Categories
Options
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » How to get an effective 2-1 that CON will win most seats
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » How to get an effective 2-1 that CON will win most seats
Part of the reason is unequal sized constituencies though a much bigger factor is that LAB voters are much more reluctant to turnout where the result in their constituency appears to be a foregone conclusion. The consequence of this is that turnout levels in LAB heartlands are much lower than in CON ones which impacts on the national vote totals.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Result - Maybury & Shearwater - Conservative gain from Lib Dem
Con 44.1% (+22.6)
Lab 34.8% (+1.1)
UKIP 10.6% (-0.2)
LD 10.5% (-23.6)
http://vote-2012.proboards.com/thread/3086/elections-17th-19th-september-2013?page=3#ixzz2fDGt2Fi1
The Lib Dem vote change in this ward since 2008 is a whopping -38.6 points. That is the stuff of extinction events.
For a long time it was EVS both above and below Shadsy's best guesstimate of 275.5 Con Seats at the next UK GE. Now the Under 275.5 seats level has gone FAV, at 10/11.
Paddy Power's break point in 271.5 Con seats (5/6 both above and below).
StanJames' break point is 265.5 Con seats (10/11 both above and below).
For reference, the Conservatives won 306 seats at the last UK GE.
Twitter
Damian McBride @DPMcBride 6m
@BBC6Music @ChrisHawkinsUK You can't beat 'Dream a little dream of me' by The Mamas and The Papas, Cass Elliot whistling it out.
"Alex Salmond's vision for an independent Scotland is too narrow. We need more than old songs and tired policies"
YouGov @YouGov 10m
Update: Labour lead at 4 - Latest YouGov / The Sun results 17th Sep - Con 33%, Lab 37%, LD 9%, UKIP 13%; APP -26 http://y-g.co/1bpfZz7
http://www.getsurrey.co.uk/news/local-news/election-tories-take-woking-lib-4721668
Edit - wrote too soon:
"LIBERAL DEMOCRAT Mohammed Bashir has been found guilty of fixing the 2012 Maybury and Sheerwater ward election."
http://www.wokingnewsandmail.co.uk/?p=3948&cb=05900766055565327
Read the 'best rated' Comments to see what one section of the public think of this spendthrift policy.
Billyrawmone's is very popular:
"Sod off Clegg. Now I have to feed kids whose parents earn more than I do?!
You are supposed to be balancing the budget you innumerate to$$er.
In which case it's hard to make any conclusions from the result.
I'm surprised Bashir sentence was only not being able to stand for public office for five years - I would have thought a jail term would have been more in order.
Edit: from later articles, it looks as though it is now in the CPS's hands.
The 2012 result was overturned by High Court because of electoral fraud.
The reward for his efforts being a "plague on both your houses" response from the good citizens of Woking.
Some wonderful stuff in the article:
Mr Mawrey highlighted in his report the abnormally high number of late registrations, multiple registrations in the same property, a high proportion of postal votes to personal votes, and a higher-than average turnout figures.
The electoral commissioner, who was in jovial mood as he delivered his verdict, said: “The best that can be said of the postal voting figures in themselves is that they are ambiguous.”
A total of 43.9 per cent of voters allegedly had their say in April 2012 – this represented an eight per cent spike when compared to the 35.81 per cent average for the rest of the borough.
The turnout for the ward was also high at 41.25 per cent, more than 10 per cent higher than the average for the entire UK.
And tim is always telling us that it is the Tories who benefit most from postal voting system.
The announcement could easily have been made by Gove, it is his department after all, but the Lib Dems have been given a place in the sun. When the tory conference comes I expect that the policy announcements will be more wide ranging but probably focus on the marriage tax break. Once again a Coalition cannot do this without cooperation and tacit support.
The Coalition still operates as a more cohesive unit than the Blair/Brown Labour party did. It is surprising how quickly this has become the new normal and we take it for granted. When a prat like Cable sounds a discordant note there is almost as much briefing against him by his own side as by the tories.
Breaking all this up is going to be complicated.
Such a comment is far more likely to come from the LOTO at the House of Commons despatch box than be posted online under a Telegraph article.
The shame of the free school meals policy is that we seem to have brought up a generation of parents who do not know - or care - how to feed their children properly.
I doubt whether Tories are disputing the link between sound nutrition and learning performance in pupils of primary school age.
Nor can I see any real objection to redirecting available funds to support efforts to improve school nutrition.
The philosophical point will be the moral hazard of removing parental responsibility to provide their own children with the right foods.
It is yet another case of the means of delivery not justifying the end.
If something is given away free it is often not valued by the recipient.
However another quote from the study: Jamie Oliver's campaign seemed to have other advantages: But definitely worth considering taking forward.
a bit off the planet even for you Mr Pole.
The countdown starts ....
How will Scotland go ? ....
Yup the Rugby World Cup starts two years from today !!
Oh and er there's some vote up north about Wee Eck becoming Prime Minister up there about a year from now.
Why would any school want to send separate bills to each parent?
But will Wee Eck avoid a TV debate with a certain Mr Darling as was being suggested on Today this morning?
It looks like a swing of less than 2% will be enough to put Labour ahead in terms of seats - the tiny swing achieved by Hague in 2001 could be enough, as would Kinnock's 1992 swing.
Only 365 days of mind-numbing boredom to go !
Watch in amazement as the Badger warns the oilfields will spontaneously combust if Scotland votes yes.
Marvel as First Minister Turkey Twizzler promises all Scots endless free gold and their their own pet panda.
Wake me up in a year's time.
Have the Chinese ordered Salmond not to meet Darling ?? .... I think we should be told !!
A better use of the £600 million may be to pack the parents off to cookery school to learn how to prepare and procure nutritional lunches.
Countdown - 1 hour 1 minute 1 second
Bargain.
What I am arguing for is some provision for a discretionary decision by parents in favour of providing their children with proper nutrition and some 'ownership' of the responsibility.
This seems to have been well demonstrated by the LD conference. Are not political conferences supposed to be places where genuine differences can be aired and debated and a common policy agreed? Not according to Vince Cable who appeared - spouting bile and a twisted bitterness, but unable to defend his biliousness when keenly interviewed - old age having caught up with him and passed him by?
It is said that voters do not like a publicly divided party - so no Conference bounce for the LDs then?
I am prepared to surrender Ruskin College and allow it to be converted to a remedial cookery school for failed parents.
I shall pray or your soul.
http://conservativehome.blogs.com/thetorydiary/2013/09/exclusive-cchq-declares-conservative-party-membership-to-be-134000.html
I think the Conservative Party membership numbers must be pegged to sterling.
The pound has risen 6.6 percent in the past six months, the best performer among 10 developed-nation currencies tracked by Bloomberg Correlation-Weighted Indexes.
You know that a recovery is embedded when you read market comments such as this one on the fall in inflation rate announced yesterday:
“The data was in line with economist expectations, but the market has become accustomed to U.K. data outperforming,” said Neil Jones, head of hedge-fund sales at Mizuho Bank Ltd. in London.
Perhaps we should invite Gordon to return for a few months to knock the complacency out of the markets.
Mr. G, if only the Scots are voting, and the Scots may separate, surely it makes more sense for Salmond to debate with someone who is on equal terms (a Scottish politician representing people in Scotland) than Cameron? After all, if the vote is Yes than Salmond and Darling will be in the same boat.
I realise that he'd prefer to have a go at an English Conservative, however.
But in Newcastle they may be still trying to experience the outer limits of hedonism!
"[Mr Shapps] wants now to revise the [Conservative Party membership] figures regularly, and send MPs a league table showing where their Association stands. "
http://conservativehome.blogs.com/thetorydiary/2013/09/exclusive-cchq-declares-conservative-party-membership-to-be-134000.html
As presently framed, the Independence Referendum is an all-Scotland affairs so it should be Alex Salmond v Johann Lamont or the head of the Yes campaign v Alistair Darling as head of Better Together.
I realise for most people in England this will only register with them as an issue on 19th September 2014 but most Scots I know are utterly bored with the Indy Ref campaign and just wish the vote was today, not a year hence.
I am still far from convinced the result will be anything like as clear cut as the polls are suggesting hence my reference to 19th September 2014.
Alex Salmond's opposite number, as pointed out by Mr. Easterross below, is either the Leader of the Opposition in Scotland or the leader of the opposing referendum campaign.
Suppose we were to have a debate on leaving the EU. Would it be the fairest way if Farage spoke for Out and Barroso spoke for In?
Countdown - 15 minutes
in Holyrood and their spokesman is Darling. If Eck can't be bothered to take on the debate with his own electorate because it's beneath him, then so be it, but it doesn't really say much for the Scottish Parliamentary system.
Darling is the chairman of "better together". Now try really hard and see if you can work out who his opposite number might be. Clearly you need a few clues. "Better together" is the official No campaign while "Yes Scotland" is the official Yes campaign and both campaigns have very similar structures and job titles for their prominent figures like Darling.
Note that there is no intrinsic reason why motoring fuel should be taxed any higher than domestic fuel: we're no longer at war with Germany!
This year is no exception: prices have risen from 138.9 to 141.9 around here in recent weeks, so a drop below 140p would be welcomed.
The differential over petrol has been down to 3p/litre recently - the lowest I can recall in recent years.
In addition, people move around nowadays.
All parties should try to have as broad a base as possible. That means tackling not just numbers, but also demographics.
"To get from the current and rising UK debt levels (passed on to a newly independent Scotland) to the 60% level required of EU members under the Maastricht Treaty, NIESR says Holyrood would have to run a surplus of 3.1% annually for the next ten years.
However, its average deficit has been around 2.3% (including its geographic share of oil and gas taxation) over that same period of 2000 to 2012.
The gap between that average deficit of the past and the average surplus in the next decade suggests a 'fiscal tightening' of 5.4%. That is, you either cut spending by 5.4%, or you raise taxes, or you do a bit of both.
NIESR points out that would still leave Scotland vulnerable to a drop in the oil price or another recession, knocking its fiscal plans off course (as is the UK at present, of course). In the unique circumstances in which Scotland would find itself, the think tank has come up with an interesting, if provocative, suggestion - Scotland could trade its future oil revenue to pay off the UK's debt.
With some understatement, it is concluded: "There may be significant political limitations to this possibility."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-24140981
Worth a read - also shows how large the unknowns for Yes voters are.
Should Scotland Be An Independent Country ?
Yes 42% .. No 58%
Scotland remains in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.
His school uniform for this term (I asked the wife) cost £126.00.
School dinners (he prefers his sandwich box) are £9 a week.
It's not a concern for us but - given the 'keeping up with the Jones' culture - I bet it is a struggle for some parents to keep their children kitted out, especially if they have more than one child in school. My boy wanted a new Lego bag, Lego sandwich box, Lego pencil case etc etc..
It all adds up so I'm certainly not against the govt helping out where it can.
On the flip side, every school has its non-working parents who gets subsidised for it all. My boy was in nursery school last year with a little boy who was one of seven kids. I know the father from school, he was hell of a boy. None of the parents worked, so it must cost the govt a hell of a lot to subsidise all seven of their kids through their school lives. Fair play, their boy always looked smarter than mine!
I guess its all he has left.
The Lib Dem policy is an investment in the future, in our children and will pay dividends for decades.
The Tory policy is misguided, a waste of money and a perversion of priorities.
Well done.
Blair McDougall and Blair Jenkins are also prominent and have been on the media a fair bit in scotland. You know who isn't because he's been rather busy undermining little Ed along with the other Blairites at westminster lately? Alistair Darling.
BOO !!!!!!!!
JohnnyJimmy beat you to it. He seems well enough informed at least.
I know why a Blairite like Darling won't relish the thought of facing his opposite number but I'm afraid that's just too bad.
have you got a voter turnout prediction ?
I wholeheartedly agree that school children should have a healthy hot meal at lunch times and would go as far as mandating that this be provided by the school canteen.
As for the parental responsibility angle... I'm not convinced that ensuring school children have a decent hot lunch in the school canteen in anyway removes parental responsibility. If the kitchen is producing healthy and tasty meals that the kids are happy to eat, then surely no parent will complain (surely any responsible parent would see it as a good thing). But there's the rub, the meals need to be tasty as well as health to avoid the push from parents wanting to give packed lunches.
Don't see why it should be free though, subsidised maybe...