Categories
Options
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Wythenshawe: To maintain momentum today UKIP needs a good s
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Wythenshawe: To maintain momentum today UKIP needs a good second place with a vote share well above 20 percent
Unlike Labour, RESPECT and the Lib Dems Nigel Farage’s UKIP has not won a Westminster by-election during this parliament. It has been regularly, as the chart shows, getting second places and in three of the last five by-elections it has chalked up vote shares of more than 20%.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Er, except for 3 people in the PB predikshun competition
Incidentally, I think UKIP will come 3rd.
I think I'd favour UKIP to beat Con, although not with any confidence.
Second place will be fine for that, whatever the vote share.
Perhaps biblical weather was all that was needed? You've been being held back by the overwhelming normalness of things. Once the abnormal becomes normal, MRLP are the obvious choice!
It's been literally days since we've had a Gove Is The AntiChrist thread and I'm starting to get withdrawal symptoms.
In any case I see that the government is now getting it in the neck for supposedly "drowning bad news" during the floods, as though the entire work of government should grind to a halt for several weeks because the media is unable to pay attention to more than one issue at a time.
Whatever criticisms one might have of the government - and I have many - the media have certainly been looking for any excuse to give them a kicking over the last few weeks, and with my objective hat on it looks to be terribly unfair, even if there is part of me that delights in a Conservative-led government being trashed.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-26167619
Tons of branches (including some pretty thick ones) have come down but, unlike a few years ago, there don't seem to be any fallen or snapped trees. I hope Mr. Crosby et al. didn't suffer too much damage.
I'm still expecting them to finish second.
The weather in the North West last night was biblical, is more serene today.
So, that's green for the quartet whatever happens. And if the other two (or one of them) come off that'll be even better. The football fairy has clearly sprinkled you with stardust
I'll post my tips sometime tomorrow.
I'll try and tweet them in future.
The only exception is if Labour storms it and no-one manages more than about 15%, in which case second is just a consolation prize, rather like third was in the last London mayoral race.
My guess is that the already determined YES crowd will get very wound up. But they're already in the Yes camp! It's the impact on waverers that counts. Will London telling them they can have the Groat or the Euro make them think twice? I think it will. Referendums lose because of fear and fear of losing the pound in their pockets - literally - will scare many off.
The 'bullying' line, as you say, will probably wind up diehard Yes supporters, but I wonder how it'll play with the rest of Scotland, who would actually like to know what currency they'd have.
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/voting-intention-2/icm
Salmond, Sturgeon et al are going to have to move beyond just shouting "bully" and "liar" - they need to explain how they believe a currency union will work, not just that it will happen; and how Scotland will have any leverage in deciding the way it will be shaped. Threatening not to pay debts etc is absurd. To have an agreement both sides have to agree; and until there is an agreement Scotland will not be independent. That's just a matter of legal fact.
The Scots can "use" Sterling the same way I use Euros when I go on holiday. They can buy them on a currency exchange (how do they pay for them?) but they can't print them, which is the definition of "use' the SNP need
http://www.bbc.co.uk/weather/2633432
which looks peaceful enough. Presumably a low poll is good for whoever is best at PVs (in this case clearly Labour) in % though bad for the winner (ditto) in votes, so it can be spun either way. I agree that it's all about how the media choose to report it, and they're a bit bored with "dramatic UKIP advance shakes big parties" and probably wantt to do a "in-fighting starts in dismayed UKIP " piece. Yes, got some sympathy with that. Apart from the people actua;lly unfortunate enough to have been victims, this too is largely media-dependent (different Telegraph columnists have run precisely contrasting pieces saying Cameron is having a good flood or a bad flood). Disasters are on the whole good for government if not obviously their fault - Gordon did splendidly for a while merely by looking grittily determined from the moment the floods broke out, and whatever his faults he was never accused of lazy lack of interest. But if you slip up then the knives are out: the "money no object" gaffe was quite serious, because it undermined a key Tory election line (vote for us as things are so difficult). A pensioner last night who I have down as Tory copied me in on an email to my opponent, saying it's good to hear that money is freely available now, so will the Government at last get on with... etc.
In general, though, the polls aren't moving much. People are rather sensibly treating it all as a grim natural disaster and not really election-related.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/timstanley/100259435/how-hollywood-became-a-bizarre-but-integral-part-of-american-democracy/
while people who want to decide on a rational, economic basis will be frustrated, maybe there will be enoughwho are not deciding on that basis?
May I also take this opportunity of inventing the rumour that in the event of defeat the Salmond-with-the-cheeky-knees will demand a further referendum in which Scots exiles are also allowed to vote?
Not that I'd have expected the PB tories to have noticed.
*chortle*
General Election @UKELECTIONS2015 3m
For every 1,000 voters who voted for them in #GE2010 how many have they retained?
#LABOUR 695
#CONSERVATIVES 607
#LIBDEMS 214
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/feb/11/truth-about-britain-volatile-electorate-election-2015
If the LDs peed all over their rep in the UK by going into coalition with the Tories, they rinsed it in raw sewage in Scotland. Perhaps Balls joining up with George & Danny may make the latter more fragrant to Scots, otoh there's a pretty good chance it'll make Balls (even) more smelly.
Not really. The news is wall to wall on the floods and storms as expected and it's the EU elections that matter most for them. That said kipper VI still isn't showing much of an upswing for May despite the massive floods which you would expect to be good for a protest party.
Of course blaming the floods on gays might not have been the best way for kippers to impress disaffected voters on the floods.
The other thing to watch out for will be how the lib dems do. Despite Clegg's amusing ostrich faction trying to pretend otherwise if they have a dire result and even lose their deposit then I'm afraid that's going to be incredibly telling for them and there will be no way to ignore that.
I explained why he was mistaken at the time and he was quite rude about it... No apology or recognition that he was wrong so far
As Mick Pork points out, in and of itself the currency is not a huge issue for Scots voters. But this feeds through into a lot of other things that are very important to them, such as the economy and how it would function in an independent Scotland. As we know, if you cannot control your currency, you can end up in all kinds of trouble; just as you would if you start threatening not to repay debts if you don't get what you want. At some stage the Yes side will have to explain how their currency plans are going to work in practice and how they will give an independent Scottish government both the flexibility it would want and the safety net it would need.
The problem that Yes has is that there is no way to construct a currency union that does not involve the rUK dictating its terms. In explaining that the Yes side would basically be upsetting a lot of its own supporters, while at the same time raising significant doubts in the minds of undecided voters. At the moment, Scottish voters have a way to influence decisions taken in Westminster that will affect the Scottish economy - they elected the last two Chancellors, after all - post-independence in the currency union that we would undoubtedly end up with there would be absolutely no leverage at all. If you were on the Yes side, would you concede this before the vote?
What is interesting is the timing, given that this aggressive attack destroys the careful lovebombing by Mr Cameron last week (I know this last was aimed technically as much at our cousins in the rest of the UK, but ...).
I'm also interested that a Labour Shadow Chancellor and frontbencher should be weighing in so publicly on the same side as the Coalition (presumably - have to wait and see what he says). This is in marked contrast to Mr Darling who is a passé backbencher by comparison. Mr Balls is linked to Mr Miliband who is not, as far as I can recall, particularly well regarded in Scotland. But in any case being in bed with Tories is not a very popular sport in Scotland, whether as a spectator or a participant Labour activist.
None of it quite makes sense to me (even from a Unionist point of view), unless one takes the view that any old denigration and confusion is better than nothing, which may well be the case. The intervention of a Labour Shadow Chancellor does tend to reinforce my suspicion that this is also aimed in part at the BoE - the London parties must be terrified of having to undergo the same fiscal disciplines as they have gleefully been predicting for the Scots, which Mr Carney made very clear in his speech in Edinburgh.
Whilst I'm sure some will use that line, I find it entirely inaccurate. I suspect some wavering Scots may be persuaded by the line, but not the majority.
I'd also point out that the entire mood music leading up to the Osborne speech has been consistently that a currency union is deeply unlikely. This is more like a conclusion to a scientific paper, making plain what the techno-talk beforehand means, rather than a brick hurled through a window with "You can't have the pound" written on it.
Just expect more shrill calls of 'bullying' and 'Westminster parties'.
The Tories have been against entering the EuroZone because of its inherent unworkability so its no surprise that they would be against setting up a Sterling Zone.
I was really rather meaning that the YES campaign would want to avoid debate on this territory if possible for the reasons you mention, and trust that enough don't knows are swayed by anti tory feelings in combination with those who don't mind the currency uncertainty to deliver a yes.
will be interesting to see which way it goes
He could almost be a PB tory or PB Romney.
*chortle*
The impact will be to drive more to YES as these slimeballs show their real faces.
Perhaps Southam, but as Osbourne seemed to essentially argue why should the rest of the UK make a commitment to the currency union if Scotland could simply withdraw when they feel like it. Would this not challenge market confidence in the currency union and this has a potentially negative impact on the rUK no too?
And that's an important issue. There is no point in going to lots of trouble and expense to set up a shared currency if 5 years down the line one party is going to leave.
We know from Salmond's previous statements how much he hates the pound (millstone round the neck) so there can be no trust of the long term future of this sterling zone. All Osborne needs to do is point to the Euro and explain that we don't want that here.
I somehow doubt all of them will be as happy as the always amusing PB tories about that.
Still stick to your *chortles* and *rolling around*, it's clearly your comfort zone.
What's the SNP's policy? Apart from saying it's 'bullying' for 90% of the UK to not accede to its demands, obviously.
They can say Osborne's wrong, but any currency union requires agreement on both sides. I've long said the English, Welsh and Northern Irish won't want it, and it appears that the three main UK parties don't either.
They can agree and unveil Plan B (the euro or a Scottish currency). The question then becomes: why wasn't that Plan A, and why were you claiming you could have the pound when you now acknowledge you can't?
Clarity is necessary.
Of course, there's an emotional rather than a rational response, which we've already seen with Sturgeon's 'bullying' nonsense (incidentally, whilst that might fire up the firm Yes supporters it also pisses off non-Scots). That will work for some but not others, and may put off more potential supporters than it convinces.
One also recalls that I've been saying for some time any break-up could be more acrimonious than many assumes would be the case. We could get into a tit-for-tat over currency, Faslane, debt-sharing (or not) etc etc. I really hope not, but it could become ugly.
Edited extra bit: sorry, forgot the third option which Mr. G espoused below.
Using the pound in the way Panama uses the dollar is possible, but I'm not sure these are necessarily the best circumstances to be without a lender of last resort and have a foreign country run your monetary policy. Be a good way to persuade Scottish financial institutions to relocate south of the border, though.
Not a question of "lying" - the electorate would not stand for it.
I don't like the idea of the Scottish people voting to remain in the Union because they're scared that Scotland couldn't cope as an independent country, or that they would vote for independence because they are made to fear that English Tories will always hate them.
Whatever side wins, can it please be for positive reasons?
As I have been noting for some weeks - and it seems others are now starting to appreciate - the unionist politicians don't have much leeway on this, because the English public are hostile to a currency union with a separate sovereign state, drawing on their observations of the Euro. In the event of a Yes vote, the terms of the settlement negotiations would be one of the main topics for the next election.
Osbrowne is utterly toxic in scotland and I'm more than happy for him to become the face of the No campaign from now on. It is of no consequence that you and all the other PB tories and right-wingers don't like that fact. All elections and referenda boil down to trust and you lot are betting everything on Osbrowne being trusted on an currency issue that 2% of the scottish public rated the most important to them making their decision.
Not my fault if you can't see the bleeding obvious.
Which part of No are the Nats struggling to comprehend?
Danny Alexander: "I couldn't recommend a currency union to Scots and my party couldn't agree to such a proposition for the rest of the UK."
Really ?
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/279455/Sir_Nicholas_Macpherson_-_Scotland_and_a_currency_union.pdf
I would advise strongly against a currency union as currently advocated, if Scotland were to vote for independence. Why?
First, the Scottish Government is still leaving the option open of moving to a different currency option in the longer term. Successful currency unions are based on the near universal belief that they are irreversible. Imagine what would have happened to Greece two years ago if they had said they were contemplating reverting to the Drachma.
Secondly, Scotland’s banking sector is far too big in relation to its national income, which means that there is a very real risk that the continuing UK would end up bearing most of the liquidity and solvency risk which it creates.
Brutal message from HMT perm sec to @George_Osborne advising against currency union pic.twitter.com/qqaffmkE5d
Treasury calls SNP bluff pic.twitter.com/SWRb7EWvid
Last time he turned up with a skinhead and affected a scouse accent, I'm hearing hes coming in drag tonight and calling himself Janice
chortle etc.
GO
Balls
Alexander
Carney
The Treasury
The civil service
The media
The financial community
The business community
Jim Sillars ?
Everyone bar wings over Somerset ?
"There is a substantive point here. If the dashing of Scottish expectations were
perpetually blamed on continuing UK intransigence within the currency union,
relations between the nations of these islands would deteriorate, putting
intolerable pressure on the currency union."
Now, now, we know the SNP are always reasonable and never seek to blame anyone else for their problems.