politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The Liberals had held Montgomeryshire for more than a centu
Options
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The Liberals had held Montgomeryshire for more than a century – until Lembit sought re-election
At GE10 the incumbent MP who did worse than his party in any of the 650 seats was Lembit Opik in what for over a century had been a Liberal stronghold. At one stage during the last campaign you could have got 8/1 on the Tories taking the seat because it was seen as so much of a certainty.
0
Comments
-
It's possible. It's not value at 5/2 on current polling in Wales.0
-
The Tories also took this seat in the Welsh election in 2011 on a huge swing, though.
Conservatives 43.7% +13.6%
Liberal Democrats 33.6 -5.4%
Labour 11.4% +4.5%
Plaid Cymru 11.3% -2.5%
Swing: Lib->Con 9.5%
I'm not convinced the 2010 result was simply an anti-Lembit vote.0 -
Have you seen the polling in Wales?
Last week the Yellow Peril were 6th behind the Welsh Nats and The Greens.0 -
It's value given the history. Just not being Lembit is a strong selling point.antifrank said:It's possible. It's not value at 5/2 on current polling in Wales.
Voters elect individuals not parties or party leaders which is why Opik got booted out in 2010.0 -
0 out of the last 7 polls showing a Tory lead.
**** WAVES GOALPOSTS IN THE AIR *****0 -
I liked Lembit. I remember saying to him after he'd organise a debate on giant asteroids hitting the earth that people weren't taking him seriously even when he was serious and he needed to embrace some mainstream cause for a bit. He looked thoughtful and said hmm, yes, you're probably right. The next week, he announced his romance with the Cheeky Girl.0
-
not a mention of the TNS poll, i wonder why!!!!0
-
CORECTION The Liberals had held Montgomeryshire for all but 4 of the last 120 years – until Lembit sought re-election0
-
FPT
I don't like Miliband or Labour, but they didn't engage in tax avoidance, as I have pointed out ad nauseam.Easterross said:
Thanks Rod, that says far more than most of the ivory towers academics who have been pontificating utter crap for several years.RodCrosby said:
I have not settled completely on a view yet, other than.Easterross said:Evening all and I see another academic has built himself up to potentially be a laughing stock on 8th May.
Rod if you are still around, what is your present thought on the election outcome?
Lab maj - OUT
Con maj - Possible
Con most seats - Likely
Lab net loss of seats - Possible
I really wish all the polls published are adjusted to reflect their historical degree of inaccuracy. If Labour was truly leading in the polls, we wouldn't have the Shadow Cabinet rehearsing for Julius Caesar's final gathering of his closest friends.
Listening to Ed Bland today, he really doesn't understand the irony of him criticising people who engage in lawful tax avoidance when that is precisely what he and his family did to avoid inheritance tax on his father's estate.
They took advantage of Ralph's lawful tax allowance, by the lawful device of deed of variation.
No tax was in fact mitigated at the time, and may never be, as Mrs. Miliband has had 20 years to lawfully mitigate tax herself.
The manoeuvre they undertook has since been superceded by statue, in the 2008 Finance Act.0 -
Just managed to catch up with Gordon Brown's speech in Edinburgh today.
Is it just me or was that the biggest crock of shite?
Vow++
Vow^2
Labour trying to be everything to everyman here... Not wanting to abandon the "shared benefits" of the union that they campaigned on during the referendum, they are left with the weak beer of additional powers to vary welfare - effectively Holyrood can lump in more cash, which won't cause any problems with the view of Scottish subsidy junkies. Add in the clusterfeck waiting to happen decoupling of housing benefit form universal credit, supposedly so they can Reverse The Bedroom Tax (tm).
All just comes across as back of the fag packet panic.
Is this really what Labour will stand on in Scotland?0 -
If this was anything like a "normal" year for the Lib Dems Mike would have a point. A frankly ridiculous candidate depressing a strong vote would normally lead to a come back with credible replacement. But this is not a "normal" year for the Lib Dems, it is not even close.
They are going to lose half their seats give or take and a catastrophic number of deposits.
One day, if they survive, they might make a come back. It might even be 2020 when the minority tory party finally and irredeemably splits into 2 on an issue so few outside the party actually give a damn about. But it will not be 2015.0 -
RodCrosby said:
» show previous quotes
Ideally, if the Samplemiser was still around, we'd have a better idea. Failing that, we could pool the polls over some reasonable moving timeframe (a week) and derive standard errors from the larger sample, then work out the probabilities the Tory lead is greater than 0. We could then say, for example, if the probability was >0.025 or <0.975 there would be a degree of uncertainty about who was ahead...</p>
Time series and moving averages memories memories.
Bloody Hell and i have an applied statistics degree too, only a 2.2 though
Long time ago too mind.
Sheffield Poly. Herriot House. Funnily enough i do remember spending a lot of time in
http://www.theoldqueenshead.co.uk/history.html0 -
LOL.NickPalmer said:I liked Lembit. I remember saying to him after he'd organise a debate on giant asteroids hitting the earth that people weren't taking him seriously even when he was serious and he needed to embrace some mainstream cause for a bit. He looked thoughtful and said hmm, yes, you're probably right. The next week, he announced his romance with the Cheeky Girl.
He's not dull, you have to give him that.0 -
What TNS poll? They usually come out on Tuesdays or Wednesdays.wumper said:not a mention of the TNS poll, i wonder why!!!!
0 -
He was the most improbable MP since Trebitsch-Lincoln. We should follow his career with interest to see where it leads.NickPalmer said:I liked Lembit. I remember saying to him after he'd organise a debate on giant asteroids hitting the earth that people weren't taking him seriously even when he was serious and he needed to embrace some mainstream cause for a bit. He looked thoughtful and said hmm, yes, you're probably right. The next week, he announced his romance with the Cheeky Girl.
I remember him at NUS conference 1986. In them days he got himself elected on what appeared indistinguishable from an Independent MLRP ticket...0 -
Surely the definition of tax avoidance is that it is legal, and legitimate, in that you exploit the tax code to minimise your tax bill. Which the Milibands did and which I have no problem with. If governments want to stop it, they should change the law. As simple as that.RodCrosby said:FPT
I don't like Miliband or Labour, but they didn't engage in tax avoidance, as I have pointed out ad nauseam.Easterross said:
Thanks Rod, that says far more than most of the ivory towers academics who have been pontificating utter crap for several years.RodCrosby said:
I have not settled completely on a view yet, other than.Easterross said:Evening all and I see another academic has built himself up to potentially be a laughing stock on 8th May.
Rod if you are still around, what is your present thought on the election outcome?
Lab maj - OUT
Con maj - Possible
Con most seats - Likely
Lab net loss of seats - Possible
I really wish all the polls published are adjusted to reflect their historical degree of inaccuracy. If Labour was truly leading in the polls, we wouldn't have the Shadow Cabinet rehearsing for Julius Caesar's final gathering of his closest friends.
Listening to Ed Bland today, he really doesn't understand the irony of him criticising people who engage in lawful tax avoidance when that is precisely what he and his family did to avoid inheritance tax on his father's estate.
They took advantage of Ralph's lawful tax allowance, by the lawful device of deed of variation.
No tax was in fact mitigated at the time, and may never be, as Mrs. Miliband has had 20 years to lawfully mitigate tax herself.
The manoeuvre they undertook has since been superceded by statue, in the 2008 Finance Act.
Where labour are hypocrites is in criticising companies for minimising their tax bills using a corporation tax code largely put in place by the last - Labour - government.
0 -
Lord Ashcroft in response to someone talking about his upcoming Scotland polling
LordAshcroft: @toryboypierce @SkyNews @Kevin_Maguire ....and what a poll it is...as I write it up....0 -
Lord Ashcroft is a bloody P.....tease0
-
Tax allowance - what Parliament gives youJohnLilburne said:
Surely the definition of tax avoidance is that it is legal, and legitimate, in that you exploit the tax code to minimise your tax bill. Which the Milibands did and which I have no problem with. If governments want to stop it, they should change the law. As simple as that.RodCrosby said:FPT
I don't like Miliband or Labour, but they didn't engage in tax avoidance, as I have pointed out ad nauseam.Easterross said:
Thanks Rod, that says far more than most of the ivory towers academics who have been pontificating utter crap for several years.RodCrosby said:
I have not settled completely on a view yet, other than.Easterross said:Evening all and I see another academic has built himself up to potentially be a laughing stock on 8th May.
Rod if you are still around, what is your present thought on the election outcome?
Lab maj - OUT
Con maj - Possible
Con most seats - Likely
Lab net loss of seats - Possible
I really wish all the polls published are adjusted to reflect their historical degree of inaccuracy. If Labour was truly leading in the polls, we wouldn't have the Shadow Cabinet rehearsing for Julius Caesar's final gathering of his closest friends.
Listening to Ed Bland today, he really doesn't understand the irony of him criticising people who engage in lawful tax avoidance when that is precisely what he and his family did to avoid inheritance tax on his father's estate.
They took advantage of Ralph's lawful tax allowance, by the lawful device of deed of variation.
No tax was in fact mitigated at the time, and may never be, as Mrs. Miliband has had 20 years to lawfully mitigate tax herself.
The manoeuvre they undertook has since been superceded by statue, in the 2008 Finance Act.
Where labour are hypocrites is in criticising companies for minimising their tax bills using a corporation tax code largely put in place by the last - Labour - government.
Tax avoidance - what Parliament didn't intend to give you, but is still lawful to exploit.
Tax evasion - Theft
The Milibands took advantage of Ralph's IHT Tax Allowance. [he had forgotten to use it in his will]0 -
If you know of a TNS poll published since the one with fieldwork 15-19 Jan, do tell.wumper said:not a mention of the TNS poll, i wonder why!!!!
0 -
What's more, the Miliband boys decided that their communist father had got his will wrong and would have much preferred that his sons keep that percentage of his wealth, rather than to have it redistributed to the poor. I'm sure they're sure he'd be proud of them.JohnLilburne said:
Surely the definition of tax avoidance is that it is legal, and legitimate, in that you exploit the tax code to minimise your tax bill. Which the Milibands did and which I have no problem with. If governments want to stop it, they should change the law. As simple as that.RodCrosby said:FPT
I don't like Miliband or Labour, but they didn't engage in tax avoidance, as I have pointed out ad nauseam.Easterross said:
Thanks Rod, that says far more than most of the ivory towers academics who have been pontificating utter crap for several years.RodCrosby said:
I have not settled completely on a view yet, other than.Easterross said:Evening all and I see another academic has built himself up to potentially be a laughing stock on 8th May.
Rod if you are still around, what is your present thought on the election outcome?
Lab maj - OUT
Con maj - Possible
Con most seats - Likely
Lab net loss of seats - Possible
I really wish all the polls published are adjusted to reflect their historical degree of inaccuracy. If Labour was truly leading in the polls, we wouldn't have the Shadow Cabinet rehearsing for Julius Caesar's final gathering of his closest friends.
Listening to Ed Bland today, he really doesn't understand the irony of him criticising people who engage in lawful tax avoidance when that is precisely what he and his family did to avoid inheritance tax on his father's estate.
They took advantage of Ralph's lawful tax allowance, by the lawful device of deed of variation.
No tax was in fact mitigated at the time, and may never be, as Mrs. Miliband has had 20 years to lawfully mitigate tax herself.
The manoeuvre they undertook has since been superceded by statue, in the 2008 Finance Act.
Where labour are hypocrites is in criticising companies for minimising their tax bills using a corporation tax code largely put in place by the last - Labour - government.0 -
An actual LD gain on what will be a night of moderate to manic slaughter for them? Sounds hilarious, I hope it ends up being true.0
-
On topic you have to remember that Mick Bates, the Lib Dem Assembly member, was charged in 2010 with 3 counts of common assault. He subsequently resigned from the party. The Conservatives then won the seat in 2011.0
-
Not sure I follow. I was made redundant a few years ago and put enough of my redundancy payment into a pension to avoid paying higher rate tax. I would call that tax avoidance too, it's not a pejorative term.RodCrosby said:
Tax allowance - what Parliament gives youJohnLilburne said:
Surely the definition of tax avoidance is that it is legal, and legitimate, in that you exploit the tax code to minimise your tax bill. Which the Milibands did and which I have no problem with. If governments want to stop it, they should change the law. As simple as that.RodCrosby said:FPT
I don't like Miliband or Labour, but they didn't engage in tax avoidance, as I have pointed out ad nauseam.Easterross said:
Thanks Rod, that says far more than most of the ivory towers academics who have been pontificating utter crap for several years.RodCrosby said:
I have not settled completely on a view yet, other than.Easterross said:Evening all and I see another academic has built himself up to potentially be a laughing stock on 8th May.
Rod if you are still around, what is your present thought on the election outcome?
Lab maj - OUT
Con maj - Possible
Con most seats - Likely
Lab net loss of seats - Possible
I really wish all the polls published are adjusted to reflect their historical degree of inaccuracy. If Labour was truly leading in the polls, we wouldn't have the Shadow Cabinet rehearsing for Julius Caesar's final gathering of his closest friends.
Listening to Ed Bland today, he really doesn't understand the irony of him criticising people who engage in lawful tax avoidance when that is precisely what he and his family did to avoid inheritance tax on his father's estate.
They took advantage of Ralph's lawful tax allowance, by the lawful device of deed of variation.
No tax was in fact mitigated at the time, and may never be, as Mrs. Miliband has had 20 years to lawfully mitigate tax herself.
The manoeuvre they undertook has since been superceded by statue, in the 2008 Finance Act.
Where labour are hypocrites is in criticising companies for minimising their tax bills using a corporation tax code largely put in place by the last - Labour - government.
Tax avoidance - what Parliament didn't intend to give you, but is still lawful to exploit.
Tax evasion - Theft
The Milibands took advantage of Ralph's IHT Tax Allowance. [he had forgotten to use it in his will]0 -
That's only part of the story and is a bit simplistic. Yes on one level they place their crosses for a local candidate, but on another they're also thinking about who they want in Government, and especially which Prime Minister. As Neil Kinnock and many others have discovered.MikeSmithson said:
Voters elect individuals not parties or party leaders which is why Opik got booted out in 2010.antifrank said:It's possible. It's not value at 5/2 on current polling in Wales.
p.s. I thought we're no longer allowed to use past polling performance for anything post 2010? 120 years worth, no less
0 -
LibDem gain - that ain't in the script. Earlier someone was suggesting Labour gains in Scotland - it's all getting very confusing!0
-
The Pension thing is sure an allowance explicitly granted by Parliament?JohnLilburne said:
Not sure I follow. I was made redundant a few years ago and put enough of my redundancy payment into a pension to avoid paying higher rate tax. I would call that tax avoidance too, it's not a pejorative term.RodCrosby said:
Tax allowance - what Parliament gives youJohnLilburne said:
Surely the definition of tax avoidance is that it is legal, and legitimate, in that you exploit the tax code to minimise your tax bill. Which the Milibands did and which I have no problem with. If governments want to stop it, they should change the law. As simple as that.RodCrosby said:FPT
I don't like Miliband or Labour, but they didn't engage in tax avoidance, as I have pointed out ad nauseam.Easterross said:
Thanks Rod, that says far more than most of the ivory towers academics who have been pontificating utter crap for several years.RodCrosby said:
I have not settled completely on a view yet, other than.Easterross said:Evening all and I see another academic has built himself up to potentially be a laughing stock on 8th May.
Rod if you are still around, what is your present thought on the election outcome?
Lab maj - OUT
Con maj - Possible
Con most seats - Likely
Lab net loss of seats - Possible
I really wish all the polls published are adjusted to reflect their historical degree of inaccuracy. If Labour was truly leading in the polls, we wouldn't have the Shadow Cabinet rehearsing for Julius Caesar's final gathering of his closest friends.
Listening to Ed Bland today, he really doesn't understand the irony of him criticising people who engage in lawful tax avoidance when that is precisely what he and his family did to avoid inheritance tax on his father's estate.
They took advantage of Ralph's lawful tax allowance, by the lawful device of deed of variation.
No tax was in fact mitigated at the time, and may never be, as Mrs. Miliband has had 20 years to lawfully mitigate tax herself.
The manoeuvre they undertook has since been superceded by statue, in the 2008 Finance Act.
Where labour are hypocrites is in criticising companies for minimising their tax bills using a corporation tax code largely put in place by the last - Labour - government.
Tax avoidance - what Parliament didn't intend to give you, but is still lawful to exploit.
Tax evasion - Theft
The Milibands took advantage of Ralph's IHT Tax Allowance. [he had forgotten to use it in his will]0 -
Don't forget Con gain Bootle and Southampton ItchenSandyRentool said:LibDem gain - that ain't in the script. Earlier someone was suggesting Labour gains in Scotland - it's all getting very confusing!
0 -
An allowance to avoid tax. You don't have to take it.RodCrosby said:
The Pension thing is sure an allowance explicitly granted by Parliament?JohnLilburne said:
Not sure I follow. I was made redundant a few years ago and put enough of my redundancy payment into a pension to avoid paying higher rate tax. I would call that tax avoidance too, it's not a pejorative term.RodCrosby said:
Tax allowance - what Parliament gives youJohnLilburne said:
Surely the definition of tax avoidance is that it is legal, and legitimate, in that you exploit the tax code to minimise your tax bill. Which the Milibands did and which I have no problem with. If governments want to stop it, they should change the law. As simple as that.RodCrosby said:FPT
I don't like Miliband or Labour, but they didn't engage in tax avoidance, as I have pointed out ad nauseam.Easterross said:
Thanks Rod, that says far more than most of the ivory towers academics who have been pontificating utter crap for several years.RodCrosby said:
I have not settled completely on a view yet, other than.Easterross said:Evening all and I see another academic has built himself up to potentially be a laughing stock on 8th May.
Rod if you are still around, what is your present thought on the election outcome?
Lab maj - OUT
Con maj - Possible
Con most seats - Likely
Lab net loss of seats - Possible
I really wish all the polls published are adjusted to reflect their historical degree of inaccuracy. If Labour was truly leading in the polls, we wouldn't have the Shadow Cabinet rehearsing for Julius Caesar's final gathering of his closest friends.
Listening to Ed Bland today, he really doesn't understand the irony of him criticising people who engage in lawful tax avoidance when that is precisely what he and his family did to avoid inheritance tax on his father's estate.
They took advantage of Ralph's lawful tax allowance, by the lawful device of deed of variation.
No tax was in fact mitigated at the time, and may never be, as Mrs. Miliband has had 20 years to lawfully mitigate tax herself.
The manoeuvre they undertook has since been superceded by statue, in the 2008 Finance Act.
Where labour are hypocrites is in criticising companies for minimising their tax bills using a corporation tax code largely put in place by the last - Labour - government.
Tax avoidance - what Parliament didn't intend to give you, but is still lawful to exploit.
Tax evasion - Theft
The Milibands took advantage of Ralph's IHT Tax Allowance. [he had forgotten to use it in his will]0 -
My guess is that Labour will have 2 gains in Scotland: East Dumbartonshire and Edinburgh West.SandyRentool said:LibDem gain - that ain't in the script. Earlier someone was suggesting Labour gains in Scotland - it's all getting very confusing!
Rather more losses though.0 -
Well it is. But how do you draw a line between something as obvious as that, and "what Parliament didn't intend to give you, but is still lawful to exploit"? Something is either legal or not.RodCrosby said:
The Pension thing is sure an allowance explicitly granted by Parliament?0 -
Surely Labour will stop targeting these two seats when they are more concerned about holding what they have?DavidL said:
My guess is that Labour will have 2 gains in Scotland: East Dumbartonshire and Edinburgh West.SandyRentool said:LibDem gain - that ain't in the script. Earlier someone was suggesting Labour gains in Scotland - it's all getting very confusing!
Rather more losses though.
0 -
An allowance to mitigate tax. Parliament says explicitly "we don't want your money, so utilize this allowance."JonnyJimmy said:
An allowance to avoid tax. You don't have to take it.
If you don't, you're either St Francis of Assisi, or you need a better accountant...
0 -
East Dunbartonshire may well be easier to dain than Dundee West to hold.No_Offence_Alan said:
Surely Labour will stop targeting these two seats when they are more concerned about holding what they have?DavidL said:
My guess is that Labour will have 2 gains in Scotland: East Dumbartonshire and Edinburgh West.SandyRentool said:LibDem gain - that ain't in the script. Earlier someone was suggesting Labour gains in Scotland - it's all getting very confusing!
Rather more losses though.0 -
I would call that embracing a mainstream cause.NickPalmer said:I liked Lembit. I remember saying to him after he'd organise a debate on giant asteroids hitting the earth that people weren't taking him seriously even when he was serious and he needed to embrace some mainstream cause for a bit. He looked thoughtful and said hmm, yes, you're probably right. The next week, he announced his romance with the Cheeky Girl.
0 -
I think these seats will fall into Labour's lap on a "last man standing" principle as Lib Dem support collapses. The tories have (lesser) hopes for Kincardine and Berwickshire on the same basis. All that is needed is that your vote falls a bit less than the other guy.No_Offence_Alan said:
Surely Labour will stop targeting these two seats when they are more concerned about holding what they have?DavidL said:
My guess is that Labour will have 2 gains in Scotland: East Dumbartonshire and Edinburgh West.SandyRentool said:LibDem gain - that ain't in the script. Earlier someone was suggesting Labour gains in Scotland - it's all getting very confusing!
Rather more losses though.
There may well be enough Lib Dem cake for everyone which is why I find talk of gains fanciful.0 -
Labour in Scotland don't have a choice. They've backed themselves into a corner but their position in England makes any meaningful extension of Devolution utterly impossible. It is obvious to everyone that the only solution to the Scottish Question is Full Fiscal Autonomy.DaemonBarber said:Just managed to catch up with Gordon Brown's speech in Edinburgh today.
Is it just me or was that the biggest crock of shite?
Vow++
Vow^2
Labour trying to be everything to everyman here... Not wanting to abandon the "shared benefits" of the union that they campaigned on during the referendum, they are left with the weak beer of additional powers to vary welfare - effectively Holyrood can lump in more cash, which won't cause any problems with the view of Scottish subsidy junkies. Add in the clusterfeck waiting to happen decoupling of housing benefit form universal credit, supposedly so they can Reverse The Bedroom Tax (tm).
All just comes across as back of the fag packet panic.
Is this really what Labour will stand on in Scotland?
But FFA by default requires EVEL at least or abolition of the Labour Benefits System better known as the House of Lords to turn the commons into an English parliament and a replacement for the Lords to deal with "Federal" matters.
Labour have no logical way to turn but because politics seldom has any basis in logic, they will twist and turn and lie and repeat the same desperate political moves only months apart. It's only 10 days since Labour in Scotland were all over the papers claiming "THE VOW HAS BEEN DELIVERED".
No people, regardless of party loyalty are that stupid. No-one will accept such a blatant volte face inside 10 days.0 -
Well, either Parliament closes the "loophole", or HMRC won't wear it, leaving you in the difficult and expensive position of having to appeal, or pay the tax.JohnLilburne said:
Well it is. But how do you draw a line between something as obvious as that, and "what Parliament didn't intend to give you, but is still lawful to exploit"? Something is either legal or not.RodCrosby said:
The Pension thing is sure an allowance explicitly granted by Parliament?0 -
Agreed but Labour were out with a stall on Saturday. They have not given up on Dundee West yet. I was being told they are getting a lot of tactical votes but then they would tell me that wouldn't they? I am going to make up my mind when I see the Ashcroft polling. If it is irredeemably lost I will vote tory.Pulpstar said:
East Dunbartonshire may well be easier to dain than Dundee West to hold.No_Offence_Alan said:
Surely Labour will stop targeting these two seats when they are more concerned about holding what they have?DavidL said:
My guess is that Labour will have 2 gains in Scotland: East Dumbartonshire and Edinburgh West.SandyRentool said:LibDem gain - that ain't in the script. Earlier someone was suggesting Labour gains in Scotland - it's all getting very confusing!
Rather more losses though.0 -
And companies hire accountants and lawyers who tell them the best way to mitigate their tax bill, then the board have to approve it as they have to do the best for their shareholders.RodCrosby said:
An allowance to mitigate tax. Parliament says explicitly "we don't want your money, so utilize this allowance."JonnyJimmy said:
An allowance to avoid tax. You don't have to take it.
If you don't, you're either St Francis of Assisi, or you need a better accountant...
While the law says it's ok, it's ok. Did Ed propose changing the relevant tax laws while he worked in the treasury?0 -
There've been a few comments about a TNS poll supposedly putting Labour 11% ahead. I've found no reputable source for this.JohnLilburne said:
If you know of a TNS poll published since the one with fieldwork 15-19 Jan, do tell.wumper said:not a mention of the TNS poll, i wonder why!!!!
What it may be about is a poll for Womans' Hour, which gives Labour an 11% lead as best understanding the issues, among parents with children.0 -
A bigger problem is that Labour don't have the resources to target any seat, target or existing. A quick look at the photos of their constituency campaign teams starting out which appear on twitter almost invariably shows between 5 and 8 people, of which at least a couple are kids, making up their campaign team photo ops.No_Offence_Alan said:
Surely Labour will stop targeting these two seats when they are more concerned about holding what they have?DavidL said:
My guess is that Labour will have 2 gains in Scotland: East Dumbartonshire and Edinburgh West.SandyRentool said:LibDem gain - that ain't in the script. Earlier someone was suggesting Labour gains in Scotland - it's all getting very confusing!
Rather more losses though.
I'm surprised they're not too embarrassed to post them. Perhaps that makes its own comment on the level of self-delusion found amongst Labour's members in Scotland.0 -
My point was, if it's legal, it's legal. You should not be criticised for it, at least not by a government that allows it to remain legal.RodCrosby said:
Well, either Parliament closes the "loophole", or HMRC won't wear it, leaving you in the difficult and expensive position of having to appeal, or pay the tax.JohnLilburne said:
Well it is. But how do you draw a line between something as obvious as that, and "what Parliament didn't intend to give you, but is still lawful to exploit"? Something is either legal or not.RodCrosby said:
The Pension thing is sure an allowance explicitly granted by Parliament?
IMO governments do not seem to be proactive enough about seeking out "loopholes" in the tax system, investigating them, determining whether they have an intended effect, and if not, introducing legislation to close them. The tax affairs of all high net worth individuals and large corporations that are paying less tax than their assets and/or known income suggest should be the case, should be looked into as a matter of routine.
But then in the UK, governments do not routinely seek out the bits that are going wrong and use them as evidence of systemic failure. They prefer to hide them from public gaze.
0 -
During the Indyref, the Nats kept on posting pics of Better Together stalls having 2 old biddies in contrast to Yes Scotland's mahoosive turnout.Dair said:
A bigger problem is that Labour don't have the resources to target any seat, target or existing. A quick look at the photos of their constituency campaign teams start out which appear on twitter almost invariably shows between 5 and 8 people, of which at least a couple are kids, making up their campaign team photo ops.No_Offence_Alan said:
Surely Labour will stop targeting these two seats when they are more concerned about holding what they have?DavidL said:
My guess is that Labour will have 2 gains in Scotland: East Dumbartonshire and Edinburgh West.SandyRentool said:LibDem gain - that ain't in the script. Earlier someone was suggesting Labour gains in Scotland - it's all getting very confusing!
Rather more losses though.
I'm surprised they're not too embarrassed to post them. Perhaps that's makes its own comment on the level of self-delusion found amongst Labour's members in Scotland.0 -
Well the courts take the view that Tax Avoidance is legal.JohnLilburne said:
Well it is. But how do you draw a line between something as obvious as that, and "what Parliament didn't intend to give you, but is still lawful to exploit"? Something is either legal or not.RodCrosby said:
The Pension thing is sure an allowance explicitly granted by Parliament?
0 -
Ken Livingstone retweeted
Simon Fletcher @fletchersimon 1m1 minute ago
RT @labourpress: Ridiculous Mail splash tonight. They have revealed a Tory peer is attacking Labour. Shock.0 -
Not a chance. Glyn Davies is a popular character who runs one of Wales' most popular political blogs: 'A View from Rural Wales'. He's also well-regarded as an independent, non-partisan and witty character, who is respected locally. That's before you even get onto the first time incumbency bonus and the fact it's the Liberal Democrats in second.
I wouldn't be tempted at 4/1.
0 -
There's a YouGov Scotland in the Times.
No figures yet, but Lab set to lose 30 seats0 -
So Labour hate Boots and M&S
Awesome.0 -
And undoubtedly the Yes campaign had an impact. They moved the support for Independence from a historic 25% to 45% over the campaign with the possibility that it was ahead in the last two weeks before the media onslaught showed that Old Media can still have an edge when focused and overwhelming.TheScreamingEagles said:
During the Indyref, the Nats kept on posting pics of Better Together stalls having 2 old biddies in contrast to Yes Scotland's mahoosive turnout.Dair said:
A bigger problem is that Labour don't have the resources to target any seat, target or existing. A quick look at the photos of their constituency campaign teams start out which appear on twitter almost invariably shows between 5 and 8 people, of which at least a couple are kids, making up their campaign team photo ops.No_Offence_Alan said:
Surely Labour will stop targeting these two seats when they are more concerned about holding what they have?DavidL said:
My guess is that Labour will have 2 gains in Scotland: East Dumbartonshire and Edinburgh West.SandyRentool said:LibDem gain - that ain't in the script. Earlier someone was suggesting Labour gains in Scotland - it's all getting very confusing!
Rather more losses though.
I'm surprised they're not too embarrassed to post them. Perhaps that's makes its own comment on the level of self-delusion found amongst Labour's members in Scotland.
Either the Yes Scotland campaign message was so coherent and effective in terms of Future Scotland and it's press coverage or all those people on the ground had an obvious and profound impact.0 -
There's a tns with raw VI figures of 37% lab vs 27% con on their website as far as I can tell but I'm not an expert on how these things work.Sean_F said:
There've been a few comments about a TNS poll supposedly putting Labour 11% ahead. I've found no reputable source for this.JohnLilburne said:
If you know of a TNS poll published since the one with fieldwork 15-19 Jan, do tell.wumper said:not a mention of the TNS poll, i wonder why!!!!
What it may be about is a poll for Womans' Hour, which gives Labour an 11% lead as best understanding the issues, among parents with children.
0 -
SNP 48%, Lab 27%0
-
I bow to the many on this site who have vastly greater experience but in my limited experience being in a campaign group as large as 8 is immensely frustrating involving far too much walking and not nearly enough talking. Groups of 4 with 3 knockers and a collator are much better.TheScreamingEagles said:
During the Indyref, the Nats kept on posting pics of Better Together stalls having 2 old biddies in contrast to Yes Scotland's mahoosive turnout.Dair said:
A bigger problem is that Labour don't have the resources to target any seat, target or existing. A quick look at the photos of their constituency campaign teams start out which appear on twitter almost invariably shows between 5 and 8 people, of which at least a couple are kids, making up their campaign team photo ops.No_Offence_Alan said:
Surely Labour will stop targeting these two seats when they are more concerned about holding what they have?DavidL said:
My guess is that Labour will have 2 gains in Scotland: East Dumbartonshire and Edinburgh West.SandyRentool said:LibDem gain - that ain't in the script. Earlier someone was suggesting Labour gains in Scotland - it's all getting very confusing!
Rather more losses though.
I'm surprised they're not too embarrassed to post them. Perhaps that's makes its own comment on the level of self-delusion found amongst Labour's members in Scotland.0 -
Ken Livingstone @ken4london 2m2 minutes ago
.@Ed_Miliband is clearly doing a lot right to get this level of abuse from the Tory press. If you want to make them more angry, vote Labour0 -
when was the fieldwork?TheScreamingEagles said:SNP 48%, Lab 27%
0 -
They haven't published that yet.DaemonBarber said:0 -
Exactly - I can't on the face of it see a lot to like but he seems to be making a lot of the right people angry so there must be something to itbigjohnowls said:Ken Livingstone @ken4london 2m2 minutes ago
.@Ed_Miliband is clearly doing a lot right to get this level of abuse from the Tory press. If you want to make them more angry, vote Labour
0 -
Press release dated 2nd February...
http://www.tns-bmrb.co.uk/news/latest-polling-from-tns-uk-voter-intention
http://www.tns-bmrb.co.uk/uploads/files/TNS_BMRB_Tables_-_All_adults.pdf0 -
In October, the YouGov Scotland poll, the SNP had a 16% lead.0
-
I always thought it was us dumb proletariat that suffered from false consciousness.bigjohnowls said:Ken Livingstone @ken4london 2m2 minutes ago
.@Ed_Miliband is clearly doing a lot right to get this level of abuse from the Tory press. If you want to make them more angry, vote Labour0 -
This is why Glyn Davies will be re-elected.
How many other MPs bother (voluntarily) to actually consult those who they were elected to represent, before casting their vote?
"Last summer, the House of Commons was recalled following the gassing of innocent civilians by the Syrian President, Bashar al-Assad. At the time, I anticipated being asked by the Prime Minister to support a military strike on Damascus. I emailed those constituents I was able to, inviting opinions on what they considered to be the best way forward. Most of the replies reinforced my personal view that the case for military action had not been made. I could not see how it would improve the position. I and many other like-minded Conservatives informed the government of our opinion and the motion finally put to the recalled House of Commons after much negotiation did not sanction a military strike. I considered the final motion to be acceptable and was very disappointed when it was defeated. It felt to me that the UK, a leading NATO country was turning its back on the world, an act that would only encourage those with evil intent. The reality was that the UK and the US did stand back, and have allowed events in the Middle East to play out as they have done. The current position is far more worrying than it was last year.
This email once again shares with you the decision I may face in the near future. It's rumoured that there may be a sudden recall of Parliament this week or next to consider becoming involved in air strikes against ISIL, the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant. At this stage, we do not know what military action would be involved. However I would expect it to involve air strikes against ISIL, though perhaps not in Syria and not involving troops on the ground. This, of course, may change.
This time, I am personally more inclined to support military involvement. The scale of ISIL's advance, its incredible brutality, its mass killings and beheadings, and threat it poses to us here in the UK seem to me to be increasingly serious. At this stage I feel we cannot continue to turn our backs on what is happening. It is important that I keep in touch with my constituents’ views on such an emotive and controversial issue. Entering military conflict is an extremely serious matter, full of uncertainty, and it seems right that I should invite my constituents to share any thoughts they have on the matter."0 -
My theory is that the level of anger is more in desperation that despite Ed M being so seemingly poor, he is still more likely to win, rather than actual worry that he is saying the right things.JWisemann said:
Exactly - I can't on the face of it see a lot to like but he seems to be making a lot of the right people angry so there must be something to itbigjohnowls said:Ken Livingstone @ken4london 2m2 minutes ago
.@Ed_Miliband is clearly doing a lot right to get this level of abuse from the Tory press. If you want to make them more angry, vote Labour0 -
0 out of the last 8 polls with Tory lead. Labour 2% in front.
Basiliscious!0 -
YouGov/Sun poll tonight - Labour lead by two: CON 33, LAB 35, LD 7, UKIP 14, GRN 60
-
I wondered if someone would nip in front of Ashcroft whilst he procrastinates.TheScreamingEagles said:There's a YouGov Scotland in the Times.
No figures yet, but Lab set to lose 30 seats0 -
Any bets on whether Audrey Anne is going to revise her polling window to march?0
-
Hmmmm....
Looks like a minor (very minor) uptick in Labour's standing, but can't figure out why it should be.0 -
Boo!! We want another crossover... it's such a tease.
In the meantime, I hope Labour will find someone in business who they are happy to listen to rather than to Cantona kick them...0 -
0
-
Socrates (previous thread) Any cuts in spending made by Obama have largely due to the GOP takeover of Congress, Reagan cut spending to 21.5% from the 22.2% he inherited from Carter
http://cnsnews.com/blog/terence-p-jeffrey/obama-fdr-set-modern-records-gdp-spending
In any case, Obama has now made clear he wants an end to 'mindless austerity'
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-310978540 -
Waiting for Spurs to sign Ed M - we like leaders of the line who constantly miss the open goal...0
-
Just you wait, people will find out that Ed M is crap at some point - I don't think it's been mentioned before - and then things will change in significant enough fashion to matter.compouter2 said:0 out of the last 8 polls with Tory lead. Labour 2% in front.
Basiliscious!
That being said, being serious no-one ever believes me round my way when I say I think the math favours Labour, so I could end up looking really stupid if he loses.0 -
Good to see that RodCrosby's fabled forecast of consistent Tory polling leads by January has come to pass.
As accurate as his histories of WWII !0 -
On the other hand the LibDems popularity with the electorate does not indicate that they are likely to make any gains in May and are instead looking at considerable losses. That is, in my opinion, a very shaky gamble.0
-
It's 21% now... What were the relative figures in Oct? Is the movement entirely Lab>SNP or are others benefiting too?TheScreamingEagles said:In October, the YouGov Scotland poll, the SNP had a 16% lead.
0 -
Tonights YG Boots Billionaire Booer Bounce still in play - EICIPM (2.42 betfair)
Tomorrow maybe Rose rebound (or not)0 -
Yes, sure, I'll take a bet on that with you if you like?JWisemann said:Any bets on whether Audrey Anne is going to revise her polling window to march?
Quite happy with the Cons share at the moment, but I'm trying to keep my preferences out. The algorithm will be applied after this week's polling regardless of what they produce.0 -
Much more importantly, are we finally just about to shift Adebayor? 25 mins to go.0
-
Wonder why, given their relentless attacks on miliband, they wouldn't play up a poll giving his party a considerable lead?isam said:Bit of mumble on the TNS poll but no VI
http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-31089739
0 -
Certainly not great polls for Con today...0
-
I made a mistake, the last YouGov Scotland poll, had SNP 47% and Lab on 27%, so SNP +1, Lab no changeDaemonBarber said:
It's 21% now... What were the relative figures in Oct? Is the movement entirely Lab>SNP or are others benefiting too?TheScreamingEagles said:In October, the YouGov Scotland poll, the SNP had a 16% lead.
0 -
Yes, I think we have enough now to say small move back to Lab over the last 5 days.
But it doesn't look as if the Con rating has fallen - instead it looks like a small rise in Lab rating.0 -
Excluding won't votes, don't knows and refuseds, the figures are:OblitusSumMe said:
(Base = 518)
Conservative 28%
Labour 39%
UKIP 14%
Lib Dem 4%
Green 8%
Others 7%
Fieldwork was January 23rd - 26th0 -
With TNS, I can't see a table with don't knows removed.0
-
I did just that (an email to the 8% of constituents whose addresses I then had) as well coming to a public meeting called by the Stop the War Coalition and debating with Alan Simpson, before deciding to support the Iraq operation. There was a clear majority of constituents in favour at the time (as there was in the national polls by the time of decision). We were, I now think, wrong, but I didn't just absent-mindedly wander into the Yes lobby.Casino_Royale said:This is why Glyn Davies will be re-elected.
How many other MPs bother (voluntarily) to actually consult those who they were elected to represent, before casting their vote?
0 -
Don't forget according to some plank on The Scum, January was always going to be the crossover month according to their contact in the Tory Campaign nest.kle4 said:
Just you wait, people will find out that Ed M is crap at some point - I don't think it's been mentioned before - and then things will change in significant enough fashion to matter.compouter2 said:0 out of the last 8 polls with Tory lead. Labour 2% in front.
Basiliscious!
That being said, being serious no-one ever believes me round my way when I say I think the math favours Labour, so I could end up looking really stupid if he loses.
That is nothing compared to the PB Hodges though, January was the pulling away month.
......and yet again, they have fallen down the polling crossover hill.
0 -
Mike thinks it is do with a minor fading of the Greens.Danny565 said:Hmmmm....
Looks like a minor (very minor) uptick in Labour's standing, but can't figure out why it should be.0 -
Mori/ARSE Gold Standard?TheScreamingEagles said:YouGov/Sun poll tonight - Labour lead by two: CON 33, LAB 35, LD 7, UKIP 14, GRN 6
Any PB Tories think 1.63 Cameron PM might have been a bit short.0 -
Last few polls,not good for the tories,even with Ed going through a political shit storm.0
-
All labour need now are a few more billionaire tax dodgers saying how bad they are for the country and they'll be back to omnishambles territory 0
-
What rubbish. The cuts in spending I showed were from US Federal Healthcare spending, which were exempted from the cuts agreed with the GOP Congress. The fiscal savings in healthcare were entirely due to Obamacare, which the GOP unanimously voted against. The Republican party specifically opposed the Medicare changes as "throwing grandma over a cliff".HYUFD said:Socrates (previous thread) Any cuts in spending made by Obama have largely due to the GOP takeover of Congress
As for Reagan, the numbers only look there because GDP grew as a result of Volcker curbing the inflation beast during the Carter years. He still spent like a maniac:
http://www.truthfulpolitics.com/images/us-government-size-spending-by-president.jpg
The deficit graph says it all:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_United_States_public_debt#mediaviewer/File:US_Federal_Debt_as_Percent_of_GDP_by_President.jpg0 -
SWINGBACKTASTIC!OblitusSumMe said:
Excluding won't votes, don't knows and refuseds, the figures are:OblitusSumMe said:
(Base = 518)
Conservative 28%
Labour 39%
UKIP 14%
Lib Dem 4%
Green 8%
Others 7%
Fieldwork was January 23rd - 26th0 -
Ed Miliband in with a 128 seat landslide...OblitusSumMe said:
Excluding won't votes, don't knows and refuseds, the figures are:OblitusSumMe said:
(Base = 518)
Conservative 28%
Labour 39%
UKIP 14%
Lib Dem 4%
Green 8%
Others 7%
Fieldwork was January 23rd - 26th
#sayingnothing
0 -
Owen Jones @OwenJones84 8m8 minutes ago
94 more days of businessmen who don’t want to pay more tax saying life on Earth will end if Labour wins the election0 -
Not good. I found the Ashcroft poll today, showing a majority of swing voters now think the country is on the wrong path, instructive.TheScreamingEagles said:YouGov/Sun poll tonight - Labour lead by two: CON 33, LAB 35, LD 7, UKIP 14, GRN 6
It reinforces my view that the Conservatives have simply failed to provide leadership and take their case to the country and win the political arguments.
They spend most of their time being buffeted by the seven winds: either acquiescing to the consensus of the New Labour years, or apologising for when they have to do something vaguely economically right of centre.0 -
Your man Andy Sawford is looking nailed on :-)Tykejohnno said:Last few polls,not good for the tories,even with Ed going through a political shit storm.
0 -
What we need is a tax dodging Tory donor, with some dodgy financial history to have a pop at Miliband.JWisemann said:All labour need now are a few more billionaire tax dodgers saying how bad they are for the country and they'll be back to omnishambles territory
**** Sits back eating popcorn ****0 -
Ed is abominably shite is PM.GIN1138 said:
Ed Miliband in with a 128 seat landslide...OblitusSumMe said:
Excluding won't votes, don't knows and refuseds, the figures are:OblitusSumMe said:
(Base = 518)
Conservative 28%
Labour 39%
UKIP 14%
Lib Dem 4%
Green 8%
Others 7%
Fieldwork was January 23rd - 26th
#sayingnothing0 -
Even I think thats Bollox.compouter2 said:
SWINGBACKTASTIC!OblitusSumMe said:
Excluding won't votes, don't knows and refuseds, the figures are:OblitusSumMe said:
(Base = 518)
Conservative 28%
Labour 39%
UKIP 14%
Lib Dem 4%
Green 8%
Others 7%
Fieldwork was January 23rd - 26th
If its included in Feb polling average its going to make CROSSSOVVVERRR difficult0
This discussion has been closed.