Cantata 140 for pseuds).0 -
Bookies not so impressed; 1000/1 to win, 18/1 to go down, 50/1 top 4Sunil_Prasannan said:
How about the Hammers?JonnyJimmy said:Delighted to see, for the first time I've ever noticed, Southampton are a shorter price to win the league (250/1 from 400/1 last week), than they are to be relegated (500/1 from 250/1 last week, all prices from ladbrokes), and now 6/1 to finish top 4 (shorter than the 7/1 on traitorous pig Pochettino's Spurs)
0 -
Was that before Carswell wrote this in his Telegraph blog?;Grandiose said:
Douglas Carswell once wrote that: "I know of a farm in Essex (not in my constituency, I might add) that has for years depended on Bulgarian students to help gather in the harvest. Each year they come over, work hard, and return to Bulgaria. Without them, the farm would not cope. However unfashionable it might be to point this out, it needs pointing out."manofkent2014 said:
But Sky doesn't mention this bit does it:isam said:Michael Fallon says the east coast is "swamped" with migrants...
" are the conservatives trying to outkip Ukip?
http://news.sky.com/story/1360747/are-the-conservatives-trying-to-out-ukip-ukip
However, in a sign of the growing split in the Conservative Party over immigration, Mr Fallon’s comments were immediately undermined by Liz Truss, the Environment Minister, who said that foreign workers are needed to ensure that Britain’s farming industry remains competitive.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/11188602/Towns-in-the-UK-are-swamped-by-EU-migrants-Cabinet-minister-warns.html
As Truss is an ex Libdem Cameroon its a classic story of divided Tories once again.
I suspect the answer is to draw a line between a level of uncontrolled immigration, benefit tourism, and so on, and the immigration necessary to sustain certain parts of the economy. But that is an answer both to Mr Carswell's membership of UKIP and of the difference between Liz Truss and Michael Fallon.
Try to imagine how that family in Clacton might now feel, when they read that student loans to Bulgarians and Romanians have just been suspended.
Do you suppose my constituents are likely to be grateful that at last some chump in Whitehall has finally woken up to the fact that many of the Bulgarian and Romanian applications were, apparently, bogus?
No, my ministerial pals. They are going to be furious. Livid. Volcanic in their anger. And it will be directed at you.
What the heck are we doing, they will ask themselves and their neighbours, giving student loans to any Bulgarians or Romanians in the first place? The very month that my constituent’s daughter had to pack her things and leave university, we were apparently approving student loans to non-UK nationals. Why?
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/douglascarswellmp/100246605/when-it-comes-to-europe-weve-been-mugged/
Of course it has little to do with my original point which is that two Tory ministers seem to be taking opposite views of the same thing. Even now the Tory Party is as divided as it ever was over the same old unresolved issues.0 -
The fact that Utd are only now odds on with any bookies not to finish Top 4 bemuses me greatly. I got on at 5/4 (frankly I could have done better, should have held out for 6/4 at least) but reckon it's at least a 60% chance, maybe better. Even when they win they're looking unconvincing.
Although, they've rescued two undeserved points in two weeks.0 -
The swing of middle income to ow incomes is there, it just isn't very significant.Socrates said:
Tories addicted to maintaining a low wage economy... the classic mentality of people who can only envision a stratified society. I'm sure all those millions on low wages facing ever more competition from the flood of unskilled labour will be happy to know it's worth it so that rich landowners can make more profit off their land.manofkent2014 said:
But Sky doesn't mention this bit does it:isam said:Michael Fallon says the east coast is "swamped" with migrants...
" are the conservatives trying to outkip Ukip?
http://news.sky.com/story/1360747/are-the-conservatives-trying-to-out-ukip-ukip
However, in a sign of the growing split in the Conservative Party over immigration, Mr Fallon’s comments were immediately undermined by Liz Truss, the Environment Minister, who said that foreign workers are needed to ensure that Britain’s farming industry remains competitive.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/11188602/Towns-in-the-UK-are-swamped-by-EU-migrants-Cabinet-minister-warns.html
As Truss is an ex Libdem Cameroon its a classic story of divided Tories once again.
One study showed that for every 1% increase in the immigrant population, middle incomes rose by 0.6% and lower incomes fell by 0.5%, a swing over the 1997-2005 period of about two pence per hour (the immigrant population rose by 3 percentage points). However, overall "there is hardly any effect of immigration on the wage distribution above the median".
More importantly, "the graph of wage effects ... is strikingly similar to the distribution of
immigrants along the native wage distribution", in other words, it is likely that existing immigrants were most badly hit. That in itself implies that the skill sets of migrant and immigrant workers are not as interchangeable as migrants with other migrants.0 -
Well when it comes to the Tories I suppose you might call that agreement given the extent of the divisions within your party. I wouldn't though.....logical_song said:
So, Liz Truss is a Tory who used to be LibDem. Carswell is UKIP and used to be Tory.manofkent2014 said:
But Sky doesn't mention this bit does it:isam said:Michael Fallon says the east coast is "swamped" with migrants...
" are the conservatives trying to outkip Ukip?
http://news.sky.com/story/1360747/are-the-conservatives-trying-to-out-ukip-ukip
However, in a sign of the growing split in the Conservative Party over immigration, Mr Fallon’s comments were immediately undermined by Liz Truss, the Environment Minister, who said that foreign workers are needed to ensure that Britain’s farming industry remains competitive.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/11188602/Towns-in-the-UK-are-swamped-by-EU-migrants-Cabinet-minister-warns.html
As Truss is an ex Libdem Cameroon its a classic story of divided Tories once again.
And they agree with each other. Everyone happy except Farage?0 -
O/T:
Sweetest Taboo by Sade on Radio 2 now.
Clacton's most famous former resident.0 -
I'm thinking there must be some value in the skybet 50/1 on Pochettino being next PL manager sacked0
-
Even though we're in the top 4 at the moment? Oh well.JonnyJimmy said:
Bookies not so impressed; 1000/1 to win, 18/1 to go down, 50/1 top 4Sunil_Prasannan said:
How about the Hammers?JonnyJimmy said:Delighted to see, for the first time I've ever noticed, Southampton are a shorter price to win the league (250/1 from 400/1 last week), than they are to be relegated (500/1 from 250/1 last week, all prices from ladbrokes), and now 6/1 to finish top 4 (shorter than the 7/1 on traitorous pig Pochettino's Spurs)
0 -
Mike Smithson - I think you may be over-rating incumbency. Do you really think the people of north London will be asking themselves whether they want Lynne Featherstone or AN Other Labour candidate to represent them? Everyone knew what the overall result would be in '97, 01 and 05. In 2010 we seemed to be headed for a messy hung parliament whatever happened.
I'm going to make a bold claim. Individual MPs and their reputation will matter less this time than at any election since 1992. Both Tories and Labour have lined up the ammo at each other and a fair few Lib Dems will be massacred in the crossfire, in the case of some decent ones, perhaps unfairly. It's also much harder to run on personal reputation when you are part of the government.0 -
Still another 29 games to go Sunil!Sunil_Prasannan said:
Even though we're in the top 4 at the moment? Oh well.JonnyJimmy said:
Bookies not so impressed; 1000/1 to win, 18/1 to go down, 50/1 top 4Sunil_Prasannan said:
How about the Hammers?JonnyJimmy said:Delighted to see, for the first time I've ever noticed, Southampton are a shorter price to win the league (250/1 from 400/1 last week), than they are to be relegated (500/1 from 250/1 last week, all prices from ladbrokes), and now 6/1 to finish top 4 (shorter than the 7/1 on traitorous pig Pochettino's Spurs)
But a small bet on top 4 @ 50/1 (or prob better, that's Ladbrokes price) could be a good trading bet at least if you think, like Big Sam does, that he's a better manager than Pelligrini
0 -
Just amazed at OGH's last line on this post. Only backing the Green Party? Kind of incredible when you look at the polls. Everyone must agree they have no hope of winning the election?
0 -
Sorry, which is my Party?manofkent2014 said:
Well when it comes to the Tories I suppose you might call that agreement given the extent of the divisions within your party. I wouldn't though.....logical_song said:
So, Liz Truss is a Tory who used to be LibDem. Carswell is UKIP and used to be Tory.manofkent2014 said:
But Sky doesn't mention this bit does it:isam said:Michael Fallon says the east coast is "swamped" with migrants...
" are the conservatives trying to outkip Ukip?
http://news.sky.com/story/1360747/are-the-conservatives-trying-to-out-ukip-ukip
However, in a sign of the growing split in the Conservative Party over immigration, Mr Fallon’s comments were immediately undermined by Liz Truss, the Environment Minister, who said that foreign workers are needed to ensure that Britain’s farming industry remains competitive.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/11188602/Towns-in-the-UK-are-swamped-by-EU-migrants-Cabinet-minister-warns.html
As Truss is an ex Libdem Cameroon its a classic story of divided Tories once again.
And they agree with each other. Everyone happy except Farage?0 -
Cambridge may be one place the Lib Dems could hold on as it's the sort of place where Tories might vote for the Lib Dems.0
-
Re LibDem seats, my friends in Cambridge - who are by no means Hubbert fans - think he'll hang on - probably on the back of a chronically divided opposition and a fairly useless local Labour party.
I have no view on Watford (ask JackW...), and I think the LibDems are likely be only distant challengers in Oxwab.
In London, Brent is obviously a big loss. Hornsey & Wood Green a likely one (although I know some Highgate Conservatives who will vote tactically for her, so she may be a surprise hold). Kingston has to be a likely (60%+ prob) loss, Twickenham is likely to be a narrower hold than most people think.
I'd reckon on Simon Hughes holding on in Southwalk, but he is by no means a certainty. Sutton & Cheam is a likely hold. Carshalton is a toss-up, but I think it's probably a Conservative gain.
So: there are three London seats which are likely (i.e 66+% chance: Southwalk, Sutton & Cheam and Twickenham), two 40% shots (Carshalton and Kingston), one 20% shot (Hornsey & Wood Green), and one 0% shot (Brent).
Most likely outcome for the Libs in the capital: three seats, but could be as few as two, and as many as five.0 -
He means that he wins whatever the outcome. On a Betfair market, your potential winnings or losses display for each outcome, profitable ones in green and losers in red. An 'all-green' book is one where you win whichever one comes in.maaarsh said:Just amazed at OGH's last line on this post. Only backing the Green Party? Kind of incredible when you look at the polls. Everyone must agree they have no hope of winning the election?
0 -
Thanks for the explanation, but if you look at the first letter of each sentence in my post, you'll probably see I was hoping for a more excitable reaction!david_herdson said:
He means that he wins whatever the outcome. On a Betfair market, your potential winnings or losses display for each outcome, profitable ones in green and losers in red. An 'all-green' book is one where you win whichever one comes in.maaarsh said:Just amazed at OGH's last line on this post. Only backing the Green Party? Kind of incredible when you look at the polls. Everyone must agree they have no hope of winning the election?
0 -
My God, we'll all have to read the postings much more carefully.maaarsh said:
Thanks for the explanation, but if you look at the first letter of each sentence in my post, you'll probably see I was hoping for a more excitable reaction!david_herdson said:
He means that he wins whatever the outcome. On a Betfair market, your potential winnings or losses display for each outcome, profitable ones in green and losers in red. An 'all-green' book is one where you win whichever one comes in.maaarsh said:Just amazed at OGH's last line on this post. Only backing the Green Party? Kind of incredible when you look at the polls. Everyone must agree they have no hope of winning the election?
There's enough misunderstanding on this site without having to look for codes!0 -
I discuss Cambridge at length on my latest post:
http://newstonoone.blogspot.co.uk/2014/10/environmentally-unfriendly-who-loses.html
Summary: I dunno lol. Neither opinion poll that has been taken in the constituency is particularly satisfactory. My hunch is that the Lib Dems will hold on and that's how I'm betting.0 -
It was only for plausible deniability!logical_song said:
My God, we'll all have to read the postings much more carefully.maaarsh said:
Thanks for the explanation, but if you look at the first letter of each sentence in my post, you'll probably see I was hoping for a more excitable reaction!david_herdson said:
He means that he wins whatever the outcome. On a Betfair market, your potential winnings or losses display for each outcome, profitable ones in green and losers in red. An 'all-green' book is one where you win whichever one comes in.maaarsh said:Just amazed at OGH's last line on this post. Only backing the Green Party? Kind of incredible when you look at the polls. Everyone must agree they have no hope of winning the election?
There's enough misunderstanding on this site without having to look for codes!0 -
rcs - the magnificent Lord Oakeshott's private polling seems to show Tories in Cambridge (who rumour has it may be a rather wet, museli eating bunch) could be prepared to vote Lib Dem to stop Labour. However there was little evidence that the proper northern Tories in Sheffield Hallam would do likewise. LOL.0
-
It seems not to have been mentioned, but the UKIP Calypso charted at number 44.0
-
Well I'm a Chelsea fan and gutted as I was with the late equalizer even I thought they deserved a draw on their first half performance. They will definitely finish top four, one reason is they have no European games this season. I backed them to finish above Liverpool and also Liverpool not to finish in the top four.Quincel said:The fact that Utd are only now odds on with any bookies not to finish Top 4 bemuses me greatly. I got on at 5/4 (frankly I could have done better, should have held out for 6/4 at least) but reckon it's at least a 60% chance, maybe better. Even when they win they're looking unconvincing.
Although, they've rescued two undeserved points in two weeks.0 -
I'm easily taken in.maaarsh said:
Thanks for the explanation, but if you look at the first letter of each sentence in my post, you'll probably see I was hoping for a more excitable reaction!david_herdson said:
He means that he wins whatever the outcome. On a Betfair market, your potential winnings or losses display for each outcome, profitable ones in green and losers in red. An 'all-green' book is one where you win whichever one comes in.maaarsh said:Just amazed at OGH's last line on this post. Only backing the Green Party? Kind of incredible when you look at the polls. Everyone must agree they have no hope of winning the election?
0 -
Does anyone have a theory as to how and why Gordo managed to rake back the Tory lead in 2010?
I ask this because if, and it's a big if, Labour merely benefitted from a swing towards 'no change' then the Tories are going to romp home in 2015.
We know without doubt that there was a big move, and we know without doubt that Gordo and his merry men did nothing to deserve it. Cameron didn't obviously blow it either.
I've bet a little against Labour next year. That's partly due to Ed, partly due to Scotland, and partly due to UKIP. I wonder though if there's a bigger picture that's passed me (and others) by. Will the Tories get the Gordo swing?
0 -
Um, I'll bear that in mindJonnyJimmy said:
Still another 29 games to go Sunil!Sunil_Prasannan said:
Even though we're in the top 4 at the moment? Oh well.JonnyJimmy said:
Bookies not so impressed; 1000/1 to win, 18/1 to go down, 50/1 top 4Sunil_Prasannan said:
How about the Hammers?JonnyJimmy said:Delighted to see, for the first time I've ever noticed, Southampton are a shorter price to win the league (250/1 from 400/1 last week), than they are to be relegated (500/1 from 250/1 last week, all prices from ladbrokes), and now 6/1 to finish top 4 (shorter than the 7/1 on traitorous pig Pochettino's Spurs)
But a small bet on top 4 @ 50/1 (or prob better, that's Ladbrokes price) could be a good trading bet at least if you think, like Big Sam does, that he's a better manager than Pelligrini 0 -
Daves "anger" was all a big act it seems... But surely they couldn't be so naive to think no one would tumble?
Lord Ashcroft (@LordAshcroft)
26/10/2014 20:15
Surely the Treasury had the numbers to roughly work out that the £1.7b demand from the EU would be on its way. If not why not?0 -
Anyone know why Shadsy's taken down his TV debate books?0
-
Me,thanks.dr_spyn said:Someone called that Ivanovic was likely to take a long walk yesterday. Good call for whoever it was.
I presume it is OK to put up bets that have nothing to do with politics, no-one has told me otherwise.0 -
Totally O/T and just to complain. It`s horrible to live in a country with more than one timezone. Waiting for the presidential result in Brazil but have to wait for 3 hours because of two states.0
-
"Parts of the UK could be "swamped" by EU migrants unless rules change, the defence secretary has claimed.
Michael Fallon said it was vital to impose some restrictions on the free movement of people in the EU, as many towns feel "under siege" by workers and those claiming benefits.
His language attracted criticism, with Labour saying it was "desperate".
A Downing Street source later said Mr Fallon "accepts he should have chosen his words better."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-297769700 -
Cameron did blow it, mostly.Omnium said:Does anyone have a theory as to how and why Gordo managed to rake back the Tory lead in 2010?
I ask this because if, and it's a big if, Labour merely benefitted from a swing towards 'no change' then the Tories are going to romp home in 2015.
We know without doubt that there was a big move, and we know without doubt that Gordo and his merry men did nothing to deserve it. Cameron didn't obviously blow it either.
I've bet a little against Labour next year. That's partly due to Ed, partly due to Scotland, and partly due to UKIP. I wonder though if there's a bigger picture that's passed me (and others) by. Will the Tories get the Gordo swing?
Brown's masterstroke was bringing back Mandelson. Labour's rebuttal game increased very markedly thereafter. The Tories sought to dominate the agenda from early 2010 with a whole series of policy initiatives but Labour successfully attacked them one after another, picking holes in each. Often these were minor details but it was enough to sustain a narrative that the manifesto was falling apart. It also took the focus away from Labour, in whom the media had lost interest as it looked like they were on the way out and were, in any case, old news. Combined with the airbrushed poster fiasco, the momentum completely went out of the Tories' campaign and though it did get going again, never recovered to its former level.0 -
I'm not sure he did. What happened IMO was that following the debates the Tories lost crucial support to the LDs.Omnium said:Does anyone have a theory as to how and why Gordo managed to rake back the Tory lead in 2010?
I ask this because if, and it's a big if, Labour merely benefitted from a swing towards 'no change' then the Tories are going to romp home in 2015.
We know without doubt that there was a big move, and we know without doubt that Gordo and his merry men did nothing to deserve it. Cameron didn't obviously blow it either.
I've bet a little against Labour next year. That's partly due to Ed, partly due to Scotland, and partly due to UKIP. I wonder though if there's a bigger picture that's passed me (and others) by. Will the Tories get the Gordo swing?0 -
Because this way he can describe it as an unreasonable demand from the EU and have a tubthumping victory when he flatly refuses to pay it.isam said:Daves "anger" was all a big act it seems... But surely they couldn't be so naive to think no one would tumble?
Lord Ashcroft (@LordAshcroft)
26/10/2014 20:15
Surely the Treasury had the numbers to roughly work out that the £1.7b demand from the EU would be on its way. If not why not?
I still don't know why the EU is pursuing this correction anyway, they could have made up the shortfall much more discretely by slightly adjusting contributions for the next few years, much the same way PAYE works.0 -
There's two effects here in making us a more unequal society: (1) reducing the wages of those already here, and (2) simply increasing the share of the population on low wages by adding more at the bottom. A certain breed of Tory might think that economic success is built on the backs of having low wage people to take advantage of, but there is another way. We don't need to maintain low wage jobs if the only way to get there is to bring in new low wage earners to fill them. We should instead be focused on increasing jobs at the top end, and improving the general culture of professionalism and economic success in the country. Reducing the supply of low wage labour will also cause their wages to increase, boosting national well-being all round.Grandiose said:
One study showed that for every 1% increase in the immigrant population, middle incomes rose by 0.6% and lower incomes fell by 0.5%, a swing over the 1997-2005 period of about two pence per hour (the immigrant population rose by 3 percentage points). However, overall "there is hardly any effect of immigration on the wage distribution above the median".
More importantly, "the graph of wage effects ... is strikingly similar to the distribution of
immigrants along the native wage distribution", in other words, it is likely that existing immigrants were most badly hit. That in itself implies that the skill sets of migrant and immigrant workers are not as interchangeable as migrants with other migrants.
0 -
If you think it is definite, would you be interested in a small wager at the bookies prices? Betvictor are still offering 5/4*, would you offer £25 to my £20?nigel4england said:
Well I'm a Chelsea fan and gutted as I was with the late equalizer even I thought they deserved a draw on their first half performance. They will definitely finish top four, one reason is they have no European games this season. I backed them to finish above Liverpool and also Liverpool not to finish in the top four.Quincel said:The fact that Utd are only now odds on with any bookies not to finish Top 4 bemuses me greatly. I got on at 5/4 (frankly I could have done better, should have held out for 6/4 at least) but reckon it's at least a 60% chance, maybe better. Even when they win they're looking unconvincing.
Although, they've rescued two undeserved points in two weeks.
*And best odds on them being Top 4 is 4/5 (WH).0 -
Carshalton is a safer LD seat than Sutton and Cheam and the local election results in the wards making up Carshalton were also betterrcs1000 said:Re LibDem seats, my friends in Cambridge - who are by no means Hubbert fans - think he'll hang on - probably on the back of a chronically divided opposition and a fairly useless local Labour party.
I have no view on Watford (ask JackW...), and I think the LibDems are likely be only distant challengers in Oxwab.
In London, Brent is obviously a big loss. Hornsey & Wood Green a likely one (although I know some Highgate Conservatives who will vote tactically for her, so she may be a surprise hold). Kingston has to be a likely (60%+ prob) loss, Twickenham is likely to be a narrower hold than most people think.
I'd reckon on Simon Hughes holding on in Southwalk, but he is by no means a certainty. Sutton & Cheam is a likely hold. Carshalton is a toss-up, but I think it's probably a Conservative gain.
So: there are three London seats which are likely (i.e 66+% chance: Southwalk, Sutton & Cheam and Twickenham), two 40% shots (Carshalton and Kingston), one 20% shot (Hornsey & Wood Green), and one 0% shot (Brent).
Most likely outcome for the Libs in the capital: three seats, but could be as few as two, and as many as five.
0 -
O/T:
Wondering what time and date a particular BBC programme was broadcast between 1923 and 2009?
http://genome.ch.bbc.co.uk/0 -
Just to be clear you are backing them to not finish in the top four?Quincel said:
If you think it is definite, would you be interested in a small wager at the bookies prices? Betvictor are still offering 5/4*, would you offer £25 to my £20?nigel4england said:
Well I'm a Chelsea fan and gutted as I was with the late equalizer even I thought they deserved a draw on their first half performance. They will definitely finish top four, one reason is they have no European games this season. I backed them to finish above Liverpool and also Liverpool not to finish in the top four.Quincel said:The fact that Utd are only now odds on with any bookies not to finish Top 4 bemuses me greatly. I got on at 5/4 (frankly I could have done better, should have held out for 6/4 at least) but reckon it's at least a 60% chance, maybe better. Even when they win they're looking unconvincing.
Although, they've rescued two undeserved points in two weeks.
*And best odds on them being Top 4 is 4/5 (WH).0 -
Great stuff Nigel ..... I've never previously had a bet on a football player being carded but took your advice this afternoon, successfully backing both Fellaini at 21/10 and Ivanovic at 2/1.nigel4england said:My three card bets all won at 5/2, 2/1 and 2/1 ish.
Who said this isn't a betting site any more!
Food on the table as they say, many thanks!0 -
Lots of EU/immigration commentary, but come May many with a bit of money and a reasonably decent job with be more concerned with "Labour's taxes" and their interest rates, than immigration.
It will be Labour's target vote - insecure job, insecure housing - that will carry on thinking about the adverse impacts of immigration because they can't get away from it.
People with good incomes or capital can always buy their selves out of a situation - so long as the government doesn't grab their money.
0 -
Cameron is crap. Failed to put the boot in, time and time again.Omnium said:Does anyone have a theory as to how and why Gordo managed to rake back the Tory lead in 2010?
I ask this because if, and it's a big if, Labour merely benefitted from a swing towards 'no change' then the Tories are going to romp home in 2015.
We know without doubt that there was a big move, and we know without doubt that Gordo and his merry men did nothing to deserve it. Cameron didn't obviously blow it either.
I've bet a little against Labour next year. That's partly due to Ed, partly due to Scotland, and partly due to UKIP. I wonder though if there's a bigger picture that's passed me (and others) by. Will the Tories get the Gordo swing?
But Gordon saved the world...
0 -
Tory under-performance (or rather Gordon outperformance) in Scotland. Doubt it will be replicated by EdM + ??Omnium said:Does anyone have a theory as to how and why Gordo managed to rake back the Tory lead in 2010?
A very effective series of PPB's - pushing the heartless Tories taking away middle class benefits line. Probably switched enough votes in key marginals.0 -
One theory might be that the public took a closer look at Cam & Osb and didn't like what they saw as much as they thought they would. Arguably the two eds are already better known to the public so a similar effect won't occur. OTOH I think the possibility is that miliband personally is going to crumble before our eyes over the next 6 months: his conf speech disclosed hitherto unguessed-at depths of crapness, and it can only get worse. That could make a real difference.Omnium said:Does anyone have a theory as to how and why Gordo managed to rake back the Tory lead in 2010?
I ask this because if, and it's a big if, Labour merely benefitted from a swing towards 'no change' then the Tories are going to romp home in 2015.
We know without doubt that there was a big move, and we know without doubt that Gordo and his merry men did nothing to deserve it. Cameron didn't obviously blow it either.
I've bet a little against Labour next year. That's partly due to Ed, partly due to Scotland, and partly due to UKIP. I wonder though if there's a bigger picture that's passed me (and others) by. Will the Tories get the Gordo swing?
0 -
@david_herdson,@andyjs
Cheers. The LD surge probably was important., and the wiley Mandelson too. There was perhaps some relief that the economy wasn't unrecoverable as well. There's certainly an unexplained gap though I feel.
The betting problem is Ed - he's awful.. but he's not that awful. The electorate have him pegged right at the low end, and even the faintest hint of adequacy could change all that.
I hate betting with my political views too.0 -
"The demand for a hefty top-up payment surprised the Netherlands and Italy too, who are being asked to pay 643m euros and 340m, respectively."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-eu-29776473
It's not just Cameron who didn't know.
0 -
Yeah. Just to make perfectly clear:nigel4england said:
Just to be clear you are backing them to not finish in the top four?Quincel said:
If you think it is definite, would you be interested in a small wager at the bookies prices? Betvictor are still offering 5/4*, would you offer £25 to my £20?nigel4england said:
Well I'm a Chelsea fan and gutted as I was with the late equalizer even I thought they deserved a draw on their first half performance. They will definitely finish top four, one reason is they have no European games this season. I backed them to finish above Liverpool and also Liverpool not to finish in the top four.Quincel said:The fact that Utd are only now odds on with any bookies not to finish Top 4 bemuses me greatly. I got on at 5/4 (frankly I could have done better, should have held out for 6/4 at least) but reckon it's at least a 60% chance, maybe better. Even when they win they're looking unconvincing.
Although, they've rescued two undeserved points in two weeks.
*And best odds on them being Top 4 is 4/5 (WH).
Utd finish top 4: I pay you £20
Utd finish outside top 4: You pay me £250 -
The big Conservative lead was down to small numbers by February/March, 2010. If anything, they clawed back some ground between then and the election, largely thanks to a stronger recovery from the TV debates. An explanation of the vanishing opposition lead needs to account for those time facts.0
-
I remember the news a few months ago about the inclusion of certain illicit activities in the national GDP calculation, I presume that activity was to do with this recalculation?MarkHopkins said:"The demand for a hefty top-up payment surprised the Netherlands and Italy too, who are being asked to pay 643m euros and 340m, respectively."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-eu-29776473
It's not just Cameron who didn't know.0 -
VotinMarkSenior said:
Carshalton is a safer LD seat than Sutton and Cheam and the local election results in the wards making up Carshalton were also betterrcs1000 said:Re LibDem seats, my friends in Cambridge - who are by no means Hubbert fans - think he'll hang on - probably on the back of a chronically divided opposition and a fairly useless local Labour party.
I have no view on Watford (ask JackW...), and I think the LibDems are likely be only distant challengers in Oxwab.
In London, Brent is obviously a big loss. Hornsey & Wood Green a likely one (although I know some Highgate Conservatives who will vote tactically for her, so she may be a surprise hold). Kingston has to be a likely (60%+ prob) loss, Twickenham is likely to be a narrower hold than most people think.
I'd reckon on Simon Hughes holding on in Southwalk, but he is by no means a certainty. Sutton & Cheam is a likely hold. Carshalton is a toss-up, but I think it's probably a Conservative gain.
So: there are three London seats which are likely (i.e 66+% chance: Southwalk, Sutton & Cheam and Twickenham), two 40% shots (Carshalton and Kingston), one 20% shot (Hornsey & Wood Green), and one 0% shot (Brent).
Most likely outcome for the Libs in the capital: three seats, but could be as few as two, and as many as five.
Voting for proven competent local government candidates where opinions on Europe and immigration are immaterial is very different to voting for national candidates.MarkSenior said:
Carshalton is a safer LD seat than Sutton and Cheam and the local election results in the wards making up Carshalton were also betterrcs1000 said:Re LibDem seats, my friends in Cambridge - who are by no means Hubbert fans - think he'll hang on - probably on the back of a chronically divided opposition and a fairly useless local Labour party.
I have no view on Watford (ask JackW...), and I think the LibDems are likely be only distant challengers in Oxwab.
In London, Brent is obviously a big loss. Hornsey & Wood Green a likely one (although I know some Highgate Conservatives who will vote tactically for her, so she may be a surprise hold). Kingston has to be a likely (60%+ prob) loss, Twickenham is likely to be a narrower hold than most people think.
I'd reckon on Simon Hughes holding on in Southwalk, but he is by no means a certainty. Sutton & Cheam is a likely hold. Carshalton is a toss-up, but I think it's probably a Conservative gain.
So: there are three London seats which are likely (i.e 66+% chance: Southwalk, Sutton & Cheam and Twickenham), two 40% shots (Carshalton and Kingston), one 20% shot (Hornsey & Wood Green), and one 0% shot (Brent).
Most likely outcome for the Libs in the capital: three seats, but could be as few as two, and as many as five.0 -
20 centres. 1911 Solo victory.0
-
Fear of change.Omnium said:Does anyone have a theory as to how and why Gordo managed to rake back the Tory lead in 2010?
I ask this because if, and it's a big if, Labour merely benefitted from a swing towards 'no change' then the Tories are going to romp home in 2015.
We know without doubt that there was a big move, and we know without doubt that Gordo and his merry men did nothing to deserve it. Cameron didn't obviously blow it either.
I've bet a little against Labour next year. That's partly due to Ed, partly due to Scotland, and partly due to UKIP. I wonder though if there's a bigger picture that's passed me (and others) by. Will the Tories get the Gordo swing?
Blair's landslide of 12.5% was over 30% just seven months before the election.
The current government hasn't delivered a Winter of Discontent, an ERM fiasco or a banking crisis.
What's the big - and I mean, big - reason for sacking them and thinking the next bloke/Mrs T must be better?
The Tories will be ahead next May, barring events.
They've actually been ahead in 3 of the last 4 Yougovs on a 2010:2014 vote ratio when applied to 2010 shares. Labour went sub 30 today for the first time.
0 -
Cutting
Cutting the 50p tax rate whilst simultaneously preaching austeritychestnut said:
Fear of change.Omnium said:Does anyone have a theory as to how and why Gordo managed to rake back the Tory lead in 2010?
I ask this because if, and it's a big if, Labour merely benefitted from a swing towards 'no change' then the Tories are going to romp home in 2015.
We know without doubt that there was a big move, and we know without doubt that Gordo and his merry men did nothing to deserve it. Cameron didn't obviously blow it either.
I've bet a little against Labour next year. That's partly due to Ed, partly due to Scotland, and partly due to UKIP. I wonder though if there's a bigger picture that's passed me (and others) by. Will the Tories get the Gordo swing?
Blair's landslide of 12.5% was over 30% just seven months before the election.
The current government hasn't delivered a Winter of Discontent, an ERM fiasco or a banking crisis.
What's the big - and I mean, big - reason for sacking them and thinking the next bloke/Mrs T must be better?0 -
That's good for me, done!Quincel said:
Yeah. Just to make perfectly clear:nigel4england said:
Just to be clear you are backing them to not finish in the top four?Quincel said:
If you think it is definite, would you be interested in a small wager at the bookies prices? Betvictor are still offering 5/4*, would you offer £25 to my £20?nigel4england said:
Well I'm a Chelsea fan and gutted as I was with the late equalizer even I thought they deserved a draw on their first half performance. They will definitely finish top four, one reason is they have no European games this season. I backed them to finish above Liverpool and also Liverpool not to finish in the top four.Quincel said:The fact that Utd are only now odds on with any bookies not to finish Top 4 bemuses me greatly. I got on at 5/4 (frankly I could have done better, should have held out for 6/4 at least) but reckon it's at least a 60% chance, maybe better. Even when they win they're looking unconvincing.
Although, they've rescued two undeserved points in two weeks.
*And best odds on them being Top 4 is 4/5 (WH).
Utd finish top 4: I pay you £20
Utd finish outside top 4: You pay me £25
I feel that with Everton, Spurs and Liverpool sidetracked with European football then fourth is up for grabs, presuming Arsenal finish third. Much as I'd like to see West Ham or Southampton get fourth I don't think their respective squads are strong enough.
If I lose then the effect on United's finances of going two years without Champions League football will be £25 well spent!0 -
My gut feel is LDs on 33 seats +/-3MikeSmithson said:
I don't think my son has access to the same data that I have.Pulpstar said:
Sounds like you're predicting a bit more than the 20 seats your son has gone for !MikeSmithson said:
Any seat that Lord A had the LDs within 5% will probably go yellow. Lord A doesn't mention candidates' names and the polling I've seen oes shows this is a major factor.Pulpstar said:
Just which seats are the Lib Dems going to lose though ?rcs1000 said:
That's my view too.anotherDave said:Surely the collapse of the LDs makes another hung parliament less rather than more likely?
The Independent's article on Conservative Party funds being directed towards defence rather than target seats suggests a Labour majority.
So far, it has been an unprofitable one.
Tory targets:
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/2015guide/conservative-targets/
I think it would be fair to hand all Lib Dem targets down to Berwick Upon Tweed (Not Norwich South or Bradford East though) and not Sutton and Cheam.
I make that 12 gains.
Looking at Labour's list I make it 11 gains for them.
UKIP Gain 10 seats say - 8 Tory 2 Labour
SNP gain 3 Labour perhaps ? (The Lib Dem seats surely drop more easily than the Labour targets)
So Con + 12
Lab + 11
Con -8
Lab -2
Lab -3
Yields a start point of Con +4; Lab -6 from the 2010 totals.
The main contradiction in my mind at the moment is the local Lib Dem strength in in particular the SW which made these gains TRICKY for the Tories, and the appalling Lib Dem national numbers.
I think @David Herdson of this parish said that in order for the Lib Dems to hold some seats they'd need to lose 6 out of 7 votes elsewhere, which he thought inconceivable. Perhaps it isn't.
Against LAB Simon Hughes and possibly Lynne Featherstone will hold on as will Cambridge.
Watford is an LD gain and there's an outside chance of Oxwab.
Incumbents standing again against the Tories will do okay. Where there's new candidate it will be different.
Finally watch Burnley. Individuals matter enormously and the incumbent is very strong.
I've only placed 1 decent bet for Tory vs Lib Dem (Solihull)
Just don't ask me to justify it!0 -
Timmy was on here before the local elections saying how the Lib Dems would lose control of Sutton council as many of their experienced councillors were retiring .FalseFlag said:
VotinMarkSenior said:
Carshalton is a safer LD seat than Sutton and Cheam and the local election results in the wards making up Carshalton were also betterrcs1000 said:Re LibDem seats, my friends in Cambridge - who are by no means Hubbert fans - think he'll hang on - probably on the back of a chronically divided opposition and a fairly useless local Labour party.
I have no view on Watford (ask JackW...), and I think the LibDems are likely be only distant challengers in Oxwab.
In London, Brent is obviously a big loss. Hornsey & Wood Green a likely one (although I know some Highgate Conservatives who will vote tactically for her, so she may be a surprise hold). Kingston has to be a likely (60%+ prob) loss, Twickenham is likely to be a narrower hold than most people think.
I'd reckon on Simon Hughes holding on in Southwalk, but he is by no means a certainty. Sutton & Cheam is a likely hold. Carshalton is a toss-up, but I think it's probably a Conservative gain.
So: there are three London seats which are likely (i.e 66+% chance: Southwalk, Sutton & Cheam and Twickenham), two 40% shots (Carshalton and Kingston), one 20% shot (Hornsey & Wood Green), and one 0% shot (Brent).
Most likely outcome for the Libs in the capital: three seats, but could be as few as two, and as many as five.
Voting for proven competent local government candidates where opinions on Europe and immigration are immaterial is very different to voting for national candidates.MarkSenior said:
Carshalton is a safer LD seat than Sutton and Cheam and the local election results in the wards making up Carshalton were also betterrcs1000 said:Re LibDem seats, my friends in Cambridge - who are by no means Hubbert fans - think he'll hang on - probably on the back of a chronically divided opposition and a fairly useless local Labour party.
I have no view on Watford (ask JackW...), and I think the LibDems are likely be only distant challengers in Oxwab.
In London, Brent is obviously a big loss. Hornsey & Wood Green a likely one (although I know some Highgate Conservatives who will vote tactically for her, so she may be a surprise hold). Kingston has to be a likely (60%+ prob) loss, Twickenham is likely to be a narrower hold than most people think.
Most likely outcome for the Libs in the capital: three seats, but could be as few as two, and as many as five.0 -
I don't think she's given up, but she's probably realistic about the position. The arithmetic is intimidating (0.7% majority, 17% LibDems, no LibDem candidate yet, and that's before you start thinking about UKIP), her local party has been nearly moribund and she has a high-profile quarrel with the main non-partisan local paper. There's quite a big anti-incumbent vote as a result of this and other spats, though a lot of that will go UKIP.JohnO said:
Have you any evidence, I mean any evidence at all, that Anna Soubry has "given up"?MikeSmithson said:
I think Anna Soubry has already given up. Nick P will be back with reasonable margin. Lord A had 45% 2010 LDs switching to him and he's done a huge amount on the ground.JBriskin said:
I would say to this - SHITEPrinceofTaranto said:So apparently Anna Soubry was at the anti- Indian Kashmir rally at Trafalgar Square today. Any idea how many Indian voters there are in Broxtowe she has just lost?
But since we are all aspiring writers here I will merely say-
Very Poor
Like Nick the candidates in 10 of LAB's top 40 targets are retreads. It'll be interesting to see if they still have an incumbency benefit.0
