politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Anybody betting on two general elections this year should f
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Anybody betting on two general elections this year should first read this analysis by Chris Huhne
Nearly a year ago the former LD cabinet minister, Chris Huhne, wrote an excellent piece in the Guardian on how the Fixed Term Parliament Act would make it difficult for a second general election shortly after an indecisive outcome – as looks highly likely in May.
Comments
-
Chris Huhne Will Never Be LibDem Leader0
-
Hard to argue with the main points here...
0 -
So my 14-1 bet placed in October 2012 is a loser.JackW said:Chris Huhne Will Never Be LibDem Leader
0 -
FPT:
The original post:
MikeK said:
Sarah Palin News @SarahPalinLinks 9m9 minutes ago
150 years after sinking, Confederate submarine slowly reveals its secrets | http://fxn.ws/1wJlTQY #TenthAmendment
---------------------------------
Speedy said:
» show previous quotes
?
So the final 2016 update for tonight will include Sarah Palin, you asked for it, watch the video and scream:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2015/01/27/jon_stewart_mocks_iowa_summit_of_a_lot_of_republicans_who_will_never_be_president.html
-------------------------------------------
What do you mean: "you asked for it?" I posted a a tweet about a Confederate Sub; the first sub ever to sink a ship. Nothing to do with Sara Palin, except she thought it important to tweet.
You, @Speedy, are a really stupid berk, showing only a hatred of things that you do not understand.0 -
I fear so.MikeSmithson said:
You'll just have to rely on some PBer of considerable betting repute to land the odd 50/1 winner .... but where would one find such a colossus ?!?
0 -
WSC started as Conservative MP for Oldham and then crossed the floor to the Liberals before finding his final home back with the Conservatives.Edin_Rokz said:
Could come back as a Tory? Didn't Churchill get kicked out at an election and get back into Westmimster for another party?JackW said:Chris Huhne Will Never Be LibDem Leader
.....................................................
Goodnight all .....
0 -
It's been a long-time since I've immersed myself in the grubbier side of politics, but my recollection is that depriving the government of money ("supply") counts as an automatic vote of no confidence (that's why you have "confidence and supply" agreements rather than just confidence).
But the reality is that a government would just govern by executive fiat and then put up the occasional populist bill and dare the opposition to vote it down.0 -
It may be a logical piece, but Huhne himself is dead meat in politics; even if his wife (ex?) is making a comeback of sorts.
Whatever happens in the GE, (hung parliament or not) I believe that FPTP is entering its final period of life.0 -
For two elections in 2015, the gap between elections would need to be shorter than any two elections so far. In 1910, the elections were in January and December and in 1974, the elections were in February and October. (Also worth noting, there were 10 months between the December 1923 and the October 1924 elections.)
Bear in mind that no one will want an election in December and there's a summer recess from July to October, and the odds of two elections in the calendar year in practice depend on an immediate collapse of the current government with no alternative able to command the confidence of Parliament even briefly.
I just don't see it.0 -
The more the world is changing, the more it stays the same...
"Margaret Thatcher, the former prime minister, was kept fully informed about an investigation into a senior diplomat who was embroiled in a paedophile scandal, newly-released secret documents show.
Mrs Thatcher received a stream of memos from officials about the “unnatural sexual proclivities” of Sir Peter Hayman.
The prime minister was carefully coached on how to deflect difficult questions about the affair after it was finally exposed by Private Eye magazine in 1980. "
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/11381191/Margaret-Thatcher-warned-of-paedophile-scandal-secret-documents-reveal.html0 -
It had a good run. Though I confess to being less certain it will end any time soon, even though it should, particularly if Labour manage to squeak a small majority or a cobbled coalition. Even under circumstances ideal for showcasing the limitations of FPTP, they could manage a win depending on Scotland, so why would they want to change it? I recall Ed M supports changing it, but I cannot imagine it would be a priority so soon after winning largely thanks to it.MikeK said:It may be a logical piece, but Huhne himself is dead meat in politics; even if his wife (ex?) is making a comeback of sorts.
Whatever happens in the GE, (hung parliament or not) I believe that FPTP is entering its final period of life.0 -
Excellent article by @DanHannanMEP regarding why the #EU has a hard time with #Israel http://washex.am/165IVfI0
-
I had a fairly decent bet on a 2015 election with vcbet at 11/4 shortly after Cameron announced the fixed term parliament. They haven't paid out yet but it's now a certain winner.
I will chase them up tomorrow.
:-)0 -
Huhne's point abou the unattractivness of a minority government makes total sense but I think the upshot is that if the numbers aren't there for a coalition, the main parties will both decline to govern in the first place and call a second election right away.0
-
And what did the Sainted Margaret do about it all ?isam said:The more the world is changing, the more it stays the same...
"Margaret Thatcher, the former prime minister, was kept fully informed about an investigation into a senior diplomat who was embroiled in a paedophile scandal, newly-released secret documents show.
Mrs Thatcher received a stream of memos from officials about the “unnatural sexual proclivities” of Sir Peter Hayman.
The prime minister was carefully coached on how to deflect difficult questions about the affair after it was finally exposed by Private Eye magazine in 1980. "
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/11381191/Margaret-Thatcher-warned-of-paedophile-scandal-secret-documents-reveal.html0 -
What happens if the minority government throws in the towel, the PM goes to Her Maj and offers his resignation AND the oppo cannot form a government or does not want to ?0
-
There might yet be a state of emergency. There was no election in either 1915 or 1940, despite elections being due on each occasion.stjohn said:I had a fairly decent bet on a 2015 election with vcbet at 11/4 shortly after Cameron announced the fixed term parliament. They haven't paid out yet but it's now a certain winner.
I will chase them up tomorrow.
:-)0 -
I rather like the Belgian solution a few years back and have no government at all. This carried on for several years as i recall0
-
Fair point. Grrhh!!antifrank said:
There might yet be a state of emergency. There was no election in either 1915 or 1940, despite elections being due on each occasion.stjohn said:I had a fairly decent bet on a 2015 election with vcbet at 11/4 shortly after Cameron announced the fixed term parliament. They haven't paid out yet but it's now a certain winner.
I will chase them up tomorrow.
:-)
(I think Grrhh!! is a small town in Hungary).
0 -
Indeed, apart from a Finance Act, and whatever has replaced the Army Acts, the Government doesn't actually have to pass legislation.Charles said:It's been a long-time since I've immersed myself in the grubbier side of politics, but my recollection is that depriving the government of money ("supply") counts as an automatic vote of no confidence (that's why you have "confidence and supply" agreements rather than just confidence).
But the reality is that a government would just govern by executive fiat and then put up the occasional populist bill and dare the opposition to vote it down.
0 -
Our politicians would never let that happen. If the idea that they were largely dispensible gained currency, the gravy train would hit the buffers for all of them.MikeSmithson said:I rather like the Belgian solution a few years back and have no government at all. This carried on for several years as i recall
0 -
Tonight's top tip
If your spouse has taken some speeding points for you DON'T COMMIT ADULTERY0 -
They have the advantage of having Walloon, Flemish and Brussels governments that run most services. No Westminster government would leave a bit of a vacuum in England, although presumably Scotland, Wales and NI could just get on with running things.MikeSmithson said:I rather like the Belgian solution a few years back and have no government at all. This carried on for several years as i recall
0 -
Also the generals could take over.antifrank said:
There might yet be a state of emergency. There was no election in either 1915 or 1940, despite elections being due on each occasion.stjohn said:I had a fairly decent bet on a 2015 election with vcbet at 11/4 shortly after Cameron announced the fixed term parliament. They haven't paid out yet but it's now a certain winner.
I will chase them up tomorrow.
:-)
0 -
Snap. But in the interim my account has been closed!stjohn said:I had a fairly decent bet on a 2015 election with vcbet at 11/4 shortly after Cameron announced the fixed term parliament. They haven't paid out yet but it's now a certain winner.
I will chase them up tomorrow.
:-)
I also seem to have the following extant with them; I think I was taking the Con bands on the basis of a reduction to 600 MPs, but I'll take them!
Con 250-274 @ 7/1
Con 275-299 @ 11/2
Simon Hughes @ 33/10 -
Conservatives and Labour will cling on to the rotten system to the bitter end, and beyond. Their entire argument is "Yes, we're horrible, but the other is worse."kle4 said:
It had a good run. Though I confess to being less certain it will end any time soon, even though it should, particularly if Labour manage to squeak a small majority or a cobbled coalition. Even under circumstances ideal for showcasing the limitations of FPTP, they could manage a win depending on Scotland, so why would they want to change it? I recall Ed M supports changing it, but I cannot imagine it would be a priority so soon after winning largely thanks to it.MikeK said:It may be a logical piece, but Huhne himself is dead meat in politics; even if his wife (ex?) is making a comeback of sorts.
Whatever happens in the GE, (hung parliament or not) I believe that FPTP is entering its final period of life.
0 -
For all the constant articles about the death of two-party politics, I think it's better than 50-50 that the two-party share increases at the next GE.Sean_F said:
Conservatives and Labour will cling on to the rotten system to the bitter end, and beyond. Their entire argument is "Yes, we're horrible, but the other is worse."kle4 said:
It had a good run. Though I confess to being less certain it will end any time soon, even though it should, particularly if Labour manage to squeak a small majority or a cobbled coalition. Even under circumstances ideal for showcasing the limitations of FPTP, they could manage a win depending on Scotland, so why would they want to change it? I recall Ed M supports changing it, but I cannot imagine it would be a priority so soon after winning largely thanks to it.MikeK said:It may be a logical piece, but Huhne himself is dead meat in politics; even if his wife (ex?) is making a comeback of sorts.
Whatever happens in the GE, (hung parliament or not) I believe that FPTP is entering its final period of life.0 -
How will the Unionist feel if there's a second General Election just because the Westminster parties don't like the outcome of the first?
After all trying to stop a Second Indyref is pretty much their only hope of stopping Independence.0 -
Tissue Price. Yes, I recall we both availed ourselves of this generous offering from Victor.Tissue_Price said:
Snap. But in the interim my account has been closed!stjohn said:I had a fairly decent bet on a 2015 election with vcbet at 11/4 shortly after Cameron announced the fixed term parliament. They haven't paid out yet but it's now a certain winner.
I will chase them up tomorrow.
:-)
I also seem to have the following extant with them; I think I was taking the Con bands on the basis of a reduction to 600 MPs, but I'll take them!
Con 250-274 @ 7/1
Con 275-299 @ 11/2
Simon Hughes @ 33/1
He is still taking my business - but this payout might make him reconsider. And when he has to pay me out at 17/1 on Sunday when Villa beat Arsenal he is going to be even grumpier. Not to mention how he will feel when he has to pay me out at 66/1 each way when Villa win the FA Cup ....
0 -
Confidence and Supply isn't about money (well not directly), it's an agreement to vote with the government on Votes of Confidence and to SUPPLY Votes on agreed legislation (which will of course include the budget but this is indirect and not what is meant by Supply).Charles said:It's been a long-time since I've immersed myself in the grubbier side of politics, but my recollection is that depriving the government of money ("supply") counts as an automatic vote of no confidence (that's why you have "confidence and supply" agreements rather than just confidence).
But the reality is that a government would just govern by executive fiat and then put up the occasional populist bill and dare the opposition to vote it down.0 -
That's UKIP's argument: 'LibLabCon'.Sean_F said:
Conservatives and Labour will cling on to the rotten system to the bitter end, and beyond. Their entire argument is "Yes, we're horrible, but the other is worse."0 -
The collapse of the Lib Dems helps them. I'd expect them to drop slightly to 65% or so.Tissue_Price said:
For all the constant articles about the death of two-party politics, I think it's better than 50-50 that the two-party share increases at the next GE.Sean_F said:
Conservatives and Labour will cling on to the rotten system to the bitter end, and beyond. Their entire argument is "Yes, we're horrible, but the other is worse."kle4 said:
It had a good run. Though I confess to being less certain it will end any time soon, even though it should, particularly if Labour manage to squeak a small majority or a cobbled coalition. Even under circumstances ideal for showcasing the limitations of FPTP, they could manage a win depending on Scotland, so why would they want to change it? I recall Ed M supports changing it, but I cannot imagine it would be a priority so soon after winning largely thanks to it.MikeK said:It may be a logical piece, but Huhne himself is dead meat in politics; even if his wife (ex?) is making a comeback of sorts.
Whatever happens in the GE, (hung parliament or not) I believe that FPTP is entering its final period of life.
0 -
What was the bet on Simon Hughes ....... losing his seat perhaps?Tissue_Price said:
Snap. But in the interim my account has been closed!stjohn said:I had a fairly decent bet on a 2015 election with vcbet at 11/4 shortly after Cameron announced the fixed term parliament. They haven't paid out yet but it's now a certain winner.
I will chase them up tomorrow.
:-)
I also seem to have the following extant with them; I think I was taking the Con bands on the basis of a reduction to 600 MPs, but I'll take them!
Con 250-274 @ 7/1
Con 275-299 @ 11/2
Simon Hughes @ 33/10 -
Why would the SNP bring down a Labour minority government? Things would have had to have got pretty terrible to reach a stage where they'd be prepared to join forces with the Tories to bring down a Labour government and thus usher in a Conservative one.0
-
stjohn - could this prove the death knell as regards your account with VCBet ?stjohn said:I had a fairly decent bet on a 2015 election with vcbet at 11/4 shortly after Cameron announced the fixed term parliament. They haven't paid out yet but it's now a certain winner.
I will chase them up tomorrow.
:-)0 -
The Greek finance minister on NewsNight is very impressive. He has just contradicted the entire BBC report.0
-
Next Pope.peter_from_putney said:
What was the bet on Simon Hughes ....... losing his seat perhaps?Tissue_Price said:
Snap. But in the interim my account has been closed!stjohn said:I had a fairly decent bet on a 2015 election with vcbet at 11/4 shortly after Cameron announced the fixed term parliament. They haven't paid out yet but it's now a certain winner.
I will chase them up tomorrow.
:-)
I also seem to have the following extant with them; I think I was taking the Con bands on the basis of a reduction to 600 MPs, but I'll take them!
Con 250-274 @ 7/1
Con 275-299 @ 11/2
Simon Hughes @ 33/10 -
Peter. I was thinking that .....but Scott_P has made a very salient point. Victor may tolerate me a while longer.peter_from_putney said:
stjohn - could this prove the death knell as regards your account with VCBet ?stjohn said:I had a fairly decent bet on a 2015 election with vcbet at 11/4 shortly after Cameron announced the fixed term parliament. They haven't paid out yet but it's now a certain winner.
I will chase them up tomorrow.
:-)
0 -
Gosh, I don't know, perhaps because their entire strategy for independence is predicated on setting Scotland against Westminster?Artist said:Why would the SNP bring down a Labour minority government? Things would have had to have got pretty terrible to reach a stage where they'd be prepared to join forces with the Tories to bring down a Labour government and thus usher in a Conservative one.
0 -
On topic: Yes, two elections in 2015 are unlikely. An unstable government, either a minority government, based on a grubby formal (or more likely informal) agreement, or some kludged-together coalition, is indeed quite likely, and indeed such a government will be unstable and chaotic, lurching from crisis to crisis, incapable of governing effectively, and using our money to buy off malcontents. But that doesn't automatically imply an early second election, for the reasons laid out by Chris Huhne . Also, as antifrank points out, there really isn't that much time for a second election this year.
Also, forget the idea of a Grand Coalition. It ain't gonna happen, for the very simple reason that it is no-one's interest for it to happen. Why would either main party tie itself to the other? They'd be wanting to tear chunks out of each other and apportion blame, not cooperate to make life easy for the other side. Their entire focus would be on how to maximise advantage for the next election.
What might happen, in some circumstances, is one of the two main parties grudgingly propping up the other by abstention, whilst waiting for the best opportunity to attempt to force the issue to a vote of confidence. But that is different from a grand coalition.0 -
Great tip Mike.MikeSmithson said:Tonight's top tip
If your spouse has taken some speeding points for you DON'T COMMIT ADULTERY0 -
In an age of austerity, surely you can cut out the first nine words? That would be a 75% reduction.MikeSmithson said:Tonight's top tip
If your spouse has taken some speeding points for you DON'T COMMIT ADULTERY0 -
All the minor parties would be reluctant to engineer a quick second election.Artist said:Why would the SNP bring down a Labour minority government? Things would have had to have got pretty terrible to reach a stage where they'd be prepared to join forces with the Tories to bring down a Labour government and thus usher in a Conservative one.
Both Labour and Conservative would say "let's stop messing around and have a majority government - us or them" and squeeze the other parties.
0 -
I'm pretty sure you are wrong.Dair said:
Confidence and Supply isn't about money (well not directly), it's an agreement to vote with the government on Votes of Confidence and to SUPPLY Votes on agreed legislation (which will of course include the budget but this is indirect and not what is meant by Supply).Charles said:It's been a long-time since I've immersed myself in the grubbier side of politics, but my recollection is that depriving the government of money ("supply") counts as an automatic vote of no confidence (that's why you have "confidence and supply" agreements rather than just confidence).
But the reality is that a government would just govern by executive fiat and then put up the occasional populist bill and dare the opposition to vote it down.
Key sentence in the middle of the first paragraph: "Loss of Supply is interpreted as indicating a loss of confidence in the government" [where Supply refers to the supply of funds from the Exchequer]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loss_of_supply0 -
Out Guardian'ing the Guardian...Scott_P said:The Greek finance minister on NewsNight is very impressive. He has just contradicted the entire BBC report.
0 -
Well I'll be damned. So I am.Charles said:
I'm pretty sure you are wrong.Dair said:
Confidence and Supply isn't about money (well not directly), it's an agreement to vote with the government on Votes of Confidence and to SUPPLY Votes on agreed legislation (which will of course include the budget but this is indirect and not what is meant by Supply).Charles said:It's been a long-time since I've immersed myself in the grubbier side of politics, but my recollection is that depriving the government of money ("supply") counts as an automatic vote of no confidence (that's why you have "confidence and supply" agreements rather than just confidence).
But the reality is that a government would just govern by executive fiat and then put up the occasional populist bill and dare the opposition to vote it down.
Key sentence in the middle of the first paragraph: "Loss of Supply is interpreted as indicating a loss of confidence in the government" [where Supply refers to the supply of funds from the Exchequer]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loss_of_supply0 -
Ah, but Scott_P ain't finking what I'm finking!stjohn said:
Peter. I was thinking that .....but Scott_P has made a very salient point. Victor may tolerate me a while longer.peter_from_putney said:
stjohn - could this prove the death knell as regards your account with VCBet ?stjohn said:I had a fairly decent bet on a 2015 election with vcbet at 11/4 shortly after Cameron announced the fixed term parliament. They haven't paid out yet but it's now a certain winner.
I will chase them up tomorrow.
:-)0 -
Oil prices roared back from six-year lows on Friday, rocketing more than 8 percent as a record weekly decline in U.S. oil drilling fueled a frenzy of short-covering.
In a rally that may spur speculation that a seven-month price collapse has ended, global benchmark Brent crude shot up to more than $53 per barrel, its highest in more than three weeks in its biggest one-day gain since 2009.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/01/30/us-markets-oil-idUSKBN0L305Q201501300 -
It was in 1978 - under a Labour govt that Hayman left paedophile literature on a bus. The police investigated him then. Hayman was reported to have fantasies - its not illegal - but he did not act on them says the report about this given to Thatcher. Its not clear what Thatcher could or would have done since Haywood's otherwise low level diplomatic career ended in 1972 - as High Commissioner to Canada. Other questions and statements were made in parliament about him at the time. BBC report that much of what was contained in the file was reported in the 1980s.surbiton said:
And what did the Sainted Margaret do about it all ?isam said:The more the world is changing, the more it stays the same...
"Margaret Thatcher, the former prime minister, was kept fully informed about an investigation into a senior diplomat who was embroiled in a paedophile scandal, newly-released secret documents show.
Mrs Thatcher received a stream of memos from officials about the “unnatural sexual proclivities” of Sir Peter Hayman.
The prime minister was carefully coached on how to deflect difficult questions about the affair after it was finally exposed by Private Eye magazine in 1980. "
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/11381191/Margaret-Thatcher-warned-of-paedophile-scandal-secret-documents-reveal.html
It is not the PM's job and should not be to institute criminal proceedings against anybody. Ask Dr Kelly's family what happens when politicians start to pick on diplomats.0 -
Here he was going to work this morningFrancisUrquhart said:
Out Guardian'ing the Guardian...Scott_P said:The Greek finance minister on NewsNight is very impressive. He has just contradicted the entire BBC report.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nxh9xpqGCg4
0 -
They did it in 1979, though they lost out disastrously by doing so. One reason they might do it again is if they thought that Labour would form another minority government and that by demonstrating their willingness to use the nuclear option, Labour might become more persuadable on Scottish matters, lest the SNP trigger another vote of no confidence at a time more inconvenient to Labour.Artist said:Why would the SNP bring down a Labour minority government? Things would have had to have got pretty terrible to reach a stage where they'd be prepared to join forces with the Tories to bring down a Labour government and thus usher in a Conservative one.
0 -
In the circumstances that Huhne describes, I can see a long period of government and opposition playing chicken with each other, each trying to show the electorate that the other is blocking the road to sanity. Eventually everyone would get fed up and an election would be called, but the government could well win in those circumstances - stop all this messing about and let us get on with the job.0
-
MikeK said:
Excellent article by @DanHannanMEP regarding why the #EU has a hard time with #Israel http://washex.am/165IVfI
Its just waffle. The Europeans have a union so therefor must hate a newly independent country in the middle east.MikeK said:Excellent article by @DanHannanMEP regarding why the #EU has a hard time with #Israel http://washex.am/165IVfI
''Israel’s story is by no means unblemished'' - well theres a thing.0 -
A period of complete inactivity from politicians would be surprisingly popular with the public IMO.MikeSmithson said:I rather like the Belgian solution a few years back and have no government at all. This carried on for several years as i recall
0 -
Anyone who missed #thelastleg Brooker/Clegg interview will have missed the TV highlight of the election. We need a "Bullshit button" in the debates.
And real Fruit Ninja played by the Deputy PM with a disabled man with a sword attached to his prosthetic leg!
Not to mention the Greek financial crises in the medium of interpretive dance...0 -
On topic, there are undoubtedly problems that the Fixed Term Parliaments Act bring minority governments but it doesn't necessarily follow that a coalition will result. For a start, the numbers need to add up. If the next election produced the same outcome as the last (which it won't but run with it for the moment), a Con-LD coalition is still the only viable and realistic majority government. If the two parties couldn't agree, there'd be a minority, one way or another.
There's also the point that a coalition can break up just as a supply and confidence arrangement can. There's a little more firmness to a coalition as presumably there are some bills going through parliament which the minor party is keen on, whereas that's less likely under S&C, and the presentation of withdrawal is harder from government, but if push comes to shove a break-up may happen anyway.
I agree with Huhne's point that minority governments will be less popular in the future. However, it may take the existence and failure of one to prove the point.0 -
Would there be a majority in the House today for repealing the FTPA?0
-
Oddschecker is down !0
-
Chris Huhne? That's the guy that lied right. His missus got porridge? Right?
Err anything that is then said can be disregarded then .... Except here?0 -
The Cabinet Manual may help here. See https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/60641/cabinet-manual.pdfsurbiton said:What happens if the minority government throws in the towel, the PM goes to Her Maj and offers his resignation AND the oppo cannot form a government or does not want to ?
0 -
Not exactly. I acknowledge that Cameron & Co. are better than Milliband & Co. In the sense that Cameron & Co. are fairly hostile to people like me, but Milliband are very hostile.Richard_Nabavi said:
That's UKIP's argument: 'LibLabCon'.Sean_F said:
Conservatives and Labour will cling on to the rotten system to the bitter end, and beyond. Their entire argument is "Yes, we're horrible, but the other is worse."
0 -
If the SNP were in coalition with anybody then they would be as responsible as anybody for what that govt did. This could turn out to be unpopular for that govt. And the SNP.david_herdson said:
They did it in 1979, though they lost out disastrously by doing so. One reason they might do it again is if they thought that Labour would form another minority government and that by demonstrating their willingness to use the nuclear option, Labour might become more persuadable on Scottish matters, lest the SNP trigger another vote of no confidence at a time more inconvenient to Labour.Artist said:Why would the SNP bring down a Labour minority government? Things would have had to have got pretty terrible to reach a stage where they'd be prepared to join forces with the Tories to bring down a Labour government and thus usher in a Conservative one.
But it might be doubly unpopular for a Labour partner who finds itself shackled to a party representing a devolved govt. How does Labour square pandering to the SNP - a regional party with its own narrow outlook - with its English voters and MPs? Not to mention the wider electorate.
Labour are the most at risk to a backlash in either country England or Wales according to what it does. I do not see any relevance to 'inconvenient timing' - it would get its desserts from one or the other no matter what it did.0 -
Racists? Bacon sandwiches? Liberals? Werewolves?Sean_F said:
Not exactly. I acknowledge that Cameron & Co. are better than Milliband & Co. In the sense that Cameron & Co. are fairly hostile to people like me, but Milliband are very hostile.Richard_Nabavi said:
That's UKIP's argument: 'LibLabCon'.Sean_F said:
Conservatives and Labour will cling on to the rotten system to the bitter end, and beyond. Their entire argument is "Yes, we're horrible, but the other is worse."
(sorry, I'm not making mock, I'm just trying to think of people that Con hate a bit and Lab hate a lot)
0 -
Ah, of course. Obvious. You are David Miliband.viewcode said:
Racists? Bacon sandwiches? Liberals? Werewolves?Sean_F said:Not exactly. I acknowledge that Cameron & Co. are better than Milliband & Co. In the sense that Cameron & Co. are fairly hostile to people like me, but Milliband are very hostile.
(sorry, I'm not making mock, I'm just trying to think of people that Con hate a bit and Lab hate a lot)
0 -
The SNP wouldn't need to be in government. Indeed, it would be better for them in many ways if they weren't: they could threaten far more, more often and more credibly. As far as their own backyard is concerned, Holyrood takes care of most of the issues anyway.Flightpath said:
If the SNP were in coalition with anybody then they would be as responsible as anybody for what that govt did. This could turn out to be unpopular for that govt. And the SNP.david_herdson said:
They did it in 1979, though they lost out disastrously by doing so. One reason they might do it again is if they thought that Labour would form another minority government and that by demonstrating their willingness to use the nuclear option, Labour might become more persuadable on Scottish matters, lest the SNP trigger another vote of no confidence at a time more inconvenient to Labour.Artist said:Why would the SNP bring down a Labour minority government? Things would have had to have got pretty terrible to reach a stage where they'd be prepared to join forces with the Tories to bring down a Labour government and thus usher in a Conservative one.
But it might be doubly unpopular for a Labour partner who finds itself shackled to a party representing a devolved govt. How does Labour square pandering to the SNP - a regional party with its own narrow outlook - with its English voters and MPs? Not to mention the wider electorate.
Labour are the most at risk to a backlash in either country England or Wales according to what it does. I do not see any relevance to 'inconvenient timing' - it would get its desserts from one or the other no matter what it did.0 -
The comment stands or falls on its own merits, whoever wrote it.Moses_ said:Chris Huhne? That's the guy that lied right. His missus got porridge? Right?
Err anything that is then said can be disregarded then .... Except here?0 -
No. UKIP support a fair electoral system where you're not penalised for voting for who you think is best. The Tories support an unfair electoral system that discourages people from voting their true preferences - and then use it to demand other parties' supporters vote for them. It's very cynical.Richard_Nabavi said:
That's UKIP's argument: 'LibLabCon'.Sean_F said:
Conservatives and Labour will cling on to the rotten system to the bitter end, and beyond. Their entire argument is "Yes, we're horrible, but the other is worse."0 -
Betfair Exchange punters appear to have lost confidence in the possibility of a Labour majority:
http://www.betfair.com/exchange/politics/market?id=1.101416490&exp=e0 -
Labour's game to rig the electorate starting to coming to fruition:
The 2015 election will be first in which seats are decided by foreign voters, a new study has found found.
In two seats, East Ham and Brent North, the majority of voters were born overseas, while across the country almost 4 million voters – about one in 10 of the entire electorate in England and Wales – were born abroad.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/11376781/Foreign-voters-will-decide-constituencies-for-the-first-time.html0 -
The L&N model has had it at ~0% chance for almost 2 years; indeed, but for a handful of occasions in 2012, for most of this parliament...AndyJS said:Betfair Exchange punters appear to have lost confidence in the possibility of a Labour majority:
http://www.betfair.com/exchange/politics/market?id=1.101416490&exp=e
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/13331381/L&N.PNG
When will people, here especially, learn not to be deceived by mid-term polls?0 -
The Greek finance minister is coming to London this weekend, and I've been offered a meeting on Sunday evening. I'm sorely tempted to take it, and then quiz him on video game economics.0
-
At the same time 20,000 voters have been found "not to exist" in Bradford:
http://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/news/11748713.One_in_20_Bradfordians_drop_off_electoral_roll_as_side_effect_of_fraud_clampdown/Socrates said:Labour's game to rig the electorate starting to coming to fruition:
The 2015 election will be first in which seats are decided by foreign voters, a new study has found found.
In two seats, East Ham and Brent North, the majority of voters were born overseas, while across the country almost 4 million voters – about one in 10 of the entire electorate in England and Wales – were born abroad.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/11376781/Foreign-voters-will-decide-constituencies-for-the-first-time.html0 -
The only honest system is one in whichSocrates said:
No. UKIP support a fair electoral system where you're not penalised for voting for who you think is best. The Tories support an unfair electoral system that discourages people from voting their true preferences - and then use it to demand other parties' supporters vote for them. It's very cynical.Richard_Nabavi said:
That's UKIP's argument: 'LibLabCon'.Sean_F said:
Conservatives and Labour will cling on to the rotten system to the bitter end, and beyond. Their entire argument is "Yes, we're horrible, but the other is worse."
i) every vote in the nation directly and equally influences the overall result
ii) parties are treated fairly, as far as possible, in where they obtain their seats.
iii) voters have some choice, as far as possible, between candidates of the same party.
Who could argue with any of the above statements, or deny that FPTP violates all three?0 -
You Your L&N model makes Conservative Majority a 90% probability ?RodCrosby said:
The L&N model has had it at ~0% chance for almost 2 years; indeed, but for a handful of occasions in 2012, for most of this parliament...AndyJS said:Betfair Exchange punters appear to have lost confidence in the possibility of a Labour majority:
http://www.betfair.com/exchange/politics/market?id=1.101416490&exp=e
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/13331381/L&N.PNG
When will people, here especially, learn not to be deceived by mid-term polls?0 -
The last L&N forecast does. One could argue certain caveats should apply.Pulpstar said:
You make Conservative Majority a 90% probability ?RodCrosby said:
The L&N model has had it at ~0% chance for almost 2 years; indeed, but for a handful of occasions in 2012, for most of this parliament...AndyJS said:Betfair Exchange punters appear to have lost confidence in the possibility of a Labour majority:
http://www.betfair.com/exchange/politics/market?id=1.101416490&exp=e
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/13331381/L&N.PNG
When will people, here especially, learn not to be deceived by mid-term polls?
However, the Lab majority odds have belatedly fallen into line with L&N.
I suspect the Tory majority odds will shortly move in their direction also...0 -
I was born overseasSocrates said:Labour's game to rig the electorate starting to coming to fruition:
The 2015 election will be first in which seats are decided by foreign voters, a new study has found found.
In two seats, East Ham and Brent North, the majority of voters were born overseas, while across the country almost 4 million voters – about one in 10 of the entire electorate in England and Wales – were born abroad.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/11376781/Foreign-voters-will-decide-constituencies-for-the-first-time.html0 -
Treat the model seperately for Scotland, Wales and England ?RodCrosby said:
The last L&N forecast does. One could argue certain caveats should apply...Pulpstar said:
You make Conservative Majority a 90% probability ?RodCrosby said:
The L&N model has had it at ~0% chance for almost 2 years; indeed, but for a handful of occasions in 2012, for most of this parliament...AndyJS said:Betfair Exchange punters appear to have lost confidence in the possibility of a Labour majority:
http://www.betfair.com/exchange/politics/market?id=1.101416490&exp=e
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/13331381/L&N.PNG
When will people, here especially, learn not to be deceived by mid-term polls?
Sturgeon enjoys a mahoosive ratings lead over both Cameron and Miliband up north...0 -
Pah, just back Labour in Brent Central and Brentford and Isleworth (2 seats most likely to be affected by the immigrant vote according to Migrationwatch), it's free money tbh.Sunil_Prasannan said:
I was born overseasSocrates said:Labour's game to rig the electorate starting to coming to fruition:
The 2015 election will be first in which seats are decided by foreign voters, a new study has found found.
In two seats, East Ham and Brent North, the majority of voters were born overseas, while across the country almost 4 million voters – about one in 10 of the entire electorate in England and Wales – were born abroad.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/11376781/Foreign-voters-will-decide-constituencies-for-the-first-time.html
Cameron v. Miliband - whoever wins, we loseSean_F said:
Conservatives and Labour will cling on to the rotten system to the bitter end, and beyond. Their entire argument is "Yes, we're horrible, but the other is worse."kle4 said:
It had a good run. Though I confess to being less certain it will end any time soon, even though it should, particularly if Labour manage to squeak a small majority or a cobbled coalition. Even under circumstances ideal for showcasing the limitations of FPTP, they could manage a win depending on Scotland, so why would they want to change it? I recall Ed M supports changing it, but I cannot imagine it would be a priority so soon after winning largely thanks to it.MikeK said:It may be a logical piece, but Huhne himself is dead meat in politics; even if his wife (ex?) is making a comeback of sorts.
Whatever happens in the GE, (hung parliament or not) I believe that FPTP is entering its final period of life.
0 -
Cameron v. Miliband - whoever wins, we loseSean_F said:
Conservatives and Labour will cling on to the rotten system to the bitter end, and beyond. Their entire argument is "Yes, we're horrible, but the other is worse."kle4 said:
It had a good run. Though I confess to being less certain it will end any time soon, even though it should, particularly if Labour manage to squeak a small majority or a cobbled coalition. Even under circumstances ideal for showcasing the limitations of FPTP, they could manage a win depending on Scotland, so why would they want to change it? I recall Ed M supports changing it, but I cannot imagine it would be a priority so soon after winning largely thanks to it.MikeK said:It may be a logical piece, but Huhne himself is dead meat in politics; even if his wife (ex?) is making a comeback of sorts.
Whatever happens in the GE, (hung parliament or not) I believe that FPTP is entering its final period of life. 0 -
Well Conservative Majority is at 6.8 at the moment...RodCrosby said:
The last L&N forecast does. One could argue certain caveats should apply.Pulpstar said:
You make Conservative Majority a 90% probability ?RodCrosby said:
The L&N model has had it at ~0% chance for almost 2 years; indeed, but for a handful of occasions in 2012, for most of this parliament...AndyJS said:Betfair Exchange punters appear to have lost confidence in the possibility of a Labour majority:
http://www.betfair.com/exchange/politics/market?id=1.101416490&exp=e
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/13331381/L&N.PNG
When will people, here especially, learn not to be deceived by mid-term polls?
However, the Lab majority odds have belatedly fallen into line with L&N.
I suspect the Tory majority odds will shortly move in their direction also...
I'll add £20 of it at that price - they only need to hold Sherwood according to the seat calcs !
0 -
Sturgeon isn't PM of the UK, so isn't a factor in the model.Pulpstar said:
Treat the model seperately for Scotland, Wales and England ?RodCrosby said:
The last L&N forecast does. One could argue certain caveats should apply...Pulpstar said:
You make Conservative Majority a 90% probability ?RodCrosby said:
The L&N model has had it at ~0% chance for almost 2 years; indeed, but for a handful of occasions in 2012, for most of this parliament...AndyJS said:Betfair Exchange punters appear to have lost confidence in the possibility of a Labour majority:
http://www.betfair.com/exchange/politics/market?id=1.101416490&exp=e
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/13331381/L&N.PNG
When will people, here especially, learn not to be deceived by mid-term polls?
Sturgeon enjoys a mahoosive ratings lead over both Cameron and Miliband up north...
The main unknowns are
i) coalition, not unheard of however, and the model copes pretty well with historical examples.
ii) rise of "new" parties, UKIP, SNP. Again not unheard of; Alliance 1980s, SNP 1974, again the model copes well.0 -
Thanks Rod,
I still maintain that Conservative majority was way too short a couple of years back - meanwhile we have level polls, so there may well be something in your theories
Adjusted the Overall Majority book a bit.
Lab -41.41 NOM 146.15 Con 188.780 -
The Tories aren't going to get a majority unless they can win Labour seats like Hampstead&Kilburn and Southampton Itchen. Difficult to envisage.0
-
Difficult to envisage?AndyJS said:The Tories aren't going to get a majority unless they can win Labour seats like Hampstead&Kilburn and Southampton Itchen. Difficult to envisage.
Perfectly do-able. Stranger things have happened at every general election within living memory...0 -
Cannock Chase is one of the most interesting seats to watch IMO.
Latest Betfair Sportsbook odds:
Lab 2.37
Con 2.87
UKIP 3.75
https://www.betfair.com/sport/politics0 -
That only worked because the various bits of Belgium already had their own devolved governments to get on with doing things.MikeSmithson said:I rather like the Belgian solution a few years back and have no government at all. This carried on for several years as i recall
0 -
If a ptarmigan can have a silent p, why not also ptarmac? Or the PTARDIS? Why not have it the other way round as well, and have a tpartridge or a tparsnip?0
-
Thanks for this link!viewcode said:
The Cabinet Manual may help here. See https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/60641/cabinet-manual.pdfsurbiton said:What happens if the minority government throws in the towel, the PM goes to Her Maj and offers his resignation AND the oppo cannot form a government or does not want to ?
0 -
Voting is underway in the Queensland state election:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Queensland_state_election,_2015
The previous election in 2012 was a landslide for the Liberals, winning 78 seats to Labor's 7.0 -
A political party which didn't exist just over a year ago is now ahead or level-pegging in the Spanish opinion polls:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_Spanish_general_election,_2015#National0 -
"A recent survey shows that Spain’s anti-austerity party Podemos is leading public opinion just ahead of regional snap elections.
The survey, conducted by Spanish daily El País, showed that the left-wing party is ahead with at least 28 percent of the votes while the ruling People’s Party is lagging behind with 19 percent."
http://www.presstv.ir/Detail/2015/01/26/394797/Spain-antiausterity-party-leads-in-opinion-poll0 -
Makes Kipper progress look pitiful.AndyJS said:A political party which didn't exist just over a year ago is now ahead or level-pegging in the Spanish opinion polls:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_Spanish_general_election,_2015#National0 -
The January average of the phone polls is:
Con 31 (31 and 5/12)
Lab 32 (31 and 7/12)
UKP 14 (13 and 7/12)
Lib 9 (8 and 2/3)
Grn 8 (8 and 1/3)
Effectively a dead heat between Labour and Conservative for the lead and between Liberal Democrats and Greens for fourth.0 -
If we had Spain's unemployment, and especially youth unemployment I suspect the kippers would be doing rather better...TGOHF said:
Makes Kipper progress look pitiful.AndyJS said:A political party which didn't exist just over a year ago is now ahead or level-pegging in the Spanish opinion polls:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_Spanish_general_election,_2015#National0 -
One way out of this would be for a Grand Coalition to be formed with a limited agreed programme to:edmundintokyo said:Huhne's point abou the unattractivness of a minority government makes total sense but I think the upshot is that if the numbers aren't there for a coalition, the main parties will both decline to govern in the first place and call a second election right away.
a) Introduce a few populist and non contentious bills
b) Agree to repeal the FTP act and call a new election exactly one year later.
Sticking point would be how PM and Ministers were chosen, but that could be sorted out and it would only be for one year anyway.0 -
Spanish general election must be held by 20th December this year. Startling that the People's Party, which was running the country from 2004 to 2011, is down to about 20% in the polls. The ruling party has declined from 44% at the last election to around 28%.Indigo said:
If we had Spain's unemployment, and especially youth unemployment I suspect the kippers would be doing rather better...TGOHF said:
Makes Kipper progress look pitiful.AndyJS said:A political party which didn't exist just over a year ago is now ahead or level-pegging in the Spanish opinion polls:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_Spanish_general_election,_2015#National0
