Categories
Options
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Local By-Election Preview: September 5th 2013
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Local By-Election Preview: September 5th 2013
Boston in Lincolnshire (part of the Boston and Skegness constituency) seems on the surface to be a perfectly normal Conservative heartland and back at the 2003 local elections it was (Con 12, Lab 11, Lib Dem 4) but something very strange has been happening in Boston and it all centres on one thing. A bypass around Boston itself.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Sounds like a busy night.
On that note, let's hope Murray can turn it around.
A huge thank you to Harry Hayfield.
Have you see the F1 calendar for 2014?
I have. It seems to have almost as much pencil as ink. Russia, South Korea and Mexico are all maybes, and New Jersey doesn't appear at all. Some say the New York race will simply not happen.
Not that that bothers me. No country should get two races, especially when the extra one is another tedious street circuit that is designed to please beancounters rather than fans.
It was quite a dramatic drop in poll lead. An interesting precedent for the next election.
Am I right in calculating that the last election that led to a single term parliament was 1970?
It does seem to me that the British electorate likes to re elect the buggers if they win power!
FPT - no push polling, standard Populus voting questions, 3 top issues affecting Country, which party is best for various issues, am I moving away or towards various parties, communications (mail, leaflets, canvassing etc) over past few months from local parties. So fairly anodyne, apart from the last section.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2005_United_States_Grand_Prix
Sounds like Pirelli will probably stay as tyre supplier, though they should've sorted the contracts by now.
And the Austin circuit is damned good (was last year anyway. Circuits can change when they're bedded in, but the variety of corners and elevation changes suggest it'll be good on a permanent basis).
This would seem to be pretty serious as he's casting into doubt previous testimony given under oath isn't he?
Patten may have smoothed himself into his last job.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23981469
SkyNews: THE INDEPENDENT: Labour says taxpayers may have to pay more for political parties. http://t.co/MTuGMEvcOs
Sky News @SkyNews 9s
THE INDEPENDENT: Labour says taxpayers may have to pay more for political parties.
pic.twitter.com/MTuGMEvcOs
Wawrinka has opened multiple cans of whoop ass
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/russia/10290243/Russia-mocks-Britain-the-little-island.html
As I pointed out, it is very rare for a single term govt to be voted out by the British electorate?
When was the previous single term govt before Heaths? I think the pre thirties...
Mr. Eagles, thou art a turnip head. Scipio had veteran troops against Hannibal's new recruits, and the Roman spent the whole winter training his men rigorously on Sicily, whereas Hannibal lacked the opportunity.
Sadly Murray seems to have as much chance of seeing off Wawrinka as Caesar had of taking Dyrrachium.
If political parties cannot persuade people to join them and pay for them then they deserve to die.
The Boston by election should be a certain UKIP gain as it is not being defended by Eng Dems . A previous by election in the ward in 2008 was won by BNP
By chance, Carthage was destroyed in the same year as Corinth (146BC). However, the African city bounced back, whereas the Greek one did not (not sure if it was obliterated as thoroughly as the Macedonians crushed Thebes, though).
Edited extra bit: I must be off for the night. One shudders to think what historical revisionism Mr. Eagles will inflict on the thread once I'm gone...
03 September 2013
Is this the dimmest comment you have ever posted?
And if no-one supports them then they die.
And, will we be able to decide what political party we want our tax to go to? (ISTR that Germany has/had a religion tax to fund churches, in which the taxpayer chooses the religion/church)
To prevent the richest buying victory limit spending each and every year.
Murray's 77 year wait cannot be a plus for him. Instead it is a minus for all British tennis players since 1936.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/tennis/23976562
Just watched the PlusNet ad with "Just Can't Get Enough" as the backing track!
Ben Bradshaw called on the party leadership to give "clear and unambiguous" answers over its future policy direction on Syria, in a sign of the deep unease at all levels of the party about the impact of Labour's defeat of the government, which killed off the possibility of military intervention.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/sep/05/labour-syria-policy-ben-bradshaw
The government Help to Buy schemes guarantee against systemic and catastrophic falls in property market prices.
The guarantee is called when a property is repossessed and its market value has fallen by more than 5.75%. The government guarantees the lending bank for up to 14.25% of property value, being a band of value loss between 5.75% and 20%.
The government is not guaranteeing credit risk: the willingness or ability of borrowers to meet capital repayments and loan interest due. The guidelines for bank lending under the scheme require borrowers to be stress tested for increases in interest rates of 2%. In other words a borrower must satisfy the lending bank that he or she has sufficient earnings to service the loan if the interest rate increased by 2%.
If the BoE raises interest rates two years before its current predicted date, i.e. in 2015 rather than 2017, then it will be because the economy has recovered the output gap faster than expected. It is inconceivable that property prices falling in nominal terms by more than 5.75% would be a symptom of such a recovery.
The taxpayer is "on the hook" if the economy does not recover not if it does.
20 have announced their retirements.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0At91c3wX1Wu5dFkzTjFrRmJRN3F6ODBTTEs4NGFhcUE#gid=0
I suppose democracy needs political parties ... does it? ... and if the population would rather spend their money on single-interest groups or latest gadgets or beer or charities or whatever, keeping democracy functioning is a public good. Presumably there was a similar sort of reasoning (or at least, some reasoning) behind the original provision of Short money for Oppositions.
Ed is setting a new standard
State funding of political parties is of course repulsive (and that includes the Short money).
But I don't see why we shouldn't have tax relief on donations, up to some maximum per tax year. After all, there's no real difference between a charitable donation (which you make because you selflessly want to help some cause), and a political donation (which you make because you selflessly want to make the country a better place).
Labour 375 UKIP 118 Con 29
Well done UKIP. On these figures you're on course to wreck the country and bring in a government diametrically opposed to everything you want.
So it does boil down to whether political parties are a public good.
Did you see the EBA table of EU bankers earning over €1 million which I posted the other day? It showed that the UK had 1,809 or 84% of 2,159 high earning bankers in Europe (excluding Switzerland) or €2.4 billion per year of taxable income.
Be quiet, tim, don't wake the golden goose. It may fly away and lay its eggs elsewhere.
It's a crap idea. If parties can't attract funding, tough s#!t, let them die, they obviously don't have the right policies.
I'm inclined to let them get funding from wherever they want, as long as it is public knowledge, so the public can make up their mind about the type of people the party want to associate with. Obviously, we'll have to have a watchdog with very sharp teeth, to ensure honesty, and any party found to be not telling the truth should be fined, and banned, possibly have the leader spend an evening in the stocks so we can pelt 'em with rotting vegetables, or sommat.
Nice example of divide and rule from a UKIP perspective.
It seems unacceptable for an ageing celebrity to fondle, but tolerated to have a girls clitoris cut off. It is a very twisted world in which we live.
40% top rate now and a property tax on evidence of a housing bubble.
Agree?
Chippenham: Julia Reid
Cornwall SE: Stephanie McWilliam
Norfolk M: Anna Hamilton
Runneymede & Weybridge: Helen Knight
Surrey E: Helena Windsor
Con 418 LD 322 UKIP 145 Lab 138 Ind 93
But if society as a whole is now saying that one or the other or both leads to the donors acquiring too much influence, then it follows that no political party should have more money available to it than any other.
Taxpayers are not consulted over any of the destinations of their money. Pacifists have no means of diverting their taxes from Defence to somewhere else. Anti-abortionists cannot divert their taxes from NHS abortion clinics.
Society has deemed certain things to be public goods, worth paying for from taxation. If political parties are a necessary part of democracy, then they may be a public good in the same way.
I do not know enough about the functioning of democratic systems to hazard a guess whether political parties are necessary.