politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Lord Ashcroft finds Clegg in trouble in Sheffield Hallam bu

foxinsoxuk said:

Cyclefree said:

HortenceWithering said:

TOPPING said:

Cyclefree said:

HortenceWithering said:

TGOHF said:

Roger said:

TGOHF

"Call me old fashioned but like Ed, the fact that he is quite happy to spawn offspring but not up to getting married which would provide security and certainty for the family says a lot about the chap"

Not like a Tory to be judgemental about people's lifestyles. I bet you don't like poofter's either?

A bit of a leap Roger - on the contrary Cameron legalising same sex marriage has been a long overdue move - why didn't it happen under Labour ?

It happened thanks to Labour. A majority of Conservative MPs voted against.

So why didn't they bring it in when they were in government? When there were even more Labour MPs?

Exactly.

A bit like EdM at PMQs with a straight face criticising Cam on hedgies and SDRT.

Absolutely shameless.

The last Labour government abolished Section 28, removed the ban on gays serving in the armed forces, made it legal for gay couples to adopt children, introduced civil partnerships, introduced equality in next of kin and pension rights, equalised the age of gay consent and so on. Each measure was vociferously opposed by the vast majority of the parliamentary Conservative Party one of whose favourite argument was ""Why is the government spending all this time on minority issues". Then there was the House of Lords that opposed each and every bill of this nature that came before it - no surprises for guessing which party's peers led that - needlessly consuming long amounts of parliamentary and legislative time. Only on PB could we then be lectured by Conservatives about shortcomings in Labour's legislative record on gay rights.

It is precisely because of Labour's record that some of us (and I am not a Conservative btw) have asked why Labour failed - when they had the time and a huge majority - to do what a Conservative Prime Minister insisted on, in the teeth of opposition from his own party.

Either they did not think it important enough or they did not have the courage. It does not reflect well on them. It does reflect well on Cameron, as even Ed Milliband has accepted.

I think that we have to accept that it takes time for attitudes to change. Gay marriage is now part of life, and increasingly so around the developed world.

You should not pick fruit until they are ready.

antifrank said:

What makes for an entertaining count? A big name biting their nails (preferably humbled), a big swing, lots of different parties interested, some proper joke candidates and (ideally) a minor scuffle. The best chances of all of those things looks to be Thanet South.

rcs1000 said:

MaxPB said:

I don't disagree with any of that. I still think Greece should have left ages ago, renegotiate with the IMF for longer terms and lower yields and told the EU/ECB to do one and not expect any repayment since most of those loans were just indirect bank bailouts.

An orderly Grexit, with the country governed by a party with sensible economic plans, would clearly have been the best option for Greece.

Unfortunately, they have managed to pi55 off the IMF (who described them as the worst country they've had to deal with in the 70 years of the institution), and to have a government committed to Chavez-ian policies.

The second best option for Greece (after sensible Grexit) was to negotiate hard, and take the - incredibly generous - offer that was on the table: i.e. continued reforms and privatisations in return for lowered interest payment, increased maturities, an interest holiday, and bonds where repayment was linked to GDP growth. This was an - effective - 35-40% write off in the value of Greece's debt.

The worst option is to fall out of the Euro having pissed everyone off and attempt to follow Communist economic policies.

Dair said:

antifrank said:

Carnyx said:

antifrank said:

Here's a link to a site detailing some of Labour's ground activity:

https://lab3seats.wordpress.com/

The Scottish seats chosen for today and tomorrow are of interest.

Mm, interesting. Margaret Curran doesn't get any help, after all, despite the arguments of late. Does it imply a prioritization?

I wouldn't like to make negative inferences. We can, however, make positive inferences that Labour thinks that these seats are worth fighting for. To me that suggests a lack of focus, because a couple of these already look decisively lost to me.

It's full headless chicken mode.

Of those seven seats the only ones where they have even the remotest chance of holding on are Airdrie and Shotts and Edinburgh South. The other 5 are a completely wasted trip, you would think they would have been better going to East Ren or Paisley South.

antifrank said:

What makes for an entertaining count? A big name biting their nails (preferably humbled), a big swing, lots of different parties interested, some proper joke candidates and (ideally) a minor scuffle. The best chance of all of those things looks to be Thanet South.

Sean_F said:

antifrank said:

What makes for an entertaining count? A big name biting their nails (preferably humbled), a big swing, lots of different parties interested, some proper joke candidates and (ideally) a minor scuffle. The best chance of all of those things looks to be Thanet South.

Putney, 1997.

The Mellorphant Man had to appear on the platform, standing next to a candidate dressed as a toe. Then, after he'd lost, he delivered his rant at Sir James Goldsmith, as everyone chanted "Out, Out, Out" and "Toesucker."

CarlottaVance said:

@FaisalIslam: Letter writing gets competitive...Labour releasing their own 100 signatory letter about economic policy soonish, not all businessmen

BenM said:

antifrank said:

Smarmeron said:

Guardian live blog :-

"Wouter den Haan, professor of economics at the LSE and a co-director of the Centre for Macroeconomics, told BBC News this afternoon that it was “rare” for macroeconomics to agree as much as they did on the proposition that the coalition’s austerity policies had been bad for growth and jobs. (See 9.18am and 10.03am.)

We asked our panel members whether they agree that the austerity plans of the coalition government had a positive effect on the economy in the UK. And the result is that most people disagreed with that statement. If you leave out the people who neither agreed or disagreed, 81% disagreed or strongly disagreed. It is rare that macroeconomists are that unanimous about something."

Chris Giles ‏@ChrisGiles_ · 10m10 minutes ago
Why the survey asking economists about austerity was... well... stupid. Spot on by @MrRBourne http://www.iea.org.uk/blog/austerity-and-silly-surveys …

Rightwing "thinktank" doesn't like people tearing holes in rightwing assumptions about the economy.

Shock.

CarlottaVance said:

Labour would “of course” work closely with the SNP after the general election, Jim Murphy has admitted for the first time before insisting this would only happen if they were both fighting a Tory Government.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/general-election-2015/11509670/Jim-Murphy-Of-course-Labour-will-work-with-the-SNP.html

What are the chances that this appears as:

Labour would “of course” work closely with the SNP after the general election, Jim Murphy has admitted

JosiasJessop said:

HurstLlama said:

Jonathan said:

Danny565 said:

Casino_Royale said:

Cyclefree said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

SouthamObserver said:

What tax rises are Labour going to impose on the middle classes?

We don't know, but clearly very substantial ones given what they've said about spending. At a guess I would say:

- Restrictions on ISAs and perhaps an outright raid
- Pension raid plus restriction or abolition of higher-rate tax relief
- Lower threshold for higher-rate tax
- Big increases in national insurance, disguised by labelling them as 'employers' contributions
- Big increases in council tax, perhaps new bands (although the mechanics of this are difficult)
- Increased stamp duty
- Extended scope of CGT

Admittedly all that is nowhere near enough, so it's anyone's guess where the rest is coming from. Perhaps some Labour supporters, more in tune than I am with Labour thinking, could enlighten us?

Others are:-

- Bankers' bonus tax
- Mansion tax
- Lowering the threshold for IHT and abolishing or limiting reliefs.
- Possibly higher VAT on "luxury" items.

- Corporation tax
- Fiscal drag

They'd also probably target free pensioner benefits for the middle classes (which I think is fair game to be honest, the Tories only keep them because they need the votes)

I'd also expect big cuts in defence, and cancellations in transport. For the rest, they've made it pretty clear they're happen to hold borrowing at £30-£40bn pa ad infinitum, rather than balance the books.

I think Labour have said they would spend more on Defence than the Tories.

Considering defence is already down to the bone, and Labour are committed to keeping Trident (or so they say), it's hard to see that there's much scope for more cuts anyway.

Would be hard to have a worse record on Defence than the Tories.

The Conservative Party's record on defence is indeed dire and Cameron's so called Strategic Defence Review of 2010 was particularly ill-thought out. However, Labour has absolutely nothing to boast about in this area and a great deal to be ashamed of.

Without using hindsight, what were the major problems in your mind with the 2010 SDR?

SouthamObserver said:

Scott_P said:

@janemerrick23: "man up" klaxon MT @peterdominiczak Danny Alexander claims Ed Balls refusing a three-way debate with him and Osborne."He should man up."

Why debate with someone who is not going to be an MP in a few weeks time?

Pong said:

http://sports.coral.co.uk/political-specials/uk/2015-tv-debates/all-men-to-wear-party-coloured-ties-2655209.html

All Men To Wear Party Coloured Ties?

No 6/5

Unless I'm missing something, that's a fantastic bet.

To be very generous with the odds;

EdM to wear a red tie? 1/10
Dave blue tie? 1/10
Nick yellow tie? 1/2
Farage purple tie? Evens

The acca = 2.63/1

Which you can bet against @ 6/5

MaxPB said:

Bob__Sykes said:

Fascinating polling data from Ashcroft.

But devastating for those of us who still harbour feint distant hopes of the Tories retaining power.

These polls provide yet more evidence, as if we needed any more, that it just ain't gonna happen.

Remove UKIP from the picture though, and the Tories would probably get a thin majority given with what's happening in Scotland to Labour.

"Fruitcakes and loonies" could well be Cameron's epitaph. It sunk his hopes of a second term.

Are we looking at the same set of polls? UKIP are sliding and the Cons are up. If the same is replicated in Con/Lab and Lab/Con marginals then Dave is in with a chance of at least being the largest party.

CarlottaVance said:

Dair said:

a much better result than previous surveys."

But there haven't been "previous surveys' other than GE2010 for these seats, have there?

One of our Labour friends was attempting to spin this as 'progress' last night - but as far as I can see its the difference between 'disaster' and 'catastrophe' .......

MaxPB said:

rcs1000 said:

MaxPB said:

I don't disagree with any of that. I still think Greece should have left ages ago, renegotiate with the IMF for longer terms and lower yields and told the EU/ECB to do one and not expect any repayment since most of those loans were just indirect bank bailouts.

An orderly Grexit, with the country governed by a party with sensible economic plans, would clearly have been the best option for Greece.

Unfortunately, they have managed to pi55 off the IMF (who described them as the worst country they've had to deal with in the 70 years of the institution), and to have a government committed to Chavez-ian policies.

The second best option for Greece (after sensible Grexit) was to negotiate hard, and take the - incredibly generous - offer that was on the table: i.e. continued reforms and privatisations in return for lowered interest payment, increased maturities, an interest holiday, and bonds where repayment was linked to GDP growth. This was an - effective - 35-40% write off in the value of Greece's debt.

The worst option is to fall out of the Euro having pissed everyone off and attempt to follow Communist economic policies.

Indeed. Greece now has the worst of everything. They should have kept the IMF on side.

Still, even this motley crew of idiots could have made it work with default and a weak currency with the IMF on side. The US would have come to the rescue as well to ensure Greece didn't fall into the Russian circle and offer Putin a warm water port.

CarlottaVance said:

@FaisalIslam: Letter writing gets competitive...Labour releasing their own 100 signatory letter about economic policy soonish, not all businessmen

foxinsoxuk said:

MarkHopkins said:

Plato said:

I got Kipper too. Unsurprisingly. I'm a political mutt here.

HurstLlama said:

O/T The Telegraph site has a little quiz this morning designed to say which party most matches your views. A little amusement as it asks about how important you think a proposal is as well as whether you agree with it or do not care. Apparently I match most closely with UKIP, which is hardly a surprise.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/general-election-2015/11471048/who-should-I-vote-for.html

Perhaps all responses just give you Kipper. That's one way to influence how people vote.

I got 63% Labour and 63% Conservative 54% LibDem.

Put me down for a floating voter!