politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The Monday polls so far: LAB 1% ahead with Populus but 4% b
Comments
-
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/record-view-scottish-vote-decide-5282533
Christ on a bike
"If this May marks the end of Labour’s dominance in Scotland, that is a tragedy for the values of working people across the UK."0 -
What do you mean by "comfort zone"? I ask because I often agree with your posts (even though I think you're a "PBTory"? :P ) but I'm always baffled when people say they think Labour's current policies are left-wing.MaxPB said:
Less than two months out from the election? Literally suicide. Anyway, anyone who wants to lead the party will want to do so with a clean slate not after winning a very bloody battle just weeks before an election. October was the time to do it, after Ed turned up the volume but Labour are too happy in their comfort zone. The Tories would have decapitated a leader that gave a speech like that but for Labour it hit all of their comfort zone notes so he survived.Dair said:At this rate, if Labour don't get rid of Ed, they are finished outside of Scotland as well.
I know it's never been done before. But surely, cutting their losses at this stage would be the best strategy.0 -
That sheet has little value at all.Tissue_Price said:It's page 55 here, figures for lots of cities - but on a "living nearest to" basis:
http://populus.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/OmOnline_Vote_February_2015-BPC.pdf0 -
"Other" +1 in Yougov, indicates another decent SNP crosstab (Since we know that Plaid and the BNP basically sum to just over 1 always)0
-
Comfort zone as in the leadership is pushing this idea that government knows best and markets are dysfunctional. Ed Miliband has been pushing this bullshit for the whole of his tenure as LOTO and that is Labour's comfort zone. Blair took them out of that and Brown and now Ed have pushed them back into it.Danny565 said:
What do you mean by "comfort zone"? I ask because I often agree with your posts (even though I think you're a "PBTory"? :P ) but I'm always baffled when people say they think Labour's current policies are left-wing.MaxPB said:
Less than two months out from the election? Literally suicide. Anyway, anyone who wants to lead the party will want to do so with a clean slate not after winning a very bloody battle just weeks before an election. October was the time to do it, after Ed turned up the volume but Labour are too happy in their comfort zone. The Tories would have decapitated a leader that gave a speech like that but for Labour it hit all of their comfort zone notes so he survived.Dair said:At this rate, if Labour don't get rid of Ed, they are finished outside of Scotland as well.
I know it's never been done before. But surely, cutting their losses at this stage would be the best strategy.
Also trust me, I'm no Tory. I just loathe all of the alternatives.0 -
ELBOW fans will note that 33.3% for w/e 8th March is the Tories' highest ELBOW score since August!0
-
ARF! Tories 14% behind Labour in Liverpool. Tory gain Walton.....nailed on.Hengists_Gift said:
That sheet has little value at all.Tissue_Price said:It's page 55 here, figures for lots of cities - but on a "living nearest to" basis:
http://populus.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/OmOnline_Vote_February_2015-BPC.pdf0 -
I'm sure all the other parties would welcome Ed's replacement by Hattie. How refreshing it would be for Labour to have such an accomplished woman leading them again.....Danny565 said:
Lest we forget, Labour polled higher under her tenure in 2010 than they are currently...Pong said:
Step forward, Harriet Harman.SimonStClare said:
As you say, tis rather late to do anything - but who would replace Ed? - Is it Ed who is toxic north of the border, or the Labour party?Dair said:At this rate, if Labour don't get rid of Ed, they are finished outside of Scotland as well.
I know it's never been done before. But surely, cutting their losses at this stage would be the best strategy.0 -
The best one is the Tories ahead in Hull. John Prescott would blow a gasket.....compouter2 said:
ARF! Tories 14% behind Labour in Liverpool. Tory gain Walton.....nailed on.Hengists_Gift said:
That sheet has little value at all.Tissue_Price said:It's page 55 here, figures for lots of cities - but on a "living nearest to" basis:
http://populus.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/OmOnline_Vote_February_2015-BPC.pdf0 -
Lowest Green score in ELBOW since December.
Lowest LibDem score in ELBOW for four weeks.
and
Lowest Lab lead in ELBOW since August (inception of ELBOW)0 -
Agreed, I was just curious as to where that Glasgow story had come from.Hengists_Gift said:
That sheet has little value at all.Tissue_Price said:It's page 55 here, figures for lots of cities - but on a "living nearest to" basis:
http://populus.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/OmOnline_Vote_February_2015-BPC.pdf0 -
NumbrCrunchrPolitics @NCPoliticsUK
YouGov/ITV Wales/Cardiff University (Wales Westminster):
CON 25 (+2)
LAB 39 (+2)
LIB 5 (-1)
PC 10 (=)
UKIP 14 (-2)
GRN 6 (-2)0 -
Greasy lefties on the slide?Sunil_Prasannan said:Lowest Green score in ELBOW since December.
Lowest LibDem score in ELBOW for four weeks.
and
Lowest Lab lead in ELBOW since August (inception of ELBOW)0 -
Tomorrow Yougov - Tie!0
-
Holding out for tomorrows surge.Hengists_Gift said:
Greasy lefties on the slide?Sunil_Prasannan said:Lowest Green score in ELBOW since December.
Lowest LibDem score in ELBOW for four weeks.
and
Lowest Lab lead in ELBOW since August (inception of ELBOW)0 -
But on public spending, Labour now are considerably to the Right of Blair. And public spending was imo the single biggest reason Blair won as many elections as he did -- maybe not 1997 when he was peddling the "sticking to Tory spending plans" stuff, but the whole 2001 and 2005 campaigns were built around how Labour would keep spending going up.MaxPB said:
Comfort zone as in the leadership is pushing this idea that government knows best and markets are dysfunctional. Ed Miliband has been pushing this bullshit for the whole of his tenure as LOTO and that is Labour's comfort zone. Blair took them out of that and Brown and now Ed have pushed them back into it.Danny565 said:
What do you mean by "comfort zone"? I ask because I often agree with your posts (even though I think you're a "PBTory"? :P ) but I'm always baffled when people say they think Labour's current policies are left-wing.MaxPB said:
Less than two months out from the election? Literally suicide. Anyway, anyone who wants to lead the party will want to do so with a clean slate not after winning a very bloody battle just weeks before an election. October was the time to do it, after Ed turned up the volume but Labour are too happy in their comfort zone. The Tories would have decapitated a leader that gave a speech like that but for Labour it hit all of their comfort zone notes so he survived.Dair said:At this rate, if Labour don't get rid of Ed, they are finished outside of Scotland as well.
I know it's never been done before. But surely, cutting their losses at this stage would be the best strategy.
Also trust me, I'm no Tory. I just loathe all of the alternatives.
Even on the markets thing, afaik it's all rhetoric apart from the now-redundant energy price thing. Although if there's any policies I've missed I'd love to see them, since I'm on the verge of voting Green in despair at how Toryesque Labour currently are!0 -
Indeed! After all... tomorrow is another day.compouter2 said:Tomorrow Yougov - Tie!
Sweet dreams, Scarlett.0 -
Well that'll be the whole "no money left" thing.Danny565 said:
But on public spending, Labour now are considerably to the Right of Blair. And public spending was imo the single biggest reason Blair won as many elections as he did -- maybe not 1997 when he was peddling the "sticking to Tory spending plans" stuff, but the whole 2001 and 2005 campaigns were built around how Labour would keep spending going up.MaxPB said:
Comfort zone as in the leadership is pushing this idea that government knows best and markets are dysfunctional. Ed Miliband has been pushing this bullshit for the whole of his tenure as LOTO and that is Labour's comfort zone. Blair took them out of that and Brown and now Ed have pushed them back into it.Danny565 said:
What do you mean by "comfort zone"? I ask because I often agree with your posts (even though I think you're a "PBTory"? :P ) but I'm always baffled when people say they think Labour's current policies are left-wing.MaxPB said:
Less than two months out from the election? Literally suicide. Anyway, anyone who wants to lead the party will want to do so with a clean slate not after winning a very bloody battle just weeks before an election. October was the time to do it, after Ed turned up the volume but Labour are too happy in their comfort zone. The Tories would have decapitated a leader that gave a speech like that but for Labour it hit all of their comfort zone notes so he survived.Dair said:At this rate, if Labour don't get rid of Ed, they are finished outside of Scotland as well.
I know it's never been done before. But surely, cutting their losses at this stage would be the best strategy.
Also trust me, I'm no Tory. I just loathe all of the alternatives.
Even on the markets thing, afaik it's all hot air apart from the now-redundant energy price thing. Although if there's any policies I've missed I'd love to see them, since I'm on the verge of voting Green in despair at how Toryesque Labour currently are!0 -
That's another very good poll for Con.Tissue_Price said:NumbrCrunchrPolitics @NCPoliticsUK
YouGov/ITV Wales/Cardiff University (Wales Westminster):
CON 25 (+2)
LAB 39 (+2)
LIB 5 (-1)
PC 10 (=)
UKIP 14 (-2)
GRN 6 (-2)
Change from 2010 GE:
Con -1
Lab +3
Equivalent to Con 36, Lab 33 if changes applied across GB - more evidence of Con vote holding up well.0 -
Blair lost 4 million votes over those two elections. The only reason Blair won was because the Tories couldn't get their act together at all.Danny565 said:
But on public spending, Labour now are considerably to the Right of Blair. And public spending was imo the single biggest reason Blair won as many elections as he did -- maybe not 1997 when he was peddling the "sticking to Tory spending plans" stuff, but the whole 2001 and 2005 campaigns were built around how Labour would keep spending going up.MaxPB said:
Comfort zone as in the leadership is pushing this idea that government knows best and markets are dysfunctional. Ed Miliband has been pushing this bullshit for the whole of his tenure as LOTO and that is Labour's comfort zone. Blair took them out of that and Brown and now Ed have pushed them back into it.Danny565 said:
What do you mean by "comfort zone"? I ask because I often agree with your posts (even though I think you're a "PBTory"? :P ) but I'm always baffled when people say they think Labour's current policies are left-wing.MaxPB said:
Less than two months out from the election? Literally suicide. Anyway, anyone who wants to lead the party will want to do so with a clean slate not after winning a very bloody battle just weeks before an election. October was the time to do it, after Ed turned up the volume but Labour are too happy in their comfort zone. The Tories would have decapitated a leader that gave a speech like that but for Labour it hit all of their comfort zone notes so he survived.Dair said:At this rate, if Labour don't get rid of Ed, they are finished outside of Scotland as well.
I know it's never been done before. But surely, cutting their losses at this stage would be the best strategy.
Also trust me, I'm no Tory. I just loathe all of the alternatives.
Even on the markets thing, afaik it's all rhetoric apart from the now-redundant energy price thing. Although if there's any policies I've missed I'd love to see them, since I'm on the verge of voting Green in despair at how Toryesque Labour currently are!0 -
If Labour are going to lose, could they at least do it properly and get sub 250 as I'm on the 226-250 band for nice profit.0
-
Wales will be the most predictable area of the UK in this coming election. Two of the Cardiff seats will probably switch and nothing else.0
-
The swing's been notably lower in Wales for a while, probably because Labour are in power there.MikeL said:
That's another very good poll for Con.Tissue_Price said:NumbrCrunchrPolitics @NCPoliticsUK
YouGov/ITV Wales/Cardiff University (Wales Westminster):
CON 25 (+2)
LAB 39 (+2)
LIB 5 (-1)
PC 10 (=)
UKIP 14 (-2)
GRN 6 (-2)
Change from 2010 GE:
Con -1
Lab +3
Equivalent to Con 36, Lab 33 if changes applied across GB - more evidence of Con vote holding up well.0 -
You may wish to cover 201-225 while it's cheap.Pulpstar said:If Labour are going to lose, could they at least do it properly and get sub 250 as I'm on the 226-250 band for nice profit.
0 -
Whether it would be economically feasible now is a different issue. But politically, Blair was more left-wing than Miliband in that crucial area, and without it Blair would imo not have won as many elections.Tissue_Price said:
Well that'll be the whole "no money left" thing.Danny565 said:
But on public spending, Labour now are considerably to the Right of Blair. And public spending was imo the single biggest reason Blair won as many elections as he did -- maybe not 1997 when he was peddling the "sticking to Tory spending plans" stuff, but the whole 2001 and 2005 campaigns were built around how Labour would keep spending going up.MaxPB said:
Comfort zone as in the leadership is pushing this idea that government knows best and markets are dysfunctional. Ed Miliband has been pushing this bullshit for the whole of his tenure as LOTO and that is Labour's comfort zone. Blair took them out of that and Brown and now Ed have pushed them back into it.Danny565 said:
What do you mean by "comfort zone"? I ask because I often agree with your posts (even though I think you're a "PBTory"? :P ) but I'm always baffled when people say they think Labour's current policies are left-wing.MaxPB said:
Less than two months out from the election? Literally suicide. Anyway, anyone who wants to lead the party will want to do so with a clean slate not after winning a very bloody battle just weeks before an election. October was the time to do it, after Ed turned up the volume but Labour are too happy in their comfort zone. The Tories would have decapitated a leader that gave a speech like that but for Labour it hit all of their comfort zone notes so he survived.Dair said:At this rate, if Labour don't get rid of Ed, they are finished outside of Scotland as well.
I know it's never been done before. But surely, cutting their losses at this stage would be the best strategy.
Also trust me, I'm no Tory. I just loathe all of the alternatives.
Even on the markets thing, afaik it's all hot air apart from the now-redundant energy price thing. Although if there's any policies I've missed I'd love to see them, since I'm on the verge of voting Green in despair at how Toryesque Labour currently are!0 -
Maybe - but this is what we will get for the next 8 weeks. Will it work?Pulpstar said:http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/record-view-scottish-vote-decide-5282533
Christ on a bike
"If this May marks the end of Labour’s dominance in Scotland, that is a tragedy for the values of working people across the UK."0 -
Danny565 said:
But on public spending, Labour now are considerably to the Right of Blair. And public spending was imo the single biggest reason Blair won as many elections as he did -- maybe not 1997 when he was peddling the "sticking to Tory spending plans" stuff, but the whole 2001 and 2005 campaigns were built around how Labour would keep spending going up.MaxPB said:
Comfort zone as in the leadership is pushing this idea that government knows best and markets are dysfunctional. Ed Miliband has been pushing this bullshit for the whole of his tenure as LOTO and that is Labour's comfort zone. Blair took them out of that and Brown and now Ed have pushed them back into it.Danny565 said:
What do you mean by "comfort zone"? I ask because I often agree with your posts (even though I think you're a "PBTory"? :P ) but I'm always baffled when people say they think Labour's current policies are left-wing.MaxPB said:
Less than two months out from the election? Literally suicide. Anyway, anyone who wants to lead the party will want to do so with a clean slate not after winning a very bloody battle just weeks before an election. October was the time to do it, after Ed turned up the volume but Labour are too happy in their comfort zone. The Tories would have decapitated a leader that gave a speech like that but for Labour it hit all of their comfort zone notes so he survived.Dair said:At this rate, if Labour don't get rid of Ed, they are finished outside of Scotland as well.
I know it's never been done before. But surely, cutting their losses at this stage would be the best strategy.
Also trust me, I'm no Tory. I just loathe all of the alternatives.
Even on the markets thing, afaik it's all rhetoric apart from the now-redundant energy price thing. Although if there's any policies I've missed I'd love to see them, since I'm on the verge of voting Green in despair at how Toryesque Labour currently are!
While you are accurate in your description of how the argument of public spending with Blair changed, but there was a narrative. The narrative was, Labour werent trusted with the economy. We will show that we have a sensible handle on the economy. Brown won a reputation as an 'iron chancellor'. He won credibility that allowed him to increase spending. Spending was increased on the back of a boom. It appeared to be sustainable.
We are richer we can spend a bit more. Remember, Brown abolished boom and bust. They could present themselves as fiscally responsible, even though they threw money around like a sailor on shore leave. They earned that.
The world is very different now.0 -
Tories trading sub 1.6 on betfair now. 63% chance to win. Funny sort of coin if you ask me.0
-
Heavier on one side.... The other side is lightweight. Made of unobtanium.Tissue_Price said:Tories trading sub 1.6 on betfair now. 63% chance to win. Funny sort of coin if you ask me.
0 -
Well all those Tories "betting with their hearts" when they were 2.0 must be doing very nicely out of these rogue polls.MarqueeMark said:
Heavier on one side.... The other side is lightweight. Made of unobtanium.Tissue_Price said:Tories trading sub 1.6 on betfair now. 63% chance to win. Funny sort of coin if you ask me.
0 -
Holler for the pink bus of destiny!Danny565 said:
Lest we forget, Labour polled higher under her tenure in 2010 than they are currently...Pong said:
Step forward, Harriet Harman.SimonStClare said:
As you say, tis rather late to do anything - but who would replace Ed? - Is it Ed who is toxic north of the border, or the Labour party?Dair said:At this rate, if Labour don't get rid of Ed, they are finished outside of Scotland as well.
I know it's never been done before. But surely, cutting their losses at this stage would be the best strategy.0 -
The tories may well win most seats, but the odds are atrocious.Tissue_Price said:
Well all those Tories "betting with their hearts" when they were 2.0 must be doing very nicely out of these rogue polls.MarqueeMark said:
Heavier on one side.... The other side is lightweight. Made of unobtanium.Tissue_Price said:Tories trading sub 1.6 on betfair now. 63% chance to win. Funny sort of coin if you ask me.
0 -
Really? As things stand (on a poll-of-polls basis) they are winning. Received wisdom is that they'll improve, but they don't even need to. An SNP slip back would be a risk. But odds in the region of 60:40 seem pretty fair.Pong said:
The tories may well win most seats, but the odds are atrocious.Tissue_Price said:
Well all those Tories "betting with their hearts" when they were 2.0 must be doing very nicely out of these rogue polls.MarqueeMark said:
Heavier on one side.... The other side is lightweight. Made of unobtanium.Tissue_Price said:Tories trading sub 1.6 on betfair now. 63% chance to win. Funny sort of coin if you ask me.
0 -
they have very successfully painted the Tories as evil baby eating nasty toffs for carrying out policies that they themselves imposed/proposed. The list is long, from benefit sanctions, work capability tests, ATOS, health care outsourcing, paring down legal aid, tuition fees, even Driver Operation Only trains have not missed out on the attacks, academy schools, elected mayors etc.Tissue_Price said:
Nope. Opposition, done properly, is a difficult business. Your party has to confront why it lost, and change. Wittering on about food banks and the alleged privatisation of the NHS for 4 years is no substitute.Dair said:
It won't make a difference in Scotland, Ed is not a factor.SimonStClare said:
As you say, tis rather late to do anything - but who would replace Ed? - Is it Ed who is toxic north of the border, or the Labour party?Dair said:At this rate, if Labour don't get rid of Ed, they are finished outside of Scotland as well.
I know it's never been done before. But surely, cutting their losses at this stage would be the best strategy.
But they need 270 seats to form a government with SNP support. Ed appears to be pulling them down below that. They don't need anyone spectacular, just someone who is Not Ed to keep them up around 33% and hit their 270 seats.
Flint or the postie would surely be enough to keep them on 270.0 -
But it's not been very successful, has it? It's made them feel good about themselves, which is a different thing altogether.notme said:
they have very successfully painted the Tories as evil baby eating nasty toffs for carrying out policies that they themselves imposed/proposed. The list is long, from benefit sanctions, work capability tests, ATOS, health care outsourcing, paring down legal aid, tuition fees, even Driver Operation Only trains have not missed out on their campaigning.Tissue_Price said:
Nope. Opposition, done properly, is a difficult business. Your party has to confront why it lost, and change. Wittering on about food banks and the alleged privatisation of the NHS for 4 years is no substitute.Dair said:
It won't make a difference in Scotland, Ed is not a factor.SimonStClare said:
As you say, tis rather late to do anything - but who would replace Ed? - Is it Ed who is toxic north of the border, or the Labour party?Dair said:At this rate, if Labour don't get rid of Ed, they are finished outside of Scotland as well.
I know it's never been done before. But surely, cutting their losses at this stage would be the best strategy.
But they need 270 seats to form a government with SNP support. Ed appears to be pulling them down below that. They don't need anyone spectacular, just someone who is Not Ed to keep them up around 33% and hit their 270 seats.
Flint or the postie would surely be enough to keep them on 270.0 -
Guesstimating by assuming a YouGov final sample of 1250, but Tories could be 2% ahead by ELBOWing across the three polls so far this week....0
-
Flint !!!?Dair said:
....SimonStClare said:
As you say, tis rather late to do anything - but who would replace Ed? - Is it Ed who is toxic north of the border, or the Labour party?Dair said:At this rate, if Labour don't get rid of Ed, they are finished outside of Scotland as well.
I know it's never been done before. But surely, cutting their losses at this stage would be the best strategy.
Flint or the postie would surely be enough to keep them on 270.
0 -
Do you fancy an evens bet that at 10pm the night before election day, the con most seats SP is under/over 1.6?Tissue_Price said:
Really? As things stand (on a poll-of-polls basis) they are winning. Received wisdom is that they'll improve, but they don't even need to. An SNP slip back would be a risk. But odds in the region of 60:40 seem pretty fair.Pong said:
The tories may well win most seats, but the odds are atrocious.Tissue_Price said:
Well all those Tories "betting with their hearts" when they were 2.0 must be doing very nicely out of these rogue polls.MarqueeMark said:
Heavier on one side.... The other side is lightweight. Made of unobtanium.Tissue_Price said:Tories trading sub 1.6 on betfair now. 63% chance to win. Funny sort of coin if you ask me.
I go higher than 1.6, you go 1.6 or lower?0 -
It hasnt, mid term poll leads are of course an illusion. It fires up the activists. Who seem to genuinely consider conservatives as evil. I was personally called evil by a labour council leader for advocating a policy that this government was carrying out, that was introduced under the last government. I was actually called 'evil'.Tissue_Price said:
But it's not been very successful, has it? It's made them feel good about themselves, which is a different thing altogether.notme said:
they have very successfully painted the Tories as evil baby eating nasty toffs for carrying out policies that they themselves imposed/proposed. The list is long, from benefit sanctions, work capability tests, ATOS, health care outsourcing, paring down legal aid, tuition fees, even Driver Operation Only trains have not missed out on their campaigning.Tissue_Price said:
Nope. Opposition, done properly, is a difficult business. Your party has to confront why it lost, and change. Wittering on about food banks and the alleged privatisation of the NHS for 4 years is no substitute.Dair said:
It won't make a difference in Scotland, Ed is not a factor.SimonStClare said:
As you say, tis rather late to do anything - but who would replace Ed? - Is it Ed who is toxic north of the border, or the Labour party?Dair said:At this rate, if Labour don't get rid of Ed, they are finished outside of Scotland as well.
I know it's never been done before. But surely, cutting their losses at this stage would be the best strategy.
But they need 270 seats to form a government with SNP support. Ed appears to be pulling them down below that. They don't need anyone spectacular, just someone who is Not Ed to keep them up around 33% and hit their 270 seats.
Flint or the postie would surely be enough to keep them on 270.
0 -
The Tories would have got rid of Miliband 3 years ago if he was their leader. Even the Lib Dems would have got rid of him a couple of years ago. Amazing to contrast with Aussie Labor who knifed 2 leaders in one parliament.MaxPB said:
Less than two months out from the election? Literally suicide. Anyway, anyone who wants to lead the party will want to do so with a clean slate not after winning a very bloody battle just weeks before an election. October was the time to do it, after Ed turned up the volume but Labour are too happy in their comfort zone. The Tories would have decapitated a leader that gave a speech like that but for Labour it hit all of their comfort zone notes so he survived.Dair said:At this rate, if Labour don't get rid of Ed, they are finished outside of Scotland as well.
I know it's never been done before. But surely, cutting their losses at this stage would be the best strategy.
Far, far too late now. An ineffectual failed coup like Purnell's on Brown would just make things worse. If the Labour backbenhers were going to do something they should demand Miliband gets some new advisors0 -
Every time an Airbus takes off from Toulouse for delivery its a 'French' export.Alanbrooke said:
Yes, it called the " Rotterdam effect ", it's why UK dependency on EU trade is a lot less than reported we export a lot to other countries via Rotterdam.Carnyx said:
There is the comparable case of the Harris Tweed industry, studied in a minor classic of a blog entry at indyref time. Because it happens to leave the UK through East Midland Airport, it is treated as an English export, whereas by definition it is in fact the product of a strictly limited part of Scotland.Dair said:
This is currently booked (mainly as there will be the dealership margin VAT) as non Scottish Revenue (where is Nissan's UK head office btw, it could well end up as London Revenue).chestnut said:
Bit like all the tax paid by a driver in Dunfermline on a new car made in Sunderland.Dair said:In case of an internal UK tax border, around 50% of the VAT paid would end up in Scotland's coffers. In the case of an Independent Scotland, in the most likely scenario with both nations being in the UK, it would be EXACTLY the same (until applicable VAT rates changed).
Even though as often as not the engines (±half the total value, are Rolls Royce) and the wings (±half the value of the airframe) are British.....0 -
Another high-profile MP complains that “given how many people have been affected by the cuts, I would have expected us to be miles ahead by now. And nothing has happened, and I’m starting to panic.”
In Labour's world, everyone has been "affected by the cuts". In fact, lots of middle-class families with mortgages [Blair voters, in other words] have quietly done pretty well since the crash. Not much by way of pay increases, but a comfortable enough standard of living, only with a bit of an social omerta attached.
http://www.standard.co.uk/comment/comment/isabel-hardman-labour-shouldnt-be-so-cocky-about-the-tv-debate-debacle-10095596.html0 -
All the action since 2010 seems to have been in the LD/UKIP/Green vote shares.MikeL said:
That's another very good poll for Con.Tissue_Price said:NumbrCrunchrPolitics @NCPoliticsUK
YouGov/ITV Wales/Cardiff University (Wales Westminster):
CON 25 (+2)
LAB 39 (+2)
LIB 5 (-1)
PC 10 (=)
UKIP 14 (-2)
GRN 6 (-2)
Change from 2010 GE:
Con -1
Lab +3
Equivalent to Con 36, Lab 33 if changes applied across GB - more evidence of Con vote holding up well.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_2015_United_Kingdom_general_election#Wales0 -
As measured by the back price on betfair? Sure, £50?Pong said:
Do you fancy an evens bet that at 10pm the night before election day, the con most seats SP is under/over 1.6?Tissue_Price said:
Really? As things stand (on a poll-of-polls basis) they are winning. Received wisdom is that they'll improve, but they don't even need to. An SNP slip back would be a risk. But odds in the region of 60:40 seem pretty fair.Pong said:
The tories may well win most seats, but the odds are atrocious.Tissue_Price said:
Well all those Tories "betting with their hearts" when they were 2.0 must be doing very nicely out of these rogue polls.MarqueeMark said:
Heavier on one side.... The other side is lightweight. Made of unobtanium.Tissue_Price said:Tories trading sub 1.6 on betfair now. 63% chance to win. Funny sort of coin if you ask me.
I go higher than 1.6, you go 1.6 or lower?0 -
This is one headline you won't be reading on PB.com tomorrow morning!Sean_F said:The Conservatives lead by 0.7% on average, in March's 12 polls.
0 -
R5 did this vox pox in Birmingham when the council made the political move of saying they would only open the new library for less hours per week. However, the interviewer was in the end pleading with people to say they were hideously affected by cuts and the answers were basically...huh, no nothing, oh wait Brian used to worked up at the council, but he now works elsewhere now.Tissue_Price said:Another high-profile MP complains that “given how many people have been affected by the cuts, I would have expected us to be miles ahead by now. And nothing has happened, and I’m starting to panic.”
In Labour's world, everyone has been "affected by the cuts". In fact, lots of middle-class families with mortgages [Blair voters, in other words] have quietly done pretty well since the crash. Not much by way of pay increases, but a comfortable enough standard of living, only with a bit of an social omerta attached.
http://www.standard.co.uk/comment/comment/isabel-hardman-labour-shouldnt-be-so-cocky-about-the-tv-debate-debacle-10095596.html
Now I am sure people have been, but for most people as long as the bins are collected etc, they won't notice things lots of things.
Remember when Lord Freud said that some people were doing very very well out of historically low interest rates and he was basically thrown under the bus, when what he said was 100% factually correct.0 -
I think what happened is that certain groups of people were immunised to the shock of 2007. The private sector was hit hard. But those in the public sector and those on benefits, life just carried on. The fact that the country lost 10% of its entire wealth (contrary to the claims otherwise, it was those with modest investments that lost out the most), yet those unaffected carried on.Tissue_Price said:Another high-profile MP complains that “given how many people have been affected by the cuts, I would have expected us to be miles ahead by now. And nothing has happened, and I’m starting to panic.”
In Labour's world, everyone has been "affected by the cuts". In fact, lots of middle-class families with mortgages [Blair voters, in other words] have quietly done pretty well since the crash. Not much by way of pay increases, but a comfortable enough standard of living, only with a bit of an social omerta attached.
http://www.standard.co.uk/comment/comment/isabel-hardman-labour-shouldnt-be-so-cocky-about-the-tv-debate-debacle-10095596.html
While business had to adjust to a new world, pensions, pay freezes, redundancy, reduced hours, negative equity. The public sector and benefits just carried on.
I think thats why fireman going on strike because they cant retire at 55 on a pension pot the equivalent of £750,000 garners very little sympathy.
A few cross overs happened in the mid 2000s. One was the public sector overtook the private sector in average pay, and the second one was that life on benefits (with children) became so luxurious that families on anywhere between minimum wage and average wage looked at what they had, and shook their heads in disgust.
0 -
Heh, vox pox is a superb typo. So true.FrancisUrquhart said:
R5 did this vox pox in Birmingham when the council made the political move of saying they would only open the new library for less hours per week. However, the interviewer was in the end pleading with people to say they were hideously affected by cuts and the answers were basically...huh, no nothing, oh wait Brian used to worked up at the council, but he now works elsewhere now.Tissue_Price said:Another high-profile MP complains that “given how many people have been affected by the cuts, I would have expected us to be miles ahead by now. And nothing has happened, and I’m starting to panic.”
In Labour's world, everyone has been "affected by the cuts". In fact, lots of middle-class families with mortgages [Blair voters, in other words] have quietly done pretty well since the crash. Not much by way of pay increases, but a comfortable enough standard of living, only with a bit of an social omerta attached.
http://www.standard.co.uk/comment/comment/isabel-hardman-labour-shouldnt-be-so-cocky-about-the-tv-debate-debacle-10095596.html
Now I am sure people have been, but for most people as long as the bins are collected etc, they won't notice things lots of things.0 -
Oh dear not the dismal Hardman. She's quickly becoming the Tories answer to YAB. I suppose at least its not one of her pathetic rah-rah 'sisters are doing it in Westminster' 'go get em girls' articles or one of her cheap mindless transparent unresearched UKIP smear jobsTissue_Price said:Another high-profile MP complains that “given how many people have been affected by the cuts, I would have expected us to be miles ahead by now. And nothing has happened, and I’m starting to panic.”
In Labour's world, everyone has been "affected by the cuts". In fact, lots of middle-class families with mortgages [Blair voters, in other words] have quietly done pretty well since the crash. Not much by way of pay increases, but a comfortable enough standard of living, only with a bit of an social omerta attached.
http://www.standard.co.uk/comment/comment/isabel-hardman-labour-shouldnt-be-so-cocky-about-the-tv-debate-debacle-10095596.html0 -
Week-ending 8th March -peter_from_putney said:
This is one headline you won't be reading on PB.com tomorrow morning!Sean_F said:The Conservatives lead by 0.7% on average, in March's 12 polls.
33.3% the highest weekly ELBOW score for the Tories since late August!
Lab lead of 0.2% lowest weekly lead in ELBOW since ELBOW started in early August!0 -
Her columns can be hit-and-miss but I was more interested in the quotes from Labour MPs in this case.Hengists_Gift said:
Oh dear not the dismal Hardman. She's quickly becoming the Tories answer to YAB. I suppose at least its not one of her pathetic rah-rah 'sisters are doing it in Westminster' 'go get em girls' articles or one of her cheap mindless transparent unresearched UKIP smear jobsTissue_Price said:Another high-profile MP complains that “given how many people have been affected by the cuts, I would have expected us to be miles ahead by now. And nothing has happened, and I’m starting to panic.”
In Labour's world, everyone has been "affected by the cuts". In fact, lots of middle-class families with mortgages [Blair voters, in other words] have quietly done pretty well since the crash. Not much by way of pay increases, but a comfortable enough standard of living, only with a bit of an social omerta attached.
http://www.standard.co.uk/comment/comment/isabel-hardman-labour-shouldnt-be-so-cocky-about-the-tv-debate-debacle-10095596.html0 -
Wow, blink and the odds go down!Tissue_Price said:
As measured by the back price on betfair? Sure, £50?Pong said:
Do you fancy an evens bet that at 10pm the night before election day, the con most seats SP is under/over 1.6?Tissue_Price said:
Really? As things stand (on a poll-of-polls basis) they are winning. Received wisdom is that they'll improve, but they don't even need to. An SNP slip back would be a risk. But odds in the region of 60:40 seem pretty fair.Pong said:
The tories may well win most seats, but the odds are atrocious.Tissue_Price said:
Well all those Tories "betting with their hearts" when they were 2.0 must be doing very nicely out of these rogue polls.MarqueeMark said:
Heavier on one side.... The other side is lightweight. Made of unobtanium.Tissue_Price said:Tories trading sub 1.6 on betfair now. 63% chance to win. Funny sort of coin if you ask me.
I go higher than 1.6, you go 1.6 or lower?
Last price matched is 1.56 - that's the bar for the bet.
If the last price matched on Con Most seats on betfair at 10pm on 6th May is 1.56 or under, I pay you.
If it's 1.57 or higher, You pay me.
£50 is fine.
Agreed?
Edit - adjudicated by ptp if necessary.0 -
No, you offered 1.60! I'll leave it at 1.56, thanks, since nothing's actually changed in the last 10 minutes. (Currently trying to lay 1.55 anyhow :-) )Pong said:
Wow, blink and the odds go down!Tissue_Price said:
As measured by the back price on betfair? Sure, £50?Pong said:
Do you fancy an evens bet that at 10pm the night before election day, the con most seats SP is under/over 1.6?Tissue_Price said:
Really? As things stand (on a poll-of-polls basis) they are winning. Received wisdom is that they'll improve, but they don't even need to. An SNP slip back would be a risk. But odds in the region of 60:40 seem pretty fair.Pong said:
The tories may well win most seats, but the odds are atrocious.Tissue_Price said:
Well all those Tories "betting with their hearts" when they were 2.0 must be doing very nicely out of these rogue polls.MarqueeMark said:
Heavier on one side.... The other side is lightweight. Made of unobtanium.Tissue_Price said:Tories trading sub 1.6 on betfair now. 63% chance to win. Funny sort of coin if you ask me.
I go higher than 1.6, you go 1.6 or lower?
Last price matched is 1.56 - that's the bar for the bet.
If the last price matched on Con Most seats on betfair at 10pm on 6th May is 1.56 or under, I pay you.
If it's 1.57 or higher, You pay me.
£50 is fine.
Agreed?
Edit - adjudicated by ptp if necessary.0 -
I laid 1.56Tissue_Price said:
No, you offered 1.60! I'll leave it at 1.56, thanks, since nothing's actually changed in the last 10 minutes. (Currently trying to lay 1.55 anyhow :-) )Pong said:
Wow, blink and the odds go down!Tissue_Price said:
As measured by the back price on betfair? Sure, £50?Pong said:
Do you fancy an evens bet that at 10pm the night before election day, the con most seats SP is under/over 1.6?Tissue_Price said:
Really? As things stand (on a poll-of-polls basis) they are winning. Received wisdom is that they'll improve, but they don't even need to. An SNP slip back would be a risk. But odds in the region of 60:40 seem pretty fair.Pong said:
The tories may well win most seats, but the odds are atrocious.Tissue_Price said:
Well all those Tories "betting with their hearts" when they were 2.0 must be doing very nicely out of these rogue polls.MarqueeMark said:
Heavier on one side.... The other side is lightweight. Made of unobtanium.Tissue_Price said:Tories trading sub 1.6 on betfair now. 63% chance to win. Funny sort of coin if you ask me.
I go higher than 1.6, you go 1.6 or lower?
Last price matched is 1.56 - that's the bar for the bet.
If the last price matched on Con Most seats on betfair at 10pm on 6th May is 1.56 or under, I pay you.
If it's 1.57 or higher, You pay me.
£50 is fine.
Agreed?
Edit - adjudicated by ptp if necessary.
Yeah, sorry to change the bar, but I'd be an idiot to confirm a bet when the odds have changed.
I'm happy to offer this bet if you change your mind though - I maintain that the tories are overpriced. They're probably very marginal favourites right now, that is all.0 -
Betfair Sportsbook once again inexplicably arbing with their own exchange (8/13 Con Most Seats).0
-
Well if the odds change back I might get back onto you, cheers :-)Pong said:
I laid 1.56Tissue_Price said:
No, you offered 1.60! I'll leave it at 1.56, thanks, since nothing's actually changed in the last 10 minutes. (Currently trying to lay 1.55 anyhow :-) )Pong said:
Wow, blink and the odds go down!Tissue_Price said:
As measured by the back price on betfair? Sure, £50?Pong said:
Do you fancy an evens bet that at 10pm the night before election day, the con most seats SP is under/over 1.6?Tissue_Price said:
Really? As things stand (on a poll-of-polls basis) they are winning. Received wisdom is that they'll improve, but they don't even need to. An SNP slip back would be a risk. But odds in the region of 60:40 seem pretty fair.Pong said:
The tories may well win most seats, but the odds are atrocious.Tissue_Price said:
Well all those Tories "betting with their hearts" when they were 2.0 must be doing very nicely out of these rogue polls.MarqueeMark said:
Heavier on one side.... The other side is lightweight. Made of unobtanium.Tissue_Price said:Tories trading sub 1.6 on betfair now. 63% chance to win. Funny sort of coin if you ask me.
I go higher than 1.6, you go 1.6 or lower?
Last price matched is 1.56 - that's the bar for the bet.
If the last price matched on Con Most seats on betfair at 10pm on 6th May is 1.56 or under, I pay you.
If it's 1.57 or higher, You pay me.
£50 is fine.
Agreed?
Edit - adjudicated by ptp if necessary.
Yeah, sorry to change the bar, but I'd be an idiot to confirm a bet when the odds have changed.
I'm happy to offer this bet if you change your mind though.
To be honest I'd be better off backing the Tories in a bunch of constituencies anyhow - that's where the disconnect is currently.0 -
'Hit and miss' is a very generous description for her generally badly researched superficial uninsightful decontextualised drivel. She'd be better employed doing a celebrity gossip column. I'd even question the quotes not for their accuracy but for their true context.Tissue_Price said:
Her columns can be hit-and-miss but I was more interested in the quotes from Labour MPs in this case.Hengists_Gift said:
Oh dear not the dismal Hardman. She's quickly becoming the Tories answer to YAB. I suppose at least its not one of her pathetic rah-rah 'sisters are doing it in Westminster' 'go get em girls' articles or one of her cheap mindless transparent unresearched UKIP smear jobsTissue_Price said:Another high-profile MP complains that “given how many people have been affected by the cuts, I would have expected us to be miles ahead by now. And nothing has happened, and I’m starting to panic.”
In Labour's world, everyone has been "affected by the cuts". In fact, lots of middle-class families with mortgages [Blair voters, in other words] have quietly done pretty well since the crash. Not much by way of pay increases, but a comfortable enough standard of living, only with a bit of an social omerta attached.
http://www.standard.co.uk/comment/comment/isabel-hardman-labour-shouldnt-be-so-cocky-about-the-tv-debate-debacle-10095596.html
For example why would a Labour MP be panicking? Is it a Scottish MP in which case that puts it on a whole different plane? if its not a Scottish MP then the polls are still indicating a swing from Con to Lab suggesting the rest are almost all pretty secure and whilst the situation is very disappointing its not close to justifying panic yet surely?
0 -
Betting Post:
95% Book alert
http://www.oddschecker.com/politics/british-politics/next-uk-general-election/total-lib-dem-seats-gained-from-other-parties
None @ 5-6
http://sportsbeta.ladbrokes.com/British/Next-General-Election/Politics-N-1z141maZ1z141m1Z1z141ng/
Lib Dems to gain any seat not won in 2010 @ 6-40 -
You are not being fair to the woman. She is just a typical journalist.Hengists_Gift said:
'Hit and miss' is a very generous description for her generally badly researched superficial uninsightful decontextualised drivel. She'd be better employed doing a celebrity gossip column. I'd even question the quotes not for their accuracy but for their true context.Tissue_Price said:
Her columns can be hit-and-miss but I was more interested in the quotes from Labour MPs in this case.Hengists_Gift said:
Oh dear not the dismal Hardman. She's quickly becoming the Tories answer to YAB. I suppose at least its not one of her pathetic rah-rah 'sisters are doing it in Westminster' 'go get em girls' articles or one of her cheap mindless transparent unresearched UKIP smear jobsTissue_Price said:Another high-profile MP complains that “given how many people have been affected by the cuts, I would have expected us to be miles ahead by now. And nothing has happened, and I’m starting to panic.”
In Labour's world, everyone has been "affected by the cuts". In fact, lots of middle-class families with mortgages [Blair voters, in other words] have quietly done pretty well since the crash. Not much by way of pay increases, but a comfortable enough standard of living, only with a bit of an social omerta attached.
http://www.standard.co.uk/comment/comment/isabel-hardman-labour-shouldnt-be-so-cocky-about-the-tv-debate-debacle-10095596.html
For example why would a Labour MP be panicking? Is it a Scottish MP in which case that puts it on a whole different plane? if its not a Scottish MP then the polls are still indicating a swing from Con to Lab suggesting the rest are almost all pretty secure and whilst the situation is very disappointing its not close to justifying panic yet surely?0 -
Given the 'qualities' of many of your posts you are the last person on here who should be giving lectures on fairness.Flightpath said:
You are not being fair to the woman. She is just a typical journalist.Hengists_Gift said:
'Hit and miss' is a very generous description for her generally badly researched superficial uninsightful decontextualised drivel. She'd be better employed doing a celebrity gossip column. I'd even question the quotes not for their accuracy but for their true context.Tissue_Price said:
Her columns can be hit-and-miss but I was more interested in the quotes from Labour MPs in this case.Hengists_Gift said:
Oh dear not the dismal Hardman. She's quickly becoming the Tories answer to YAB. I suppose at least its not one of her pathetic rah-rah 'sisters are doing it in Westminster' 'go get em girls' articles or one of her cheap mindless transparent unresearched UKIP smear jobsTissue_Price said:Another high-profile MP complains that “given how many people have been affected by the cuts, I would have expected us to be miles ahead by now. And nothing has happened, and I’m starting to panic.”
In Labour's world, everyone has been "affected by the cuts". In fact, lots of middle-class families with mortgages [Blair voters, in other words] have quietly done pretty well since the crash. Not much by way of pay increases, but a comfortable enough standard of living, only with a bit of an social omerta attached.
http://www.standard.co.uk/comment/comment/isabel-hardman-labour-shouldnt-be-so-cocky-about-the-tv-debate-debacle-10095596.html
For example why would a Labour MP be panicking? Is it a Scottish MP in which case that puts it on a whole different plane? if its not a Scottish MP then the polls are still indicating a swing from Con to Lab suggesting the rest are almost all pretty secure and whilst the situation is very disappointing its not close to justifying panic yet surely?
0
