politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » New Ashcroft Scottish seat polling finds SNP gains from LAB

Options
13

Comments

  • Pulpstar
    Pulpstar Posts: 79,813
    Tissue_Price said:

    Shadsy has gone 5/1 Labour in Midlothian!

    http://www.oddschecker.com/politics/british-politics/midlothian/winning-party

    Oh my Lord.

    Taken more of the 4-6 with SkyBet too.
  • TheWatcher
    TheWatcher Posts: 5,262
    edited April 2015
    DecrepitJohnL said:

    Scott_P said:

    @SamCoatesTimes: Tonight at midnight, one of the main political parties will announce a ministerial appointment in the next government (if they win). Gosh.

    UKIP.

    UKIP because of the timing. Midnight makes no sense for a news release because everyone is asleep, and it is too late for the first editions.

    It is too late for the first editions. That, I think, is the key. Midnight is when newspapers publish their own scoops -- because if they ran it in their first edition, all the other papers can nick it for their own later editions. Which party has just taken a million quid from a newspaper proprietor? UKIP. QED.
    UKIP, the political wing of The Express?
  • welshowl
    welshowl Posts: 4,464
    Speedy said:

    Carnyx said:

    Tykejohnno said:

    Slackbladder said:

    Scott_P said:

    @SamCoatesTimes: Tonight at midnight, one of the main political parties will announce a ministerial appointment in the next government (if they win). Gosh.

    eh? what? why would anyone do that, unless it's something 'special'?
    If it is labour,Blair anyone ;-)

    Or Mr Brown as SoS for Scotland? Doesn't make sense given his retirement - but it may be something of the ilk: a de-Murphifying move to try and regain the initiative in Scotland.

    It's probably Labour and the only reason I can think of why they think they need to make that announcement is scotland.

    So Brown in the cabinet is probably a reasonable guess.
    Not exactly a starter for ten in Middle England that one. What a gift to the Tories/Lib/UKIP to have the return of Brown back from the political dead. This is the bloke that won 28% in England. Can't see it.
  • Speedy
    Speedy Posts: 12,100
    Carnyx said:

    Speedy said:

    Carnyx said:

    Tykejohnno said:

    Slackbladder said:

    Scott_P said:

    @SamCoatesTimes: Tonight at midnight, one of the main political parties will announce a ministerial appointment in the next government (if they win). Gosh.

    eh? what? why would anyone do that, unless it's something 'special'?
    If it is labour,Blair anyone ;-)

    Or Mr Brown as SoS for Scotland? Doesn't make sense given his retirement - but it may be something of the ilk: a de-Murphifying move to try and regain the initiative in Scotland.

    It's probably Labour and the only reason I can think of why they think they need to make that announcement is scotland.

    So Brown in the cabinet is probably a reasonable guess.
    Hmm. This might, then, turn out to be prescient, from a few days ago:

    http://www.thenational.scot/cartoon/the-strip-april-13.3
    The SNP doesn't have the best sketch artists.
  • Tykejohnno
    Tykejohnno Posts: 7,362
    Ex-fans' spokesman: Former Bantams chairman 'was out to make money'

    http://www.itv.com/news/calendar/update/2015-04-17/ex-fans-spokesman-former-bantams-chairman-was-out-to-make-money/

    It takes another turn.
  • Philip_Thompson
    Philip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    SeanT said:

    Philip_Thompson said:

    SeanT said:

    Alistair said:

    Any reports of crazy odds still available, evens on an ov

    Millsy said:

    A proper political earthquake, not this Ukip rumble in an ant's belly

    The SNP earthquake is helping to suppress UKIP. UKIP thrive on media coverage, the frankly astonishing rise of the SNP is focusing the lime light to the north and sucking the oxygen of publicity from Farage's lungs.
    Meh. UKIP are still very likely to get over 10% of the vote (i.e. twice that of the Nats, and possibly more than the LDS) thus coming THIRD in vote share,

    That is an earthquake of its own. UKIP were trivially insignificant in 2010. Not any more. And they will have a few MPs, too.

    In the face of a pathetic Miliband-Sturgeon non-Coalition, milking the English taxpayer, the vehemently English UKIP could prosper, mightily.

    They have every reason to be optimistic in the medium term even as they face squalls right now. Remember they are following the electoral path the Nats have already established. From joke to irritant to player to government.
    The UKIP bubble will pop just as surely as the BNP bubble before it.

    A Miliband-Sturgeon non-coalition will see the (non-extremist) right unite behind the Conservatives under a new leader, not the party with 4 seats if they're lucky.
    That really depends who you choose as a leader. I can't see any Tory leader uniting the europhile and eurosceptic, posh and chav, libertarian and conservative ends of the right wing spectrum.

    I reckon UKIP are here to stay, not least cause - without a referendum (thanks to Miliband becoming PM) the EU sore will only fester more.
    I disagree. Cameron has eliminated the EU sore, whether others recognise it yet or not. Besides Ken Clarke (and even him not so vocally or frequently as in the past) who is objecting to the present policy of having a referendum?

    If Miliband is PM I see no reason for the Tories to change that policy. I suspect if we lose the talk of renegotiation will be dropped and we'll have a policy to let the people decide. I can't see that festering.
  • AlastairMeeks
    AlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    Pulpstar said:

    Tissue_Price said:

    Shadsy has gone 5/1 Labour in Midlothian!

    http://www.oddschecker.com/politics/british-politics/midlothian/winning-party

    Oh my Lord.

    Taken more of the 4-6 with SkyBet too.
    Scotland is arbtastic right now. You can back Labour at 6/4 in Edinburgh North & Leith with Ladbrokes and the SNP at 5/4 with BoyleSports (11/10 with BetFred).
  • JosiasJessop
    JosiasJessop Posts: 46,251
    anotherDave said:

    rcs1000 said:

    anotherDave said:

    rcs1000 said:

    anotherDave said:

    Slackbladder said:

    chestnut said:

    Boris - Secretary of State for Scotland?

    Was thinking of a role for Boris, but Boris surely has eyes on the leadership, so why would he tie himself to anything Cameron does?
    Daniel Hannan as Foreign Secretary?
    He's not standing to be an MP is he?
    Does that matter? No-one elected Lord Sainsbury and he was a government minister.
    He wasn't Foreign Secretary, though.

    And presumably Hannan couldn't continue to be an MEP if he was a member of the House of Lords and a member of government.
    His job would presumably be negotiating the UK's departure from the EU. Much more fun than being an MEP.
    Someone might get great personal satisfaction in negotiating our leaving the EU, but I doubt there'll be much fun to be had in it.

    The real mess would be if we have to negotiate Scotland leaving at the same time. ;-)
  • Speedy
    Speedy Posts: 12,100
    welshowl said:

    Speedy said:

    Carnyx said:

    Tykejohnno said:

    Slackbladder said:

    Scott_P said:

    @SamCoatesTimes: Tonight at midnight, one of the main political parties will announce a ministerial appointment in the next government (if they win). Gosh.

    eh? what? why would anyone do that, unless it's something 'special'?
    If it is labour,Blair anyone ;-)

    Or Mr Brown as SoS for Scotland? Doesn't make sense given his retirement - but it may be something of the ilk: a de-Murphifying move to try and regain the initiative in Scotland.

    It's probably Labour and the only reason I can think of why they think they need to make that announcement is scotland.

    So Brown in the cabinet is probably a reasonable guess.
    Not exactly a starter for ten in Middle England that one. What a gift to the Tories/Lib/UKIP to have the return of Brown back from the political dead. This is the bloke that won 28% in England. Can't see it.
    Brown would not run for PM, he would run for scotland.
    If he's in, then you are going to see him a lot on STV not ITV.
  • MikeSmithson
    MikeSmithson Posts: 7,382
    https://twitter.com/MSmithsonPB/status/589107680020684800
  • Morris_Dancer
    Morris_Dancer Posts: 62,742
    Mr. Jessop, I'm only following the feed, not watching video, so it sounded like Perez's fault but I didn't see the incident occur.

    Mr. Carnyx, could be a noble appointment. To be honest, that would be my guess.

    It seems a peculiar move.
  • anotherDave
    anotherDave Posts: 6,746
    DecrepitJohnL said:

    Scott_P said:

    @SamCoatesTimes: Tonight at midnight, one of the main political parties will announce a ministerial appointment in the next government (if they win). Gosh.

    UKIP.

    UKIP because of the timing. Midnight makes no sense for a news release because everyone is asleep, and it is too late for the first editions.

    It is too late for the first editions. That, I think, is the key. Midnight is when newspapers publish their own scoops -- because if they ran it in their first edition, all the other papers can nick it for their own later editions. Which party has just taken a million quid from a newspaper proprietor? UKIP. QED.
    UKIP are not expecting to win the general election.
  • Garethofthevale
    Garethofthevale Posts: 503
    Carnyx said:

    Speedy said:

    Carnyx said:

    Tykejohnno said:

    Slackbladder said:

    Scott_P said:

    @SamCoatesTimes: Tonight at midnight, one of the main political parties will announce a ministerial appointment in the next government (if they win). Gosh.

    eh? what? why would anyone do that, unless it's something 'special'?
    If it is labour,Blair anyone ;-)

    Or Mr Brown as SoS for Scotland? Doesn't make sense given his retirement - but it may be something of the ilk: a de-Murphifying move to try and regain the initiative in Scotland.

    It's probably Labour and the only reason I can think of why they think they need to make that announcement is scotland.

    So Brown in the cabinet is probably a reasonable guess.
    Hmm. This might, then, turn out to be prescient, from a few days ago:

    http://www.thenational.scot/cartoon/the-strip-april-13.3
    Brown isn't standing for election though. Unless they are suggesting he would be parachuted into the Lords
  • welshowl
    welshowl Posts: 4,464
    Speedy said:

    welshowl said:

    Speedy said:

    Carnyx said:

    Tykejohnno said:

    Slackbladder said:

    Scott_P said:

    @SamCoatesTimes: Tonight at midnight, one of the main political parties will announce a ministerial appointment in the next government (if they win). Gosh.

    eh? what? why would anyone do that, unless it's something 'special'?
    If it is labour,Blair anyone ;-)

    Or Mr Brown as SoS for Scotland? Doesn't make sense given his retirement - but it may be something of the ilk: a de-Murphifying move to try and regain the initiative in Scotland.

    It's probably Labour and the only reason I can think of why they think they need to make that announcement is scotland.

    So Brown in the cabinet is probably a reasonable guess.
    Not exactly a starter for ten in Middle England that one. What a gift to the Tories/Lib/UKIP to have the return of Brown back from the political dead. This is the bloke that won 28% in England. Can't see it.
    Brown would not run for PM, he would run for scotland.
    If he's in, then you are going to see him a lot on STV not ITV.
    I can see the sense in Scotland "Brown saves SLAB" as "Brown saved the Union" but he's just hugely toxic in vast parts of England. The Tories would have field day : "the man who wrecked the economy back with hands on the levers of power". "Ed retreads his mentor" " It's Sturgeon or Brown - vote Tory and save England" etc etc
  • MarkHopkins
    MarkHopkins Posts: 5,584
    welshowl said:

    Speedy said:

    welshowl said:

    Speedy said:

    Carnyx said:

    Tykejohnno said:

    Slackbladder said:

    Scott_P said:

    @SamCoatesTimes: Tonight at midnight, one of the main political parties will announce a ministerial appointment in the next government (if they win). Gosh.

    eh? what? why would anyone do that, unless it's something 'special'?
    If it is labour,Blair anyone ;-)

    Or Mr Brown as SoS for Scotland? Doesn't make sense given his retirement - but it may be something of the ilk: a de-Murphifying move to try and regain the initiative in Scotland.

    It's probably Labour and the only reason I can think of why they think they need to make that announcement is scotland.

    So Brown in the cabinet is probably a reasonable guess.
    Not exactly a starter for ten in Middle England that one. What a gift to the Tories/Lib/UKIP to have the return of Brown back from the political dead. This is the bloke that won 28% in England. Can't see it.
    Brown would not run for PM, he would run for scotland.
    If he's in, then you are going to see him a lot on STV not ITV.
    I can see the sense in Scotland "Brown saves SLAB" as "Brown saved the Union" but he's just hugely toxic in vast parts of England. The Tories would have field day : "the man who wrecked the economy back with hands on the levers of power". "Ed retreads his mentor" " It's Sturgeon or Brown - vote Tory and save England" etc etc

    Sounds like an excellent idea - Labour should definitely go for it.

  • another_richard
    another_richard Posts: 27,927
    A rather shoddy article from Boris:

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/general-election-2015/11531690/Inheritance-tax-should-not-be-inflicted-on-ordinary-families.html

    He uses an example of an 'ordinary family' in a £490k property before mentioning that the average London property price is only £356k.

    He finished with 'It is entirely right that this tax cut should be funded by changes to the pension arrangements of the tiny minority earning over £150,000.'

    Can we assume that he thinks income tax changes of the 'tiny minority earning over £150,000' are also 'entirely right' ?
  • Morris_Dancer
    Morris_Dancer Posts: 62,742
    Mr. Vale, if Labour need to get Brown into the Lords swiftly, I can recommend the space cannon as the mechanism of delivery.
  • Richard_Nabavi
    Richard_Nabavi Posts: 30,822
    This is getting ridiculous. How many times have we had to trawl through frantically grabbing the goodies as the SNP surge sloshes through the betting markets?
  • Carnyx
    Carnyx Posts: 44,654
    Morris_Dancer said:

    Mr. Jessop, I'm only following the feed, not watching video, so it sounded like Perez's fault but I didn't see the incident occur.

    Mr. Carnyx, could be a noble appointment. To be honest, that would be my guess.

    It seems a peculiar move.

    Afternoon, Mr D. It does seem odd, I agree, as taking a seat in the HoL would be (a) against Mr B's expressed intentions, as was my instant reaction, and (b) whoever it was would to some extent be a hostage to fortune (unelected, antidemocratic, and all that).

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-30277709

    One wonders if it is something even odder. Should I bet on, say, Ally McCoist being ennobled and made the future SoSfS? Or Lord Foulkes?

    Mr L's timing argument for a UKIP/Daily Express stunt is, however, interesting.

  • another_richard
    another_richard Posts: 27,927
    edited April 2015
    Philip_Thompson said:

    anotherDave said:

    The UKIP bubble will pop just as surely as the BNP bubble before it.

    A Miliband-Sturgeon non-coalition will see the (non-extremist) right unite behind the Conservatives under a new leader, not the party with 4 seats if they're lucky.

    Which of UKIP's policies do you consider extreme?

    http://www.ukip.org/ukip_manifesto_summary
    I'm not reading a 72 page manifesto.

    But just from skimming it:

    1: A five year moratorium on unskilled migration (at a time we're nearing full employment).
    2: Leaving the EU (the proposed question on the referendum is absurdly biased)
    3: Opposing TTIP (free trade agreement with the USA).

    To start with.




    Why do you want unskilled immigrants ?

    Do you understand that they will be net recipients of public spending ?
  • SouthamObserver
    SouthamObserver Posts: 40,054
    Danny565 said:

    surbiton said:

    Shall we coin a new phrase, the silent Labour voter ?

    I do still think Scottish Labour won't be decimated quite this badly, purely because we know a lot of the pro-independence voters last year were people who had never voted before (often benefit-claimants). I wouldn't be surprised if they just didn't show up on election day.

    But even factoring that in, that's not going to save many Labour seats at this rate; we're probably talking about a 10% defeat in Glasgow SW for example as opposed to a 20% rout. At the end of the day, Labour are going to need some miracle that causes a genuine swing to hold on to these types of places.

    Labour is going to get an absolute pasting in Scotland. It took all its seats for granted and treated its electorate with contempt. Why on earth would anyone vote for that when there is a strong, consequence-free alternative?

    I have to say, though, that even I did not expect Labour to lose every single seat it has there, but that now looks to be a very real possibility. From an overall perspective that means 41 gains in England and Wales just to stand still. And that is very unlikely to happen given Labour's weakness in the South, SW, East and Midlands. Only London and the NW look to be harvestable, with maybe three or four in Wales. It won't be close to enough to be the biggest party.

  • bondegezou
    bondegezou Posts: 15,133
    Philip_Thompson said:

    The LD's are very fortunate that we have FPTP now.

    If we operated on PR with a 5% threshold then the LD's would have as many seats next month as the FDP have in the Bundestag.

    No and no.

    The LibDems are on about 8% (BBC poll average), so still above a 5% threshold. They are predicted to win between 17 and 29 seats (looking at current predictions listed on Wikipedia). So, not good for the party, but not an FDP-style wipeout.

    Under a German-style PR system, the LibDems would get 52 seats, way more than they will win under FPTP. FPTP is still hurting the LibDems, if not *as much* as it did in 2010. The LDs are not fortunate that we have FPTP; they remain unfortunate to have FPTP.

    One party that is fortunate to have FPTP is the SNP, due to get 38-54 seats on ~4% of the vote. Under many national PR systems, the SNP would get no seats at all, although the German system is proportional within Lands, so in an equivalent UK system, they'd do well enough to get seats in the Scottish region. But under PR, the SNP would only be getting 26 seats.

    The kingmakers in this election will be the SNP, a party that will get fewer votes than the LibDems or UKIP or (probably) Greens, but will get substantially more seats than all three of those *put together*. That's FPTP for you.

    Indeed, basically the outcome of this election will be determined by the fact that FPTP rewards regionalists (SNP, but also DUP, SF, PC) over mid-level parties popular over wide areas. If the Tories tell us we should fear a Lab/SNP pact and the threat to the union, then perhaps they should recognise that it's their support for FPTP which is to blame! It is FPTP that threatens the union and FPTP that gives the SNP such power.
  • Plato
    Plato Posts: 15,724
    edited April 2015
    More gaiety for the nation
    Cllr Tanswell said his email had been hacked to create the error-ridden pamphlet which was then printed off and distributed in his name.

    A former Lib-Dem councillor himself, he added that he had called in police after getting 'scores' of phone calls making threats on his life.

    "They have been hacking into my emails, the Liberal Democrats. They have been hacking it and that's what they did," he said.
    telegraph.co.uk/news/11545146/Ukip-election-leaflet-ridiculed-for-dozens-of-errors.html
  • MP_SE
    MP_SE Posts: 3,642
    SeanT said:

    Alistair said:

    Any reports of crazy odds still available, evens on an ov

    Millsy said:

    A proper political earthquake, not this Ukip rumble in an ant's belly

    The SNP earthquake is helping to suppress UKIP. UKIP thrive on media coverage, the frankly astonishing rise of the SNP is focusing the lime light to the north and sucking the oxygen of publicity from Farage's lungs.
    Meh. UKIP are still very likely to get over 10% of the vote (i.e. twice that of the Nats, and possibly more than the LDS) thus coming THIRD in vote share,

    That is an earthquake of its own. UKIP were trivially insignificant in 2010. Not any more. And they will have a few MPs, too.

    In the face of a pathetic Miliband-Sturgeon non-Coalition, milking the English taxpayer, the vehemently English UKIP could prosper, mightily.

    They have every reason to be optimistic in the medium term even as they face squalls right now. Remember they are following the electoral path the Nats have already established. From joke to irritant to player to government.
    During the 2010 election there were talking heads openly calling UKIP fruitcakes. I bet they did not think in a million years they would win the Euro elections and have elected members of parliament.
  • Alistair
    Alistair Posts: 23,670
    Richard_Nabavi said:

    This is getting ridiculous. How many times have we had to trawl through frantically grabbing the goodies as the SNP surge sloshes through the betting markets?

    There should have been a NatValue website - deposit tour betting roll with with and then at every Ashcroft poll it would automatically bet on the most ridiculous prices. l before they were cut.
  • Morris_Dancer
    Morris_Dancer Posts: 62,742
    Mr. Observer, Labour could make some gains in West Yorkshire. But they also have some marginals to defend. If WWC sorts go purple in significant numbers, it could be bad for Labour here [or very good, if they don't].

    Mr. Carnyx, Lord Foulkes as ambassador to Somalia?
  • frpenkridge
    frpenkridge Posts: 670
    Events in Scotland may not be enough to save the Conservative party but will surely deprive Labour of its intellectual and emotional vanguard and reduce the number of latter day Pushkins drilled in the elite academy of Brownian blitzkrieg.
  • David_Evershed
    David_Evershed Posts: 6,506
    Since a majority of Scottish folk see themselves as victims of the English, they are bound to vote for an SNP party who will hold Labour to ransome to extract most cash from their persecutors.

    A very good reason for English (and Welsh?) voters not to vote Labour and end up with Labour paying the SNP ransome money.
  • Carnyx
    Carnyx Posts: 44,654
    Alistair said:

    Richard_Nabavi said:

    This is getting ridiculous. How many times have we had to trawl through frantically grabbing the goodies as the SNP surge sloshes through the betting markets?

    There should have been a NatValue website - deposit tour betting roll with with and then at every Ashcroft poll it would automatically bet on the most ridiculous prices. l before they were cut.
    Something for 2016, if you could get your head around the Holyrood permuitations?

  • MP_SE
    MP_SE Posts: 3,642
    rcs1000 said:

    I'm hearing there may be a done deal in Greece. More when I have it.

    Greece to stay or Greece to go?
  • Pong
    Pong Posts: 4,693
    Antifrank, you're a legend.
  • philiph
    philiph Posts: 4,705
    Brown to be Scotland office supremo? The author of the vow will protect the interests of Scotland. You don't need the SNP. Vote Labour.

  • Danny565
    Danny565 Posts: 8,091
    edited April 2015
    SouthamObserver said:

    Danny565 said:

    surbiton said:

    Shall we coin a new phrase, the silent Labour voter ?

    I do still think Scottish Labour won't be decimated quite this badly, purely because we know a lot of the pro-independence voters last year were people who had never voted before (often benefit-claimants). I wouldn't be surprised if they just didn't show up on election day.

    But even factoring that in, that's not going to save many Labour seats at this rate; we're probably talking about a 10% defeat in Glasgow SW for example as opposed to a 20% rout. At the end of the day, Labour are going to need some miracle that causes a genuine swing to hold on to these types of places.

    Labour is going to get an absolute pasting in Scotland. It took all its seats for granted and treated its electorate with contempt. Why on earth would anyone vote for that when there is a strong, consequence-free alternative?

    I agree, and my big worry is that the Labour leadership are going to complacently assume this is an issue just confined to Scotland because of independence. It's not: imo you hear much the same things in many of Labour's northern heartlands about their MPs being lazy and complacent, and the party generally just focussing on southern middle-class voters. The only difference being that northern England doesn't have a party like the SNP which is precision-packaged to mop up Labour voters.
  • Pulpstar
    Pulpstar Posts: 79,813
    Richard_Nabavi said:

    This is getting ridiculous. How many times have we had to trawl through frantically grabbing the goodies as the SNP surge sloshes through the betting markets?

    The overreactions are the funniest part mind.

    2-1 For Labour in Edinburgh South.

    That's their safest seat on quite a few measures.
  • another_richard
    another_richard Posts: 27,927
    With today's averages earnings data from the ONS its possible to make some interesting comparisons:

    Feb 2015
    Avg Earn +1.3%
    RPI +1.0%
    Diff +0.3%

    Feb 2010
    Avg Earn +5.6%
    RPI +3.7%
    Diff +1.9%

    Feb 2005
    Avg Earn +6.1%
    RPI +3.2%
    Diff +2.9%

    Feb 2001
    Avg Earn +8.4%
    RPI +2.7%
    Diff +5.7%

    Feb 1997
    Avg Earn +3.6%
    RPI +2.7%
    Diff +0.9%

    Feb 1992
    Avg Earn +7.8%
    RPI +4.1%
    Diff +3.7%

    Feb 1987
    Avg Earn +7.7%
    RPI +3.9%
    Diff +3.8%

    Feb 1983
    Avg Earn +9.2
    RPI +5.3%
    Diff +3.9%

    Feb 1979
    Avg Earn +14.3%
    RPI +9.6%
    Diff +4.7%

    The average person doesn't work for the joy of it but to earn money.

    Unemployment is an issue to those who are unemployment and those who are afraid of becoming unemployed. But when fear of unemployment is low what people want is a good pay rise.

    Telling people who aren't getting good pay rises that the economy is in great shape leads to those people thinking that they're being cheated and that someone else is getting 'their share'.
  • SouthamObserver
    SouthamObserver Posts: 40,054
    Danny565 said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    Danny565 said:

    surbiton said:

    Shall we coin a new phrase, the silent Labour voter ?

    I do still think Scottish Labour won't be decimated quite this badly, purely because we know a lot of the pro-independence voters last year were people who had never voted before (often benefit-claimants). I wouldn't be surprised if they just didn't show up on election day.

    But even factoring that in, that's not going to save many Labour seats at this rate; we're probably talking about a 10% defeat in Glasgow SW for example as opposed to a 20% rout. At the end of the day, Labour are going to need some miracle that causes a genuine swing to hold on to these types of places.

    Labour is going to get an absolute pasting in Scotland. It took all its seats for granted and treated its electorate with contempt. Why on earth would anyone vote for that when there is a strong, consequence-free alternative?

    I agree, and my big worry is that some Labour figures are going to complacently assume this is an issue just confined to Scotland because of independence. It's not: imo you hear much the same things in many of Labour's northern heartlands about the party taking them for granted and just focussing on southern middle-class voters, with the only difference being that northern England doesn't have a party like the SNP which is precision-packaged to mop up Labour voters.

    Spot on. While UKIP is a right-wing party, Labour will just about hold on. Should that change, though, then it will be goodnight Vienna.

  • logical_song
    logical_song Posts: 10,082
    bondegezou said:

    Philip_Thompson said:

    The LD's are very fortunate that we have FPTP now.

    If we operated on PR with a 5% threshold then the LD's would have as many seats next month as the FDP have in the Bundestag.

    No and no.

    The LibDems are on about 8% (BBC poll average), so still above a 5% threshold. They are predicted to win between 17 and 29 seats (looking at current predictions listed on Wikipedia). So, not good for the party, but not an FDP-style wipeout.

    Under a German-style PR system, the LibDems would get 52 seats, way more than they will win under FPTP. FPTP is still hurting the LibDems, if not *as much* as it did in 2010. The LDs are not fortunate that we have FPTP; they remain unfortunate to have FPTP.

    One party that is fortunate to have FPTP is the SNP, due to get 38-54 seats on ~4% of the vote. Under many national PR systems, the SNP would get no seats at all, although the German system is proportional within Lands, so in an equivalent UK system, they'd do well enough to get seats in the Scottish region. But under PR, the SNP would only be getting 26 seats.

    The kingmakers in this election will be the SNP, a party that will get fewer votes than the LibDems or UKIP or (probably) Greens, but will get substantially more seats than all three of those *put together*. That's FPTP for you.

    Indeed, basically the outcome of this election will be determined by the fact that FPTP rewards regionalists (SNP, but also DUP, SF, PC) over mid-level parties popular over wide areas. If the Tories tell us we should fear a Lab/SNP pact and the threat to the union, then perhaps they should recognise that it's their support for FPTP which is to blame! It is FPTP that threatens the union and FPTP that gives the SNP such power.
    Thanks for the facts, always useful to have on a betting site.
  • SouthamObserver
    SouthamObserver Posts: 40,054
    David_Evershed said:

    Since a majority of Scottish folk see themselves as victims of the English, they are bound to vote for an SNP party who will hold Labour to ransome to extract most cash from their persecutors.

    A very good reason for English (and Welsh?) voters not to vote Labour and end up with Labour paying the SNP ransome money.

    The Scots have a credible anti-Westminster party to vote for. The rest of us do not. That is basically the difference.

  • HYUFD
    HYUFD Posts: 128,924
    So the Tories make the only other gain in Scotland in an otherwise SNP sweep (albeit David Mundell loses his seat), could the Tories be the second party in Scotland after May 7th? The big swing to the SNP continues, and clearly they are going to have a majority of Scottish Westminster seats in May, however some unionist tactical voting really needs to take place if that is not going to be a complete near wipe-out. In Dumfrieshire for example the SNP are only 2% ahead, while Labour is on 20%, in E Dunbartonshire 11% ahead, while the Tories and Labour combined are on 28%, and in E Renfrewshire 9% ahead while the Tories are on 25%

    O/T Also just got back from a short visit to Elgar's birthplace in Worcestershire, a beautiful cottage and garden full of Elgar memorabilia, well worth a visit
  • state_go_away
    state_go_away Posts: 5,855
    away from the SNP snips the bet that stands out to me at the moment is betfair sportsbook one that Miliband will get a higher percentage of the vote (in his seat)than salmond /Cameron/clegg or farage at 7/4.
    On uniform swings he comes close and he must get a bonus because last time he was only environment minister (?) and now LOTO
  • Bob__Sykes
    Bob__Sykes Posts: 1,179
    Scott_P said:

    @SamCoatesTimes: Tonight at midnight, one of the main political parties will announce a ministerial appointment in the next government (if they win). Gosh.

    Dave announces his out of work mate Jezza as Minister for Transport in a desperate "we'll try anything now" bid to up the Tory vote/squeeze UKIP?
  • another_richard
    another_richard Posts: 27,927
    Morris_Dancer said:

    Mr. Observer, Labour could make some gains in West Yorkshire. But they also have some marginals to defend. If WWC sorts go purple in significant numbers, it could be bad for Labour here [or very good, if they don't].

    Mr. Carnyx, Lord Foulkes as ambassador to Somalia?

    The wwc have always been more pro Conservative in mill towns than they have on average so there's little scope for Labour losses there.

    The exception being the Wakefield area which was instead mining dominated and hence has a wwc more pro-Labour than average.
  • glw
    glw Posts: 10,463
    welshowl said:

    Speedy said:

    Carnyx said:

    Tykejohnno said:

    Slackbladder said:

    Scott_P said:

    @SamCoatesTimes: Tonight at midnight, one of the main political parties will announce a ministerial appointment in the next government (if they win). Gosh.

    eh? what? why would anyone do that, unless it's something 'special'?
    If it is labour,Blair anyone ;-)

    Or Mr Brown as SoS for Scotland? Doesn't make sense given his retirement - but it may be something of the ilk: a de-Murphifying move to try and regain the initiative in Scotland.

    It's probably Labour and the only reason I can think of why they think they need to make that announcement is scotland.

    So Brown in the cabinet is probably a reasonable guess.
    Not exactly a starter for ten in Middle England that one. What a gift to the Tories/Lib/UKIP to have the return of Brown back from the political dead. This is the bloke that won 28% in England. Can't see it.
    Announcing cabinet appointments before the election is daft enough as it is, announcing that you are going to resurrect Gordon Brown's political career would be very reckless.
  • HYUFD
    HYUFD Posts: 128,924
    Speedy Jesus Christ would not have saved Scottish Labour at this election, Murphy's job is to hold the seat, and rebuild the party at Holyrood
  • David_Evershed
    David_Evershed Posts: 6,506
    another_richard said:

    With today's averages earnings data from the ONS its possible to make some interesting comparisons:

    The average person doesn't work for the joy of it but to earn money.

    Unemployment is an issue to those who are unemployment and those who are afraid of becoming unemployed. But when fear of unemployment is low what people want is a good pay rise.

    Telling people who aren't getting good pay rises that the economy is in great shape leads to those people thinking that they're being cheated and that someone else is getting 'their share'.

    Someone needs to tell these people they are now competing with workers in India, China, Indonesia etc and salaries in the UK are far above those. Over time wage levels are converging. This means Asian wages going up but Uk wages going down.
  • tyson
    tyson Posts: 6,122
    another_richard said:

    With today's averages earnings data from the ONS its possible to make some interesting comparisons:

    Feb 2015
    Avg Earn +1.3%
    RPI +1.0%
    Diff +0.3%

    Feb 2010
    Avg Earn +5.6%
    RPI +3.7%
    Diff +1.9%

    Feb 2005
    Avg Earn +6.1%
    RPI +3.2%
    Diff +2.9%

    Feb 2001
    Avg Earn +8.4%
    RPI +2.7%
    Diff +5.7%

    Feb 1997
    Avg Earn +3.6%
    RPI +2.7%
    Diff +0.9%

    Feb 1992
    Avg Earn +7.8%
    RPI +4.1%
    Diff +3.7%

    Feb 1987
    Avg Earn +7.7%
    RPI +3.9%
    Diff +3.8%

    Feb 1983
    Avg Earn +9.2
    RPI +5.3%
    Diff +3.9%

    Feb 1979
    Avg Earn +14.3%
    RPI +9.6%
    Diff +4.7%

    The average person doesn't work for the joy of it but to earn money.

    Unemployment is an issue to those who are unemployment and those who are afraid of becoming unemployed. But when fear of unemployment is low what people want is a good pay rise.

    Telling people who aren't getting good pay rises that the economy is in great shape leads to those people thinking that they're being cheated and that someone else is getting 'their share'.

    A superb post- the best I have read in a long time. Some great analysis backed up by stats.

  • SouthamObserver
    SouthamObserver Posts: 40,054
    All those SLab MPs who so vocally opposed PR because they thought they had jobs for life; I wonder what they are thinking now. Close to 100% of the seats for 50% of the vote is not a bad return for the SNP.
  • Morris_Dancer
    Morris_Dancer Posts: 62,742
    Could it be the Lib Dems?

    SNP have ruled out a formal coalition, so they can't be a 'proper' party of government.

    I'm not sure it makes sense for any party. Maybe an old big gun (Prescott, Mandelson, Major, Hague) getting a gig.
  • another_richard
    another_richard Posts: 27,927
    SouthamObserver said:

    Danny565 said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    Danny565 said:

    surbiton said:

    Shall we coin a new phrase, the silent Labour voter ?

    I do still think Scottish Labour won't be decimated quite this badly, purely because we know a lot of the pro-independence voters last year were people who had never voted before (often benefit-claimants). I wouldn't be surprised if they just didn't show up on election day.

    But even factoring that in, that's not going to save many Labour seats at this rate; we're probably talking about a 10% defeat in Glasgow SW for example as opposed to a 20% rout. At the end of the day, Labour are going to need some miracle that causes a genuine swing to hold on to these types of places.

    Labour is going to get an absolute pasting in Scotland. It took all its seats for granted and treated its electorate with contempt. Why on earth would anyone vote for that when there is a strong, consequence-free alternative?

    I agree, and my big worry is that some Labour figures are going to complacently assume this is an issue just confined to Scotland because of independence. It's not: imo you hear much the same things in many of Labour's northern heartlands about the party taking them for granted and just focussing on southern middle-class voters, with the only difference being that northern England doesn't have a party like the SNP which is precision-packaged to mop up Labour voters.

    Spot on. While UKIP is a right-wing party, Labour will just about hold on. Should that change, though, then it will be goodnight Vienna.

    Two years of PM EdM and UKIP will be hoovering up Labour votes in northern England irrespective of what policies they have.
  • AlastairMeeks
    AlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    While I take Pulpstar's point about overreactions, I don't really want to be backing value losers when there are still so many SNP prices that have yet to catch up properly with the polling. I've just backed the SNP at 8/5 in Rutherglen & Hamilton West with BetFred. I suppose I could guarantee myself a win with the 10/11 on offer for Labour from Coral, but I doubt that price is going anywhere any time soon.
  • HYUFD
    HYUFD Posts: 128,924
    Marco Rubio overtakes Jeb Bush in new Florida GOP primary poll

    Marco Rubio 31%
    Jeb Bush 30%
    Ted Cruz 8%
    Rand Paul 7%
    Scott Walker 2%
    Other 5%
    Undecided 17%
    http://www.politico.com/story/2015/04/florida-poll-rollout-helps-rubio-tie-bush-in-home-state-117069.html#ixzz3XXRoSgZC
  • Pulpstar
    Pulpstar Posts: 79,813
    state_go_away said:

    away from the SNP

    The only thing that's possibly come close to the SNP is some of the Tory polling in the SW, especially where they enjoy incumbency making it feel even more solid.

    I'll be disappointed to lose money from this election :)
  • NickPalmer
    NickPalmer Posts: 21,724
    MikeL said:

    Deadline for registering to vote is on Monday.

    Will electorate figures be published for each constituency - and if so, when?

    None of the polls is asking whether respondents are registered to vote. I think this is now probably Cameron's main potential upside - that far more young people are not registered compared to 2010.

    Plus the generally very low level of interest amongst the public - as illustrated by the TV debate ratings. Low turnout must favour Con.

    I asked about registration levels at my electoral returning officer's office today - they said there had been a sharp dip last year but a surge this year had brought the total up to roughly 2010 levels, though they didn't have an exact count. They did say individual registration was proving a nightmare, with numerous voters registering twice, sending inadequate documentation, missing out signatures and numerous other administrative errors - in some cases they'd had to send forms back and forth three times.

    Interest here is pretty intense - we have over 400 poster requests (way more than last time) and 80 garden stake requests which we're busily filling, and it's now impossible to go anywhere without being stopped two or three times by strangers and asked anxiously how it's going. The main Tory freepost has landed - ours hits in a couple of days for the postal voters, as the PVs lands on the 23rd) - a neat Tory tweak is that not just the address but the leaflet is customised in the heading, "Securing Britain's future for John Smith". We have had three hustings, with four more to come. You occasionally meet "Nah, don't vote" types, but they're rare, as are undecided voters.

    Postal voting is well up too, but that's a long-term trend, I think.
  • Bob__Sykes
    Bob__Sykes Posts: 1,179
    It's amusing to think that just last September, Labour were sh1tting themselves at the thought of having no MPs from Scotland in the next Parliament (or not for all of it) should the Yes campaign win - and now that looks a very plausible prospect, for a very different reason, even with a No.

    Funny how things move so quickly.
  • Pulpstar
    Pulpstar Posts: 79,813
    HYUFD said:

    So the Tories make the only other gain in Scotland in an otherwise SNP sweep (albeit David Mundell loses his seat), could the Tories be the second party in Scotland after May 7th? The big swing to the SNP continues, and clearly they are going to have a majority of Scottish Westminster seats in May, however some unionist tactical voting really needs to take place if that is not going to be a complete near wipe-out. In Dumfrieshire for example the SNP are only 2% ahead, while Labour is on 20%, in E Dunbartonshire 11% ahead, while the Tories and Labour combined are on 28%, and in E Renfrewshire 9% ahead while the Tories are on 25%

    O/T Also just got back from a short visit to Elgar's birthplace in Worcestershire, a beautiful cottage and garden full of Elgar memorabilia, well worth a visit

    The Lib Dems could be the second biggest party in terms of seats, with an incredible vote efficiency if they hold BRS.

    Berwickshire Roxburgh Selkirk still no bet (Except by panda proxy) for me though.
  • Pong
    Pong Posts: 4,693
    edited April 2015
    Pulpstar said:

    Richard_Nabavi said:

    This is getting ridiculous. How many times have we had to trawl through frantically grabbing the goodies as the SNP surge sloshes through the betting markets?

    The overreactions are the funniest part mind.

    2-1 For Labour in Edinburgh South.

    That's their safest seat on quite a few measures.
    Dumfries and Galloway could well turn out to be SLAB's safest seat.

    Available with PP @ 4/1

    Bonkers.

    All I need now is for Coral to go evens on the LD's in orkney, then i'll book me holiday for May 8th.
  • Alistair
    Alistair Posts: 23,670
    I still can't believe believes was thinking of laying off my snp book only a few weeks ago.
  • Pulpstar
    Pulpstar Posts: 79,813
    antifrank said:

    While I take Pulpstar's point about overreactions, I don't really want to be backing value losers when there are still so many SNP prices that have yet to catch up properly with the polling. I've just backed the SNP at 8/5 in Rutherglen & Hamilton West with BetFred. I suppose I could guarantee myself a win with the 10/11 on offer for Labour from Coral, but I doubt that price is going anywhere any time soon.

    You're right :)

    Well done on Rutherglen and Hamilton West though.

    I'm banned with Fred ;)
  • AlastairMeeks
    AlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    BetFred are offering proper-sized stakes at very good prices. I just got another £100 on the SNP in Stirling at 4/6. Ladbrokes are offering 5/1 on Labour in the same seat (and go 1/10 on the SNP!).
  • nigel4england
    nigel4england Posts: 4,800
    another_richard said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    Danny565 said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    Danny565 said:

    surbiton said:

    Shall we coin a new phrase, the silent Labour voter ?

    I do still think Scottish Labour won't be decimated quite this badly, purely because we know a lot of the pro-independence voters last year were people who had never voted before (often benefit-claimants). I wouldn't be surprised if they just didn't show up on election day.

    But even factoring that in, that's not going to save many Labour seats at this rate; we're probably talking about a 10% defeat in Glasgow SW for example as opposed to a 20% rout. At the end of the day, Labour are going to need some miracle that causes a genuine swing to hold on to these types of places.

    Labour is going to get an absolute pasting in Scotland. It took all its seats for granted and treated its electorate with contempt. Why on earth would anyone vote for that when there is a strong, consequence-free alternative?

    I agree, and my big worry is that some Labour figures are going to complacently assume this is an issue just confined to Scotland because of independence. It's not: imo you hear much the same things in many of Labour's northern heartlands about the party taking them for granted and just focussing on southern middle-class voters, with the only difference being that northern England doesn't have a party like the SNP which is precision-packaged to mop up Labour voters.

    Spot on. While UKIP is a right-wing party, Labour will just about hold on. Should that change, though, then it will be goodnight Vienna.

    Two years of PM EdM and UKIP will be hoovering up Labour votes in northern England irrespective of what policies they have.
    If Ed does get in the only consolation is he will destroy Socialism for a generation.
  • Flightpath
    Flightpath Posts: 4,012
    SouthamObserver said:

    Danny565 said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    Danny565 said:

    surbiton said:

    Shall we coin a new phrase, the silent Labour voter ?

    I do still think Scottish Labour won't be decimated quite this badly, purely because we know a lot of the pro-independence voters last year were people who had never voted before (often benefit-claimants). I wouldn't be surprised if they just didn't show up on election day.

    But even factoring that in, that's not going to save many Labour seats at this rate; we're probably talking about a 10% defeat in Glasgow SW for example as opposed to a 20% rout. At the end of the day, Labour are going to need some miracle that causes a genuine swing to hold on to these types of places.

    Labour is going to get an absolute pasting in Scotland. It took all its seats for granted and treated its electorate with contempt. Why on earth would anyone vote for that when there is a strong, consequence-free alternative?

    I agree, and my big worry is that some Labour figures are going to complacently assume this is an issue just confined to Scotland because of independence. It's not: imo you hear much the same things in many of Labour's northern heartlands about the party taking them for granted and just focussing on southern middle-class voters, with the only difference being that northern England doesn't have a party like the SNP which is precision-packaged to mop up Labour voters.

    Spot on. While UKIP is a right-wing party, Labour will just about hold on. Should that change, though, then it will be goodnight Vienna.

    So you are suggesting UKIP should change its policies so Farage can join in the girlie luvvie hug in with Nicola and all the other far lefty bozoetts? Is there some confusion about what UKIP stand for?
  • Morris_Dancer
    Morris_Dancer Posts: 62,742
    Mr. England, or embed it so deeply in the system it takes decades to root out.
  • Pulpstar
    Pulpstar Posts: 79,813
    Seat Supremacy: Conservative/Labour Sell 15 - 21
  • Pulpstar
    Pulpstar Posts: 79,813
    I just can't see Labour most seats now - but Ed Mili PM never looked better lol
  • stodge
    stodge Posts: 14,907
    Evening all :)

    Well, some fairly exciting stuff from the Scottish front - would be slightly amusing if the Conservatives, Labour and Liberal Democrats won a grand total of zero seats north of Carter Bar.

    Here in the Labour stronghold of East Ham no such concerns though the pace of the election has upped a notch - UKIP have delivered a leaflet and Labour were leafleting outside the tube station this evening.

    It's not as though Stephen Timms has too many concerns about keeping his seat I would imagine and unlike 2010 when we had Council elections at the same time, the Conservative effort thus far has been minimal to non existent.

    Back in 2010, the Conservatives occupied some offices opposite the tube station and were much more visible but, as the song goes, that was then and this is now.

    Declining voter registration and UKIP might well peg Timms back to just over 60% with the Conservatives getting their usual 15-20%. UKIP got 10% in the Beckton by-election but only 6% in the Mayoral contest last year and I'd expect them to be nearer the latter than the former. The LD candidate will probably lose his deposit despite my efforts along with the Greens, TUSC and the Communities United Party who make up the seven runners.

    Working out the order of the last four won't be easy but the front three are pretty much confirmed.
  • tyson
    tyson Posts: 6,122
    Bob__Sykes said:

    It's amusing to think that just last September, Labour were sh1tting themselves at the thought of having no MPs from Scotland in the next Parliament (or not for all of it) should the Yes campaign win - and now that looks a very plausible prospect, for a very different reason, even with a No.

    Funny how things move so quickly.

    And, I wonder how EVEL goes with no Labour Scottish seats. Would it be even an afterthought for Tories? And suppose Labour is able to gain more seats in England than the Tories, but have no seats in Scotland. How would that work?
  • Carnyx
    Carnyx Posts: 44,654
    Flightpath said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    Danny565 said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    Danny565 said:

    surbiton said:

    Shall we coin a new phrase, the silent Labour voter ?

    I do still think Scottish Labour won't be decimated quite this badly, purely because we know a lot of the pro-independence voters last year were people who had never voted before (often benefit-claimants). I wouldn't be surprised if they just didn't show up on election day.

    But even factoring that in, that's not going to save many Labour seats at this rate; we're probably talking about a 10% defeat in Glasgow SW for example as opposed to a 20% rout. At the end of the day, Labour are going to need some miracle that causes a genuine swing to hold on to these types of places.

    Labour is going to get an absolute pasting in Scotland. It took all its seats for granted and treated its electorate with contempt. Why on earth would anyone vote for that when there is a strong, consequence-free alternative?

    I agree, and my big worry is that some Labour figures are going to complacently assume this is an issue just confined to Scotland because of independence. It's not: imo you hear much the same things in many of Labour's northern heartlands about the party taking them for granted and just focussing on southern middle-class voters, with the only difference being that northern England doesn't have a party like the SNP which is precision-packaged to mop up Labour voters.

    Spot on. While UKIP is a right-wing party, Labour will just about hold on. Should that change, though, then it will be goodnight Vienna.

    So you are suggesting UKIP should change its policies so Farage can join in the girlie luvvie hug in with Nicola and all the other far lefty bozoetts? Is there some confusion about what UKIP stand for?
    There is on my part. I was wondering earlier this afternoon why (Mr Coburn MEP aside, and he's not the best spokesperson for a wider consensus) UKIP have such difficulty in gaining seats in Scotland. Is it because they aren't really a UK party at all?

  • Artist
    Artist Posts: 1,893
    edited April 2015
    tyson said:

    Bob__Sykes said:

    It's amusing to think that just last September, Labour were sh1tting themselves at the thought of having no MPs from Scotland in the next Parliament (or not for all of it) should the Yes campaign win - and now that looks a very plausible prospect, for a very different reason, even with a No.

    Funny how things move so quickly.

    And, I wonder how EVEL goes with no Labour Scottish seats. Would it be even an afterthought for Tories? And suppose Labour is able to gain more seats in England than the Tories, but have no seats in Scotland. How would that work?
    Labour and the Conservatives are pretty close in England only vote share at the moment, it could be the perfect time for voting reform, regional devolution and an English (and Welsh) parliament. Labour did say they would hold a constitutional convention.
  • Chris_A
    Chris_A Posts: 1,237
    Makes http://moneyweek.com/election-2015-why-david-cameron-will-remain-prime-minister/ seem loopier than ever then
  • Pulpstar
    Pulpstar Posts: 79,813
    To put the size of the Scottish swings into English context, the Conservatives would comfortably take East Ham if the Glasgow SW swing took place there.
  • HYUFD
    HYUFD Posts: 128,924
    Pulpstar But if the LDs lose Berwickshire, as they would on this poll to the Tories, could be a wipeout
  • tyson
    tyson Posts: 6,122
    Anderson (good Burnley lad), is on the verge of breaking Botham's record- new Ball with the Windies flailing. The time differences for the cricket make following these early evening matches a joy.
  • Pulpstar
    Pulpstar Posts: 79,813
    HYUFD said:

    Pulpstar But if the LDs lose Berwickshire, as they would on this poll to the Tories, could be a wipeout

    It could indeed be, I'd love to know what's going on in Caithness and Orkney !
  • Carnyx
    Carnyx Posts: 44,654
    tyson said:

    Bob__Sykes said:

    It's amusing to think that just last September, Labour were sh1tting themselves at the thought of having no MPs from Scotland in the next Parliament (or not for all of it) should the Yes campaign win - and now that looks a very plausible prospect, for a very different reason, even with a No.

    Funny how things move so quickly.

    And, I wonder how EVEL goes with no Labour Scottish seats. Would it be even an afterthought for Tories? And suppose Labour is able to gain more seats in England than the Tories, but have no seats in Scotland. How would that work?
    A very good point. If the SNP also follow their current policy on not voting on purely English matters, then the two immediate issues of the West Lothian Question are defanged but the constitutional heritage of Mr A. R. P. Blair is saved to cause problems further down the line - when and how I have no idea.

  • nigel4england
    nigel4england Posts: 4,800
    Morris_Dancer said:

    Mr. England, or embed it so deeply in the system it takes decades to root out.

    It's already embedded in the system, for example education.

    Ed will wreck the country within two years and that will encourage the right to finally rid institutions like the BBC, the civil service etc of the Socialist evil.
  • DavidL
    DavidL Posts: 55,867
    Speaking to a friend of mine who lives in Glasgow SW today. His neighbours are Tories but they are all voting Labour to try and stop the SNP. May be a bit optimistic going by this polling.
  • another_richard
    another_richard Posts: 27,927
    tyson said:

    another_richard said:

    With today's averages earnings data from the ONS its possible to make some interesting comparisons:

    Feb 2015
    Avg Earn +1.3%
    RPI +1.0%
    Diff +0.3%

    Feb 2010
    Avg Earn +5.6%
    RPI +3.7%
    Diff +1.9%

    Feb 2005
    Avg Earn +6.1%
    RPI +3.2%
    Diff +2.9%

    Feb 2001
    Avg Earn +8.4%
    RPI +2.7%
    Diff +5.7%

    Feb 1997
    Avg Earn +3.6%
    RPI +2.7%
    Diff +0.9%

    Feb 1992
    Avg Earn +7.8%
    RPI +4.1%
    Diff +3.7%

    Feb 1987
    Avg Earn +7.7%
    RPI +3.9%
    Diff +3.8%

    Feb 1983
    Avg Earn +9.2
    RPI +5.3%
    Diff +3.9%

    Feb 1979
    Avg Earn +14.3%
    RPI +9.6%
    Diff +4.7%

    The average person doesn't work for the joy of it but to earn money.

    Unemployment is an issue to those who are unemployment and those who are afraid of becoming unemployed. But when fear of unemployment is low what people want is a good pay rise.

    Telling people who aren't getting good pay rises that the economy is in great shape leads to those people thinking that they're being cheated and that someone else is getting 'their share'.

    A superb post- the best I have read in a long time. Some great analysis backed up by stats.

    Thanks.

    Inevitably you get somewhat different data if you use different months or CPI (which stretches back only to 1992).

    But the overall point runs true that the average worker is not doing well now.

    And this is where I think the Conservative strategy is misconceived - constantly telling people how good the economy is does not gain votes if those people only feel cheated.

    In 1983, 1987 and 1992 the average workers was getting good pay rises and there was socioeconomic mobility - I've pointed out before that the Harry Enfield 'Loadsamoney' character was not a banker or a yuppie generally but a plasterer.

    By comparison in 1997 when the macroeconomy was doing very well pay rises were low.

    1979 is interesting with its high pay rises but government defeat. But those pay rises were often the result of industrial action and it was that industrial action which caused the pro-Conservative swing which brought Thatcher to power.

    I really think its dangerous for the Conservatives, being thought of as they are as the party of the 'rich', to look like they don't care about the 'hardworking families' pay rise.

    To prosper the Conservatives need widespread prosperity not increasing inequality.


  • Pulpstar
    Pulpstar Posts: 79,813
    DavidL said:

    Speaking to a friend of mine who lives in Glasgow SW today. His neighbours are Tories but they are all voting Labour to try and stop the SNP. May be a bit optimistic going by this polling.

    Holy smokes !?

    Didn't realise any Tories lived in Glasgow.
  • MikeL
    MikeL Posts: 7,809
    edited April 2015
    NickPalmer said:

    MikeL said:

    Deadline for registering to vote is on Monday.

    Will electorate figures be published for each constituency - and if so, when?

    None of the polls is asking whether respondents are registered to vote. I think this is now probably Cameron's main potential upside - that far more young people are not registered compared to 2010.

    Plus the generally very low level of interest amongst the public - as illustrated by the TV debate ratings. Low turnout must favour Con.

    I asked about registration levels at my electoral returning officer's office today - they said there had been a sharp dip last year but a surge this year had brought the total up to roughly 2010 levels, though they didn't have an exact count. They did say individual registration was proving a nightmare, with numerous voters registering twice, sending inadequate documentation, missing out signatures and numerous other administrative errors - in some cases they'd had to send forms back and forth three times.
    Thanks a lot Nick.

    Of course if the total number registered is the same as 2010 that would imply a reduction in the registration rate due to population increase (across the whole country; not necessarily in any one seat).

    And even a small reduction in the registration rate across the whole population could mean quite a significant reduction in the younger age group if the vast majority of the fall is in that group.
  • Flightpath
    Flightpath Posts: 4,012
    another_richard said:

    With today's averages earnings data from the ONS its possible to make some interesting comparisons:

    etc

    The average person doesn't work for the joy of it but to earn money.

    Unemployment is an issue to those who are unemployment and those who are afraid of becoming unemployed. But when fear of unemployment is low what people want is a good pay rise.

    Telling people who aren't getting good pay rises that the economy is in great shape leads to those people thinking that they're being cheated and that someone else is getting 'their share'.

    There has been wage restraint and as such many people are far better off as they have not lost their jobs. Now we have seen a significant fall in unemployment. Otherwise those who had kept their jobs would have been rolling in it as before but at the expense of the unemployed.
    Given the big build up the public sector under Labour - how do you think jobs could be preserved but for wage restraint given the massive deficit labour left?

  • another_richard
    another_richard Posts: 27,927
    edited April 2015
    DavidL said:

    Speaking to a friend of mine who lives in Glasgow SW today. His neighbours are Tories but they are all voting Labour to try and stop the SNP. May be a bit optimistic going by this polling.

    But why try to stop the SNP ?

    SNP MPs are likely to get more money for Scotland than Labour MPs and they'll likely not treat their constituents as crap as Labour MPs in safe seats tend to do.

  • Tykejohnno
    Tykejohnno Posts: 7,362
    Chris_A said:

    Makes http://moneyweek.com/election-2015-why-david-cameron-will-remain-prime-minister/ seem loopier than ever then

    He's got the tories on 7 seats in Scotland
  • RobD
    RobD Posts: 60,608
    Tykejohnno said:

    Chris_A said:

    Makes http://moneyweek.com/election-2015-why-david-cameron-will-remain-prime-minister/ seem loopier than ever then

    He's got the tories on 7 seats in Scotland
    I think I need to sit down..... :sweat:
  • state_go_away
    state_go_away Posts: 5,855
    another_richard said:

    DavidL said:

    Speaking to a friend of mine who lives in Glasgow SW today. His neighbours are Tories but they are all voting Labour to try and stop the SNP. May be a bit optimistic going by this polling.

    But why try to stop the SNP ?

    SNP MPs are likely to get more money for Scotland than Labour MPs and they'll likely not treat their constituents as crap as Labour MPs in safe seats tend to do.

    Because the more SNP the government is then the more chance the rest of the UK will turn around and say sod you we will vote to get rid of Scotland and not the other way around
  • JosiasJessop
    JosiasJessop Posts: 46,251
    SouthamObserver said:

    All those SLab MPs who so vocally opposed PR because they thought they had jobs for life; I wonder what they are thinking now. Close to 100% of the seats for 50% of the vote is not a bad return for the SNP.

    Surely they voted against AV, not PR?

    And I expect an MP to vote for the best interests of the country, not their jobs.
  • Tissue_Price
    Tissue_Price Posts: 9,039
    Lol at the optimistic punter asking for £500 at 16/1 on a UKIP v Green tie: https://www.betfair.com/exchange/politics/market?id=1.118029047
  • Pulpstar
    Pulpstar Posts: 79,813
    Conservative's best interest is served by voting Conservative.

    For instance if Murphy loses his seat I forsee it becoming an SNP-Con marginal, Labour out the picture.
  • trublue
    trublue Posts: 103
    Pretty remarkable that even with this carnage for labour in Scotland, Conservatives still can't get a working majority. They might still be able to get enough seats though to lock SNP/Lab out. But right now the momentum is against it.
  • Plato
    Plato Posts: 15,724
    Holy Ballot Box
    Tykejohnno said:

    Chris_A said:

    Makes http://moneyweek.com/election-2015-why-david-cameron-will-remain-prime-minister/ seem loopier than ever then

    He's got the tories on 7 seats in Scotland
  • state_go_away
    state_go_away Posts: 5,855
    Tissue_Price said:

    Lol at the optimistic punter asking for £500 at 16/1 on a UKIP v Green tie: https://www.betfair.com/exchange/politics/market?id=1.118029047

    its 9/1 with Coral ! Not a bad bet
  • Tissue_Price
    Tissue_Price Posts: 9,039
    state_go_away said:

    Tissue_Price said:

    Lol at the optimistic punter asking for £500 at 16/1 on a UKIP v Green tie: https://www.betfair.com/exchange/politics/market?id=1.118029047

    its 9/1 with Coral ! Not a bad bet
    Yes that 9/1 might well be value
  • another_richard
    another_richard Posts: 27,927
    edited April 2015
    Flightpath said:

    another_richard said:

    With today's averages earnings data from the ONS its possible to make some interesting comparisons:

    etc

    The average person doesn't work for the joy of it but to earn money.

    Unemployment is an issue to those who are unemployment and those who are afraid of becoming unemployed. But when fear of unemployment is low what people want is a good pay rise.

    Telling people who aren't getting good pay rises that the economy is in great shape leads to those people thinking that they're being cheated and that someone else is getting 'their share'.

    There has been wage restraint and as such many people are far better off as they have not lost their jobs. Now we have seen a significant fall in unemployment. Otherwise those who had kept their jobs would have been rolling in it as before but at the expense of the unemployed.
    Given the big build up the public sector under Labour - how do you think jobs could be preserved but for wage restraint given the massive deficit labour left?

    So you want wage stagnation and productivity stagnation and government borrowing to subsidise unskilled jobs.

    And an 'elite' getting ever richer.

    Very 1980s Eastern Bloc.




  • Flightpath
    Flightpath Posts: 4,012
    David_Evershed said:

    Since a majority of Scottish folk see themselves as victims of the English, they are bound to vote for an SNP party who will hold Labour to ransome to extract most cash from their persecutors.

    A very good reason for English (and Welsh?) voters not to vote Labour and end up with Labour paying the SNP ransome money.

    As a matter of interest do you have evidence for 'the majority' of Scots seeing themselves as victims of the English? I'm not sure the majority do.
  • Omnium
    Omnium Posts: 11,763
    nigel4england said:

    Morris_Dancer said:

    Mr. England, or embed it so deeply in the system it takes decades to root out.

    It's already embedded in the system, for example education.

    Ed will wreck the country within two years and that will encourage the right to finally rid institutions like the BBC, the civil service etc of the Socialist evil.
    It never works out like that though. Even if Ed does wreck the country he'll mostly get away with it.

    There are huge numbers of people who just equate one side or the other of the political debate with 'bad'.

    As an example we need look no further than Ed himself - he said in the last debate that he'd been 'fighting Tories all his life'. No period of decision, no period of thought - just fighting Tories. I think of myself as pretty right wing (small state), but I have never, nor would I ever, describe my political views, nor how I put them across as 'fighting socialists'.

  • Pulpstar
    Pulpstar Posts: 79,813
    Similiary places like the old Edi Pentlands seat are natural Tory places (Is that Edi South now) - heck even Jo's seat should be a Con-SNP marginal.

    Conservatives in Scotland have tactical voted themselves out the game and this is a once in a generation opportunity to establish some second places.
  • Tissue_Price
    Tissue_Price Posts: 9,039
    Pulpstar said:

    I just can't see Labour most seats now - but Ed Mili PM never looked better lol

    I don't think so. This is not good for him at all - it keeps the conversation on Sturgeon, and widens the gap between Labour and the Tories by 6 seats or so.
  • Tykejohnno
    Tykejohnno Posts: 7,362
    Pulpstar said:

    Conservative's best interest is served by voting Conservative.

    For instance if Murphy loses his seat I forsee it becoming an SNP-Con marginal, Labour out the picture.

    Agree.
  • Danny565
    Danny565 Posts: 8,091
    another_richard said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    Danny565 said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    Danny565 said:

    surbiton said:

    Shall we coin a new phrase, the silent Labour voter ?

    I do still think Scottish Labour won't be decimated quite this badly, purely because we know a lot of the pro-independence voters last year were people who had never voted before (often benefit-claimants). I wouldn't be surprised if they just didn't show up on election day.

    But even factoring that in, that's not going to save many Labour seats at this rate; we're probably talking about a 10% defeat in Glasgow SW for example as opposed to a 20% rout. At the end of the day, Labour are going to need some miracle that causes a genuine swing to hold on to these types of places.

    Labour is going to get an absolute pasting in Scotland. It took all its seats for granted and treated its electorate with contempt. Why on earth would anyone vote for that when there is a strong, consequence-free alternative?

    I agree, and my big worry is that some Labour figures are going to complacently assume this is an issue just confined to Scotland because of independence. It's not: imo you hear much the same things in many of Labour's northern heartlands about the party taking them for granted and just focussing on southern middle-class voters, with the only difference being that northern England doesn't have a party like the SNP which is precision-packaged to mop up Labour voters.

    Spot on. While UKIP is a right-wing party, Labour will just about hold on. Should that change, though, then it will be goodnight Vienna.

    Two years of PM EdM and UKIP will be hoovering up Labour votes in northern England irrespective of what policies they have.
    If UKIP elect a northern leader and shift to the left on the economy, they could wreak havoc with Labour's Northern voters.

    That goes double if Labour elect Chuka Umunna as their next leader, who would go down in the North about as well as a stackload of copies of the Sun at Anfield.
  • Tissue_Price
    Tissue_Price Posts: 9,039
    Tissue_Price said:

    state_go_away said:

    Tissue_Price said:

    Lol at the optimistic punter asking for £500 at 16/1 on a UKIP v Green tie: https://www.betfair.com/exchange/politics/market?id=1.118029047

    its 9/1 with Coral ! Not a bad bet
    Yes that 9/1 might well be value
    It's 8/1 but definitely decent. Plaid to beat UKIP at 21/10 is even better.
  • state_go_away
    state_go_away Posts: 5,855
    Tissue_Price said:

    Tissue_Price said:

    state_go_away said:

    Tissue_Price said:

    Lol at the optimistic punter asking for £500 at 16/1 on a UKIP v Green tie: https://www.betfair.com/exchange/politics/market?id=1.118029047

    its 9/1 with Coral ! Not a bad bet
    Yes that 9/1 might well be value
    It's 8/1 but definitely decent. Plaid to beat UKIP at 21/10 is even better.
    yes on both -I think I got it at 9/1 a while ago.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories