politicalbetting
Home› General

Howdy, Stranger!

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

Sign In Register

Categories

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Jim Murphy wins Scottish Labour leadership election with 56

SystemSystem Posts: 12,550
edited December 2014 in General

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Jim Murphy wins Scottish Labour leadership election with 56% of votes on first round

.@ScottishLabour will lead us to a fairer Scotland. #ScotLabLeader pic.twitter.com/KtdCauopFf

Read the full story here


«134

Comments

  • Moses_Moses_ Posts: 4,865
    edited December 2014
    1st

    but not the unions choice 1st? Is this a first?
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 14,207
    So Murphy tells us that Labour will tax more and spend more.

    Fire up the printing presses baby.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,422
    Breakdown of SLAB Leadership votes by section:

    http://labourlist.org/2014/12/murphy-wins-scottish-leadership-contest/

    MPs/MSPs/MEPs section – Murphy 22.36%, Findlay 6.75%, Boyack 4.22%

    Labour members section – Murphy 20.14%, Findlay 10.89%, Boyack 2.3%

    Affiliates section – Murphy 13.26%, Findlay 17.34%, Boyack 2.73%
  • Moses_Moses_ Posts: 4,865
    edited December 2014
    I see Maguire is clutching at straws again,

    Kevin Maguire @Kevin_Maguire
    Fighting acceptance speech showed why SNP didn't want @jimmurphymp to be Labour's leader in Scotland


    News for you Kevin .......neither did the Unions either who both bankroll you and control your policies.

    I see trouble ahead lets play the music etc
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,422
    Murphy lead:

    Politicians: +15.6
    Members: +9.25
    Union: -4.08

    Two clear wins and one pretty close loss......
  • IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966
    FPT:
    isam said:

    Alistair said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    calum said:

    The anointing of Jim Murphy as the potential saviour of SLAB, shows just how out of touch with Scottish politics the Labour party, political commentators and mainstream media have become.

    Forgive me, but we had over two years of being told how 'out of touch with the Scottish people' the London based media/unionist stooges were in Indyref.

    We were right.

    The Nats were wrong.
    We had two years of being told that the Yes vote wouldn't break 35% and that talking about it being over 40 was pure fantasy.
    Indeed we did

    Compare the attitude shown here to scottish independence supporters "get over it, you lost" rather than acknowledging it was much much closer than people on here predicted, with the attitude when ukip won the euros, clacton and rochester which was "aah but you didn't win by as far as the opinion polls suggested" rather than "fair enough, you won"

    That's why it is often difficult to use this site as a betting resource, because so many people spin rather than accept facts, and shift their opinion solely on what's sounds best for the team they support/worst for the one they dislike most
    Social Judgement Theory https://explorable.com/social-judgment-theory-experiment
    We studied this experiment at University many years ago, its fascinating. People put into groups even on a meaningless basis act to promote the interest of their group, and most specifically act to create the widest possible difference between their group and the other group, even if the result for their group is less than optimal as a result.
  • IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966
    Floater said:

    So Murphy tells us that Labour will tax more and spend more.

    Fire up the printing presses baby.

    Has he told Ed Bo***cks ?

  • TCPoliticalBettingTCPoliticalBetting Posts: 10,819
    Will Unite lift a finger to help Murphy? I doubt it.
  • isamisam Posts: 42,122
    Indigo said:

    FPT:

    isam said:

    Alistair said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    calum said:

    The anointing of Jim Murphy as the potential saviour of SLAB, shows just how out of touch with Scottish politics the Labour party, political commentators and mainstream media have become.

    Forgive me, but we had over two years of being told how 'out of touch with the Scottish people' the London based media/unionist stooges were in Indyref.

    We were right.

    The Nats were wrong.
    We had two years of being told that the Yes vote wouldn't break 35% and that talking about it being over 40 was pure fantasy.
    Indeed we did

    Compare the attitude shown here to scottish independence supporters "get over it, you lost" rather than acknowledging it was much much closer than people on here predicted, with the attitude when ukip won the euros, clacton and rochester which was "aah but you didn't win by as far as the opinion polls suggested" rather than "fair enough, you won"

    That's why it is often difficult to use this site as a betting resource, because so many people spin rather than accept facts, and shift their opinion solely on what's sounds best for the team they support/worst for the one they dislike most
    Social Judgement Theory https://explorable.com/social-judgment-theory-experiment
    We studied this experiment at University many years ago, its fascinating. People put into groups even on a meaningless basis act to promote the interest of their group, and most specifically act to create the widest possible difference between their group and the other group, even if the result for their group is less than optimal as a result.
    I wasn't aware of this experiment but pretty much argued its conclusion at university when trying to explain why In my opinion it was impossible for communism to work

    The anti ukip at any cost behaviour is evidence that groups of all kinds, even those that think themselves hard wired to fairness, like a scapegoat to blame everything on
  • chestnutchestnut Posts: 7,341
    Wasn't Jim Murphy meant to be one of the prominent Labour/No people during the referendum?

    And there's been a 20 point swing to the SNP since then.

    It's like watching the Tories floundering around in 1996.
  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 7,382
    TCPoliticalBetting said:

    Will Unite lift a finger to help Murphy? I doubt it.

    UNITE desperately want the Tories out and even though they might not like Murphy I've little doubt they'll do their best.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,422
    isam said:

    Indigo said:

    FPT:

    isam said:

    Alistair said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    calum said:

    The anointing of Jim Murphy as the potential saviour of SLAB, shows just how out of touch with Scottish politics the Labour party, political commentators and mainstream media have become.

    Forgive me, but we had over two years of being told how 'out of touch with the Scottish people' the London based media/unionist stooges were in Indyref.

    We were right.

    The Nats were wrong.
    We had two years of being told that the Yes vote wouldn't break 35% and that talking about it being over 40 was pure fantasy.
    Indeed we did

    Compare the attitude shown here to scottish independence supporters "get over it, you lost" rather than acknowledging it was much much closer than people on here predicted, with the attitude when ukip won the euros, clacton and rochester which was "aah but you didn't win by as far as the opinion polls suggested" rather than "fair enough, you won"

    That's why it is often difficult to use this site as a betting resource, because so many people spin rather than accept facts, and shift their opinion solely on what's sounds best for the team they support/worst for the one they dislike most
    Social Judgement Theory https://explorable.com/social-judgment-theory-experiment
    We studied this experiment at University many years ago, its fascinating. People put into groups even on a meaningless basis act to promote the interest of their group, and most specifically act to create the widest possible difference between their group and the other group, even if the result for their group is less than optimal as a result.
    The anti ukip at any cost behaviour is evidence that groups of all kinds, even those that think themselves hard wired to fairness, like a scapegoat to blame everything on
    Self awareness meter on the blink?
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    This is probably the optimal result for Scottish Labour out of those on offer. Jim Murphy is at least capable, even if he is not fully stocked on charm. Since he has registered a convincing victory, it is not really open to his opponents to sulk from the sidelines or to launch a guerilla campaign against him in the short term.

    Labour may still do badly next May in Scotland, but I expect that the chances of obliteration have receded significantly with this result.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,422
    TCPoliticalBetting said:

    Will Unite lift a finger to help Murphy? I doubt it.

    That rather depends on whether they want a Labour government in Westminster.....
  • JPJ2JPJ2 Posts: 380
    Murphy was the "best" choice for the British Labour Party in Scotland (and for me, as I made a good few hundred on the inevitable result).

    With the help of the BBC (Catriona Renton, the report on the BBC news channel from the event is a former Labour councillor, epitomising the institutional unionism of BBC Scotland) and the MSM, it will probably be enough to prevent an utter disaster for Labour at the GE 2015.

    However, as his Blairite/right wing credentials (by Labour in Scotland terms) become better known by the electorate, another heavy defeat for Holyrood 2016 will follow thereafter.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,422
    chestnut said:

    Wasn't Jim Murphy meant to be one of the prominent Labour/No people during the referendum?

    He was.

    No won.

  • YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 4,382
    Good, to at least have a vote for a leader.

    Beats the coronation for PM , Gordon Brown
    First Minister Nicola Surgeon.
    Leader of the Opposition Michael Howard and many other examples.

    It should be mandatory in all political parties to have a contested vote.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 66,590
    Does this mean a by-election?
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,422
    Indigo said:

    Floater said:

    So Murphy tells us that Labour will tax more and spend more.

    Fire up the printing presses baby.

    Has he told Ed Bo***cks ?

    He's been quoted as saying that Ed Bo***cks and Ed Fu**up can read his policies in the newspapers like everyone else.
  • isamisam Posts: 42,122
    edited December 2014
    CarlottaVance said:

    isam said:

    Indigo said:

    FPT:

    isam said:

    Alistair said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    calum said:

    The anointing of Jim Murphy as the potential saviour of SLAB, shows just how out of touch with Scottish politics the Labour party, political commentators and mainstream media have become.

    Forgive me, but we had over two years of being told how 'out of touch with the Scottish people' the London based media/unionist stooges were in Indyref.

    We were right.

    The Nats were wrong.
    We had two years of being told that the Yes vote wouldn't break 35% and that talking about it being over 40 was pure fantasy.
    Indeed we did

    Compare the attitude shown here to scottish independence supporters "get over it, you lost" rather than acknowledging it was much much closer than people on here predicted, with the attitude when ukip won the euros, clacton and rochester which was "aah but you didn't win by as far as the opinion polls suggested" rather than "fair enough, you won"

    That's why it is often difficult to use this site as a betting resource, because so many people spin rather than accept facts, and shift their opinion solely on what's sounds best for the team they support/worst for the one they dislike most
    Social Judgement Theory https://explorable.com/social-judgment-theory-experiment
    We studied this experiment at University many years ago, its fascinating. People put into groups even on a meaningless basis act to promote the interest of their group, and most specifically act to create the widest possible difference between their group and the other group, even if the result for their group is less than optimal as a result.
    The anti ukip at any cost behaviour is evidence that groups of all kinds, even those that think themselves hard wired to fairness, like a scapegoat to blame everything on
    Self awareness meter on the blink?
    Not at all... I suppose you are trying to imply I scapegoat immigrants for everything, but I don't blame them for anything

    Did you understand that? I don't blame immigrants for anything

    I used that phrase precisely because it is what people stereotype ukip as thinking, whilst exhibiting exactly that behaviour and thought processes themselves
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 44,191
    MikeSmithson said:

    TCPoliticalBetting said:

    Will Unite lift a finger to help Murphy? I doubt it.

    UNITE desperately want the Tories out and even though they might not like Murphy I've little doubt they'll do their best.
    'Their best' may be open to interpretation.

    'Scottish Labour faces ‘death’ if Murphy wins, union head says

    The head of Labour’s biggest donor, Unite the Union, has warned that if Jim Murphy becomes leader of the party in Scotland it could prove “a sentence of political death”.
    Len McCluskey, general secretary of the union, told the Financial Times that electing an “unashamedly” Blairite politician to run Scottish Labour would mean “no future” for the party north of the border. It was vital to have a member of the Scottish Parliament leading the group, he argued, such as his favoured candidate Neil Findlay.'

    http://tinyurl.com/m5dfh7n

  • TCPoliticalBettingTCPoliticalBetting Posts: 10,819
    MikeSmithson said:

    TCPoliticalBetting said:

    Will Unite lift a finger to help Murphy? I doubt it.

    UNITE desperately want the Tories out and even though they might not like Murphy I've little doubt they'll do their best.
    OGH, Unite's money needs to be re-directed to save SLAB. That needs decisions by Miliband and the co-operation of McCluskey. Will both of those happen? Unite may choose to re-direct discretionary spend to England & Wales plus Unite sponsored MPs in Scotland.

  • Max_EdinburghMax_Edinburgh Posts: 347
    Murphy is a shrewd operator and a very capable politician. Given his background he also greatly increases the chances of Labour winning back Catholic supporters in the west of Scotland who have defected to the SNP. It will be interesting to see what ground he fights on but one thing we can be assured of is that the fantasy economics of $113 a barrel will be raised time and time and time again in the run up to May 2015.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 44,191
    rottenborough said:

    Does this mean a by-election?

    I gather Murphy will fight his seat in the GE and then give it up once he's won a seat for Holyrood in 2016.
  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 7,382
    Theuniondivvie said:

    MikeSmithson said:

    TCPoliticalBetting said:

    Will Unite lift a finger to help Murphy? I doubt it.

    UNITE desperately want the Tories out and even though they might not like Murphy I've little doubt they'll do their best.
    'Their best' may be open to interpretation.

    'Scottish Labour faces ‘death’ if Murphy wins, union head says

    The head of Labour’s biggest donor, Unite the Union, has warned that if Jim Murphy becomes leader of the party in Scotland it could prove “a sentence of political death”.
    Len McCluskey, general secretary of the union, told the Financial Times that electing an “unashamedly” Blairite politician to run Scottish Labour would mean “no future” for the party north of the border. It was vital to have a member of the Scottish Parliament leading the group, he argued, such as his favoured candidate Neil Findlay.'

    http://tinyurl.com/m5dfh7n


    All sorts of things are said before elections. The Labour movement is desperate to return to power and UNITE will follow in line.

  • TCPoliticalBettingTCPoliticalBetting Posts: 10,819
    Theuniondivvie said:

    MikeSmithson said:

    TCPoliticalBetting said:

    Will Unite lift a finger to help Murphy? I doubt it.

    UNITE desperately want the Tories out and even though they might not like Murphy I've little doubt they'll do their best.
    'Their best' may be open to interpretation.
    'Scottish Labour faces ‘death’ if Murphy wins, union head says
    The head of Labour’s biggest donor, Unite the Union, has warned that if Jim Murphy becomes leader of the party in Scotland it could prove “a sentence of political death”.
    Len McCluskey, general secretary of the union, told the Financial Times that electing an “unashamedly” Blairite politician to run Scottish Labour would mean “no future” for the party north of the border. It was vital to have a member of the Scottish Parliament leading the group, he argued, such as his favoured candidate Neil Findlay.'
    http://tinyurl.com/m5dfh7n
    Judge Unite by what its Leader says they will do, not what is in the "best interest" of the Union.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,422
    isam said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    isam said:

    Indigo said:

    FPT:

    isam said:

    Alistair said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    calum said:

    The anointing of Jim Murphy as the potential saviour of SLAB, shows just how out of touch with Scottish politics the Labour party, political commentators and mainstream media have become.

    Forgive me, but we had over two years of being told how 'out of touch with the Scottish people' the London based media/unionist stooges were in Indyref.

    We were right.

    The Nats were wrong.
    We had two years of being told that the Yes vote wouldn't break 35% and that talking about it being over 40 was pure fantasy.
    Indeed we did

    Compare the attitude shown here to scottish independence supporters "get over it, you lost" rather than acknowledging it was much much closer than people on here predicted, with the attitude when ukip won the euros, clacton and rochester which was "aah but you didn't win by as far as the opinion polls suggested" rather than "fair enough, you won"

    That's why it is often difficult to use this site as a betting resource, because so many people spin rather than accept facts, and shift their opinion solely on what's sounds best for the team they support/worst for the one they dislike most
    Social Judgement Theory https://explorable.com/social-judgment-theory-experiment
    We studied this experiment at University many years ago, its fascinating. People put into groups even on a meaningless basis act to promote the interest of their group, and most specifically act to create the widest possible difference between their group and the other group, even if the result for their group is less than optimal as a result.
    The anti ukip at any cost behaviour is evidence that groups of all kinds, even those that think themselves hard wired to fairness, like a scapegoat to blame everything on
    Self awareness meter on the blink?
    Not at all... I suppose you are trying to imply I scapegoat immigrants for everything, but I don't blame them for anything
    Not at all.

    UKIP's scapegoat is the EU, just as the Scot Nats is 'Westminster' - both scapegoat an 'other' and pretend everything would be so much better if only we could leave.....
  • YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 4,382
    CarlottaVance said:

    chestnut said:

    Wasn't Jim Murphy meant to be one of the prominent Labour/No people during the referendum?

    He was.

    No won.

    True Carlotta

    It did .

    You would think the opposite that 55% voted yes.

    I supported a yes vote for scotland, in the main because it will become a neverendum campaign.

    Jim Murphy came across to me as a tough campaigner.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 44,191
    The oracle speaks.

    Dan Hodges ‏@DPJHodges 10 mins10 minutes ago Greenwich, London
    Given Jim Murphy appointment, can't see how unions continue to back Labour in Scotland. May hold the line in 2015, but not 2016.
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    edited December 2014
    Actually, Labour will not be too worried even with the current SPIN or others' spread, circa 20 - 22. It is the current polls and their possible ramifications which is giving Labour nightmares.

    Note about 20-22. If this turns out to be correct, SNP gains 15 seats. 7 or 8 will be coming from the Liberal Democrats. Labour thus loses 8 or 9, if the Tories gain 1 or even 2.

    That means Labour wins 32-34 seats. The 20-22 spread, I fear, is too optimistic for Labour !

    O Jimmy, Jimmy ! jimmy, Jimmy, Jimmy........ Jimmy Murphy !!!
  • TCPoliticalBettingTCPoliticalBetting Posts: 10,819
    edited December 2014
    Meanwhile the Lib Dems are making "brave" forecasts.
    "top figures in the party are forecasting they will have 35-40 MPs "
    " The estimate is based on secret opinion polling seen by leading figures in Nick Clegg's party and obtained by Sky News.
    But they are predicting they will hold 28 seats, half their current 56. Another 10 are regarded as marginal, five more are less winnable, and senior Lib Dems expect to gain two seats from the Conservatives."
    "The two seats party chiefs predict they will win are Watford and Winchester"
    https://uk.news.yahoo.com/lib-dems-fear-losing-11-seats-election-230646430.html
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    Could the unions switch to the SNP? Or the Greens?
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,422
    Jim Murphy Leadership election speech:

    http://labourlist.org/2014/12/together-lets-build-the-fairest-nation-on-earth-jim-murphys-victory-speech/

    Ed is not going to enjoy the comparisons over the coming months.....
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    rottenborough said:

    Does this mean a by-election?

    No.
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    CarlottaVance said:

    chestnut said:

    Wasn't Jim Murphy meant to be one of the prominent Labour/No people during the referendum?

    He was.

    No won.

    Remarkable, how Scot Tories love [ or, at least, like ] Jim Murphy. Fitalass is a great fan !
  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 7,382
    My guess is that next Scottish poll will be Survation for Daily Record. Will that show a Murphy LAB bounce?
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,422
    surbiton said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    chestnut said:

    Wasn't Jim Murphy meant to be one of the prominent Labour/No people during the referendum?

    He was.

    No won.

    Remarkable, how Scot Tories love [ or, at least, like ] Jim Murphy. Fitalass is a great fan !
    Why? We're unionists and someone has to take the fight to the Nats among Labour supporters.....

  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 44,447
    antifrank said:

    This is probably the optimal result for Scottish Labour out of those on offer. Jim Murphy is at least capable, even if he is not fully stocked on charm. Since he has registered a convincing victory, it is not really open to his opponents to sulk from the sidelines or to launch a guerilla campaign against him in the short term.

    Labour may still do badly next May in Scotland, but I expect that the chances of obliteration have receded significantly with this result.

    It is certainly the best possible outcome for SNP, having a Tory as their Scottish puppet leader will not be a rallying point.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 35,117
    Yorkcity said:

    Good, to at least have a vote for a leader.

    Beats the coronation for PM , Gordon Brown
    First Minister Nicola Surgeon.
    Leader of the Opposition Michael Howard and many other examples.

    It should be mandatory in all political parties to have a contested vote.

    Even if it’s clearly (eg Brown, Sturgeon) a one-horse race? I agree there’s a good argument for having a stalking horse (sorry about the double equine) when a leader is losing popularity .... eg Sir Anthony Meyer.
  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 7,382
    CarlottaVance said:

    Jim Murphy Leadership election speech:

    http://labourlist.org/2014/12/together-lets-build-the-fairest-nation-on-earth-jim-murphys-victory-speech/

    Ed is not going to enjoy the comparisons over the coming months.....

    I always reckoned that Murphy would make great UK LAB leader. I'm on at 33/1

  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 44,447
    CarlottaVance said:

    Indigo said:

    Floater said:

    So Murphy tells us that Labour will tax more and spend more.

    Fire up the printing presses baby.

    Has he told Ed Bo***cks ?

    He's been quoted as saying that Ed Bo***cks and Ed Fu**up can read his policies in the newspapers like everyone else.
    Big talk is easy , he will be crawling to Ed and taking orders as normal
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,841
    isam said:

    Not at all... I suppose you are trying to imply I scapegoat immigrants for everything, but I don't blame them for anything

    Did you understand that? I don't blame immigrants for anything

    I used that phrase precisely because it is what people stereotype ukip as thinking, whilst exhibiting exactly that behaviour and thought processes themselves

    There's two elements to the immigration story. Firstly there's the economic side of it relating to jobs (that we're told the natives won't do) and public services/housing provisions. Then there's the more social/cultural side of it where the nature of communities (usually working class) change dramatically.

    The anti-Ukip brigade like to make out Ukip and their voters are all about the second side of it. They like to make out that what's really driving the Ukip vote is an inherent dislike of foreigners and people "not like us". Now I suspect that is true for some of the support. But I think the economic side of it is far more important.

    What angers me is that on the one hand the left are very much pro-immigration and label anyone who questions it as racist. Yet, at the very same time, they complain about low wages and the cost of living.

    I'm sorry, but why should I care about an immigrant getting paid a very low wage? It's there choice to come here, and by doing so they are helping to suppress wages and increase demand for housing and other services.
  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 7,382
    Ladbrokes betting bit.ly/c5gpH6 has Jim Murphy at 33/1 to be EdM's successor. Might be worth a punt.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,422
    malcolmg said:

    antifrank said:

    This is probably the optimal result for Scottish Labour out of those on offer. Jim Murphy is at least capable, even if he is not fully stocked on charm. Since he has registered a convincing victory, it is not really open to his opponents to sulk from the sidelines or to launch a guerilla campaign against him in the short term.

    Labour may still do badly next May in Scotland, but I expect that the chances of obliteration have receded significantly with this result.

    It is certainly the best possible outcome for SNP, having a Tory as their Scottish puppet leader will not be a rallying point.
    And the Prize Turnip for the first post to claim its a 'Victory for the SNP!' goes to the sorest loser in the (united) Kingdom....

  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 44,447
    Theuniondivvie said:

    rottenborough said:

    Does this mean a by-election?

    I gather Murphy will fight his seat in the GE and then give it up once he's won a seat for Holyrood in 2016.
    He will not give up the gravy train for sure, he will milk as much as he can get.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,422
    malcolmg said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    Indigo said:

    Floater said:

    So Murphy tells us that Labour will tax more and spend more.

    Fire up the printing presses baby.

    Has he told Ed Bo***cks ?

    He's been quoted as saying that Ed Bo***cks and Ed Fu**up can read his policies in the newspapers like everyone else.
    Big talk is easy , he will be crawling to Ed and taking orders as normal
    You're misjudging the man as badly as you misjudged Indyref......
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 44,447
    Yorkcity said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    chestnut said:

    Wasn't Jim Murphy meant to be one of the prominent Labour/No people during the referendum?

    He was.

    No won.

    True Carlotta

    It did .

    You would think the opposite that 55% voted yes.

    I supported a yes vote for scotland, in the main because it will become a neverendum campaign.

    Jim Murphy came across to me as a tough campaigner.
    A big jessie who was shouting to nobody until he got hit with an egg. After that he was scared to come out the house.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    They've released voting percentages but not raw figures. SLab embarrassed about membership number in face of SNP membership surge?
  • IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966
    TCPoliticalBetting said:

    Meanwhile the Lib Dems are making "brave" forecasts.
    "top figures in the party are forecasting they will have 35-40 MPs "
    " The estimate is based on secret opinion polling seen by leading figures in Nick Clegg's party and obtained by Sky News.
    But they are predicting they will hold 28 seats, half their current 56. Another 10 are regarded as marginal, five more are less winnable, and senior Lib Dems expect to gain two seats from the Conservatives."
    "The two seats party chiefs predict they will win are Watford and Winchester"
    https://uk.news.yahoo.com/lib-dems-fear-losing-11-seats-election-230646430.html

    I guess they are hoping UKIP will take a huge chunk out of the CONs in Winchester, seems optimistic since there is a 3000 majority, and no one else to squeeze, plus the LDs have a new candidate. The LDs presumably had most of the Gown vote, but students and dons seem to have been moving off to the Greens recently. The rest of the constituency is mostly city commuters, hardly the WVM sorts that would be expected to move to UKIP in droves.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 44,447
    surbiton said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    chestnut said:

    Wasn't Jim Murphy meant to be one of the prominent Labour/No people during the referendum?

    He was.

    No won.

    Remarkable, how Scot Tories love [ or, at least, like ] Jim Murphy. Fitalass is a great fan !
    That says it all
  • YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 4,382
    malcolmg said:

    antifrank said:

    This is probably the optimal result for Scottish Labour out of those on offer. Jim Murphy is at least capable, even if he is not fully stocked on charm. Since he has registered a convincing victory, it is not really open to his opponents to sulk from the sidelines or to launch a guerilla campaign against him in the short term.

    Labour may still do badly next May in Scotland, but I expect that the chances of obliteration have receded significantly with this result.

    It is certainly the best possible outcome for SNP, having a Tory as their Scottish puppet leader will not be a rallying point.
    Sending your previous leader back to Westminster and the Oil Price the SNP worked their economic credibility on will be thrown right back ..

    Do you ever criticize the SNP ?

  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,732
    Assuming the polls have been exaggerating the Labour decline, which seems likely (temporary media squabbling plus the SNP being flattered by referendum-only voters), the resulting "turnaround" story should set Murphy up nicely for the leadership of UK Labour.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 44,447
    CarlottaVance said:

    malcolmg said:

    antifrank said:

    This is probably the optimal result for Scottish Labour out of those on offer. Jim Murphy is at least capable, even if he is not fully stocked on charm. Since he has registered a convincing victory, it is not really open to his opponents to sulk from the sidelines or to launch a guerilla campaign against him in the short term.

    Labour may still do badly next May in Scotland, but I expect that the chances of obliteration have receded significantly with this result.

    It is certainly the best possible outcome for SNP, having a Tory as their Scottish puppet leader will not be a rallying point.
    And the Prize Turnip for the first post to claim its a 'Victory for the SNP!' goes to the sorest loser in the (united) Kingdom....

    Yawn, I see you are as pathetic and juvenile as ever
  • isamisam Posts: 42,122
    CarlottaVance said:

    isam said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    isam said:

    Indigo said:

    FPT:

    isam said:

    Alistair said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    calum said:

    The anointing of Jim Murphy as the potential saviour of SLAB, shows just how out of touch with Scottish politics the Labour party, political commentators and mainstream media have become.

    Forgive me, but we had over two years of being told how 'out of touch with the Scottish people' the London based media/unionist stooges were in Indyref.

    We were right.

    The Nats were wrong.
    We had two years of being told that the Yes vote wouldn't break 35% and that talking about it being over 40 was pure fantasy.
    Indeed we did

    Compare the attitude shown here to scottish independence supporters "get over it, you lost" rather than acknowledging it was much much closer than people on here predicted, with the attitude when ukip won the euros, clacton and rochester which was "aah but you didn't win by as far as the opinion polls suggested" rather than "fair enough, you won"

    That's why it is often difficult to use this site as a betting resource, because so many people spin rather than accept facts, and shift their opinion solely on what's sounds best for the team they support/worst for the one they dislike most
    Social Judgement Theory https://explorable.com/social-judgment-theory-experiment
    We studied this experiment at University many years ago, its fascinating. People put into groups even on a meaningless basis act to promote the interest of their group, and most specifically act to create the widest possible difference between their group and the other group, even if the result for their group is less than optimal as a result.
    The anti ukip at any cost behaviour is evidence that groups of all kinds, even those that think themselves hard wired to fairness, like a scapegoat to blame everything on
    Self awareness meter on the blink?
    Not at all... I suppose you are trying to imply I scapegoat immigrants for everything, but I don't blame them for anything
    Not at all.

    UKIP's scapegoat is the EU, just as the Scot Nats is 'Westminster' - both scapegoat an 'other' and pretend everything would be so much better if only we could leave.....
    Even the EU is only doing what we allow them to do, by 'we' I mean the british govt and the people who vote for it. Ultimate responsibility for all these things is on governments who sign us up to the EU and allow mass immigration, not the people who end up in the situations those decisions encourage
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,841
    CarlottaVance said:

    UKIP's scapegoat is the EU, just as the Scot Nats is 'Westminster' - both scapegoat an 'other' and pretend everything would be so much better if only we could leave.....

    I want us to have an in-out referendum. If the answer is to stay in, then fine. I don't think that things would be much better if we left...but I certainly don't think they'd be any worse.

    For sure Ukip as a party makes it out to be a bigger issue than I think it is (and I happen to get much more angry about devolution!), but then that's true of all parties.

    Labour argue that they'd be much better in power than the Tories. The Tories argue that we must not let Labour back in. But the reality is that it probably won't matter who's in power.

    The situation in Scotland, on the other hand, is potentially much more important.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,422
    malcolmg said:

    Yorkcity said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    chestnut said:

    Wasn't Jim Murphy meant to be one of the prominent Labour/No people during the referendum?

    He was.

    No won.

    True Carlotta

    It did .

    You would think the opposite that 55% voted yes.

    I supported a yes vote for scotland, in the main because it will become a neverendum campaign.

    Jim Murphy came across to me as a tough campaigner.
    A big jessie who was shouting to nobody until he got hit with an egg. After that he was scared to come out the house.
    And yet.....

    His side won......

    Yours, lost.......

  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 44,447
    CarlottaVance said:

    malcolmg said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    Indigo said:

    Floater said:

    So Murphy tells us that Labour will tax more and spend more.

    Fire up the printing presses baby.

    Has he told Ed Bo***cks ?

    He's been quoted as saying that Ed Bo***cks and Ed Fu**up can read his policies in the newspapers like everyone else.
    Big talk is easy , he will be crawling to Ed and taking orders as normal
    You're misjudging the man as badly as you misjudged Indyref......
    The only thing Murphy cares about is himself, he would stab his granny if it helped him
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,422
    edmundintokyo said:

    Assuming the polls have been exaggerating the Labour decline, which seems likely (temporary media squabbling plus the SNP being flattered by referendum-only voters), the resulting "turnaround" story should set Murphy up nicely for the leadership of UK Labour.

    I also suspect he'll be a useful stick to beat Ed with - I'm sure his victory speech will be written up along the lines of 'If only Ed could talk from the heart like that...'
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 44,447
    CarlottaVance said:

    malcolmg said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    Indigo said:

    Floater said:

    So Murphy tells us that Labour will tax more and spend more.

    Fire up the printing presses baby.

    Has he told Ed Bo***cks ?

    He's been quoted as saying that Ed Bo***cks and Ed Fu**up can read his policies in the newspapers like everyone else.
    Big talk is easy , he will be crawling to Ed and taking orders as normal
    You're misjudging the man as badly as you misjudged Indyref......
    I do not believe I misjudged it, your jaundiced views hold no water. Given the donkeys on here had it as a walkover , you the biggest fan boy as well, it was a very good result given the political bribery and interference.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 44,447
    Alistair said:

    They've released voting percentages but not raw figures. SLab embarrassed about membership number in face of SNP membership surge?

    Bet about 1200 out of their 3000 members voted
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 38,997
    CarlottaVance said:

    isam said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    isam said:

    Indigo said:

    FPT:

    isam said:

    Alistair said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    calum said:

    The anointing of Jim Murphy as the potential saviour of SLAB, shows just how out of touch with Scottish politics the Labour party, political commentators and mainstream media have become.

    Forgive me, but we had over two years of being told how 'out of touch with the Scottish people' the London based media/unionist stooges were in Indyref.

    We were right.

    The Nats were wrong.
    We had two years of being told that the Yes vote wouldn't break 35% and that talking about it being over 40 was pure fantasy.
    Indeed we did

    Compare the attitude shown here to scottish independence supporters "get over it, you lost" rather than acknowledging it was much much closer than people on here predicted, with the attitude when ukip won the euros, clacton and rochester which was "aah but you didn't win by as far as the opinion polls suggested" rather than "fair enough, you won"

    That's why it is often difficult to use this site as a betting resource, because so many people spin rather than accept facts, and shift their opinion solely on what's sounds best for the team they support/worst for the one they dislike most
    Social Judgement Theory https://explorable.com/social-judgment-theory-experiment
    We studied this experiment at University many years ago, its fascinating. People put into groups even on a meaningless basis act to promote the interest of their group, and most specifically act to create the widest possible difference between their group and the other group, even if the result for their group is less than optimal as a result.
    The anti ukip at any cost behaviour is evidence that groups of all kinds, even those that think themselves hard wired to fairness, like a scapegoat to blame everything on
    Self awareness meter on the blink?
    Not at all... I suppose you are trying to imply I scapegoat immigrants for everything, but I don't blame them for anything
    Not at all.

    UKIP's scapegoat is the EU, just as the Scot Nats is 'Westminster' - both scapegoat an 'other' and pretend everything would be so much better if only we could leave.....
    As David Herdson pointed out a fortnight ago, scapegoating The Other is universal in politics. But, different factions pick different scapegoats.
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    MikeSmithson said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    Jim Murphy Leadership election speech:

    http://labourlist.org/2014/12/together-lets-build-the-fairest-nation-on-earth-jim-murphys-victory-speech/

    Ed is not going to enjoy the comparisons over the coming months.....

    I always reckoned that Murphy would make great UK LAB leader. I'm on at 33/1

    As long as he stands for a Scottish seat he shouldn't be allowed to form policy for English only matters.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 44,191
    MikeSmithson said:

    Ladbrokes betting bit.ly/c5gpH6 has Jim Murphy at 33/1 to be EdM's successor. Might be worth a punt.

    So that means Ed resigning/getting pushed, Murphy completely reverse ferreting his commitment to Holyrood and then winning the leadership? Not sure if 33/1 is such great value.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,422
    malcolmg said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    malcolmg said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    Indigo said:

    Floater said:

    So Murphy tells us that Labour will tax more and spend more.

    Fire up the printing presses baby.

    Has he told Ed Bo***cks ?

    He's been quoted as saying that Ed Bo***cks and Ed Fu**up can read his policies in the newspapers like everyone else.
    Big talk is easy , he will be crawling to Ed and taking orders as normal
    You're misjudging the man as badly as you misjudged Indyref......
    The only thing Murphy cares about is himself, he would stab his granny if it helped him
    I expect thats why he ran away from the Clutha Pub then....

    http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/scottish-labour-mp-jim-murphy-2867079

    The desperation of Nationalists to run down Jim Murphy is heartening......
  • IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966
    tlg86 said:


    What angers me is that on the one hand the left are very much pro-immigration and label anyone who questions it as racist. Yet, at the very same time, they complain about low wages and the cost of living.

    I'm sorry, but why should I care about an immigrant getting paid a very low wage? It's there choice to come here, and by doing so they are helping to suppress wages and increase demand for housing and other services.

    Thats because its the Guardian/Metropolitian Left who are characterised by being well off and able to enjoy the cheap Polish plumbers and Hungarian sandwich makers. The White Van Man part of the Labour vote doesn't like it, and has decamped to UKIP by the ... van load. The "old labour" union vote doesn't like it either, just as Len McCluskey who hates TTIP and wants a referendum on Europe, presumably because he thinks as you do that it is driving down the pay of his members, and replacing local union labour with immigrant non-union labor. I suspect most of Old Labour will stay at home on polling day.
  • JohnLilburneJohnLilburne Posts: 6,825
    I am waiting for him to reply to an email. He appeared on the Today programme a few weeks ago, he said something to the effect that he wouldn't be so impertinent as to tell the English how they would want to be governed. A little while later he said he would be comfortable with "further devolution to cities and regions". I sent him an email asking how he squared these two incompatible statements. It was a polite email and I carefully avoided using the word "hypocrisy". I haven't had a reply, even from a minion.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,422
    malcolmg said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    malcolmg said:

    antifrank said:

    This is probably the optimal result for Scottish Labour out of those on offer. Jim Murphy is at least capable, even if he is not fully stocked on charm. Since he has registered a convincing victory, it is not really open to his opponents to sulk from the sidelines or to launch a guerilla campaign against him in the short term.

    Labour may still do badly next May in Scotland, but I expect that the chances of obliteration have receded significantly with this result.

    It is certainly the best possible outcome for SNP, having a Tory as their Scottish puppet leader will not be a rallying point.
    And the Prize Turnip for the first post to claim its a 'Victory for the SNP!' goes to the sorest loser in the (united) Kingdom....

    Yawn, I see you are as pathetic and juvenile as ever
    Did you copyright 'Turnip'?

  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,706
    Pretty convincing mandate there. Interesting that the heavy slant in most unions' presentation of the ballot didn't have a massive outcome.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,422
    malcolmg said:

    surbiton said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    chestnut said:

    Wasn't Jim Murphy meant to be one of the prominent Labour/No people during the referendum?

    He was.

    No won.

    Remarkable, how Scot Tories love [ or, at least, like ] Jim Murphy. Fitalass is a great fan !
    That says it all
    That we judge people on their merits and are not blinded by tribal hatred?

    Yes, possibly.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 44,447
    edited December 2014
    Yorkcity said:

    malcolmg said:

    antifrank said:

    This is probably the optimal result for Scottish Labour out of those on offer. Jim Murphy is at least capable, even if he is not fully stocked on charm. Since he has registered a convincing victory, it is not really open to his opponents to sulk from the sidelines or to launch a guerilla campaign against him in the short term.

    Labour may still do badly next May in Scotland, but I expect that the chances of obliteration have receded significantly with this result.

    It is certainly the best possible outcome for SNP, having a Tory as their Scottish puppet leader will not be a rallying point.
    Sending your previous leader back to Westminster and the Oil Price the SNP worked their economic credibility on will be thrown right back ..

    Do you ever criticize the SNP ?

    your point is , why is Salmond choosing to continue his career elsewhere an issue and can you name anyone who ever gets/has previously got oil prices correct , it could be 200 dollars next month , who knows.

    PS , yes the changing of the drink drive laws is pathetic , as is stopping buy 3 for 2 and other such interfering nanny state stuff they come up with. They are arseholes like the rest but are far superior to the crooks in Westminster, I am no SNP fan boy.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,706
    edited December 2014
    Also shows the limits of canvassing. If Findlay's camp were telling the truth, they thought they were slightly ahead on members' preferences. Looking at changes in what previously-canvassed people say is significant. Raw canvass returns, not so much.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,422
    malcolmg said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    malcolmg said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    Indigo said:

    Floater said:

    So Murphy tells us that Labour will tax more and spend more.

    Fire up the printing presses baby.

    Has he told Ed Bo***cks ?

    He's been quoted as saying that Ed Bo***cks and Ed Fu**up can read his policies in the newspapers like everyone else.
    Big talk is easy , he will be crawling to Ed and taking orders as normal
    You're misjudging the man as badly as you misjudged Indyref......
    I do not believe I misjudged it, your jaundiced views hold no water. Given the donkeys on here had it as a walkover , you the biggest fan boy as well, it was a very good result given the political bribery and interference.
    Which part of 'you predicted victory, but lost' has not sunk in yet?

  • isamisam Posts: 42,122
    Indigo said:

    tlg86 said:


    What angers me is that on the one hand the left are very much pro-immigration and label anyone who questions it as racist. Yet, at the very same time, they complain about low wages and the cost of living.

    I'm sorry, but why should I care about an immigrant getting paid a very low wage? It's there choice to come here, and by doing so they are helping to suppress wages and increase demand for housing and other services.

    Thats because its the Guardian/Metropolitian Left who are characterised by being well off and able to enjoy the cheap Polish plumbers and Hungarian sandwich makers. The White Van Man part of the Labour vote doesn't like it, and has decamped to UKIP by the ... van load. The "old labour" union vote doesn't like it either, just as Len McCluskey who hates TTIP and wants a referendum on Europe, presumably because he thinks as you do that it is driving down the pay of his members, and replacing local union labour with immigrant non-union labor. I suspect most of Old Labour will stay at home on polling day.
    Yet the unthinkers on here think McCluskey is the one stopping Miliband offering a referendum #insight
  • David_EvershedDavid_Evershed Posts: 6,506
    malcolmg said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    malcolmg said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    Indigo said:

    Floater said:

    So Murphy tells us that Labour will tax more and spend more.

    Fire up the printing presses baby.

    Has he told Ed Bo***cks ?

    He's been quoted as saying that Ed Bo***cks and Ed Fu**up can read his policies in the newspapers like everyone else.
    Big talk is easy , he will be crawling to Ed and taking orders as normal
    You're misjudging the man as badly as you misjudged Indyref......
    The only thing Murphy cares about is himself, he would stab his granny if it helped him
    Would you really want to be an MP or a politician if the only thing you care about is yourself?
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,422
    NickPalmer said:

    Also shows the limits of canvassing.

    Particularly in Scotland.......(in recent experience - but I'm sure its just as unreliable throughout the rest of the United Kingdom.....)

  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 44,191
    Snigger.

    Derec Thompson ‏@DerecThompson 19m19 minutes ago
    This wins tweet of the day, hands down http://tinyurl.com/lz3z8t5
  • ArtistArtist Posts: 1,893
    It was either a Blairite or the Scottish John McDonnell, so Labour couldn't really win either way. Findlay made no effort to appear moderate during the campaign and also didn't come across like leadership material. Electing a prominent no campaigner seems counter productive considering where the voters have gone post referendum, but Murphy did have strong support amongst the MPs and MEPs who know the situation up there and must think there are votes to be had somewhere else.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 44,447
    CarlottaVance said:

    malcolmg said:

    Yorkcity said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    chestnut said:

    Wasn't Jim Murphy meant to be one of the prominent Labour/No people during the referendum?

    He was.

    No won.

    True Carlotta

    It did .

    You would think the opposite that 55% voted yes.

    I supported a yes vote for scotland, in the main because it will become a neverendum campaign.

    Jim Murphy came across to me as a tough campaigner.
    A big jessie who was shouting to nobody until he got hit with an egg. After that he was scared to come out the house.
    And yet.....

    His side won......

    Yours, lost.......

    what a pansy you are, it was a political vote. You seriously need to get a life.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 38,997
    TCPoliticalBetting said:

    Meanwhile the Lib Dems are making "brave" forecasts.
    "top figures in the party are forecasting they will have 35-40 MPs "
    " The estimate is based on secret opinion polling seen by leading figures in Nick Clegg's party and obtained by Sky News.
    But they are predicting they will hold 28 seats, half their current 56. Another 10 are regarded as marginal, five more are less winnable, and senior Lib Dems expect to gain two seats from the Conservatives."
    "The two seats party chiefs predict they will win are Watford and Winchester"
    https://uk.news.yahoo.com/lib-dems-fear-losing-11-seats-election-230646430.html

    30 is achievable on current polling, even if 10 Scottish seats are lost. 35-40 would require a big recovery in Scotland.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,422
    Unite on the SLAB Leadership:

    "Neil Findlay offered a genuine alternative to the politics and policies that led to consecutive electoral defeats for Scottish Labour and the haemorrhaging thousands of members.

    "Unite was proud to support Neil and his share of the vote is enough to show his popular policies have resonance among working people in Scotland.

    "Arguably, Jim Murphy recognised this appetite for real change during the hustings, because as the campaign progressed his arguments became bolder on issues like taxation and a living wage.

    "Jim now needs to turn words into action if he wants to start the process of re-building Scottish Labour."

    http://www.unitetheunion.org/news/unite-reaction-to-scottish-labour-leader-result/
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 35,117
    JohnLilburne said:

    I am waiting for him to reply to an email. He appeared on the Today programme a few weeks ago, he said something to the effect that he wouldn't be so impertinent as to tell the English how they would want to be governed. A little while later he said he would be comfortable with "further devolution to cities and regions". I sent him an email asking how he squared these two incompatible statements. It was a polite email and I carefully avoided using the word "hypocrisy". I haven't had a reply, even from a minion.

    But are they incompatible? On the one hand he “wouldn't be so impertinent as to TELL”, on the other, he appears to be saying that if a particular system is chosen he would be content.

    Seems a reasonable position to me.

  • Max_EdinburghMax_Edinburgh Posts: 347
    malcolmg said:

    Yorkcity said:

    malcolmg said:

    antifrank said:

    This is probably the optimal result for Scottish Labour out of those on offer. Jim Murphy is at least capable, even if he is not fully stocked on charm. Since he has registered a convincing victory, it is not really open to his opponents to sulk from the sidelines or to launch a guerilla campaign against him in the short term.

    Labour may still do badly next May in Scotland, but I expect that the chances of obliteration have receded significantly with this result.

    It is certainly the best possible outcome for SNP, having a Tory as their Scottish puppet leader will not be a rallying point.
    Sending your previous leader back to Westminster and the Oil Price the SNP worked their economic credibility on will be thrown right back ..

    Do you ever criticize the SNP ?

    your point is , why is Salmond choosing to continue his career elsewhere an issue and can you name anyone who ever gets/has previously got oil prices correct , it could be 200 dollars next month , who knows.
    I know it won't be $200 a barrel next month. Plenty of people said at the time the SNP's oil forecasts were hugely overstated. Thankfully 55% of the population weren't duped. I'm sure you'll agree that we need to find out how such an over inflated, unbelievable figure got into the White Paper, produced as it was, by impartial civil servants.
  • MonikerDiCanioMonikerDiCanio Posts: 5,792
    malcolmg said:

    Yorkcity said:

    malcolmg said:

    antifrank said:

    This is probably the optimal result for Scottish Labour out of those on offer. Jim Murphy is at least capable, even if he is not fully stocked on charm. Since he has registered a convincing victory, it is not really open to his opponents to sulk from the sidelines or to launch a guerilla campaign against him in the short term.

    Labour may still do badly next May in Scotland, but I expect that the chances of obliteration have receded significantly with this result.

    It is certainly the best possible outcome for SNP, having a Tory as their Scottish puppet leader will not be a rallying point.
    Sending your previous leader back to Westminster and the Oil Price the SNP worked their economic credibility on will be thrown right back ..

    Do you ever criticize the SNP ?

    your point is , why is Salmond choosing to continue his career elsewhere an issue and can you name anyone who ever gets/has previously got oil prices correct , it could be 200 dollars next month , who knows.

    PS , yes the changing of the drink drive laws is pathetic , as is stopping buy 3 for 2 and other such interfering nanny state stuff they come up with. They are arseholes like the rest but are far superior to the crooks in Westminster, I am no SNP fan boy.

    Salmond is only ever really happy at Westminster, I think he finds Holyrood provincial and lacking in glamour.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,422
    malcolmg said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    malcolmg said:

    Yorkcity said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    chestnut said:

    Wasn't Jim Murphy meant to be one of the prominent Labour/No people during the referendum?

    He was.

    No won.

    True Carlotta

    It did .

    You would think the opposite that 55% voted yes.

    I supported a yes vote for scotland, in the main because it will become a neverendum campaign.

    Jim Murphy came across to me as a tough campaigner.
    A big jessie who was shouting to nobody until he got hit with an egg. After that he was scared to come out the house.
    And yet.....

    His side won......

    Yours, lost.......

    what a pansy you are, it was a political vote. You seriously need to get a life.
    I see your grasp of debate has not been dulled by your trouncing. What happened to your emigration plans? Or are you stuck in a land of hopeless losers, to use your phrase?
  • HurstLlamaHurstLlama Posts: 9,098
    Indigo said:

    TCPoliticalBetting said:

    Meanwhile the Lib Dems are making "brave" forecasts.
    "top figures in the party are forecasting they will have 35-40 MPs "
    " The estimate is based on secret opinion polling seen by leading figures in Nick Clegg's party and obtained by Sky News.
    But they are predicting they will hold 28 seats, half their current 56. Another 10 are regarded as marginal, five more are less winnable, and senior Lib Dems expect to gain two seats from the Conservatives."
    "The two seats party chiefs predict they will win are Watford and Winchester"
    https://uk.news.yahoo.com/lib-dems-fear-losing-11-seats-election-230646430.html

    I guess they are hoping UKIP will take a huge chunk out of the CONs in Winchester, seems optimistic since there is a 3000 majority, and no one else to squeeze, plus the LDs have a new candidate. The LDs presumably had most of the Gown vote, but students and dons seem to have been moving off to the Greens recently. The rest of the constituency is mostly city commuters, hardly the WVM sorts that would be expected to move to UKIP in droves.
    I like Winchester, a fine old town with a very nice market (the cheese stall is particularly magnificent), good pubs but a dearth of decent restaurants. It should be the site of the new English Parliament. However, I am lost as to your reference to the dons and the gown vote. Winchester isn't a university city, or have I missed something.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    Max_Edinburgh said:

    malcolmg said:

    Yorkcity said:

    malcolmg said:

    antifrank said:

    This is probably the optimal result for Scottish Labour out of those on offer. Jim Murphy is at least capable, even if he is not fully stocked on charm. Since he has registered a convincing victory, it is not really open to his opponents to sulk from the sidelines or to launch a guerilla campaign against him in the short term.

    Labour may still do badly next May in Scotland, but I expect that the chances of obliteration have receded significantly with this result.

    It is certainly the best possible outcome for SNP, having a Tory as their Scottish puppet leader will not be a rallying point.
    Sending your previous leader back to Westminster and the Oil Price the SNP worked their economic credibility on will be thrown right back ..

    Do you ever criticize the SNP ?

    your point is , why is Salmond choosing to continue his career elsewhere an issue and can you name anyone who ever gets/has previously got oil prices correct , it could be 200 dollars next month , who knows.
    I know it won't be $200 a barrel next month. Plenty of people said at the time the SNP's oil forecasts were hugely overstated. Thankfully 55% of the population weren't duped. I'm sure you'll agree that we need to find out how such an over inflated, unbelievable figure got into the White Paper, produced as it was, by impartial civil servants.
    The effect on Scotland's tax take of $60 oil (assuming a 50% reduction in oil based economic activity on top of the reduction in raw oil tax take) is less than natural year by year volatility in Scotland's tax receipts.
  • ArtistArtist Posts: 1,893
    edited December 2014
    TCPoliticalBetting said:

    Meanwhile the Lib Dems are making "brave" forecasts.
    "top figures in the party are forecasting they will have 35-40 MPs "
    " The estimate is based on secret opinion polling seen by leading figures in Nick Clegg's party and obtained by Sky News.
    But they are predicting they will hold 28 seats, half their current 56. Another 10 are regarded as marginal, five more are less winnable, and senior Lib Dems expect to gain two seats from the Conservatives."
    "The two seats party chiefs predict they will win are Watford and Winchester"
    https://uk.news.yahoo.com/lib-dems-fear-losing-11-seats-election-230646430.html

    Tallies with what Stephen Tall said a while go. "Secondly, while his focus on the second constituency voting intention question is commendable, it remains a shame he is not naming candidates. When done in private constituency polls commissioned for the party, I’m told this boosts Lib Dem MPs further."
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,422
    Theuniondivvie said:

    Snigger.

    Derec Thompson ‏@DerecThompson 19m19 minutes ago
    This wins tweet of the day, hands down http://tinyurl.com/lz3z8t5

    You are surprised that the Scottish Labour Leader is not of interest in the capital of the United Kingdom?

    Its also of interest in Edinburgh:

    http://trendsmap.com/local/gb/edinburgh

    And Glasgow:

    http://trendsmap.com/local/gb/glasgow

  • chestnutchestnut Posts: 7,341
    edited December 2014
    CarlottaVance said:

    He was.

    No won.

    But Labour lost.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 46,075
    HurstLlama said:

    Indigo said:

    TCPoliticalBetting said:

    Meanwhile the Lib Dems are making "brave" forecasts.
    "top figures in the party are forecasting they will have 35-40 MPs "
    " The estimate is based on secret opinion polling seen by leading figures in Nick Clegg's party and obtained by Sky News.
    But they are predicting they will hold 28 seats, half their current 56. Another 10 are regarded as marginal, five more are less winnable, and senior Lib Dems expect to gain two seats from the Conservatives."
    "The two seats party chiefs predict they will win are Watford and Winchester"
    https://uk.news.yahoo.com/lib-dems-fear-losing-11-seats-election-230646430.html

    I guess they are hoping UKIP will take a huge chunk out of the CONs in Winchester, seems optimistic since there is a 3000 majority, and no one else to squeeze, plus the LDs have a new candidate. The LDs presumably had most of the Gown vote, but students and dons seem to have been moving off to the Greens recently. The rest of the constituency is mostly city commuters, hardly the WVM sorts that would be expected to move to UKIP in droves.
    I like Winchester, a fine old town with a very nice market (the cheese stall is particularly magnificent), good pubs but a dearth of decent restaurants. It should be the site of the new English Parliament. However, I am lost as to your reference to the dons and the gown vote. Winchester isn't a university city, or have I missed something.
    Can I second a fondness for Winchester; it's a superb little town. It's the place I took Mrs J to when she was considering moving to Southampton for a job, and in part persuaded her to take that job. (*) For anyone visiting, the walk from the city to St Catherine's Hill is lovely, and anyone interested in history and/or architecture must visit the little-known St Cross Hospital, the oldest charitable institution in the UK.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hospital_of_St_Cross

    (*) I decided Southampton itself would put anyone sane off a move. That was wrong: Southampton is quite a pleasant place as well, if scruffy in parts thanks to the Germans.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 85,210
    HurstLlama said:

    Indigo said:

    TCPoliticalBetting said:

    Meanwhile the Lib Dems are making "brave" forecasts.
    "top figures in the party are forecasting they will have 35-40 MPs "
    " The estimate is based on secret opinion polling seen by leading figures in Nick Clegg's party and obtained by Sky News.
    But they are predicting they will hold 28 seats, half their current 56. Another 10 are regarded as marginal, five more are less winnable, and senior Lib Dems expect to gain two seats from the Conservatives."
    "The two seats party chiefs predict they will win are Watford and Winchester"
    https://uk.news.yahoo.com/lib-dems-fear-losing-11-seats-election-230646430.html

    I guess they are hoping UKIP will take a huge chunk out of the CONs in Winchester, seems optimistic since there is a 3000 majority, and no one else to squeeze, plus the LDs have a new candidate. The LDs presumably had most of the Gown vote, but students and dons seem to have been moving off to the Greens recently. The rest of the constituency is mostly city commuters, hardly the WVM sorts that would be expected to move to UKIP in droves.
    I like Winchester, a fine old town with a very nice market (the cheese stall is particularly magnificent), good pubs but a dearth of decent restaurants. It should be the site of the new English Parliament. However, I am lost as to your reference to the dons and the gown vote. Winchester isn't a university city, or have I missed something.
    The old teaching training college is now a "university".
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 40,054
    Alistair said:

    Max_Edinburgh said:

    malcolmg said:

    Yorkcity said:

    malcolmg said:

    antifrank said:

    This is probably the optimal result for Scottish Labour out of those on offer. Jim Murphy is at least capable, even if he is not fully stocked on charm. Since he has registered a convincing victory, it is not really open to his opponents to sulk from the sidelines or to launch a guerilla campaign against him in the short term.

    Labour may still do badly next May in Scotland, but I expect that the chances of obliteration have receded significantly with this result.

    It is certainly the best possible outcome for SNP, having a Tory as their Scottish puppet leader will not be a rallying point.
    Sending your previous leader back to Westminster and the Oil Price the SNP worked their economic credibility on will be thrown right back ..

    Do you ever criticize the SNP ?

    your point is , why is Salmond choosing to continue his career elsewhere an issue and can you name anyone who ever gets/has previously got oil prices correct , it could be 200 dollars next month , who knows.
    I know it won't be $200 a barrel next month. Plenty of people said at the time the SNP's oil forecasts were hugely overstated. Thankfully 55% of the population weren't duped. I'm sure you'll agree that we need to find out how such an over inflated, unbelievable figure got into the White Paper, produced as it was, by impartial civil servants.
    The effect on Scotland's tax take of $60 oil (assuming a 50% reduction in oil based economic activity on top of the reduction in raw oil tax take) is less than natural year by year volatility in Scotland's tax receipts.

    Oil makes up 20% of the Scottish economy. A drop in its value of 50% is not background noise, it is catastrophe. But it will be interesting to see the figures you come up with to justify your claim.
  • YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 4,382
    malcolmg said:

    Yorkcity said:

    malcolmg said:

    antifrank said:

    This is probably the optimal result for Scottish Labour out of those on offer. Jim Murphy is at least capable, even if he is not fully stocked on charm. Since he has registered a convincing victory, it is not really open to his opponents to sulk from the sidelines or to launch a guerilla campaign against him in the short term.

    Labour may still do badly next May in Scotland, but I expect that the chances of obliteration have receded significantly with this result.

    It is certainly the best possible outcome for SNP, having a Tory as their Scottish puppet leader will not be a rallying point.
    Sending your previous leader back to Westminster and the Oil Price the SNP worked their economic credibility on will be thrown right back ..

    Do you ever criticize the SNP ?

    your point is , why is Salmond choosing to continue his career elsewhere an issue and can you name anyone who ever gets/has previously got oil prices correct , it could be 200 dollars next month , who knows.

    PS , yes the changing of the drink drive laws is pathetic , as is stopping buy 3 for 2 and other such interfering nanny state stuff they come up with. They are arseholes like the rest but are far superior to the crooks in Westminster, I am no SNP fan boy.
    True regarding the Oil Price and quantitative easing you get more sense from Max Keiser than the mainstream media.

    Regarding Alex Salmond he should show some magnanimity, and not go back to Westminster.

    He threw the kitchen sink at keeping all the items of the British state such as the currency, an unelected head of state etc to not scare the voters, and still lost , because the Scottish people did not have the courage to leave .
    The SNP are like their national football team in the seventies all promise, but can not get out of the group stage at the world cup.
    Now they do not even qualify.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    SouthamObserver said:

    Alistair said:

    Max_Edinburgh said:

    malcolmg said:

    Yorkcity said:

    malcolmg said:

    antifrank said:

    This is probably the optimal result for Scottish Labour out of those on offer. Jim Murphy is at least capable, even if he is not fully stocked on charm. Since he has registered a convincing victory, it is not really open to his opponents to sulk from the sidelines or to launch a guerilla campaign against him in the short term.

    Labour may still do badly next May in Scotland, but I expect that the chances of obliteration have receded significantly with this result.

    It is certainly the best possible outcome for SNP, having a Tory as their Scottish puppet leader will not be a rallying point.
    Sending your previous leader back to Westminster and the Oil Price the SNP worked their economic credibility on will be thrown right back ..

    Do you ever criticize the SNP ?

    your point is , why is Salmond choosing to continue his career elsewhere an issue and can you name anyone who ever gets/has previously got oil prices correct , it could be 200 dollars next month , who knows.
    I know it won't be $200 a barrel next month. Plenty of people said at the time the SNP's oil forecasts were hugely overstated. Thankfully 55% of the population weren't duped. I'm sure you'll agree that we need to find out how such an over inflated, unbelievable figure got into the White Paper, produced as it was, by impartial civil servants.
    The effect on Scotland's tax take of $60 oil (assuming a 50% reduction in oil based economic activity on top of the reduction in raw oil tax take) is less than natural year by year volatility in Scotland's tax receipts.

    Oil makes up 20% of the Scottish economy. A drop in its value of 50% is not background noise, it is catastrophe. But it will be interesting to see the figures you come up with to justify your claim.
    HMRC disaggregated accounts.

    https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/360002/disag-stats.pdf
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 44,637
    edited December 2014
    Floater said:

    So Murphy tells us that Labour will tax more and spend more.

    Fire up the printing presses baby.

    JPJ2 said:

    Murphy was the "best" choice for the British Labour Party in Scotland (and for me, as I made a good few hundred on the inevitable result).

    With the help of the BBC (Catriona Renton, the report on the BBC news channel from the event is a former Labour councillor, epitomising the institutional unionism of BBC Scotland) and the MSM, it will probably be enough to prevent an utter disaster for Labour at the GE 2015.

    However, as his Blairite/right wing credentials (by Labour in Scotland terms) become better known by the electorate, another heavy defeat for Holyrood 2016 will follow thereafter.

    Max_Edinburgh said:

    Murphy is a shrewd operator and a very capable politician. Given his background he also greatly increases the chances of Labour winning back Catholic supporters in the west of Scotland who have defected to the SNP. It will be interesting to see what ground he fights on but one thing we can be assured of is that the fantasy economics of $113 a barrel will be raised time and time and time again in the run up to May 2015.

    Interesting comments. Some things strike me -

    1.Mr Murphy has to go left wing at the same time as keeping his very right wing constituents happy - with the added handicap of going into GE2015 with the implicit promise of resigning in a year's time.

    2. [edited to remove stray words] More generally, despite many unionists on PB complaining that the Yes side won't move on from indyref, it seems more and more that the unionist side are planning to refight indyref in 2015 and 2016. This has obvious problems when independence is not, in fact, on the immediate agenda (NB I said 'immediate'), and what happened to the Labour Party this year when it got into bed with the Tories.

    3. The only way that Mr Murphy can achieve a smooth transition to a MSP without serious risk is to persuade a current constituency MSP to resign in the next 6 months and even then he has a by-election (and £50-£100k to find in unofficial compensation for lost payments, too, as Lallans Peat Worrier pointed out long ago). Getting a list MSP to resign is no good as the next person on the list, who could be SNP for all we know, just gets it.

  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 44,447
    CarlottaVance said:

    malcolmg said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    malcolmg said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    Indigo said:

    Floater said:

    So Murphy tells us that Labour will tax more and spend more.

    Fire up the printing presses baby.

    Has he told Ed Bo***cks ?

    He's been quoted as saying that Ed Bo***cks and Ed Fu**up can read his policies in the newspapers like everyone else.
    Big talk is easy , he will be crawling to Ed and taking orders as normal
    You're misjudging the man as badly as you misjudged Indyref......
    I do not believe I misjudged it, your jaundiced views hold no water. Given the donkeys on here had it as a walkover , you the biggest fan boy as well, it was a very good result given the political bribery and interference.
    Which part of 'you predicted victory, but lost' has not sunk in yet?

    dear dear , I predicted nothing , I was "hoping" for yes, only morons like yourself who have no life are so rectally fixated about politics .
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,422
    malcolmg said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    malcolmg said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    malcolmg said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    Indigo said:

    Floater said:

    So Murphy tells us that Labour will tax more and spend more.

    Fire up the printing presses baby.

    Has he told Ed Bo***cks ?

    He's been quoted as saying that Ed Bo***cks and Ed Fu**up can read his policies in the newspapers like everyone else.
    Big talk is easy , he will be crawling to Ed and taking orders as normal
    You're misjudging the man as badly as you misjudged Indyref......
    I do not believe I misjudged it, your jaundiced views hold no water. Given the donkeys on here had it as a walkover , you the biggest fan boy as well, it was a very good result given the political bribery and interference.
    Which part of 'you predicted victory, but lost' has not sunk in yet?

    dear dear , I predicted nothing , I was "hoping" for yes, only morons like yourself who have no life are so rectally fixated about politics .
    So you were fibbing when you said you planned to emigrate if Yes did not win and the 'no-hope, hopeless losers' (aka fellow Scots) prevailed and voted 'No'?
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 44,637
    edited December 2014
    Socrates said:

    Could the unions switch to the SNP? Or the Greens?

    The SNP are already doing very well amongst unions.
    CarlottaVance said:

    surbiton said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    chestnut said:

    Wasn't Jim Murphy meant to be one of the prominent Labour/No people during the referendum?

    He was.

    No won.

    Remarkable, how Scot Tories love [ or, at least, like ] Jim Murphy. Fitalass is a great fan !
    Why? We're unionists and someone has to take the fight to the Nats among Labour supporters.....

    Quite. Anyone would think they didn't think indyref was a done deal, despite their telling us that incessantly over the last few months.

  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 44,447
    Max_Edinburgh said:

    malcolmg said:

    Yorkcity said:

    malcolmg said:

    antifrank said:

    This is probably the optimal result for Scottish Labour out of those on offer. Jim Murphy is at least capable, even if he is not fully stocked on charm. Since he has registered a convincing victory, it is not really open to his opponents to sulk from the sidelines or to launch a guerilla campaign against him in the short term.

    Labour may still do badly next May in Scotland, but I expect that the chances of obliteration have receded significantly with this result.

    It is certainly the best possible outcome for SNP, having a Tory as their Scottish puppet leader will not be a rallying point.
    Sending your previous leader back to Westminster and the Oil Price the SNP worked their economic credibility on will be thrown right back ..

    Do you ever criticize the SNP ?

    your point is , why is Salmond choosing to continue his career elsewhere an issue and can you name anyone who ever gets/has previously got oil prices correct , it could be 200 dollars next month , who knows.
    I know it won't be $200 a barrel next month. Plenty of people said at the time the SNP's oil forecasts were hugely overstated. Thankfully 55% of the population weren't duped. I'm sure you'll agree that we need to find out how such an over inflated, unbelievable figure got into the White Paper, produced as it was, by impartial civil servants.
    I would also be interested to hear how the IFS and other Westminster government puppets get all their numbers as wrong as well. Compared to Westminster liars on things the SNP are amateurs, all the same but no comparison to the lies we get from the establishment.
  • HurstLlamaHurstLlama Posts: 9,098
    "I decided Southampton itself would put anyone sane off a move. That was wrong: Southampton is quite a pleasant place as well, if scruffy in parts thanks to the Germans."

    The same could be said for Plymouth and Portsmouth. Fortunately the horrors of the post-war rebuilding are themselves now being removed and all three cities will be much better as a result.

    Southampton does also have a very fine curry house, probably one of the best in the South of England.
This discussion has been closed.