politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The mood of Tory optimism shows itself on the betting marke
With so any polls this week showing CON and LAB level-pegging or the blues ahead it’s inevitable that this was going to show on the betting markets. The money’s been going on them winning most seats and, as can be seen, there’s now quite a difference with the Labour price.
Comments
-
You do have the feeling that the mood music for the tories is good, and that it's labour on the defensive backfoot.
0 -
For PB regulars this is Tony Lit all over again.0
-
Over the conference season, the Conservatives were able to nibble a few points from other parties, particularly Labour. IMO they (we) are confident that the campaign will be this writ large, with 2-3 points shifting this way and putting the Conservatives in the driving seat.0
-
Yes, with Dan Hodges stamping on it.Slackbladder said:You do have the feeling that the mood music for the tories is good, and that it's labour on the defensive backfoot.
0 -
I'm more green Con Seats than I am the Labour alternative, but I'm not adding to it at odds on.0
-
For what it's worth I do have some dosh on a labour majority, as i thought Ed was just doing enough, but I under-estimated how crap he is.0
-
When Labour's election campaign is already on the backfoot - over the NHS, of all things - then there won't be much singing from the Reds this side of the election.Slackbladder said:You do have the feeling that the mood music for the tories is good, and that it's labour on the defensive backfoot.
0 -
Well deserved. Labour have spent 5 years being lazy, assuming that victory would fall into their lap by default as soon as they said the word 'NHS'.Slackbladder said:You do have the feeling that the mood music for the tories is good, and that it's labour on the defensive backfoot.
0 -
How do we know that all this optimism isn't like the optimism felt by Romney supporters back in 2012? (And, no, I'm not claiming that Milliband is another Obama.)0
-
The polls are pretty much backing it up.Cyclefree said:How do we know that all this optimism isn't like the optimism felt by Romney supporters back in 2012? (And, no, I'm not claiming that Milliband is another Obama.)
I do fully expect labour most seats though, but at a seat situation where the house will be nigh on ungovernable.
a lot could depend on how much the lib dem seats in the south crumble to the tories (or not).
0 -
Oh, and anecdote alert: a good friend of mine, a political sparring partner since school, has told me today he has let his Labour Party membership lapse after 37 years. Because he just has no belief in Tory-lite Ed Miliband.
He feels Labour has left him.0 -
Well it does seem to dominating the TV news at the moment. For some reason.TheWatcher said:
Well deserved. Labour have spent 5 years being lazy, assuming that victory would fall into their lap by default as soon as they said the word 'NHS'.Slackbladder said:You do have the feeling that the mood music for the tories is good, and that it's labour on the defensive backfoot.
0 -
I do think labour do have a bit of an identity crisis. They would love to be the borrow and spend party, but that simply isn't plausible anymore. It doesn't help that they've been swamped with non-entities withe a PPE degree and no life experience.
Then you get the radicals seeing whats happening in europe, but there's no way in hell labour could ever become radical in that way.0 -
What an excellent choice of thread.....
0 -
I see Miliband is promising a special manifesto for the Scots.
Presumably he will issue a special manifesto for the English, given that he considers them equal to the Scots? Or will he have a double standard, lest giving the English attention as a nation only encourage "the most nationalistic people in the world"?0 -
Right now it looks like irrational exuberance. The Conservatives might get most seats but I'd still make Labour favourites for now.0
-
I personally think GE 2015 is slipping away for the Reds
Its beginning to look like EICIPM is now only a 50% chance0 -
FTPT
GP's surgeries are private companies.FrancisUrquhart said:
Far too many GP surgeries are stuck in some sort of technology time-warp.Cyclefree said:
John Humphreys interviewed his own GP who was talking about the level of bureaucracy involved in everything, how much time it took and that was why she - like others - was thinking of leaving. From what I could gather the bureaucracy rather than the money was the issue. She didn't really come up with any answers as to what could be done so it was hard to tell whether this was unnecessary bureaucracy (providing meaningless statistics) or necessary stuff e.g. proper medical notes.MarkHopkins said:
Summary?Cyclefree said:Interesting report on the Today programme this morning about why GPs are so fed up.
Things like, no internet booking (something they can do something about) and computer systems that aren't joined up with the rest of the NHS (well we all know about why this is).
No private company would run this way and be able to survive in today's world. Amazon manage to process huge amounts of data automatically and even my local council gym has online booking
0 -
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/dec/30/david-cameron-ed-miliband-trust-nhs-survey
"David Cameron still more trusted on NHS than Ed Miliband, survey shows"
It's a month old, but still..
This is weird Ed's trump card. Of course we're optimistic.0 -
Jeez, what a bunch of whiners. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-31057005
I'm not an economist but I could take a pretty good punt at question 3 with common sense and A-level maths. "Final year economics students" should be able to take it on easily.0 -
"Theoretically this makes Labour the value bet but I’m doing nothing till I see the Ashcroft Scottish seats polls."
Agreed. As I posted on the last thread though, the Scottish seat polls shouldn't make a difference to EdM's chances of becoming PM, yet his price has drifted along with the labour most seats price. That's the value bet right now.
I suspect there's some betting psychology going on here - tory punters can't *envisage* EdM as PM, and they can overenvisage Cameron as PM. Because he's already PM.
Back in early 2010, very few PB'ers could imagine a stable coalition lasting 5 years. Didn't ladbrokes or WH offer crazy odds on an election in 2015 at one point?0 -
We've already see left-wing radicalism cause its inevitable effects in France, and we'll shortly see it in Greece too. How many examples of national collapse will the left need to see it's disastrous?Slackbladder said:I do think labour do have a bit of an identity crisis. They would love to be the borrow and spend party, but that simply isn't plausible anymore. It doesn't help that they've been swamped with non-entities withe a PPE degree and no life experience.
Then you get the radicals seeing whats happening in europe, but there's no way in hell labour could ever become radical in that way.
Probably infinity, given that leftism is not an evidence-based philosophy.0 -
With huge public support and funding though.Alistair said:FTPT
GP's surgeries are private companies.FrancisUrquhart said:
Far too many GP surgeries are stuck in some sort of technology time-warp.Cyclefree said:
John Humphreys interviewed his own GP who was talking about the level of bureaucracy involved in everything, how much time it took and that was why she - like others - was thinking of leaving. From what I could gather the bureaucracy rather than the money was the issue. She didn't really come up with any answers as to what could be done so it was hard to tell whether this was unnecessary bureaucracy (providing meaningless statistics) or necessary stuff e.g. proper medical notes.MarkHopkins said:
Summary?Cyclefree said:Interesting report on the Today programme this morning about why GPs are so fed up.
Things like, no internet booking (something they can do something about) and computer systems that aren't joined up with the rest of the NHS (well we all know about why this is).
No private company would run this way and be able to survive in today's world. Amazon manage to process huge amounts of data automatically and even my local council gym has online booking
0 -
it's not just tory punters though is it... it's pretty much everyone.Pong said:
I suspect there's some betting psychology going on here - tory punters can't *envisage* EdM as PM, and they can overenvisage Cameron as PM. Because he's already PM.
0 -
Unlike the gritty, down-to-Earth realism of Dave, George and co.Slackbladder said:It doesn't help that they've been swamped with non-entities withe a PPE degree and no life experience.
0 -
It is one of the facts of political betting that Tory punters react more to positive news about the party than Labour ones do.
Yup. Happened in 2010. Happening now.0 -
Perhaps Nick Clegg will be able to re-run his 2010 Greek reason to justify coalition with the Tories to his party.0
-
Yup. Happened in 2010. Happening now.BenM said:It is one of the facts of political betting that Tory punters react more to positive news about the party than Labour ones do.
You've missed the latest Owl's post below.0 -
I'm starting to be of the opinion that even if Miliband gets 5-10 more seats than Cameron he won't be able to put a coalition together and Cameron will remain PM in a minority government.0
-
Indeed. The Tories have stolen their clothes.Slackbladder said:I do think labour do have a bit of an identity crisis. They would love to be the borrow and spend party, but that simply isn't plausible anymore.
0 -
3(a) and (c) while they appear to be mathematical are clearly not primarily so upon reflection.Anorak said:Jeez, what a bunch of whiners. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-31057005
I'm not an economist but I could take a pretty good punt at question 3 with common sense and A-level maths. "Final year economics students" should be able to take it on easily.0 -
They are partnerships I think. The funding would come from the public if it were from taxes or statutory insurance. I would have thought the paperwork would be just as bad if everything were private and involved billing money. A fully private doctor could treat who he wanted, charge what he wanted and work when and where he wanted. Comparing medicine with BP is not realistic.Slackbladder said:
With huge public support and funding though.Alistair said:FTPT
GP's surgeries are private companies.FrancisUrquhart said:
Far too many GP surgeries are stuck in some sort of technology time-warp.Cyclefree said:
John Humphreys interviewed his own GP who was talking about the level of bureaucracy involved in everything, how much time it took and that was why she - like others - was thinking of leaving. From what I could gather the bureaucracy rather than the money was the issue. She didn't really come up with any answers as to what could be done so it was hard to tell whether this was unnecessary bureaucracy (providing meaningless statistics) or necessary stuff e.g. proper medical notes.MarkHopkins said:
Summary?Cyclefree said:Interesting report on the Today programme this morning about why GPs are so fed up.
Things like, no internet booking (something they can do something about) and computer systems that aren't joined up with the rest of the NHS (well we all know about why this is).
No private company would run this way and be able to survive in today's world. Amazon manage to process huge amounts of data automatically and even my local council gym has online booking
0 -
Labour are in the position we Tories would have been in, had we fought an election with IDS still in place. The SatNav co-ordinates show that position as being alongside the upper reaches of Shit Creek.
The paddle option not having been taken up.0 -
If Labour + SNP + Plaid > 323 then no, he won't. Nothing in current polling suggests that number won't happen so the chance of Cameron being PM without at least another 4% movement in the polling is pretty slim.AndyJS said:I'm starting to be of the opinion that even if Miliband gets 5-10 more seats than Cameron he won't be able to put a coalition together and Cameron will remain PM in a minority government.
0 -
He can't be both R-Ed and Tory-lite. But I guess everyone is entitled to their own opinion.MarqueeMark said:Oh, and anecdote alert: a good friend of mine, a political sparring partner since school, has told me today he has let his Labour Party membership lapse after 37 years. Because he just has no belief in Tory-lite Ed Miliband.
He feels Labour has left him.0 -
There is nothing new in thisSocrates said:I see Miliband is promising a special manifesto for the Scots.
Presumably he will issue a special manifesto for the English, given that he considers them equal to the Scots? Or will he have a double standard, lest giving the English attention as a nation only encourage "the most nationalistic people in the world"?
http://www.politicsresources.net/area/uk/ge10/man/parties/scotslabmanifesto.pdf
What's new is Labour feel the need to advertise it.0 -
FPT
Re Next London Mayor:
"All jesting aside, I think someone who can reach out with a bit of cross-party charm is a good bet. "
I quite agree and at such a short price, this guy seems a bit lacking in the charm offensive department to represent good value. In terms of value for money I far prefer the Postie at more than double the odds of 14/1 (various), plus he starts with the considerable advantage of being far better known by the General Public than Sadiq Khan and imho has the warm, likeable personality to more readily attract support from the majority of Londoners who, like yours truly for instance, are not Labour supporters. I'm not sure that the likes of OGH and PtP fully appreciate this aspect.0 -
I can't imagine that being stable if it's close to 323. The amount of porl barrelling and deals labour would have to do would rip apart both the union and the labour party.Dair said:
If Labour + SNP + Plaid > 323 then no, he won't. Nothing in current polling suggests that number won't happen so the chance of Cameron being PM without at least another 4% movement in the polling is pretty slim.AndyJS said:I'm starting to be of the opinion that even if Miliband gets 5-10 more seats than Cameron he won't be able to put a coalition together and Cameron will remain PM in a minority government.
0 -
He can be both to different people if he doesn't have a clear and strong identity of his own.logical_song said:
He can't be both R-Ed and Tory-lite. But I guess everyone is entitled to their own opinion.MarqueeMark said:Oh, and anecdote alert: a good friend of mine, a political sparring partner since school, has told me today he has let his Labour Party membership lapse after 37 years. Because he just has no belief in Tory-lite Ed Miliband.
He feels Labour has left him.0 -
The move on the betting markets is perfectly reasonable given the polling. If Labour are value now, they were value before. I've taken the 12.0 on a Labour Majority, hedged by backing the Tories to hold seats that would fall in the event of one.
The fundamental question is whether we should:
(a) trust the main markets - which can be overly influenced by uninformed sentiment
or (b) trust the seat markets - which can be very laggy in terms of reacting to changes in the big picture0 -
He survived Tony Blair and left because Ed Miliband is too Tory-lite?!MarqueeMark said:Oh, and anecdote alert: a good friend of mine, a political sparring partner since school, has told me today he has let his Labour Party membership lapse after 37 years. Because he just has no belief in Tory-lite Ed Miliband.
He feels Labour has left him.0 -
It may well do.Slackbladder said:
I can't imagine that being stable if it's close to 323. The amount of porl barrelling and deals labour would have to do would rip apart both the union and the labour party.Dair said:
If Labour + SNP + Plaid > 323 then no, he won't. Nothing in current polling suggests that number won't happen so the chance of Cameron being PM without at least another 4% movement in the polling is pretty slim.AndyJS said:I'm starting to be of the opinion that even if Miliband gets 5-10 more seats than Cameron he won't be able to put a coalition together and Cameron will remain PM in a minority government.
But the reality is that Cameron could win 310 seats and STILL have no chance of forming a government because most of his legislative programme and definitely his budget would be outvoted by Labour + SNP + Plaid and if needed + Green + SDLP + Alliance.
When you consider how likely the 3 to 5 Kippers would be to cause mischief, the idea of Cameron even trying to be PM in a minority government is pretty hard to imagine.
There really are only two possible Stable Governments from the current polling (even with some movement to Tory) and that is Labour backed by SNP/Plaid and Grand Coalition.0 -
Blair was a winner though...Neil said:
He survived Tony Blair and left because Ed Miliband is too Tory-lite?!MarqueeMark said:Oh, and anecdote alert: a good friend of mine, a political sparring partner since school, has told me today he has let his Labour Party membership lapse after 37 years. Because he just has no belief in Tory-lite Ed Miliband.
He feels Labour has left him.0 -
MM - are you beginning to feel that your football side has left you?MarqueeMark said:Oh, and anecdote alert: a good friend of mine, a political sparring partner since school, has told me today he has let his Labour Party membership lapse after 37 years. Because he just has no belief in Tory-lite Ed Miliband.
He feels Labour has left him.
The only thing mine is leaving is the Championship.0 -
I know what you mean. Cameron is the incumbent and gets first dibs. If Miliband can't put a coalition together that demonstrates he's more likely to command a majority in the House than Cameron, then Cameron doesn't have to go to the Queen and stays in office.AndyJS said:I'm starting to be of the opinion that even if Miliband gets 5-10 more seats than Cameron he won't be able to put a coalition together and Cameron will remain PM in a minority government.
0 -
Ed's problem is hardly one of being all things to all men. Rather it is of being nothing to everyone.Slackbladder said:
He can be both to different people if he doesn't have a clear and strong identity of his own.logical_song said:
He can't be both R-Ed and Tory-lite. But I guess everyone is entitled to their own opinion.MarqueeMark said:Oh, and anecdote alert: a good friend of mine, a political sparring partner since school, has told me today he has let his Labour Party membership lapse after 37 years. Because he just has no belief in Tory-lite Ed Miliband.
He feels Labour has left him.
0 -
Before I get back to work (lots to do...), let me try and quickly answer a few questions about Greece:
(1) Will Russia help? If oil was $115/barrel, then yes, I think they would. The Russians definitely want a warm water port, and the there is a Serb-Russian-Greek orthodox commonality that means that there's a lot of cultural sympathy. (And Russia really wants to stick two fingers up at the West.) However, Russia is becoming rapidly poorer. It's debt just got cut to junk. The combination of low oil prices and sanctions is biting into its economy, and (frankly) I just don't believe the GDP and industrial production numbers. I don't believe Russia has the $100bn or so lying around that would be needed to bail out Greece (and that's assuming they tell the IMF and the EU to f*ck off, and just prop up the local banks).
(2) Can Greece 'electronically print' Euros? No, it can't. There is no mechanism for the Greek government to manufacture Euros electronically. That being said, it would be theoretically possible (if, again, in breach of treaty obligations, and the charter of the Bank of Greece) for the Bank of Greece to conjure up new Euros and use them to buy assets out of Greek banks. However, I think in that circumstance, the rest of the world would refuse to recognise the holdings of Greek banks for the purposes of transfers. They might be able to call them "Euros", but the rest of the world would call them "New Drachma".
(3) What does this mean for Potemas in Spain? I think it's important to recognise a few differences between Spain and Greece. In Greece, about 65% of the parties voted for in the elections were "anti-bailout". SYRIZA, the Independent Greeks, the Communists, Golden Dawn. Pro-bailout parties were really just New Democracy and (perhaps) Potemi. In Spain, parties representing 65+% of the electorate are "pro-austerity". And the Spanish economy is growing again pretty quickly. (They announced 4Q GDP growth of 0.7% today, which will be first or second best in Europe - depending on whether Ireland beats them.) Unemployment, although still horribly high, is coming down quickly, and while Southern Spain is still pretty awful, much of the rest of the country is doing OK. Potemas is marooned on about 25% in the polls, and I can't see any of the other parties (certainly not the Catalans or the Basques or the PP, and probably not PSOE, wanting to enter into a coalition with them). For that reason, I'd say Spain following the path of Greece is pretty unlikely. But events may change this, of course.0 -
PtP appreciates it, PfP.peter_from_putney said:FPT
Re Next London Mayor:
"All jesting aside, I think someone who can reach out with a bit of cross-party charm is a good bet. "
I quite agree and at such a short price, this guy seems a bit lacking in the charm offensive department to represent good value. In terms of value for money I far prefer the Postie at more than double the odds of 14/1 (various), plus he starts with the considerable advantage of being far better known by the General Public than Sadiq Khan and imho has the warm, likeable personality to more readily attract support from the majority of Londoners who, like yours truly for instance, are not Labour supporters. I'm not sure that the likes of OGH and PtP fully appreciate this aspect.
If Postie stands, he walks it. But is he standing? I think not, but if I'm wrong please correct me straight away, preferably by private email.0 -
Fundamentally wrong. At 310 seats the only game in town is Cameron PM, as we saw last time. You have to remember that voting the budget down would essentially precipitate a new election, and most of the parties you list wouldn't want that.Dair said:
It may well do.Slackbladder said:
I can't imagine that being stable if it's close to 323. The amount of porl barrelling and deals labour would have to do would rip apart both the union and the labour party.Dair said:
If Labour + SNP + Plaid > 323 then no, he won't. Nothing in current polling suggests that number won't happen so the chance of Cameron being PM without at least another 4% movement in the polling is pretty slim.AndyJS said:I'm starting to be of the opinion that even if Miliband gets 5-10 more seats than Cameron he won't be able to put a coalition together and Cameron will remain PM in a minority government.
But the reality is that Cameron could win 310 seats and STILL have no chance of forming a government because most of his legislative programme and definitely his budget would be outvoted by Labour + SNP + Plaid and if needed + Green + SDLP + Alliance.
When you consider how likely the 3 to 5 Kippers would be to cause mischief, the idea of Cameron even trying to be PM in a minority government is pretty hard to imagine.
There really are only two possible Stable Governments from the current polling (even with some movement to Tory) and that is Labour backed by SNP/Plaid and Grand Coalition.0 -
How does he equate Mansion Taxes with tory policies. Or obsessing about the NHS. He voted for Tony Blair and only now says Labour has left him?MarqueeMark said:Oh, and anecdote alert: a good friend of mine, a political sparring partner since school, has told me today he has let his Labour Party membership lapse after 37 years. Because he just has no belief in Tory-lite Ed Miliband.
He feels Labour has left him.
I just make the point because it seems to show how irrational political views can be. Others consider Ed a crypto marxist and as far from tory-lite as you can get.
0 -
O/TCasino_Royale said:
I know what you mean. Cameron is the incumbent and gets first dibs. If Miliband can't put a coalition together that demonstrates he's more likely to command a majority in the House than Cameron, then Cameron doesn't have to go to the Queen and stays in office.AndyJS said:I'm starting to be of the opinion that even if Miliband gets 5-10 more seats than Cameron he won't be able to put a coalition together and Cameron will remain PM in a minority government.
Casino - did you see my reply on the previous thread to your betting proposal last night. Please let me know if you wish to proceed.0 -
Under the Fixed Term Parliaments Act it wouldn't (although 300 would be a better figure I may be too harsh saying 310 wouldn't work as I discounted the Liberals). But under FTPA if you lose a vote of No Confidence the next largest party gets a shot as Cameron doesn't have the option of defaulting to calling an election.Tissue_Price said:
Fundamentally wrong. At 310 seats the only game in town is Cameron PM, as we saw last time. You have to remember that voting the budget down would essentially precipitate a new election, and most of the parties you list wouldn't want that.Dair said:
It may well do.Slackbladder said:
I can't imagine that being stable if it's close to 323. The amount of porl barrelling and deals labour would have to do would rip apart both the union and the labour party.Dair said:
If Labour + SNP + Plaid > 323 then no, he won't. Nothing in current polling suggests that number won't happen so the chance of Cameron being PM without at least another 4% movement in the polling is pretty slim.AndyJS said:I'm starting to be of the opinion that even if Miliband gets 5-10 more seats than Cameron he won't be able to put a coalition together and Cameron will remain PM in a minority government.
But the reality is that Cameron could win 310 seats and STILL have no chance of forming a government because most of his legislative programme and definitely his budget would be outvoted by Labour + SNP + Plaid and if needed + Green + SDLP + Alliance.
When you consider how likely the 3 to 5 Kippers would be to cause mischief, the idea of Cameron even trying to be PM in a minority government is pretty hard to imagine.
There really are only two possible Stable Governments from the current polling (even with some movement to Tory) and that is Labour backed by SNP/Plaid and Grand Coalition.0 -
That was true under the old system too. If Mr Cameron cannot command a majority in the House, he must go the Queen, who will ask if someone else can.Dair said:under FTPA if you lose a vote of No Confidence the next largest party gets a shot as Cameron doesn't have the option of defaulting to calling an election.
0 -
£20 on Calder Valley (Con), £20 on North East Somerset (Con), £20 on Labour majority - am I doing it rightTissue_Price said:The move on the betting markets is perfectly reasonable given the polling. If Labour are value now, they were value before. I've taken the 12.0 on a Labour Majority, hedged by backing the Tories to hold seats that would fall in the event of one.
The fundamental question is whether we should:
(a) trust the main markets - which can be overly influenced by uninformed sentiment
or (b) trust the seat markets - which can be very laggy in terms of reacting to changes in the big picture
? 0 -
Article defending halal slaughter:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/11379157/Banning-ritual-slaughter-would-be-a-victory-for-racists.html0 -
At 310 seats, the Lib Dems simply abstain.Tissue_Price said:
Fundamentally wrong. At 310 seats the only game in town is Cameron PM, as we saw last time. You have to remember that voting the budget down would essentially precipitate a new election, and most of the parties you list wouldn't want that.Dair said:
It may well do.Slackbladder said:
I can't imagine that being stable if it's close to 323. The amount of porl barrelling and deals labour would have to do would rip apart both the union and the labour party.Dair said:
If Labour + SNP + Plaid > 323 then no, he won't. Nothing in current polling suggests that number won't happen so the chance of Cameron being PM without at least another 4% movement in the polling is pretty slim.AndyJS said:I'm starting to be of the opinion that even if Miliband gets 5-10 more seats than Cameron he won't be able to put a coalition together and Cameron will remain PM in a minority government.
But the reality is that Cameron could win 310 seats and STILL have no chance of forming a government because most of his legislative programme and definitely his budget would be outvoted by Labour + SNP + Plaid and if needed + Green + SDLP + Alliance.
When you consider how likely the 3 to 5 Kippers would be to cause mischief, the idea of Cameron even trying to be PM in a minority government is pretty hard to imagine.
There really are only two possible Stable Governments from the current polling (even with some movement to Tory) and that is Labour backed by SNP/Plaid and Grand Coalition.
Job done.0 -
Over the course of his two decades in power, Aleksandr Lukashenko, Belarus’s autocratic president, has perfected the art of weaving between Russia and the West. But with the fighting in eastern Ukraine approaching his country’s doorstep and Russia’s struggling economy weighing down his own, Lukashenko has begun an unprecedented tilt away from Moscow.
https://foreignpolicy.com/2015/01/30/russia-may-need-to-say-do-svidaniya-to-belarus/?utm_content=buffer301f8&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer0 -
TBH Peter, I simply don't know, but it would surely be a superb way for him to end his career. I can't imagine why he wouldn't want it, unless of course he is "persuaded" otherwise.Peter_the_Punter said:
PtP appreciates it, PfP.peter_from_putney said:FPT
Re Next London Mayor:
"All jesting aside, I think someone who can reach out with a bit of cross-party charm is a good bet. "
I quite agree and at such a short price, this guy seems a bit lacking in the charm offensive department to represent good value. In terms of value for money I far prefer the Postie at more than double the odds of 14/1 (various), plus he starts with the considerable advantage of being far better known by the General Public than Sadiq Khan and imho has the warm, likeable personality to more readily attract support from the majority of Londoners who, like yours truly for instance, are not Labour supporters. I'm not sure that the likes of OGH and PtP fully appreciate this aspect.
If Postie stands, he walks it. But is he standing? I think not, but if I'm wrong please correct me straight away, preferably by private email.
When he started apearing alongside Portillo on the Andrew Neill weekly TV prog (name?), this made me wonder whether he was seeking to lift his public profile in preparation for a tilt at the MoL job.
Btw both his recent autobiographies are superb reads - his innate charm really shines through.0 -
Yes, though of course you might win both sides or lose both sides - it's not a pure arb but the price mismatch is absurd.Pulpstar said:
£20 on Calder Valley (Con), £20 on North East Somerset (Con), £20 on Labour majority - am I doing it rightTissue_Price said:The move on the betting markets is perfectly reasonable given the polling. If Labour are value now, they were value before. I've taken the 12.0 on a Labour Majority, hedged by backing the Tories to hold seats that would fall in the event of one.
The fundamental question is whether we should:
(a) trust the main markets - which can be overly influenced by uninformed sentiment
or (b) trust the seat markets - which can be very laggy in terms of reacting to changes in the big picture ?
For a purer arb, with much more chance of copping both sides, consider Tory seats around the 1/7-1/8 mark - Staffordshire Moorlands, Rugby, Reading East. Though you'll tie up a lot of capital using this strategy!0 -
Are you sure you should be using the plural when you talk about them?Pulpstar said:
At 310 seats, the Lib Dems simply abstain.Tissue_Price said:
Fundamentally wrong. At 310 seats the only game in town is Cameron PM, as we saw last time. You have to remember that voting the budget down would essentially precipitate a new election, and most of the parties you list wouldn't want that.Dair said:
It may well do.Slackbladder said:
I can't imagine that being stable if it's close to 323. The amount of porl barrelling and deals labour would have to do would rip apart both the union and the labour party.Dair said:
If Labour + SNP + Plaid > 323 then no, he won't. Nothing in current polling suggests that number won't happen so the chance of Cameron being PM without at least another 4% movement in the polling is pretty slim.AndyJS said:I'm starting to be of the opinion that even if Miliband gets 5-10 more seats than Cameron he won't be able to put a coalition together and Cameron will remain PM in a minority government.
But the reality is that Cameron could win 310 seats and STILL have no chance of forming a government because most of his legislative programme and definitely his budget would be outvoted by Labour + SNP + Plaid and if needed + Green + SDLP + Alliance.
When you consider how likely the 3 to 5 Kippers would be to cause mischief, the idea of Cameron even trying to be PM in a minority government is pretty hard to imagine.
There really are only two possible Stable Governments from the current polling (even with some movement to Tory) and that is Labour backed by SNP/Plaid and Grand Coalition.
Job done.0 -
Interesting FactCheck on Kosher and HalalAndyJS said:Article defending halal slaughter:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/11379157/Banning-ritual-slaughter-would-be-a-victory-for-racists.html
http://blogs.channel4.com/factcheck/factcheck-qa-ban-kosher-halal-slaughter/178770 -
Hmm the longest odds on price I've backed the Conservatives in is the 1-6 in Basingstoke, which was ridiculous.Tissue_Price said:
Yes, though of course you might win both sides or lose both sides - it's not a pure arb but the price mismatch is absurd.Pulpstar said:
£20 on Calder Valley (Con), £20 on North East Somerset (Con), £20 on Labour majority - am I doing it rightTissue_Price said:The move on the betting markets is perfectly reasonable given the polling. If Labour are value now, they were value before. I've taken the 12.0 on a Labour Majority, hedged by backing the Tories to hold seats that would fall in the event of one.
The fundamental question is whether we should:
(a) trust the main markets - which can be overly influenced by uninformed sentiment
or (b) trust the seat markets - which can be very laggy in terms of reacting to changes in the big picture ?
For a purer arb, with much more chance of copping both sides, consider Tory seats around the 1/7-1/8 mark - Staffordshire Moorlands, Rugby, Reading East. Though you'll tie up a lot of capital using this strategy!0 -
Happy with Blair, but Ed is 'Tory-lite'? Interesting take on things.MarqueeMark said:Oh, and anecdote alert: a good friend of mine, a political sparring partner since school, has told me today he has let his Labour Party membership lapse after 37 years. Because he just has no belief in Tory-lite Ed Miliband.
He feels Labour has left him.0 -
They only get a shot if they can command the confidence of the House. With the Tories having 310 seats that's almost an impossibility. At 300 it's still highly tenuous. At 290, it could well happen, but I can't see the SNP wanting to prop up Labour [they want DC as PM] unless they get huge quid pro quos, which would surely fatally hamstring any EM administration in England.Dair said:
Under the Fixed Term Parliaments Act it wouldn't (although 300 would be a better figure I may be too harsh saying 310 wouldn't work as I discounted the Liberals). But under FTPA if you lose a vote of No Confidence the next largest party gets a shot as Cameron doesn't have the option of defaulting to calling an election.Tissue_Price said:
Fundamentally wrong. At 310 seats the only game in town is Cameron PM, as we saw last time. You have to remember that voting the budget down would essentially precipitate a new election, and most of the parties you list wouldn't want that.Dair said:
It may well do.Slackbladder said:
I can't imagine that being stable if it's close to 323. The amount of porl barrelling and deals labour would have to do would rip apart both the union and the labour party.Dair said:
If Labour + SNP + Plaid > 323 then no, he won't. Nothing in current polling suggests that number won't happen so the chance of Cameron being PM without at least another 4% movement in the polling is pretty slim.AndyJS said:I'm starting to be of the opinion that even if Miliband gets 5-10 more seats than Cameron he won't be able to put a coalition together and Cameron will remain PM in a minority government.
But the reality is that Cameron could win 310 seats and STILL have no chance of forming a government because most of his legislative programme and definitely his budget would be outvoted by Labour + SNP + Plaid and if needed + Green + SDLP + Alliance.
When you consider how likely the 3 to 5 Kippers would be to cause mischief, the idea of Cameron even trying to be PM in a minority government is pretty hard to imagine.
There really are only two possible Stable Governments from the current polling (even with some movement to Tory) and that is Labour backed by SNP/Plaid and Grand Coalition.0 -
Yeah but the usual reason why politicians want to be different things to different people is to be able to seem an attractive proposition to those different people. Ed's managing the remarkable feat of simultaneously seeming too left-wing for the Blarites, too Blairite for the left, and too inconsistent for the centre of the Labour Party.Slackbladder said:
He can be both to different people if he doesn't have a clear and strong identity of his own.logical_song said:
He can't be both R-Ed and Tory-lite. But I guess everyone is entitled to their own opinion.MarqueeMark said:Oh, and anecdote alert: a good friend of mine, a political sparring partner since school, has told me today he has let his Labour Party membership lapse after 37 years. Because he just has no belief in Tory-lite Ed Miliband.
He feels Labour has left him.0 -
Yep, Farron and Clegg can both abstain.rcs1000 said:
Are you sure you should be using the plural when you talk about them?Pulpstar said:
At 310 seats, the Lib Dems simply abstain.Tissue_Price said:
Fundamentally wrong. At 310 seats the only game in town is Cameron PM, as we saw last time. You have to remember that voting the budget down would essentially precipitate a new election, and most of the parties you list wouldn't want that.Dair said:
It may well do.Slackbladder said:
I can't imagine that being stable if it's close to 323. The amount of porl barrelling and deals labour would have to do would rip apart both the union and the labour party.Dair said:
If Labour + SNP + Plaid > 323 then no, he won't. Nothing in current polling suggests that number won't happen so the chance of Cameron being PM without at least another 4% movement in the polling is pretty slim.AndyJS said:I'm starting to be of the opinion that even if Miliband gets 5-10 more seats than Cameron he won't be able to put a coalition together and Cameron will remain PM in a minority government.
But the reality is that Cameron could win 310 seats and STILL have no chance of forming a government because most of his legislative programme and definitely his budget would be outvoted by Labour + SNP + Plaid and if needed + Green + SDLP + Alliance.
When you consider how likely the 3 to 5 Kippers would be to cause mischief, the idea of Cameron even trying to be PM in a minority government is pretty hard to imagine.
There really are only two possible Stable Governments from the current polling (even with some movement to Tory) and that is Labour backed by SNP/Plaid and Grand Coalition.
Job done.0 -
That wasn't an article defending halal slaughter. It was just a tired allegation that any people arguing against it are racists. Despite being eight paragraphs long, there wasn't a single line in the article actually reasoning why her opponents' arguments were incorrect. Very weak journalism.AndyJS said:Article defending halal slaughter:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/11379157/Banning-ritual-slaughter-would-be-a-victory-for-racists.html0 -
Martin Day Limos can despatch a pair of Taxi bikes.rcs1000 said:
Are you sure you should be using the plural when you talk about them?Pulpstar said:
At 310 seats, the Lib Dems simply abstain.Tissue_Price said:
Fundamentally wrong. At 310 seats the only game in town is Cameron PM, as we saw last time. You have to remember that voting the budget down would essentially precipitate a new election, and most of the parties you list wouldn't want that.Dair said:
It may well do.Slackbladder said:
I can't imagine that being stable if it's close to 323. The amount of porl barrelling and deals labour would have to do would rip apart both the union and the labour party.Dair said:
If Labour + SNP + Plaid > 323 then no, he won't. Nothing in current polling suggests that number won't happen so the chance of Cameron being PM without at least another 4% movement in the polling is pretty slim.AndyJS said:I'm starting to be of the opinion that even if Miliband gets 5-10 more seats than Cameron he won't be able to put a coalition together and Cameron will remain PM in a minority government.
But the reality is that Cameron could win 310 seats and STILL have no chance of forming a government because most of his legislative programme and definitely his budget would be outvoted by Labour + SNP + Plaid and if needed + Green + SDLP + Alliance.
When you consider how likely the 3 to 5 Kippers would be to cause mischief, the idea of Cameron even trying to be PM in a minority government is pretty hard to imagine.
There really are only two possible Stable Governments from the current polling (even with some movement to Tory) and that is Labour backed by SNP/Plaid and Grand Coalition.
Job done.0 -
I don't particularly want to ban halal or kosher slaughter but I sure as hell want to have proper labelling of meat so that, just as Jews and Muslims can choose kosher/halal meat, I can choose meat where the animal has been stunned first.AndyJS said:Article defending halal slaughter:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/11379157/Banning-ritual-slaughter-would-be-a-victory-for-racists.html
Quite why such labelling is not routine beats me.
0 -
@AndyJS The most stupid line in that whole thing is that, by banning cruel slaughter of animals, we are valuing the animals more than religious people that support cruel slaughter. This is clearly nonsense. We are not allowing religious people to be slaughtered at all. Therefore religious people are clearly being valued more highly than the animals.
What a foolish woman.0 -
That could be said about most of her articles. She markets herself as a religious journalist but writes very superficially about that - and other - topics.Socrates said:
Very weak journalism.AndyJS said:Article defending halal slaughter:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/11379157/Banning-ritual-slaughter-would-be-a-victory-for-racists.html
0 -
Couldn't agree more, PfP.peter_from_putney said:
TBH Peter, I simply don't know, but it would surely be a superb way for him to end his career. I can't imagine why he wouldn't want it, unless of course he is "persuaded" otherwise.Peter_the_Punter said:
PtP appreciates it, PfP.peter_from_putney said:FPT
Re Next London Mayor:
"All jesting aside, I think someone who can reach out with a bit of cross-party charm is a good bet. "
I quite agree and at such a short price, this guy seems a bit lacking in the charm offensive department to represent good value. In terms of value for money I far prefer the Postie at more than double the odds of 14/1 (various), plus he starts with the considerable advantage of being far better known by the General Public than Sadiq Khan and imho has the warm, likeable personality to more readily attract support from the majority of Londoners who, like yours truly for instance, are not Labour supporters. I'm not sure that the likes of OGH and PtP fully appreciate this aspect.
If Postie stands, he walks it. But is he standing? I think not, but if I'm wrong please correct me straight away, preferably by private email.
When he started apearing alongside Portillo on the Andrew Neill weekly TV prog (name?), this made me wonder whether he was seeking to lift his public profile in preparation for a tilt at the MoL job.
Btw both his recent autobiographies are superb reads - his innate charm really shines through.
He would have made a strong contender for the Party Leadership and certainly has all the credentials and more for Mayor. But there is not a whisper of it - not here, not from any of my spies.
If I hear differently you will of course be the first to know. [Clears throat.] But until then we just have to assume the guy isn't running.0 -
@Tissue_Price From your clever analysis I think we can deduce that either NOM is too short or the seat prices are in too narrow a range ?0
-
Politicians used to be able to get away with it, too.Richard_Nabavi said:
Yeah but the usual reason why politicians want to be different things to different people is to be able to seem an attractive proposition to those different people.Slackbladder said:
He can be both to different people if he doesn't have a clear and strong identity of his own.logical_song said:
He can't be both R-Ed and Tory-lite. But I guess everyone is entitled to their own opinion.MarqueeMark said:Oh, and anecdote alert: a good friend of mine, a political sparring partner since school, has told me today he has let his Labour Party membership lapse after 37 years. Because he just has no belief in Tory-lite Ed Miliband.
He feels Labour has left him.
But with the internet & particularly social media, politicians are expected to display an inhuman level of ideological consistency - every conversation with a voter is potentially recorded and twitterized.
I almost feel sorry for 'em.0 -
Probably the latter. It's natural to be cautious pricing individual seats since you don't want to go 6/1 when 3/1 will do. People (mostly) aren't going to be interested in backing 2/9 shots 100 days out, let alone 500 days out, when many of these markets were formed.Pulpstar said:@Tissue_Price From your clever analysis I think we can deduce that either NOM is too short or the seat prices are in too narrow a range ?
EDIT: and of course, the range of outcomes for the election has narrowed as time has passed. NOM looks about right to me, if anything just a touch short. Though I know some posters think 1.3 is too big.0 -
UKIP Policy, though I cant get too worked up about it.. if you want to be kind to animals, don't eat them, and less will be killed (or born just so they can be killed)Cyclefree said:
I don't particularly want to ban halal or kosher slaughter but I sure as hell want to have proper labelling of meat so that, just as Jews and Muslims can choose kosher/halal meat, I can choose meat where the animal has been stunned first.AndyJS said:Article defending halal slaughter:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/11379157/Banning-ritual-slaughter-would-be-a-victory-for-racists.html
Quite why such labelling is not routine beats me.
In a strange way the mere thought of halal slaughter makes me want to eat less meat of any kind, so I wouldn't say it is an entirely bad thing
0 -
Look at this bias being taught in our schools.. absolutely disgraceful.. #Bluehand #UKIP #EDL pic.twitter.com/oDW76UEG2g
— James Bond (@EnglandsTerrier) January 28, 2015
To teach in school that UKIP is racist and the same as Neo Nazis is a disgrace and must be condemned.0 -
Personally I find this a bit bizarre. Recent polling has shown the tories are now level with Labour but they are not clearly ahead. The comments from Professor Fisher this morning included this:
"•There is now increasing evidence that the Conservative vote is not moving up as we would normally expect in the run up to an Election. This means our expectation of the Conservative’s final position has been dampened. We are seeing some evidence that the Conservative vote is beginning to rise, which might cause us to remove our dampening of Conservative expectations."
A bit contradictory but I personally see a lot more evidence to support the first sentence than the second. Labour have been on a long tem declining trend with a breather in December. But the tory share is still pretty static.
At the moment it seems likely to me that the tories will win the most votes but most seats is completely up for grabs and largely depends on Scotland. I think that the Conservative supporters are getting a bit carried away with themselves.0 -
Here is a challenge to all on PB as I know all like a challenge.....
The "Havengore" today recreated the river procession of Winston Churchill. The boat has now been fully restored to its original condition and very well done to those responsible.
However there is one very significant difference between the boat that carried Winston Churchill's coffin 50 years ago and the boat that transited the Thames today.
What is it?
(..... And no it's not that Churchill was present or anyone else for that matter.)
Anyone that gets the answer right ( the answer I am thinking off and quite obvious really ) I will make a donation of £25 to a charity of their choice. PB to be sent the receipt as proof.
Travelling at the moment but will check back later.
Moses0 -
Fisher has plugged the same numbers into his model this week as last week. It's not surprising he hasn't picked up any change.DavidL said:Personally I find this a bit bizarre. Recent polling has shown the tories are now level with Labour but they are not clearly ahead. The comments from Professor Fisher this morning included this:
"•There is now increasing evidence that the Conservative vote is not moving up as we would normally expect in the run up to an Election. This means our expectation of the Conservative’s final position has been dampened. We are seeing some evidence that the Conservative vote is beginning to rise, which might cause us to remove our dampening of Conservative expectations."
A bit contradictory but I personally see a lot more evidence to support the first sentence than the second. Labour have been on a long tem declining trend with a breather in December. But the tory share is still pretty static.
At the moment it seems likely to me that the tories will win the most votes but most seats is completely up for grabs and largely depends on Scotland. I think that the Conservative supporters are getting a bit carried away with themselves.0 -
MikeK said:
Look at this bias being taught in our schools.. absolutely disgraceful.. #Bluehand #UKIP #EDL pic.twitter.com/oDW76UEG2g
— James Bond (@EnglandsTerrier) January 28, 2015
To teach in school that UKIP is racist and the same as Neo Nazis is a disgrace and must be condemned.
They are comparing UKIP to Hitler? Perhaps they should also teach them Godwin's law.
0 -
You need to factor in the freemasons and the lizard people at Bildenberg fixing the voting so that capitalist interests are protected.DavidL said:Personally I find this a bit bizarre. Recent polling has shown the tories are now level with Labour but they are not clearly ahead. The comments from Professor Fisher this morning included this:
"•There is now increasing evidence that the Conservative vote is not moving up as we would normally expect in the run up to an Election. This means our expectation of the Conservative’s final position has been dampened. We are seeing some evidence that the Conservative vote is beginning to rise, which might cause us to remove our dampening of Conservative expectations."
A bit contradictory but I personally see a lot more evidence to support the first sentence than the second. Labour have been on a long tem declining trend with a breather in December. But the tory share is still pretty static.
At the moment it seems likely to me that the tories will win the most votes but most seats is completely up for grabs and largely depends on Scotland. I think that the Conservative supporters are getting a bit carried away with themselves.
Seriously though - we are at the pre-election weigh in - Cam looks in reasonable shape and has a horseshoe or two in his gloves.
Ed's underweight and his trainer and coach are squaring up to each other.
Not surprising blues are taking the most money in bets.0 -
I thought Alan Johnson has already said, firmly, that he's not running. See, for example, here:Peter_the_Punter said:
He would have made a strong contender for the Party Leadership and certainly has all the credentials and more for Mayor. But there is not a whisper of it - not here, not from any of my spies.
If I hear differently you will of course be the first to know. [Clears throat.] But until then we just have to assume the guy isn't running.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/london-mayoral-elections-alan-johnson-isnt-standing-sadiq-khan-says-he-might-david-lammy-definitely-will-and-as-for-boris-johnson-8771501.html
0 -
I criticised a poster earlier for making a dodgy comparison of polls, but comparing like-with-like and the increase in the Tory share is even larger +1.6% this week (Ashcroft, 2xPopulus and mid-week YouGovs) compared to last week then they had earlier calculated.DavidL said:Personally I find this a bit bizarre. Recent polling has shown the tories are now level with Labour but they are not clearly ahead. The comments from Professor Fisher this morning included this:
"•There is now increasing evidence that the Conservative vote is not moving up as we would normally expect in the run up to an Election. This means our expectation of the Conservative’s final position has been dampened. We are seeing some evidence that the Conservative vote is beginning to rise, which might cause us to remove our dampening of Conservative expectations."
A bit contradictory but I personally see a lot more evidence to support the first sentence than the second. Labour have been on a long tem declining trend with a breather in December. But the tory share is still pretty static.
At the moment it seems likely to me that the tories will win the most votes but most seats is completely up for grabs and largely depends on Scotland. I think that the Conservative supporters are getting a bit carried away with themselves.
I became a bit stuck trying to calculate the uncertainty, in the weekly averages, as I couldn't remember how to properly combine the uncertainties in each individual poll into an uncertainty in the mean of several polls. So I don't know how significant the increase is.
No denying that it's been a good polling week for the Conservatives, though.0 -
There is no mood of Tory optimism here:
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/ukip-claim-panicked-tories-offering-5071828#ICID=sharebar_twitter
UKIP claim panicked Tories are offering them election deals if they 'call off the dogs'
It's alleged Tory activists are defying their party’s campaign chief's orders in a bid to secure key marginals across the country.0 -
MikeK said:
Look at this bias being taught in our schools.. absolutely disgraceful.. #Bluehand #UKIP #EDL pic.twitter.com/oDW76UEG2g
— James Bond (@EnglandsTerrier) January 28, 2015
To teach in school that UKIP is racist and the same as Neo Nazis is a disgrace and must be condemned.
Who would want to be a teacher these days, when a single, hastily prepared slide (probably in response to a racist bullying incident or something) can be stripped of context and posted on twitter?0 -
LOL!MikeK said:There is no mood of Tory optimism here:
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/ukip-claim-panicked-tories-offering-5071828#ICID=sharebar_twitter
UKIP claim panicked Tories are offering them election deals if they 'call off the dogs'
It's alleged Tory activists are defying their party’s campaign chief's orders in a bid to secure key marginals across the country.
Mike, that's the Daily Mirror.0 -
0
-
OT
Just seeing the memorial events for the anniversary of the death and funeral of Churchill, has made me realise the paucity of political leadership that the UK has suffered since then.0 -
Who would want to be a teacher these days, when a single, hastily prepared slide (probably in response to a racist bullying incident or something) can be stripped of context and posted on twitter?Pong said:MikeK said:Look at this bias being taught in our schools.. absolutely disgraceful.. #Bluehand #UKIP #EDL pic.twitter.com/oDW76UEG2g
— James Bond (@EnglandsTerrier) January 28, 2015
To teach in school that UKIP is racist and the same as Neo Nazis is a disgrace and must be condemned.
That looks more like a student's presentation to me.
Surely the double exclamation marks are the giveaway.
0 -
Dair said:
It may well do.Slackbladder said:
I can't imagine that being stable if it's close to 323. The amount of porl barrelling and deals labour would have to do would rip apart both the union and the labour party.Dair said:
If Labour + SNP + Plaid > 323 then no, he won't. Nothing in current polling suggests that number won't happen so the chance of Cameron being PM without at least another 4% movement in the polling is pretty slim.AndyJS said:I'm starting to be of the opinion that even if Miliband gets 5-10 more seats than Cameron he won't be able to put a coalition together and Cameron will remain PM in a minority government.
But the reality is that Cameron could win 310 seats and STILL have no chance of forming a government because most of his legislative programme and definitely his budget would be outvoted by Labour + SNP + Plaid and if needed + Green + SDLP + Alliance.
When you consider how likely the 3 to 5 Kippers would be to cause mischief, the idea of Cameron even trying to be PM in a minority government is pretty hard to imagine.
There really are only two possible Stable Governments from the current polling (even with some movement to Tory) and that is Labour backed by SNP/Plaid and Grand Coalition.
I agree, it seems near impossible to me. The likely make up of the House of Commons after the election will be:
Labour inclined: Plaid (3), SDLP (3), SNP (33), Green (1), Lady Hermon (1). Farron led Lib Dems (29)
Tory inclined: DUP (9) UKIP (9) Clegg led Lib Dems (29)
If the Conservatives have 280 odd seats they'd be trying to run a government on a maximum base of 327 if Clegg stays. Even if it was a temporary arrangement before a second election, it'd struggle to pass anything.0 -
MarkHopkins said:MikeK said:
Look at this bias being taught in our schools.. absolutely disgraceful.. #Bluehand #UKIP #EDL pic.twitter.com/oDW76UEG2g
— James Bond (@EnglandsTerrier) January 28, 2015
To teach in school that UKIP is racist and the same as Neo Nazis is a disgrace and must be condemned.
They are comparing UKIP to Hitler? Perhaps they should also teach them Godwin's law.
Godwin's Law doesn't say what most people think it says.0 -
MikeK said:
Look at this bias being taught in our schools.. absolutely disgraceful.. #Bluehand #UKIP #EDL pic.twitter.com/oDW76UEG2g
— James Bond (@EnglandsTerrier) January 28, 2015
To teach in school that UKIP is racist and the same as Neo Nazis is a disgrace and must be condemned.
Who wrote the slide?
Was it a pupil as part of a presentation?
If so what Mark was given?
If it was a prepared lesson from a teacher you may have a point until you can prove that though it would be better to break the habit of jumping on every UKIP bandwagon.0 -
That looks more like a student's presentation to me.Grandiose said:
Who would want to be a teacher these days, when a single, hastily prepared slide (probably in response to a racist bullying incident or something) can be stripped of context and posted on twitter?Pong said:MikeK said:Look at this bias being taught in our schools.. absolutely disgraceful.. #Bluehand #UKIP #EDL pic.twitter.com/oDW76UEG2g
— James Bond (@EnglandsTerrier) January 28, 2015
To teach in school that UKIP is racist and the same as Neo Nazis is a disgrace and must be condemned.
Surely the double exclamation marks are the giveaway.
Well, precisely.
Without context, the slide is meaningless. It's kinda funny the use of hashtags, and the twitter account itself indicates a certain crossover between EDL & UKIP support. The "racist" line is blurry, isn't it?0 -
Who would want to be a teacher these days, when a single, hastily prepared slide (probably in response to a racist bullying incident or something) can be stripped of context and posted on twitter?Pong said:MikeK said:Look at this bias being taught in our schools.. absolutely disgraceful.. #Bluehand #UKIP #EDL pic.twitter.com/oDW76UEG2g
— James Bond (@EnglandsTerrier) January 28, 2015
To teach in school that UKIP is racist and the same as Neo Nazis is a disgrace and must be condemned.
Maybe they're not neo-Nazis but their friends are:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/nigel-farage-strikes-alliance-with-farright-mep-who-joked-about-hitler-and-beating-women-9807995.html0 -
Godwin's Law doesn't say what most people think it says.Alistair said:MarkHopkins said:MikeK said:Look at this bias being taught in our schools.. absolutely disgraceful.. #Bluehand #UKIP #EDL pic.twitter.com/oDW76UEG2g
— James Bond (@EnglandsTerrier) January 28, 2015
To teach in school that UKIP is racist and the same as Neo Nazis is a disgrace and must be condemned.
They are comparing UKIP to Hitler? Perhaps they should also teach them Godwin's law.
Fun fact, I have been in a discussion with Mike Godwin, he's now a first-class IP lawyer. And a big Doctor Who fan! (Despite living in the States.)
Apparently when he tells his daughter to tidy her room, she compares him to Hitler.0 -
I think the labelling is not routine because the people who might push for such labelling are more concerned with having the law as it is enforced, and amended to remove the religious exemption, which would make labelling superfluous.Cyclefree said:
I don't particularly want to ban halal or kosher slaughter but I sure as hell want to have proper labelling of meat so that, just as Jews and Muslims can choose kosher/halal meat, I can choose meat where the animal has been stunned first.AndyJS said:Article defending halal slaughter:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/11379157/Banning-ritual-slaughter-would-be-a-victory-for-racists.html
Quite why such labelling is not routine beats me.
http://www.ciwf.org.uk/our-campaigns/slaughter/
The above claims that a lot of halal slaughter already involves effective stunning of the animal to be slaughtered, which suggests that the exemption on religious grounds can be removed.0 -
The referendum has stuffed Labour , they have to try and face two ways now and look sillier by the day. Seen as Tories little helpers in Scotland and favouring Scotland in England. They are getting their just desserts.Socrates said:I see Miliband is promising a special manifesto for the Scots.
Presumably he will issue a special manifesto for the English, given that he considers them equal to the Scots? Or will he have a double standard, lest giving the English attention as a nation only encourage "the most nationalistic people in the world"?0
