politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Clegg 10% behind LAB in Sheffield Hallam according to UNITE
Comments
-
You forgot about that South Yorkshire town in the news at the moment. That can only ever be like an injection of concentrated elixir to UKIP. (Or so I've been assured.)TGOHF said:
Stick a fork in the Kippers - they are done. Passé , over, fini, goodnight Vienna...TheScreamingEagles said:Two crossovers
YouGov/Sun poll tonight - Tories ahead by one: CON 34%, LAB 33%, LD 6%, UKIP 13%, GRN 7%0 -
Can you thank him for leaving the SNP market up when the Ashcroft was leaked btwisam said:
Just been speaking to my mate at Betfair and I know exactly what bets were placed on that market...Pulpstar said:
I'm struggling to believe that poll is right, Clegg is facing LABOUR not the bloody SNP.isam said:
How much did you have on the Clegg bet and at what price?TheScreamingEagles said:It just dawned on me, the 23.5% swing against Clegg isn't even in the top 10 swings in the polls today.
Labour 32, Lib Dem 31 something like that would be more believable.
0 -
Christ you are obsessed with meisam said:
Just been speaking to my mate at Betfair and I know exactly what bets were placed on that market...Pulpstar said:
I'm struggling to believe that poll is right, Clegg is facing LABOUR not the bloody SNP.isam said:
How much did you have on the Clegg bet and at what price?TheScreamingEagles said:It just dawned on me, the 23.5% swing against Clegg isn't even in the top 10 swings in the polls today.
Labour 32, Lib Dem 31 something like that would be more believable.
Tell your mate, that he's probably violating the Data Protection Act.
Do I need to give the information commissioner a ring in the morning?0 -
Ha well that was the fault of the night traders I would sayPulpstar said:
Can you thank him for leaving the SNP market up when the Ashcroft was leaked btwisam said:
Just been speaking to my mate at Betfair and I know exactly what bets were placed on that market...Pulpstar said:
I'm struggling to believe that poll is right, Clegg is facing LABOUR not the bloody SNP.isam said:
How much did you have on the Clegg bet and at what price?TheScreamingEagles said:It just dawned on me, the 23.5% swing against Clegg isn't even in the top 10 swings in the polls today.
Labour 32, Lib Dem 31 something like that would be more believable.0 -
You are obsessed with yourself, as your awful thread headers proveTheScreamingEagles said:
Christ you are obsessed with meisam said:
Just been speaking to my mate at Betfair and I know exactly what bets were placed on that market...Pulpstar said:
I'm struggling to believe that poll is right, Clegg is facing LABOUR not the bloody SNP.isam said:
How much did you have on the Clegg bet and at what price?TheScreamingEagles said:It just dawned on me, the 23.5% swing against Clegg isn't even in the top 10 swings in the polls today.
Labour 32, Lib Dem 31 something like that would be more believable.
Tell your mate, that he's probably violating the Data Protection Act.
Do I need to give the information commissioner a ring in the morning?
Its not against any law to say how much they have laid on a market to a mate, phone who you like
But I know...0 -
You mean my thread headers that are often quoted elsewhere as the basis of articles.isam said:
You are obsessed with yourself, as your awful thread headers proveTheScreamingEagles said:
Christ you are obsessed with meisam said:
Just been speaking to my mate at Betfair and I know exactly what bets were placed on that market...Pulpstar said:
I'm struggling to believe that poll is right, Clegg is facing LABOUR not the bloody SNP.isam said:
How much did you have on the Clegg bet and at what price?TheScreamingEagles said:It just dawned on me, the 23.5% swing against Clegg isn't even in the top 10 swings in the polls today.
Labour 32, Lib Dem 31 something like that would be more believable.
Tell your mate, that he's probably violating the Data Protection Act.
Do I need to give the information commissioner a ring in the morning?
Its not against any law to say how much they have laid on a market to a mate, phone who you like
But I know...
Thanks, as I said, I'll contact Betfair in the morning.
I'm sure your mate won't get into much trouble.0 -
Do what you like, he wont get into any. no names were mentioned, I dont even know your name.. Its perfectly above board for a betting trader to tell a mate how much they have laid at what price on a marketTheScreamingEagles said:
You mean my thread headers that are often quoted elsewhere as the basis of articles.isam said:
You are obsessed with yourself, as your awful thread headers proveTheScreamingEagles said:
Christ you are obsessed with meisam said:
Just been speaking to my mate at Betfair and I know exactly what bets were placed on that market...Pulpstar said:
I'm struggling to believe that poll is right, Clegg is facing LABOUR not the bloody SNP.isam said:
How much did you have on the Clegg bet and at what price?TheScreamingEagles said:It just dawned on me, the 23.5% swing against Clegg isn't even in the top 10 swings in the polls today.
Labour 32, Lib Dem 31 something like that would be more believable.
Tell your mate, that he's probably violating the Data Protection Act.
Do I need to give the information commissioner a ring in the morning?
Its not against any law to say how much they have laid on a market to a mate, phone who you like
But I know...
Thanks, as I said, I'll contact Betfair in the morning.
I'm sure your mate won't get into much trouble.
Go for it0 -
Agree.SeanT said:Socrates informs me that he is banned from pb. Quite repulsive, if true.
0 -
Absolutely disgraceful, who is moderator this evening? Need I ask?SeanT said:Socrates informs me that he is banned from pb. Quite repulsive, if true.
0 -
Big moves on BF
Lab maj 20.0 (!)
Con >seats 1.770 -
TSE has a bigger ego than Lord Ashcroft, as the above childish response shows.TheScreamingEagles said:
You mean my thread headers that are often quoted elsewhere as the basis of articles.isam said:
You are obsessed with yourself, as your awful thread headers proveTheScreamingEagles said:
Christ you are obsessed with meisam said:
Just been speaking to my mate at Betfair and I know exactly what bets were placed on that market...Pulpstar said:
I'm struggling to believe that poll is right, Clegg is facing LABOUR not the bloody SNP.isam said:
How much did you have on the Clegg bet and at what price?TheScreamingEagles said:It just dawned on me, the 23.5% swing against Clegg isn't even in the top 10 swings in the polls today.
Labour 32, Lib Dem 31 something like that would be more believable.
Tell your mate, that he's probably violating the Data Protection Act.
Do I need to give the information commissioner a ring in the morning?
Its not against any law to say how much they have laid on a market to a mate, phone who you like
But I know...
Thanks, as I said, I'll contact Betfair in the morning.
I'm sure your mate won't get into much trouble.0 -
Do we know the reason Sean.SeanT said:I think people need to know that Socrates has just been banned from pb. He might be a little monomaniac about the "Muslim issue" but then, so is much of western Europe, in recent months, cf the potential election of Marine Le Pen. Others get obsessed about "Lib Dem switchers", and we don't ban them: they are entitled to their geekiness. We are all geeks.
And Socrates is never personally abusive or insulting, as far as I can recall.
This is a ludicrous and unjust decision which should be rescinded at once. If it is not, this site is very seriously diminished, and I will happily blog to that effect, even if Mike bans me. Who cares.0 -
Is it surprising?SeanT said:I think people need to know that Socrates has just been banned from pb. He might be a little monomaniac about the "Muslim issue" but then, so is much of western Europe, in recent months, cf the potential election of Marine Le Pen. Others get obsessed about "Lib Dem switchers", and we don't ban them: they are entitled to their geekiness. We are all geeks.
And Socrates is never personally abusive or insulting, as far as I can recall.
This is a ludicrous and unjust decision which should be rescinded at once. If it is not, this site is very seriously diminished, and I will happily blog to that effect, even if Mike bans me. Who cares.
The closing down of this issue on here mirrors the real life goings on & attitudes at Rotherham council very closely
Look how they celebrated on PB when Labour won the SYPCC thanks to votes in Sheffield0 -
What? For endlessly smearing government ministers and weaponising child abuse? All from behind a nom de plume?SeanT said:Socrates informs me that he is banned from pb. Quite repulsive, if true.
0 -
Je suis SocratesSeanT said:I think people need to know that Socrates has just been banned from pb. He might be a little monomaniac about the "Muslim issue" but then, so is much of western Europe, in recent months, cf the potential election of Marine Le Pen. Others get obsessed about "Lib Dem switchers", and we don't ban them: they are entitled to their geekiness. We are all geeks.
And Socrates is never personally abusive or insulting, as far as I can recall.
This is a ludicrous and unjust decision which should be rescinded at once. If it is not, this site is very seriously diminished, and I will happily blog to that effect, even if Mike bans me. Who cares.0 -
If he is banned why?SeanT said:I think people need to know that Socrates has just been banned from pb. He might be a little monomaniac about the "Muslim issue" but then, so is much of western Europe, in recent months, cf the potential election of Marine Le Pen. Others get obsessed about "Lib Dem switchers", and we don't ban them: they are entitled to their geekiness. We are all geeks.
And Socrates is never personally abusive or insulting, as far as I can recall.
This is a ludicrous and unjust decision which should be rescinded at once. If it is not, this site is very seriously diminished, and I will happily blog to that effect, even if Mike bans me. Who cares.
He does have the habit of making serious unfounded accusations, if that's the reason, fair enough. If it's because he is just banging on about his favourite issues, with no legal issues, it is a poor decision.0 -
Are you sure that's right? His avatar hasn't changed to the usual "keep calm and carry on" that we usually see with banned posters.SeanT said:Socrates informs me that he is banned from pb. Quite repulsive, if true.
I think he was just banned from discussing Rotherham et al because he does tend to be a little incautious with some of his comments and accusations.0 -
Late to the party but:
1)Memo to the right: if Labour is as rubbish as you say, why aren’t the Tories streets ahead?
2)Scottish Labour is going down in flames – and taking Miliband’s chance of a majority with them
3)Labour will have to move to the left – or lose the election
4)The implosion of Scottish Labour means the battle for Britain has only just begun
5)Ed Balls forgets a name: we’ve all done it, but then, we’re not all Shadow Chancellor. Ed Balls’s Newsnight slip-up was bad news for Labour for two reasons
6)Tory Party members’ views of coalition red lines: the EU referendum and renegotiation come top – as before
7)UKIP: shooting up like a rocket but coming down like a stick?
8)What does Margaret Hodge bowing out mean for Labour’s mayoral election race?
9)PMQs review: Cameron rides roughshod over Miliband again
1)Hard to argue against really. I see plenty of reasons which perhaps should mean the Tories would be doing better, but they aren't even if that is a little unfair. Sucks to be them really.
2+4)A serious possibility. The death of the Union - for what else can be signified by a party which wants to end the Union winning such masses of parliamentary seats mean, even if many of those who might consider voting SNP would balk at that action as indeed many did last September - is once again depressing me mightily, even though my instincts are to be glad that someone is getting challenged in their safe havens for once.
5+9) Doesn't seem to actually help much beyond the morale stakes for the Tories, but it did allow a genuinely funny line from Cameron, so a worthy slip up by any measure.
8)With the result of a Labour win seeming pretty likely in London, it's hard to be interested in which Labour figure gets the gig really. Not much excitement.0 -
Test
Edit: Phew. Still alive!0 -
Do you remember all those times Pork thought he'd been banned again (he had a counter) when it was a case of exceeding the allowed word count on a post or some such. Given his warning earlier today and failure to keep to it I suspect he's been given some time to try to cool off. It's Mike's site and he's free to smite who he likes for whatever reason he chooses. The rest of us are free to read, post or move on.Charles said:
Are you sure that's right? His avatar hasn't changed to the usual "keep calm and carry on" that we usually see with banned posters.SeanT said:Socrates informs me that he is banned from pb. Quite repulsive, if true.
I think he was just banned from discussing Rotherham et al because he does tend to be a little incautious with some of his comments and accusations.0 -
@TSE - The Betfair trader is a real hero, don't get him into trouble for heaven's sake!
As for Socrates, he shouldn't be banned.0 -
It's simply a passion to him and he has the money to indulge that passion. I for one am very grateful that he has polling for an interest. As I also appreciate his (also non-profit motivated) interest in bringing VCs and their stories to a wider audience.nigel4england said:
Fair enough and anyone in their right mind will fully respect your opinion.MikeSmithson said:
You are both totally wrong. We have never seen this level and depth of polling before at a UK general election and I have a great respect for Lord Ashcroft's approach.nigel4england said:
I said something similar a couple of days ago, this is one big ego trip for Ashcroft.tyson said:Really I hate this absolute reverential stuff to Ashcroft, an anachronistic peer of the realm. OGH- if you could put your tongue even further up his rectum you would put enemas out of business.
If you don't like it then tough. My judgement is that this is very important.
I'm sure you can find other sites to go to.
I'm not for one minute questioning his findings nor the value of them, I am more curious as to why he is actually doing it, it's hardly a profitable commercial enterprise for him.
Is everything you do purely motivated by profit? I would imagine you spend money on your hobbies - albeit on a different scale.0 -
Clegg surviving or not, it's becoming impossible to ignore just how screwed the LDs are. If he does hang on, it'll be a weird feeling in the parliamentary party afterwards - what other action to restore themselves can they take other than to repudiate everything Clegg and his cohorts did (ignoring that the party was consulted on going into Coalition), but given where many of Clegg's allies have seats, they might make up an even more significant number of those that are left, if the rest are unlucky, making it harder to toss them to the curb.0
-
Quite so.Sean_F said:
He does it because he enjoys it.tyson said:
Mike- what the hell do you think Ashcroft is doing this polling for? I mean are you such a patsy? Why should someone like him put his resources into these kind of endeavours except for one huge vanity project.MikeSmithson said:
You are both totally wrong. We have never seen this level and depth of polling before at a UK general election and I have a great respect for Lord Ashcroft's approach.nigel4england said:
I said something similar a couple of days ago, this is one big ego trip for Ashcroft.tyson said:Really I hate this absolute reverential stuff to Ashcroft, an anachronistic peer of the realm. OGH- if you could put your tongue even further up his rectum you would put enemas out of business.
If you don't like it then tough. My judgement is that this is very important.
I'm sure you can find other sites to go to.
You slavishly follow his every move and it's more than pathetic, it really is. It demeans you and it demands your site.
What on earth would be the point of being a billionaire if you can't enjoy your hobbies?0 -
Tbh Would you be bothered about making a profit if you were a billionaire ?GeoffM said:
It's simply a passion to him and he has the money to indulge that passion. I for one am very grateful that he has polling for an interest. As I also appreciate his (also non-profit motivated) interest in bringing VCs and their stories to a wider audience.nigel4england said:
Fair enough and anyone in their right mind will fully respect your opinion.MikeSmithson said:
You are both totally wrong. We have never seen this level and depth of polling before at a UK general election and I have a great respect for Lord Ashcroft's approach.nigel4england said:
I said something similar a couple of days ago, this is one big ego trip for Ashcroft.tyson said:Really I hate this absolute reverential stuff to Ashcroft, an anachronistic peer of the realm. OGH- if you could put your tongue even further up his rectum you would put enemas out of business.
If you don't like it then tough. My judgement is that this is very important.
I'm sure you can find other sites to go to.
I'm not for one minute questioning his findings nor the value of them, I am more curious as to why he is actually doing it, it's hardly a profitable commercial enterprise for him.
Is everything you do purely motivated by profit? I would imagine you spend money on your hobbies - albeit on a different scale.
I'd pursue my hobbies and dreams !0 -
If a poster is asked by the moderator to do something and then doesn't then steps will eventually be taken
So no more discussion on moderation issues.0 -
Fair enough, just seems a strange hobby.GeoffM said:
It's simply a passion to him and he has the money to indulge that passion. I for one am very grateful that he has polling for an interest. As I also appreciate his (also non-profit motivated) interest in bringing VCs and their stories to a wider audience.nigel4england said:
Fair enough and anyone in their right mind will fully respect your opinion.MikeSmithson said:
You are both totally wrong. We have never seen this level and depth of polling before at a UK general election and I have a great respect for Lord Ashcroft's approach.nigel4england said:
I said something similar a couple of days ago, this is one big ego trip for Ashcroft.tyson said:Really I hate this absolute reverential stuff to Ashcroft, an anachronistic peer of the realm. OGH- if you could put your tongue even further up his rectum you would put enemas out of business.
If you don't like it then tough. My judgement is that this is very important.
I'm sure you can find other sites to go to.
I'm not for one minute questioning his findings nor the value of them, I am more curious as to why he is actually doing it, it's hardly a profitable commercial enterprise for him.
Is everything you do purely motivated by profit? I would imagine you spend money on your hobbies - albeit on a different scale.
And for the record I am grateful too.0 -
I think you will be closing in on Billionaire status on 8.5.15Pulpstar said:
Tbh Would you be bothered about making a profit if you were a billionaire ?GeoffM said:
It's simply a passion to him and he has the money to indulge that passion. I for one am very grateful that he has polling for an interest. As I also appreciate his (also non-profit motivated) interest in bringing VCs and their stories to a wider audience.nigel4england said:
Fair enough and anyone in their right mind will fully respect your opinion.MikeSmithson said:
You are both totally wrong. We have never seen this level and depth of polling before at a UK general election and I have a great respect for Lord Ashcroft's approach.nigel4england said:
I said something similar a couple of days ago, this is one big ego trip for Ashcroft.tyson said:Really I hate this absolute reverential stuff to Ashcroft, an anachronistic peer of the realm. OGH- if you could put your tongue even further up his rectum you would put enemas out of business.
If you don't like it then tough. My judgement is that this is very important.
I'm sure you can find other sites to go to.
I'm not for one minute questioning his findings nor the value of them, I am more curious as to why he is actually doing it, it's hardly a profitable commercial enterprise for him.
Is everything you do purely motivated by profit? I would imagine you spend money on your hobbies - albeit on a different scale.
I'd pursue my hobbies and dreams !0 -
Perhaps Plato could get in touch with Socrates and then relay his thoughts to us?0
-
Everything in moderation except moderation?MikeSmithson said:If a poster is asked by the moderator to do something and then doesn't then steps will eventually be taken
So no more discussion on moderation issues.0 -
Are you sure you want to go down that route?SeanT said:If it is not, this site is very seriously diminished, and I will happily blog to that effect, even if Mike bans me. Who cares.
http://scotgoespop.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05/free-pork.html0 -
Indeed, he can't really bet on politics, well he could but even a £10k bet is meaningless to him - so he polls, finds information. Helps out amateur psephologistsRichard_Nabavi said:
Quite so.Sean_F said:
He does it because he enjoys it.tyson said:
Mike- what the hell do you think Ashcroft is doing this polling for? I mean are you such a patsy? Why should someone like him put his resources into these kind of endeavours except for one huge vanity project.MikeSmithson said:
You are both totally wrong. We have never seen this level and depth of polling before at a UK general election and I have a great respect for Lord Ashcroft's approach.nigel4england said:
I said something similar a couple of days ago, this is one big ego trip for Ashcroft.tyson said:Really I hate this absolute reverential stuff to Ashcroft, an anachronistic peer of the realm. OGH- if you could put your tongue even further up his rectum you would put enemas out of business.
If you don't like it then tough. My judgement is that this is very important.
I'm sure you can find other sites to go to.
You slavishly follow his every move and it's more than pathetic, it really is. It demeans you and it demands your site.
What on earth would be the point of being a billionaire if you can't enjoy your hobbies?
0 -
Is my North Warwickshire Conservative bet still aliveRodCrosby said: ? 0 -
@Charles is right, I think. The avatar would have changed if there was a ban enforced at a technical blog level. Much more plausible, as others have pointed out, that after the topic-specific ban he's stormed off and slammed the door loudly. But only temporarily, I hope.Neil said:
Do you remember all those times Pork thought he'd been banned again (he had a counter) when it was a case of exceeding the allowed word count on a post or some such. Given his warning earlier today and failure to keep to it I suspect he's been given some time to try to cool off. It's Mike's site and he's free to smite who he likes for whatever reason he chooses. The rest of us are free to read, post or move on.Charles said:
Are you sure that's right? His avatar hasn't changed to the usual "keep calm and carry on" that we usually see with banned posters.SeanT said:Socrates informs me that he is banned from pb. Quite repulsive, if true.
I think he was just banned from discussing Rotherham et al because he does tend to be a little incautious with some of his comments and accusations.0 -
You've got to be joking lolbigjohnowls said:
I think you will be closing in on Billionaire status on 8.5.15Pulpstar said:
Tbh Would you be bothered about making a profit if you were a billionaire ?GeoffM said:
It's simply a passion to him and he has the money to indulge that passion. I for one am very grateful that he has polling for an interest. As I also appreciate his (also non-profit motivated) interest in bringing VCs and their stories to a wider audience.nigel4england said:
Fair enough and anyone in their right mind will fully respect your opinion.MikeSmithson said:
You are both totally wrong. We have never seen this level and depth of polling before at a UK general election and I have a great respect for Lord Ashcroft's approach.nigel4england said:
I said something similar a couple of days ago, this is one big ego trip for Ashcroft.tyson said:Really I hate this absolute reverential stuff to Ashcroft, an anachronistic peer of the realm. OGH- if you could put your tongue even further up his rectum you would put enemas out of business.
If you don't like it then tough. My judgement is that this is very important.
I'm sure you can find other sites to go to.
I'm not for one minute questioning his findings nor the value of them, I am more curious as to why he is actually doing it, it's hardly a profitable commercial enterprise for him.
Is everything you do purely motivated by profit? I would imagine you spend money on your hobbies - albeit on a different scale.
I'd pursue my hobbies and dreams !0 -
Humanising though. I recall a comedy piece once about how today's billionaires are much more disappointing as villains than the titans of old, all distant and tyrannical, shrouded in mystery, whereas today's will get into twitter spats and minor issues and share their funny little hobbies with the world, or even occasionally be likable people! I do like how occasionally Rupert Murdoch seems to spend an afternoon teasing and winding up politicians and media by making vague comments on twitter and the like.nigel4england said:
Fair enough, just seems a strange hobby.GeoffM said:
It's simply a passion to him and he has the money to indulge that passion. I for one am very grateful that he has polling for an interest. As I also appreciate his (also non-profit motivated) interest in bringing VCs and their stories to a wider audience.nigel4england said:
Fair enough and anyone in their right mind will fully respect your opinion.MikeSmithson said:
You are both totally wrong. We have never seen this level and depth of polling before at a UK general election and I have a great respect for Lord Ashcroft's approach.nigel4england said:
I said something similar a couple of days ago, this is one big ego trip for Ashcroft.tyson said:Really I hate this absolute reverential stuff to Ashcroft, an anachronistic peer of the realm. OGH- if you could put your tongue even further up his rectum you would put enemas out of business.
If you don't like it then tough. My judgement is that this is very important.
I'm sure you can find other sites to go to.
I'm not for one minute questioning his findings nor the value of them, I am more curious as to why he is actually doing it, it's hardly a profitable commercial enterprise for him.
Is everything you do purely motivated by profit? I would imagine you spend money on your hobbies - albeit on a different scale.0 -
Whatever happened to Mick Pork?Stark_Dawning said:
Are you sure you want to go down that route?SeanT said:If it is not, this site is very seriously diminished, and I will happily blog to that effect, even if Mike bans me. Who cares.
http://scotgoespop.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05/free-pork.html
0 -
I am still of the view that Brown never had any marbles.TGOHF said:
Brown lost his marbles pre 2007. A shameful coverup ever since.Dair said:
From the transcript, Brown sounds like he just decided to that Independence is the best solution. He must be. Surely he can't be saying that democracy should be sacrificed in order to strengthen dead institutional concepts?dr_spyn said:Brown points the finger at Cameron.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-31141916
Can't say that I was ever impressed with Cameron's management of relations with Scotland.
0 -
Another delightful Porkism - every decision of the moderating team was an extension of TSE's personal vendetta against him. I'm sure Socrates thinks he kepts to the moderator's rules but this is a guy who thinks its ok to continue posting on a legally sensitive matter because he quickly retracts when he oversteps the mark.SeanT said:
Perhaps TSE just decided to "isolate" him forever?0 -
I take your point and it is possible that Ed could poll worse than Brown, but sadly Dave isn't The Blessed Margaret...RodCrosby said:
0 -
Sausages?GIN1138 said:
Whatever happened to Mick Pork?Stark_Dawning said:
Are you sure you want to go down that route?SeanT said:If it is not, this site is very seriously diminished, and I will happily blog to that effect, even if Mike bans me. Who cares.
http://scotgoespop.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05/free-pork.html0 -
Avery locked him up in a big yellow box.GIN1138 said:
Whatever happened to Mick Pork?Stark_Dawning said:
Are you sure you want to go down that route?SeanT said:If it is not, this site is very seriously diminished, and I will happily blog to that effect, even if Mike bans me. Who cares.
http://scotgoespop.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05/free-pork.html0 -
The very last comment (3.08 pm) might raise a wry ghost of a smile.Stark_Dawning said:
Are you sure you want to go down that route?SeanT said:If it is not, this site is very seriously diminished, and I will happily blog to that effect, even if Mike bans me. Who cares.
http://scotgoespop.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05/free-pork.html0 -
The correct term is a 'Flounce'.GeoffM said:
@Charles is right, I think. The avatar would have changed if there was a ban enforced at a technical blog level. Much more plausible, as others have pointed out, that after the topic-specific ban he's stormed off and slammed the door loudly. But only temporarily, I hope.Neil said:
Do you remember all those times Pork thought he'd been banned again (he had a counter) when it was a case of exceeding the allowed word count on a post or some such. Given his warning earlier today and failure to keep to it I suspect he's been given some time to try to cool off. It's Mike's site and he's free to smite who he likes for whatever reason he chooses. The rest of us are free to read, post or move on.Charles said:
Are you sure that's right? His avatar hasn't changed to the usual "keep calm and carry on" that we usually see with banned posters.SeanT said:Socrates informs me that he is banned from pb. Quite repulsive, if true.
I think he was just banned from discussing Rotherham et al because he does tend to be a little incautious with some of his comments and accusations.0 -
Maybe setting my sights low for billionaire status, possibly multi-millionaire, but I'd build or (preferably) restore a J-class yacht.Pulpstar said:
Tbh Would you be bothered about making a profit if you were a billionaire ?GeoffM said:
It's simply a passion to him and he has the money to indulge that passion. I for one am very grateful that he has polling for an interest. As I also appreciate his (also non-profit motivated) interest in bringing VCs and their stories to a wider audience.nigel4england said:
Fair enough and anyone in their right mind will fully respect your opinion.MikeSmithson said:
You are both totally wrong. We have never seen this level and depth of polling before at a UK general election and I have a great respect for Lord Ashcroft's approach.nigel4england said:
I said something similar a couple of days ago, this is one big ego trip for Ashcroft.tyson said:Really I hate this absolute reverential stuff to Ashcroft, an anachronistic peer of the realm. OGH- if you could put your tongue even further up his rectum you would put enemas out of business.
If you don't like it then tough. My judgement is that this is very important.
I'm sure you can find other sites to go to.
I'm not for one minute questioning his findings nor the value of them, I am more curious as to why he is actually doing it, it's hardly a profitable commercial enterprise for him.
Is everything you do purely motivated by profit? I would imagine you spend money on your hobbies - albeit on a different scale.
I'd pursue my hobbies and dreams !
0 -
OK, what's the problem with this:
Mike owns PB.com. Mike say's what we can and can't discuss on his website. We do what we're told and if we don't like it we go somewhere else.
Them's the rules and have been for as long as I've posted here in 2007.
Don't know what's so hard to understand about this.0 -
Would Tories in Sheffield Hallam really let the seat go to Labour by not propping up Clegg? I thought they were meant to be more tactical than the rest of us idiots.
Can't believe I almost went to bed without noticing the Tories had retaken the lead; the election is still an open contest!0 -
No, it isn't.TheWatcher said:
The correct term is a 'Flounce'.GeoffM said:
@Charles is right, I think. The avatar would have changed if there was a ban enforced at a technical blog level. Much more plausible, as others have pointed out, that after the topic-specific ban he's stormed off and slammed the door loudly. But only temporarily, I hope.Neil said:
Do you remember all those times Pork thought he'd been banned again (he had a counter) when it was a case of exceeding the allowed word count on a post or some such. Given his warning earlier today and failure to keep to it I suspect he's been given some time to try to cool off. It's Mike's site and he's free to smite who he likes for whatever reason he chooses. The rest of us are free to read, post or move on.Charles said:
Are you sure that's right? His avatar hasn't changed to the usual "keep calm and carry on" that we usually see with banned posters.SeanT said:Socrates informs me that he is banned from pb. Quite repulsive, if true.
I think he was just banned from discussing Rotherham et al because he does tend to be a little incautious with some of his comments and accusations.
The correct term is banned, and further to that banned by an egotistical moderator with his own agenda.0 -
To be honest I did actually type "flounce" in my first comment draft and rephrased it before publishing.TheWatcher said:
The correct term is a 'Flounce'.GeoffM said:
@Charles is right, I think. The avatar would have changed if there was a ban enforced at a technical blog level. Much more plausible, as others have pointed out, that after the topic-specific ban he's stormed off and slammed the door loudly. But only temporarily, I hope.Neil said:
Do you remember all those times Pork thought he'd been banned again (he had a counter) when it was a case of exceeding the allowed word count on a post or some such. Given his warning earlier today and failure to keep to it I suspect he's been given some time to try to cool off. It's Mike's site and he's free to smite who he likes for whatever reason he chooses. The rest of us are free to read, post or move on.Charles said:
Are you sure that's right? His avatar hasn't changed to the usual "keep calm and carry on" that we usually see with banned posters.SeanT said:Socrates informs me that he is banned from pb. Quite repulsive, if true.
I think he was just banned from discussing Rotherham et al because he does tend to be a little incautious with some of his comments and accusations.
0 -
Why is Unite spending money on polling Clegg's constituency? Up to them I suppose.0
-
In the old days pb regulars used to anounce when they were going on holiday so that others wouldn't worry about them.0
-
You have definitely made me quite a bit of money in past couple of weeks.Pulpstar said:
You've got to be joking lolbigjohnowls said:
I think you will be closing in on Billionaire status on 8.5.15Pulpstar said:
Tbh Would you be bothered about making a profit if you were a billionaire ?GeoffM said:
It's simply a passion to him and he has the money to indulge that passion. I for one am very grateful that he has polling for an interest. As I also appreciate his (also non-profit motivated) interest in bringing VCs and their stories to a wider audience.nigel4england said:
Fair enough and anyone in their right mind will fully respect your opinion.MikeSmithson said:
You are both totally wrong. We have never seen this level and depth of polling before at a UK general election and I have a great respect for Lord Ashcroft's approach.nigel4england said:
I said something similar a couple of days ago, this is one big ego trip for Ashcroft.tyson said:Really I hate this absolute reverential stuff to Ashcroft, an anachronistic peer of the realm. OGH- if you could put your tongue even further up his rectum you would put enemas out of business.
If you don't like it then tough. My judgement is that this is very important.
I'm sure you can find other sites to go to.
I'm not for one minute questioning his findings nor the value of them, I am more curious as to why he is actually doing it, it's hardly a profitable commercial enterprise for him.
Is everything you do purely motivated by profit? I would imagine you spend money on your hobbies - albeit on a different scale.
I'd pursue my hobbies and dreams !
Thanks for the tips on next leader market value0 -
Perhaps Joyce Thacker has joined the Moderation team?0
-
God,reading that,it sounds like the site has turned into something not very liberal or democratic,one of them old commie countries would be proud.Stark_Dawning said:
Are you sure you want to go down that route?SeanT said:If it is not, this site is very seriously diminished, and I will happily blog to that effect, even if Mike bans me. Who cares.
http://scotgoespop.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05/free-pork.html0 -
I thought the first rule of moderation club is not to mention moderation club.0
-
On that topic, people say Brown and Ed M supporters are thin on the ground thesedays, but - anecdote alert - I happened across that rarest of people the other day; someone who likes and is impressed by both Brown and Ed M, despite residing in the true blue Tory shires. An incredible shock.Flightpath said:
I am still of the view that Brown never had any marbles.TGOHF said:
Brown lost his marbles pre 2007. A shameful coverup ever since.Dair said:
From the transcript, Brown sounds like he just decided to that Independence is the best solution. He must be. Surely he can't be saying that democracy should be sacrificed in order to strengthen dead institutional concepts?dr_spyn said:Brown points the finger at Cameron.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-31141916
Can't say that I was ever impressed with Cameron's management of relations with Scotland.
0 -
Were they on medication?kle4 said:
On that topic, people say Brown and Ed M supporters are thin on the ground thesedays, but - anecdote alert - I happened across that rarest of people the other day; someone who likes and is impressed by both Brown and Ed M, despite residing in the true blue Tory shires. An incredible shock.Flightpath said:
I am still of the view that Brown never had any marbles.TGOHF said:
Brown lost his marbles pre 2007. A shameful coverup ever since.Dair said:
From the transcript, Brown sounds like he just decided to that Independence is the best solution. He must be. Surely he can't be saying that democracy should be sacrificed in order to strengthen dead institutional concepts?dr_spyn said:Brown points the finger at Cameron.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-31141916
Can't say that I was ever impressed with Cameron's management of relations with Scotland.
0 -
The quote about ''creating two classes of MP'' is bananas. We already have two classes of MP but which favour Labour. The SNP made great play about not voting on English only matters, yet Brown says that just because the English have the nerve to want a bit of what HE went out of his way to promise Scotland then this has 'scuppered the union'. I think this speech goes some way to pointing up the total delusional world that Gordon Brown inhabits.Dair said:
From the transcript, Brown sounds like he just decided to that Independence is the best solution. He must be. Surely he can't be saying that democracy should be sacrificed in order to strengthen dead institutional concepts?dr_spyn said:Brown points the finger at Cameron.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-31141916
Can't say that I was ever impressed with Cameron's management of relations with Scotland.0 -
You followed the link? That turps-nudging ringpiece will be wondering how his traffic has doubled overnight.Tykejohnno said:
God,reading that,it sounds like the site has turned into something not very liberal or democratic,one of them old commie countries would be proud.Stark_Dawning said:
Are you sure you want to go down that route?SeanT said:If it is not, this site is very seriously diminished, and I will happily blog to that effect, even if Mike bans me. Who cares.
http://scotgoespop.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05/free-pork.html0 -
The Survation website has no mention of the Sheffield Hallam poll. It does however have this weird headline: "New Poll of the Jewish Community Finds 88% Have Not Considered Leaving the UK"0
-
Care in the community...kle4 said:
On that topic, people say Brown and Ed M supporters are thin on the ground thesedays, but - anecdote alert - I happened across that rarest of people the other day; someone who likes and is impressed by both Brown and Ed M, despite residing in the true blue Tory shires. An incredible shock.Flightpath said:
I am still of the view that Brown never had any marbles.TGOHF said:
Brown lost his marbles pre 2007. A shameful coverup ever since.Dair said:
From the transcript, Brown sounds like he just decided to that Independence is the best solution. He must be. Surely he can't be saying that democracy should be sacrificed in order to strengthen dead institutional concepts?dr_spyn said:Brown points the finger at Cameron.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-31141916
Can't say that I was ever impressed with Cameron's management of relations with Scotland.0 -
I could not speculate as to such, but a greatly intelligent and amusing person in every other way. In truth, the rare Labour supporters I come across in these parts seem much more fond of Brown than Blair - those that don't come across just like Tories for some reason. For my part, I don't like Brown as such, but I never disliked him as much as the oily Blair, and never really understood his appeal, real as it must have been to win so many times.GIN1138 said:
Were they on medication?kle4 said:
On that topic, people say Brown and Ed M supporters are thin on the ground thesedays, but - anecdote alert - I happened across that rarest of people the other day; someone who likes and is impressed by both Brown and Ed M, despite residing in the true blue Tory shires. An incredible shock.Flightpath said:
I am still of the view that Brown never had any marbles.TGOHF said:
Brown lost his marbles pre 2007. A shameful coverup ever since.Dair said:
From the transcript, Brown sounds like he just decided to that Independence is the best solution. He must be. Surely he can't be saying that democracy should be sacrificed in order to strengthen dead institutional concepts?dr_spyn said:Brown points the finger at Cameron.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-31141916
Can't say that I was ever impressed with Cameron's management of relations with Scotland.
Quite. I am seriously uncertain as to the best approach to take on this conundrum - if dozens of seats are voting for a party that wants the Union to end, then the Union is dying a death anyway irrespective of the heartening IndyRef result - but that argument has never made a lick of sense to me as a reason not to do something, divorced as it is from the reality of the situation.Flightpath said:
The quote about ''creating two classes of MP'' is bananas. We already have two classes of MPDair said:
From the transcript, Brown sounds like he just decided to that Independence is the best solution. He must be. Surely he can't be saying that democracy should be sacrificed in order to strengthen dead institutional concepts?dr_spyn said:Brown points the finger at Cameron.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-31141916
Can't say that I was ever impressed with Cameron's management of relations with Scotland.
0 -
At least she had her priorities straight back when she was employed by Rotherham council.CD13 said:Perhaps Joyce Thacker has joined the Moderation team?
I think Rotherham will pale into insignificance when compared to the Westminster VIP sex ring. Hopefully the number of witnesses will continue to grow and those involved, who are still alive, serve lengthy prison sentences.
0 -
Quite extraordinary. Labour majority almost 20 with Betfair Exchange.0
-
Headline? I'm sure I read about that in the Chronic back in mid January.Richard_Nabavi said:The Survation website has no mention of the Sheffield Hallam poll. It does however have this weird headline: "New Poll of the Jewish Community Finds 88% Have Not Considered Leaving the UK"
Edit: Yes, Jewish Chronicle, 14th Jan: http://www.thejc.com/news/uk-news/128162/jc-poll-reveals-88-cent-british-jews-have-not-considered-leaving-uk0 -
-
If the Lib Dems are on 23, the Tories are on 22 and Labour's on 33, then there's practically no point voting tactically; you might as well fight for the win.kle4 said:Would Tories in Sheffield Hallam really let the seat go to Labour by not propping up Clegg? I thought they were meant to be more tactical than the rest of us idiots.
...0 -
Sounds about right to me. Labour need to gain net 57 seats, and if they lose 25 in Scotland then it seems out of reach.AndyJS said:Quite extraordinary. Labour majority almost 20 with Betfair Exchange.
Particularly if the campaign carries on like it has the last couple of weeks by the 2 Eds.0 -
Enjoying the Betfair most seats move, going greener by the minute...0
-
Maybe you're right - certainly I'm so emotionally invested in keeping the Union, I'll get offended by things but would probably give in even if I think it is unfair on the English. My worry is that while the Scots may not want Indy, in trying to get what they do want, they could end up going down that route, if it causes problems such as the one you suggest.SeanT said:
The UK is going down the same route. It does not necessarily mean break-up, London parties simply have to readjust. Scotland does not want indy, it wants respect and lots of money. The problem will come when the ENGLISH object, but I doubt they ever will.kle4 said:
I could not d never really understood his appeal, real as it must have been to win so many times.GIN1138 said:
Were they on medication?kle4 said:
On that topic, pFlightpath said:
I am still ever had any marbles.TGOHF said:
Brown lost his marbles pre 2007. A shameful coverup ever since.Dair said:
Fromnal concepts?dr_spyn said:Brown points the finger at Cameron.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-31141916
Can't say that I was ever impressed with Cameron's management of relations with Scotland.
Quite. I am seriously uncertain as to the best approach to take on this conundrum - if dozens of seats are voting for a party that wants the Union to end, then the Union is dying a death anyway irrespective of the heartening IndyRef result - but that argument has never made a lick of sense to me as a reason not to do something, divorced as it is from the reality of the situation.Flightpath said:
The quote about ''creating two classes of MP'' is bananas. We already have two classes of MPDair said:
Fromcepts?dr_spyn said:Brown points the finger at Cameron.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-31141916
Camanagement of relations with Scotland.0 -
Now that we can appreciate the long-term tactical genius of losing all those Scottish seats, that should ensure a further historical revision upwards of Sir John Major.0
-
Arithmetic!foxinsoxuk said:
Sounds about right to me. Labour need to gain net 57 seats, and if they lose 25 in Scotland then it seems out of reach.AndyJS said:Quite extraordinary. Labour majority almost 20 with Betfair Exchange.
Particularly if the campaign carries on like it has the last couple of weeks by the 2 Eds.
Lab need 68 to get 326.0 -
If they get a majority there will probably have been a recovery of sorts in Scotland... so as they're related contingencies count 15 gains for the Nats sayfoxinsoxuk said:
Sounds about right to me. Labour need to gain net 57 seats, and if they lose 25 in Scotland then it seems out of reach.AndyJS said:Quite extraordinary. Labour majority almost 20 with Betfair Exchange.
Particularly if the campaign carries on like it has the last couple of weeks by the 2 Eds.
Which seat is target 72 for Labour ?0 -
Rumoured to have attempted to defect to UKIP and spill the beans on his former Labour colleagues:Flightpath said:
https://rotherhampolitics.wordpress.com/2015/01/08/jahangir-akhtar-disloyalty-knows-no-bounds/
0 -
>seats (BF)
Con 1.73
Lab 2.400 -
All look the same to you do they mate?Flightpath said:
That's not what the hmmmm meant but who expects you to get things right eh ting tong?0 -
My Betfair saysScrapheap_as_was said:Enjoying the Betfair most seats move, going greener by the minute...
Labour overall majority + 228.59
Conservative majority +108.78
NOM -108.85
Conservative most seats -139.03
Labour most seats +110.78
Am I in trouble ? 0 -
“There is no Israel for me,”Richard_Nabavi said:The Survation website has no mention of the Sheffield Hallam poll. It does however have this weird headline: "New Poll of the Jewish Community Finds 88% Have Not Considered Leaving the UK"
0 -
Well Look North (Yorkshire) managed to get through their half past six programme without mentioning the words Asian, muslim, Pakistani or (I think), Labour.isam said:
"Jahangir Akhtar declined to comment" - BBC NewsSeanT said:Pretty brutal BBC Ten so far.
Rotherham Labour had a "deep rooted culture of cover-up"
Jahangir Akhtar.. hmmmm0 -
That makes it even less likely. I think that I got the 57 from 257 current seats.RodCrosby said:
Arithmetic!foxinsoxuk said:
Sounds about right to me. Labour need to gain net 57 seats, and if they lose 25 in Scotland then it seems out of reach.AndyJS said:Quite extraordinary. Labour majority almost 20 with Betfair Exchange.
Particularly if the campaign carries on like it has the last couple of weeks by the 2 Eds.
Lab need 68 to get 326.
I cannot see Labour gaining 100 odd seats in England and Wales. There have been very few elections with that many gains.0 -
What is Labour's 83rd target seat ?0
-
Maybe they just don't want to get banned from PB ?david_herdson said:
Well Look North (Yorkshire) managed to get through their half past six programme without mentioning the words Asian, muslim, Pakistani or (I think), Labour.isam said:
"Jahangir Akhtar declined to comment" - BBC NewsSeanT said:Pretty brutal BBC Ten so far.
Rotherham Labour had a "deep rooted culture of cover-up"
Jahangir Akhtar.. hmmmm0 -
Betting tip:
Don't forget Rother Valley comes under Rotherham council, and the voters there are less likely to POSTAL vote.0 -
According to AndyJS's spreadsheet it is Ilford North or Aberconway, with Watford being a bell wether.Pulpstar said:What is Labour's 83rd target seat ?
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/lv?key=0At91c3wX1Wu5dDRiT1FSRTF2bjVYRThSTnRaNzFXMlE#gid=00 -
Tories 1.69. Seems overdone for today, though it fits with my longer-term expectations.0
-
kle4SeanT Indeed, and in Quebec the Bloc Quebecois has regularly sent 40-50 MPs to the Canadian Parliament since the early 90s0
-
is vince cables seat looking shaky?0
-
Rother Valley looks like excellent value in comparison to Rotherham. I believe the Ashcroft polling there was slightly more favourable to UKIP as well.Pulpstar said:Betting tip:
Don't forget Rother Valley comes under Rotherham council, and the voters there are less likely to POSTAL vote.
0 -
Socrates has made clear on several occasions that he does not use his real name because of specific restrictions in his employment. You on the other hand are just a cowardly piece of shit shilling for the Tory party.Flightpath said:
What? For endlessly smearing government ministers and weaponising child abuse? All from behind a nom de plume?SeanT said:Socrates informs me that he is banned from pb. Quite repulsive, if true.
There is a world of difference.0 -
or if you want to go all daily mail,Richard_Nabavi said:The Survation website has no mention of the Sheffield Hallam poll. It does however have this weird headline: "New Poll of the Jewish Community Finds 88% Have Not Considered Leaving the UK"
HOUSE PRICE CRASH FEARED AS SURVEY SHOWS THOUSANDS OF JEWS READY TO FLEE BRITAIN
0 -
Whoopee... do I lock in yet... or wait for the 4 figure winnings if the blues land most seats... hmm.Tissue_Price said:Tories 1.69. Seems overdone for today, though it fits with my longer-term expectations.
0 -
I'm in the happy position of winning £100 if UKIP take the seat and losing nothing if they don't. I'm ruling out a Conservative voctory hereMP_SE said:
Rother Valley looks like excellent value in comparison to Rotherham. I believe the Ashcroft polling there was slightly more favourable to UKIP as well.Pulpstar said:Betting tip:
Don't forget Rother Valley comes under Rotherham council, and the voters there are less likely to POSTAL vote. 0 -
I believe a number of papers have mentioned the sex ring may have committed numerous murders, both of children and potential whistleblowers. There are MPs both serving and retired, the judiciary, the police, the security services, the civil service all potentially implicated. Potentially a cover up on a huge scale by the very people we trust to look after our best interests and keep us safe.john_zims said:@MP_SE
'I think Rotherham will pale into insignificance when compared to the Westminster VIP sex ring.'
You think it will exceed the 1,600 cases of abuse that took pace in Rotherham ?
0
