politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The debate: The post mortem continues

dr_spyn said:

FluffyThoughts said:

dr_spyn said:

Interviews without biscuits or coffee.

Sky News Newsdesk ‏@SkyNewsBreak 2m2 minutes ago
Nine Britons will be deported tomorrow after being arrested in #Turkey for trying to cross into #Syria illegally

No doubt these "nine conservative-Asians" will get another chance to vote - again - for sven's "flockers"? Maybe a 'vote-swap-out' from Rochdale to Broxtowe...?

:paint-it-black:

If anything 'significant' is found at the Councillor's premises which lead to charges, would Labour struggle to hold Rochdale, Heywood and Middleton?

Indigo said:

rcs1000 said:

Indigo said:

EPG said:

As you can see here, Ukip and generally anti-immigration supporters is deeply split. Some anti-immigration people agree and are worried by Farage's line of rhetoric. Most, including many non-Kippers, believe there's nothing wrong about specifically stigmatising HIV as part of anti-immigration policies, and in fact that it is sensible and a good thing to say. I think attempting to unweave this kind of racism from a party that is only about anti-immigration is impossible, but to each his own and good luck to those Kippers who try.

You just cant help yourself can you, when did race suddenly come back into this debate ? Its like Pavlov's dog Farage: Racist, UKIP: Racist, Talking about immigration: Racist.

Controlling immigration isn't racist. Stopping people coming into the country because of their race (like the EU does) is racist.

The EU says that we must treat citizens of other EU states as we treat our own. If that is racist, then so was the open borders policy we ran between Ireland and the UK from the formation of the Republic. And, for that matter, is our policy of allowing working holiday visas for people from certain parts of the Commonwealth.

We have never treated people from all countries as equal. That will not change under UKIP or if we leave the EU.

Quite possibly.

I am just pointing out that accusing the kippers of having a racist immigration policy which is in effect colour blind because its points system doesn't consider race or country of origin, while being completely happy with a policy which selects who can get into the country purely on the basis of where they come from, irrespective of their cost or benefit to the nation, is a bit of bizarre mental gymnastics.

JosiasJessop said:

dr_spyn said:

FluffyThoughts said:

dr_spyn said:

Interviews without biscuits or coffee.

Sky News Newsdesk ‏@SkyNewsBreak 2m2 minutes ago
Nine Britons will be deported tomorrow after being arrested in #Turkey for trying to cross into #Syria illegally

No doubt these "nine conservative-Asians" will get another chance to vote - again - for sven's "flockers"? Maybe a 'vote-swap-out' from Rochdale to Broxtowe...?

:paint-it-black:

If anything 'significant' is found at the Councillor's premises which lead to charges, would Labour struggle to hold Rochdale, Heywood and Middleton?

The old adage "Don't blame the sin of the father on the son" (or somesuch) applies, although to a lesser degree, in the opposite direction.

Pulpstar said:

anotherDave said:

chestnut said:

anotherDave said:

ComRes tables are on line.

http://www.comres.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/ITV-News-Leaders-Debate-Snap-Poll_Table.pdf

Ed wins comfortably among 18-34 year olds and DE's. 4th in Scotland and Wales.

One for the psephological risk assessors;

Labour collapse in Wales would be entertaining.

Welsh subsample will be statistically insignificant though, but it does appear to me that Ed may well have won with the "wrong" groups.

SunnyJim said:

Betting Post:

1545 Lingfield Gaelic Silver 100-1 (VC 1/5 place, SJ 1/4 place)

Plato said:

Given much willy waving on here, this seemed apposite.

Gentlemen, if you've ever been concerned about the size of your penis, take comfort in the fact that no matter how small it seems, it is one of the largest in the primate world.

An evolutionary biologist has compared the sizes of genitals of humans to gorillas and apes to look at why there is such a discrepancy between the species. And he concludes the human penis may have grown so long to make it more conspicuous to potential partners, or even as a way of cooling the body down.

The relative size of the male reproductive organs across these species was discussed by evolutionary biologist Darren Curnoe in his latest 'How Did We Get Here?' video series for the University of New South Wales, Australia.

Gorillas have small penises and small testicles, while chimps have medium-sized penises and large testicles. By comparison, human males have the longest penis and medium-sized testicles.

'Amazingly the size of the reproductive organs, especially the testicles, are a reflection of how the apes are organised socially,' explained Professor Curnoe.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3022925/Why-humans-large-penises-Difference-size-great-apes-way-keeping-

MikeK said:

marktheowl said:

MyBurningEars said:

Farage did little to win my vote last night, but the calls of do-gooders and right-thinkers that his voice should not be heard, that UKIP's opinions are not acceptable for debate, that the issues they raise (many of which resontate with the British public) do not need to be addressed, is something I find troubling.

I have the suspicion he was deliberately attempting to invoke such a backlash against him - I agree in principle with JackW that a subtler approach might have been advantageous, but he may have felt he could benefit from provoking a reaction that showed the left-wingers at their out-of-touch worst, and the Tories not prepared to engage with "the facts".

Can I be a lefty to defend UKIP, with a few caveats and explain why the HIV thing was dreadful?

You and others deliberately miss the point. Farage was only using HIV sufferers as an example that foreigners who have not paid a penny into the upkeep of the NHS, can come to this country and get treatment free (cost £24k) at British taxpayers expense. He could probably used cancer patients or other diseases, but the outcry would probably be the same, because Farage uttered them.

SMukesh said:

In the outside world,reports are that the 'mo' is now with Miliband and Sturgeon.

marktheowl said:

MikeK said:

marktheowl said:

MyBurningEars said:

Farage did little to win my vote last night, but the calls of do-gooders and right-thinkers that his voice should not be heard, that UKIP's opinions are not acceptable for debate, that the issues they raise (many of which resontate with the British public) do not need to be addressed, is something I find troubling.

I have the suspicion he was deliberately attempting to invoke such a backlash against him - I agree in principle with JackW that a subtler approach might have been advantageous, but he may have felt he could benefit from provoking a reaction that showed the left-wingers at their out-of-touch worst, and the Tories not prepared to engage with "the facts".

Can I be a lefty to defend UKIP, with a few caveats and explain why the HIV thing was dreadful?

You and others deliberately miss the point. Farage was only using HIV sufferers as an example that foreigners who have not paid a penny into the upkeep of the NHS, can come to this country and get treatment free (cost £24k) at British taxpayers expense. He could probably used cancer patients or other diseases, but the outcry would probably be the same, because Farage uttered them.

I think you miss my point, which is not about the policy, which even if fully enacted would save miniscule amounts of money if at all

anotherDave said:

marktheowl said:

MikeK said:

marktheowl said:

MyBurningEars said:

Farage did little to win my vote last night, but the calls of do-gooders and right-thinkers that his voice should not be heard, that UKIP's opinions are not acceptable for debate, that the issues they raise (many of which resontate with the British public) do not need to be addressed, is something I find troubling.

I have the suspicion he was deliberately attempting to invoke such a backlash against him - I agree in principle with JackW that a subtler approach might have been advantageous, but he may have felt he could benefit from provoking a reaction that showed the left-wingers at their out-of-touch worst, and the Tories not prepared to engage with "the facts".

Can I be a lefty to defend UKIP, with a few caveats and explain why the HIV thing was dreadful?

You and others deliberately miss the point. Farage was only using HIV sufferers as an example that foreigners who have not paid a penny into the upkeep of the NHS, can come to this country and get treatment free (cost £24k) at British taxpayers expense. He could probably used cancer patients or other diseases, but the outcry would probably be the same, because Farage uttered them.

I think you miss my point, which is not about the policy, which even if fully enacted would save miniscule amounts of money if at all

As I recall Mr Farage said 'health tourism' costs the NHS £2 billion a year.

SMukesh said:

In the outside world,reports are that the 'mo' is now with Miliband and Sturgeon.

marktheowl said:

MyBurningEars said:

Farage did little to win my vote last night, but the calls of do-gooders and right-thinkers that his voice should not be heard, that UKIP's opinions are not acceptable for debate, that the issues they raise (many of which resontate with the British public) do not need to be addressed, is something I find troubling.

I have the suspicion he was deliberately attempting to invoke such a backlash against him - I agree in principle with JackW that a subtler approach might have been advantageous, but he may have felt he could benefit from provoking a reaction that showed the left-wingers at their out-of-touch worst, and the Tories not prepared to engage with "the facts".

Can I be a lefty to defend UKIP, with a few caveats and explain why the HIV thing was dreadful?

I profoundly disagree with them but at their best UKIP are a party with an interesting philosophy. One might think they're completely and utterly wrong but there's something there. In fact it's arguably a good thing that those who are a bit racist are voting for a party that generally isn't and articulates a section of the population's views.

The HIV thing last night was awful because it pandered to people's worst prejudices over what is, at its most heinous a tiny, tiny issue. It also stigmatises those with HIV who are British. We're also getting to the stage where people can live full lives with HIV, so it's doubly idiotic. Why not any other long term disease, before we get to the cost effectiveness of such a procedure?

At their best, UKIP have legitimate arguments about the benefits of being in the EU and immigration, which even if you disagree with them have to be answered. That nonsense isn't one of them.

Ishmael_X said:

SMukesh said:

In the outside world,reports are that the 'mo' is now with Miliband and Sturgeon.

Perhaps you, rose and pete could attend some kind of punctuation seminar to sort out the space-after-commas issue? I am pretty certain you could get a three-for-the-price-of-one deal.

peter_from_putney said:

SunnyJim said:

Betting Post:

1545 Lingfield Gaelic Silver 100-1 (VC 1/5 place, SJ 1/4 place)

Instant PB.com stardom awaits ahould you be proved right, although I for one am not holding my breath!

Scott_P said:

Nigel Farage’s suggestion that foreigners with HIV should not be treated on the NHS was a carefully planned move to fire up Ukip’s core vote, under a strategy insiders have dubbed “shock and awful”.

Mr Farage discussed whether to deploy statistics showing that sixty per cent of newly-diagnosed HIV patients are foreigners at length with his aides before Thursday night’s television debate, and decided to go ahead after being reassured it would “motivate” the party’s base, the Telegraph understands.

Scott_P said:

Nigel Farage’s suggestion that foreigners with HIV should not be treated on the NHS was a carefully planned move to fire up Ukip’s core vote, under a strategy insiders have dubbed “shock and awful”.

Mr Farage discussed whether to deploy statistics showing that sixty per cent of newly-diagnosed HIV patients are foreigners at length with his aides before Thursday night’s television debate, and decided to go ahead after being reassured it would “motivate” the party’s base, the Telegraph understands.

marktheowl said:

Plato said:

Really? That's quite a reach based on your political leanings.

Oak trees mostly stand for history - like redwoods. If Labour were a tree, it'd be a Leylandii.

FrankBooth said:

Who else knew this?

We all know that David Cameron decided to replace the Conservative Torch with an Oak Tree. It was seen as a clever piece of rebranding by a leader who thought a concern with green issues were a way to make the party seem more compassionate and focussed on the challenges of the 21st century. So with fascination I learn that Edmund Burke, considered the father of modern conservatism, used the oak tree as a metaphor for the aristocracy. I wonder if Cameron knew that? Those trusty, unmoving oaks whose eternal prescence makes us feel more secure about our way of life.

Whether he knew it or not I think it does sum up his rebranding of the Tories.

I'm guessing the Lib Dems are elms.

Flightpath said:

I've just seen another richards reply OPT about about UK manufacturing.
The facts are clear in the LSE report, published by the government, clearly states that UK output of manufacturing goods is higher than its ever been absolute terms. As a proportion of GDP it has declined as other activity has grown quicker. Financial services and the service sector.
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/277158/ep2-government-policy-since-1945.pdf
http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/news/article-2803400/UK-manufacturing-output-increased-1978-ONS-figures-show.html
http://www.cer.org.uk/in-the-press/its-fabrication-britain-doesnt-make-things-any-more
''Until the global collapse in output triggered by the financial crisis in late 2008, manufacturing output in the UK was higher than it had ever been. In 2007 it was two and a half times higher in real terms than it was in 1950. And despite the surge in imports from China, production was 7.1 per cent higher in 2007 than it was in 1995.''

Maybe it should be higher - but as a mature economy its inevitable that the wages of the industrial sector and the successful financial sector will be spent on services and not just other relatively low value consumer goods more readily made abroad.
But its not right as Financier says that we do not make anything any more. We do.
Indeed it is not only not right, it is not even wrong,
Plus we have major investments abroad which when the world does well earns us money. Its a good sign of the activity of the UK economy relative to the rest of the world when our own overseas investment income declines and the earnings of other people's investments here rise.
Who owns Lockheed Martin - and a significant swathe of the US aerospace/defence industry? What is the likely effect of repatriating UK profits of one of its 6th largest suppliers if the US cuts defence spending?

nigel4england said:

felix said:

volcanopete said:

Gold Standard ICM calls it correctly as a narrow but crucial win by Ed over Dave,who seemed more concerned not to upset Farage and the future Ukip/Tory coalition.Dave hid up for most of the time like the chicken he is.He must now accept a head-to-head with Ed to retain any credibility.

I see the Labour trolls are out in force today. Risible.

Good laugh though as their desperation shines through.

TCPoliticalBetting said:

FrankBooth said:

TCPoliticalBetting said:

marktheowl said:

Plato said:

Really? That's quite a reach based on your political leanings.

Oak trees mostly stand for history - like redwoods. If Labour were a tree, it'd be a Leylandii.

FrankBooth said:

Who else knew this?

We all know that David Cameron decided to replace the Conservative Torch with an Oak Tree. It was seen as a clever piece of rebranding by a leader who thought a concern with green issues were a way to make the party seem more compassionate and focussed on the challenges of the 21st century. So with fascination I learn that Edmund Burke, considered the father of modern conservatism, used the oak tree as a metaphor for the aristocracy. I wonder if Cameron knew that? Those trusty, unmoving oaks whose eternal prescence makes us feel more secure about our way of life.

Whether he knew it or not I think it does sum up his rebranding of the Tories.

I'm guessing the Lib Dems are elms.

knotweed

I think a fair few Lib Dems trying to hang on to their seats would take comfort from that.

that is why I said it. It is something difficult to remove that pollutes the ground.

marktheowl said:

anotherDave said:

marktheowl said:

MikeK said:

marktheowl said:

MyBurningEars said:

Farage did little to win my vote last night, but the calls of do-gooders and right-thinkers that his voice should not be heard, that UKIP's opinions are not acceptable for debate, that the issues they raise (many of which resontate with the British public) do not need to be addressed, is something I find troubling.

I have the suspicion he was deliberately attempting to invoke such a backlash against him - I agree in principle with JackW that a subtler approach might have been advantageous, but he may have felt he could benefit from provoking a reaction that showed the left-wingers at their out-of-touch worst, and the Tories not prepared to engage with "the facts".

Can I be a lefty to defend UKIP, with a few caveats and explain why the HIV thing was dreadful?

You and others deliberately miss the point. Farage was only using HIV sufferers as an example that foreigners who have not paid a penny into the upkeep of the NHS, can come to this country and get treatment free (cost £24k) at British taxpayers expense. He could probably used cancer patients or other diseases, but the outcry would probably be the same, because Farage uttered them.

I think you miss my point, which is not about the policy, which even if fully enacted would save miniscule amounts of money if at all

As I recall Mr Farage said 'health tourism' costs the NHS £2 billion a year.

Source? Is that all conditions - including those that aren't log-term? Does it count those who pay taxes? How much can be claimed back? How do you define 'health tourism' in other words?

anotherDave said:

FluffyThoughts said:

AndreaParma_82 said:

Viewing figures from last night

ITV & ITVHD 6.71m (30.0%)
ITV+1 273,000 (1.4%)

On BBC

MasterChef 3.93m (17.6%)
The Truth About Fat 2.96m (13.3%)
Question Time 2.67m (22.7%)

Dr Andrea:

Master Chef was crap: Some Asian bloke who cooks soggie curry came second! The Truth about Fat was good though!

So what is the truth about fat then?

FluffyThoughts said:

anotherDave said:

FluffyThoughts said:

AndreaParma_82 said:

Viewing figures from last night

ITV & ITVHD 6.71m (30.0%)
ITV+1 273,000 (1.4%)

On BBC

MasterChef 3.93m (17.6%)
The Truth About Fat 2.96m (13.3%)
Question Time 2.67m (22.7%)

Dr Andrea:

Master Chef was crap: Some Asian bloke who cooks soggie curry came second! The Truth about Fat was good though!

So what is the truth about fat then?

Needed for a brain to function. Apparently....

isam said:

2/96=4%?

MaxPB said:

I find it amazing that other political leaders have been so quick to shout down Farage's health tourism argument but the BBC IPSOS worm showed a highly positive response to his central argument. Making the NHS exclusive to British nationals/residents is a no-brainer and while I think the HIV comment may have crossed a line on specifics, Farage got it right and he again comes across as the only politician who is willing to call a spade a spade.

If the opposition debate includes a segment on policing/security he is absolutely going to wipe the floor with Ed on CSE in Rotherham and Rochdale.

MP_SE said:

MaxPB said:

I find it amazing that other political leaders have been so quick to shout down Farage's health tourism argument but the BBC IPSOS worm showed a highly positive response to his central argument. Making the NHS exclusive to British nationals/residents is a no-brainer and while I think the HIV comment may have crossed a line on specifics, Farage got it right and he again comes across as the only politician who is willing to call a spade a spade.

If the opposition debate includes a segment on policing/security he is absolutely going to wipe the floor with Ed on CSE in Rotherham and Rochdale.

If he mentions CSE, which he should, you can put money on the liberal left going absolutely ballistic accusing him of politicising the issue. Once again the WWC will lap it up whilst the guardianistas will be choking on their lentil soup.

MaxPB said:

MP_SE said:

MaxPB said:

I find it amazing that other political leaders have been so quick to shout down Farage's health tourism argument but the BBC IPSOS worm showed a highly positive response to his central argument. Making the NHS exclusive to British nationals/residents is a no-brainer and while I think the HIV comment may have crossed a line on specifics, Farage got it right and he again comes across as the only politician who is willing to call a spade a spade.

If the opposition debate includes a segment on policing/security he is absolutely going to wipe the floor with Ed on CSE in Rotherham and Rochdale.

If he mentions CSE, which he should, you can put money on the liberal left going absolutely ballistic accusing him of politicising the issue. Once again the WWC will lap it up whilst the guardianistas will be choking on their lentil soup.

Yup, it will be exactly the same as his points on health tourism. The metropolitan elite vs UKIP. He made that point over and over again last night.

Plato said:

OT Culinary Advice. I haven't eaten fillet beef in years and just bought two - what should I have with it?

I've a fridge packed to the gunnels with almost every normal veg you can think of and a freezer full of everything else. And then there's an enormous range of herbs and spices.

HurstLlama said:

Plato said:

OT Culinary Advice. I haven't eaten fillet beef in years and just bought two - what should I have with it?

I've a fridge packed to the gunnels with almost every normal veg you can think of and a freezer full of everything else. And then there's an enormous range of herbs and spices.

Cut fillet into small cubes, fry in butter and garlic long enough to seal the outside but leave the inside pink, allow to cool, give to cat, sit back with a large drink and bask in the sound of contented purrs.

HurstLlama said:

Plato said:

OT Culinary Advice. I haven't eaten fillet beef in years and just bought two - what should I have with it?

I've a fridge packed to the gunnels with almost every normal veg you can think of and a freezer full of everything else. And then there's an enormous range of herbs and spices.

Cut fillet into small cubes, fry in butter and garlic long enough to seal the outside but leave the inside pink, allow to cool, give to cat, sit back with a large drink and bask in the sound of contented purrs.