Categories
Options
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Will Nick Clegg lead the Lib Dems at the general election?
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Will Nick Clegg lead the Lib Dems at the general election?
Electorally, they’ve had three years of successive net loss of councillors in the local elections, finishing seventh and eighth by-elections, losing the AV referendum, House of Lords reform foundering, and that’s before we move onto the opinion polls, which has seen the Liberal Democrats consistently polling in single digits/behind UKIP, even with the most recent ICM poll, they…
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Well that would be the entirely sensible way to play it anyway, allows the new LD leader a honeymoon boost right before the GE. Also this means that whatever their faults they will have stuck an entire term in Gov't without precipitating an early GE.
This would be the best option.
Labour appear to be the Starks.
Not only does he look hopeless, he makes hopeless Ed look halfway decent.
Where is the command of his brief, confidence in his policies, steely determination and wit that Blair or Thatcher had?
You can see why Farage senses this is his moment, with voters asked to choose between two uninspiring out of their depth mediocrities.
"Our Nhs"
"Everyone in the NHS knows.."
repeatedly.
A good, winning line by Cameron. Genuinely funny, but needed better delivery.
Then he spoiled it by making some jokey drugs reference to Ibiza, almost suggesting that he went there on holiday for that sole purpose. Odd, and not very Prime Ministerial.
So far, apart from one sensible question on Syria from a sensible Tory, each Tory MP has asked about the EU and parliamentary procedure - where's the questions on growth and the key issues of the day that matter to the man on the street?
And also an unlimited legal aid budget.
Isn't he making a hostage to fortune for the next time he inevitably has to do the same - surely the 2015 Tory manifesto is going to contain some shifts on what went for this parliament?
Schoolboy error.
Cameron appears refreshed and ready for battle.
Miliband appeared to have spent the Whitsun recess in convalescence.
Cameron wins on pulse rate alone.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YFJdUJg4wOk
Miliband as Mr C and Cameron as the Jerry Sadowitz character?
It could explain their policies... ;-)
GeoffM's mob seem to be hosting our-boys on 10-07-2013. Can he get hold of some complementary tickets (with flights and accomodation throw-in)...?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/teams/charlton-athletic
As I understand it, polling, or publicity of poll results, is supposed to have an effect on voter behaviour.
Oh to be back in the nineties in the sweet sunshine.
I can't recall many u-turns in the Grands Prix I've watched.
Though the policy altering substances gag was funny, does Dave really want people asking him questions about drugs all over again
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CMnKm2bbNZk
And it's Grands Prix (like courts martial or passers-by).
Considering I wrote a French phrase into the thread header, I'm disappointed in myself for my lack of nous when it comes French,
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-22770064
As flagged by Miss Carola last night, but the comments, of which there are many, seem very enthusiastic.
Grand Prixs would be open to unfortunate mispronunciation.
"HAHA we've got him, there aren't U-turns in Grands Prix, this will bring him down, just you see"
Its through the looking glass material.
I might also post some tennis stuff or non-betting F1 things there too. Not sure yet. The move is solely because of spam on pb2, which is a shame as I've very much enjoyed posting there since 2009.
It fails the basic Bobajob test which is, "were the situation reversed would the PB Tories also have deemed it a disaster?" (i.e had Labour agreed to exceed Tory spending plans)
Of course the answer to that question is an emphatic yes. Draw your own conclusions...
Labour promising to exceed Tory spending plans (which they are still doing BTW) is a disaster electorally. Osborne has comprehensively won the spending argument.
Labour trashing universal benefits is ALSO a disaster for them. It upsets a large part of their core vote and upsets the Unions.
Win-win.
Because it was really likely that he would say anything else right now wasn't it?
"there’s not been quite so much speculation about Nick Clegg’s leadership in recent weeks."
Clegg's still toxic, the lib dems are still polling terribly while their base gets pounded, so the only thing that keeps Clegg safe is that none of his likely replacements wants to take over as coalition sh*t magnet for the next couple of years.
Far better to wait until the best moment for a possible honeymoon period election campaign for a new face. The excuses will also have totally run out for Clegg after the lib dem base gets hammered next year as well as with likely dire EU elections.
This is not “religious freedom” but theocracy-by-stealth — and a firm distinction must be drawn between the two. In a pluralist society there is no right not to be offended. There is no right to impose your doctrines on the lives of others; no right to withhold equal access to an institution from a particular group because such access transgresses your private morality.
Yet this is precisely what the opponents of gay marriage demand — and it would be foolishly complacent to imagine they will throw in the towel. What started life as a straightforward incremental reform has become the civil rights issue for which the Cameron generation will be remembered."
http://www.standard.co.uk/comment/comment/matthew-dancona-opponents-of-gay-marriage-wont-call-it-a-day-yet-8645648.html
Osborne setting spending plans now for 2015-16 has constrained Balls's ability to differentiate Labour from Tory policy at the next General Election.
It also makes the whole 'austerity is failing' message that much weaker. Current growth rates will see rapid deficit reduction return and diminish the apparent need for further cuts. So Osborne getting commitments to further cuts in June is clever politics.
Read Ed Balls's recent speech in full and you will see his anger and frustration is evident in every paragraph.
For Ed M, the solution is simple. Replace Balls before the election.
Those magic-money-tree folk are now having the scales removed from their eyes with
pliers.
This sanity from the two Eds is bound to affect their vote. For starters, where will all those protest-voting, hate the world, dreamy-eyed 2010 voting Lib Dems go?
Labour would've been better served from the start to admit we are in the shit and spent the last three years thinking up radical yet sensible ways of how to deal with it.
Promising more borrowing and more spending and maintenance of our mid-noughties standard of living was never going to work.
And things will really hit the fan when the unions find out that Labour won't be job creating in the public sector during their next term in office.
Oh and for those who think the economy is turning around and this government is getting things right, heed the words of Albert Edwards, head of international strategy at Societe Generale who's got some choice words for Osborne's mad Help To Buy scheme.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2013/jun/04/george-osborne-help-to-buy-moronic
Where were the lib Dems in stopping this craziness? It's safe to say now that this 2010 Lib Dem voter has been lost.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/finance/philipaldrick/100024765/the-uk-economic-motor-is-spluttering-back-to-life/
"The latest cause for hope has been this week’s purchasing managers indices for manufacturing, construction and now services.
All three sectors showed growth in tandem for May, for the first time since March last year. “The UK economy has moved up a gear with all cylinders now firing,” Chris Williamson, chief economist at Markit, said.
If his maths is right and the momentum carries into June, the UK could be in line to grow at 0.5pc in the second quarter."
"Why are houses too expensive in the UK? Too much debt. "
Yet households have been paying back debt at an unprecedented rate for 5 years - and prices have continued to rise in London - but less so in the rest of the Uk.
Here's the evidence:
http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/statistics/PublishingImages/hew/2012/Dec/chart1.GIF
Perhaps the rising prices in London are from international investors looking for a safe haven - and not much to do with Uk debt.
If accelerating growth means increases in tax revenues, then labour really do have a problem...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-22781146
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/conservative/9308031/Tory-peer-Baroness-Warsi-and-her-secret-business.html
I'm also waiting for BenM to tell us how on earth economic growth can accelerate in a country that's ostensibly practising austerity.
According to him, only increases in government spending can kick start growth.
Come to that, its pretty much been Ed Balls' position over the last three years too.
I have reservations about the technology but was surprised to see this article on Al-Beeb.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-22775980
I would hate to think that harvesting human embryoes would become a norm: If genetic material can be harvested from other - ahem - by-products I would be open to it's medical use.
More shocking is the following statement: Ok, that includes Sixty-eight guns* and...?
* Only 12" album I bought. Well-done Taff (or should that be the Dee)....
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/alex-massie/2013/06/prime-time-for-nationalists-stv-screens-a-60-minute-advert-for-the-snp/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=prime-time-for-nationalists-stv-screens-a-60-minute-advert-for-the-snp&utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter
The truth is the government embarked on a stupid austerity programme that killed growth. There was no need for it. Gilts were already at record lows. They've ended up borrowing far more than anticipated and the markets haven't turned. There's simply no defence of it anymore. The trouble is that Labour is so damaged thanks to overseeing the initial financial crisis and the Lib Dems hamstrung by their decision to go into government with the Tories, so there is no-one in power to make the argument. It makes you want to hit your head against a brick wall.
I'm confused, why were glassfet and replying posts removed?
It's called "sound money" Frank - takes time unlike splurging but wins out in the end - always.
However bad things get you will eventually hit the bottom. The issue is whether the growth we see now results in sustainable recovery or whether it is a dead cat bounce.
He has produced the most atrocious time trial in the Dauphine which is an excellent indicator for the Tour.
do you think the markets would have differentiated between a govt that said austerity was needed and one that didn't?
Nothing to do with cuts then? Pretty much the Labour line.
"Miliband evidently thinks he can make hay on the NHS, but he forgets that blame for many of the problems with it are shared between the government and his own party. A further complication is that in trying to present the PM as uncaring, out of touch and an enemy of the NHS, he forgets Cameron’s personal experience of the health system, to which the PM referred in passing today and which is widely recognised. The effect is to make Miliband look the mean one. Different approach needed."
http://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/blog/pmqs-miliband-needs-a-new-approach/#.Ua80Bsu9KK0
Very important for growth.
it's a simple "can't get to there from here" issue.
We saw how an expansion of both public and private balance sheets created nominal growth. The problem was the unwind.
We were (in 2010) at the point when the capital markets were not in the mood for more borrowed growth and a contraction was required.
The Cons said "no" to more borrowing and were rewarded with low bond yields and now it seems a potential return of growth. Lab said (and says) "just a bit more borrowing" but ignored the fact that there wasn't anyone else who was still willing to lend.
Lots of places have low interest rates without cuts.
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/alex-massie/2013/06/prime-time-for-nationalists-stv-screens-a-60-minute-advert-for-the-snp/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=prime-time-for-nationalists-stv-screens-a-60-minute-advert-for-the-snp&utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter
He argues, rather against the consensus, that the Nats have a big advantage because they can construct a pseudo-historical 'narrative'.
Off topic good comment on cricinfo:
"If you look at bowlers who have played at least 5 ODIs in the 12 months and bowled at least 5 overs, Bopara is ranked No 1 in the world in terms of economy rate. Dernbach is 92nd. Out of 92."
Got to be worth a try but what is wrong with Bairstow?
The labour line was increasing spending = growth = increasing tax revenues = reducing deficit.
Or put simply, increasing deficit = reducing deficit.
Tory policy only influenced low bond yields by killing the nascient recovery in 2009-10.
The subsequent double dip recession and flatlining economy fed into the very low bond yields we have experienced in the last 2 years.
I worry that this site is becoming nothing more than a diluted version of the House of Commons where all anyone does is point out negative aspects in the policies of the party that the poster supports, with an aversion to admitting anything negative about their own party.
Why? There's no downside fessing up unless you are a petty point scorer. You're not going to get deselected!
Barely any talk of betting
No response/little discussion of any bets offered
http://www.citigroup.com/citi/citiforcities/pdfs/hotspots2025.pdf
Kennedy would be the best but he is I assume ruled out
Japan has been in a yield trap for decades and the US is demonstrably a special case. There is no such argument for the UK nor any good reason why a leftist borrowing govt wouldn't have spooked the bond markets to the point whereby debt service would have wiped out any prospect of recovery for many quarters.
Plus didn't we not have a double-dip recession?
Did you get anyone to offer you odds on UKIP polling ahead of the tories at all?
Assignment [ = ]: The value on the right is held within the variable [holder] on the left.
Ergo:
- Reducing deficit result in increased tax-revenues.
- Increased tax-revenues result in Growth
Unlike your escapade yesterday we are no longer evaluating a test but assigning outcomes to results. Assignments must be true (by definition).US - the ultimate safe haven
Germany - best Euro denominated investment
France - probably second best, especially given flight from periphery, but increasinly market aware of the fundamental issues
Just got told off by @antifrank for asking
All someone had to do was say "I make it 60/40 No" for example.. didn't think that was much of a stretch
She has argued with me (and with plenty of backing, given that I'm a valleyboy and lots of my friends are valleys people) that Ed Miliband will restore Labour to its socialist values and as a party of the working class.
I told her Ed Miliband would not repeal any of the cuts the coalition have made (not the bedroom tax, not tuition fees, not child benefits, not anything). She laughed at me, told me I didn't have a clue...
I don't know whether to spend the afternoon winding her up or gently congratulating her on her leaders' graduation to sanity