Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The Scottish play. Will Wales follow Scotland and abandon Labo

SystemSystem Posts: 11,008
edited November 2019 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The Scottish play. Will Wales follow Scotland and abandon Labour at a general election?

The latest polling in Wales shows the Conservatives leading Labour 29% to 25% yet that 4% lead for the Conservatives still sees Labour win more seats than the Conservatives so it is understandable why Labour are the favourites in this market because first past the post and old constituency boundaries are working against the Conservatives in Wales.

Read the full story here


«13456

Comments

  • Options
    FloaterFloater Posts: 14,195
    first
  • Options
    Second, like the SNP dreams.
  • Options
    FloaterFloater Posts: 14,195
    3rd like Labour in Scotland on a good day

  • Options
    Wales Thread - Yawn. SNP under 50.5 is where the actions at.
  • Options
    JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901
    I predict that the SNP will be less successful in Wales.
  • Options
    nunu2nunu2 Posts: 1,453
    Could this Scottish seat be a suprise Tory gain?

    https://mobile.twitter.com/ShonaHaslam/status/1190990809178480640
  • Options
    AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    nunu2 said:

    Could this Scottish seat be a suprise Tory gain?

    https://mobile.twitter.com/ShonaHaslam/status/1190990809178480640

    Could be if Labour voters put pegs on their nose and vote Tory to stop the SNP.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,109
    1) Abandon - no. There will still be multiple Labour MPs in Wales on January 1st. Retreat from - quite possibly.

    2) For the umpteenth time, the so-called Remain alliance made no fecking difference in Brecon. It was the collapse of the tribal Labour vote that delivered the seat to the Yellows, which is part of the phenomenon we’re seeing in this poll.

    3) further question. My understanding was that the last ScotParl and Sennedd elections were postponed from 2015 to 2016 because of a clash with a general election as the government believed the Celts were too thick to deal with three ballot papers. I thought this was a one-off due to a scheduled GE and in future if there was not a GE scheduled elections would still be held quadrennially. Has this now changed permanently and therefore the next ScotParl and Sennedd elections will be in 2021?

    If so, that is when the money should move to a Labour wipeout in Wales.
  • Options
    eggegg Posts: 1,749
    David Lamy. Writing in one of the Mirror Group tabloids today.

    “equality has not extended to African soldiers who helped to win the war. There are amazing cemeteries in Kenya and Tanzania with great dedication to British soldiers but not to Africans. They were thrown into unmarked graves, this was policy by Winston Churchill’s government their graves thrown to nature. What was disturbing was the lengths to ensure Africans not buried alongside British soldiers, macabre things like measuring skulls.”

    What? Does he actually have history on his side here in his attack on Churchill’s government and the War Graves Commission?
  • Options
    JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901
    edited November 2019
    Increasingly there are no safe seats. Politics is just too volatile. Maybe not this time, but the joyous day will come when the blues lose their grip on their safe seats.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,109
    edited November 2019
    egg said:

    David Lamy. Writing in one of the Mirror Group tabloids today.

    “equality has not extended to African soldiers who helped to win the war. There are amazing cemeteries in Kenya and Tanzania with great dedication to British soldiers but not to Africans. They were thrown into unmarked graves, this was policy by Winston Churchill’s government their graves thrown to nature. What was disturbing was the lengths to ensure Africans not buried alongside British soldiers, macabre things like measuring skulls.”

    What? Does he actually have history on his side here in his attack on Churchill’s government and the War Graves Commission?

    I would have thought any war graves in those countries would relate to the First World War, not the second. Particularly in Tanzania, where AFAIK there was no fighting the Second World War, although around 100,000 Tanzanians served in the Askaris in the desert conflict and India.

    So, it should be Lloyd George’s government under attack for that if he’s right. But given the numerous memorials I have seen to Indian soldiers including in this country I am sceptical.

    EDIT - having read it, he is talking about the First World War, and Winston Churchill as Secretary of State, so not Churchill’s government. I don’t know enough about the subject to opine either way, but that would as I note above have been somewhat of a contrast with the treatment of Indian soldiers.

    I think one point he may be forgetting is that it was comparatively unusual for regiments to serve where they were raised. They would normally be sent to another part of the same continent. Moreover as Tanganyika was a German colony adjoining Rhodesia it was very possible there were not many non-white soldiers there.
  • Options
    SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 20,581
    AndyJS said:

    nunu2 said:

    Could this Scottish seat be a suprise Tory gain?

    https://mobile.twitter.com/ShonaHaslam/status/1190990809178480640

    Could be if Labour voters put pegs on their nose and vote Tory to stop the SNP.
    Any Labour supporters doing that are fecking idiots.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,645
    edited November 2019
    In Wales, I think 2019 will be a repeat of 2017, more or less. Though as per the header it was worse than I had remembered.

    AndyJS said:

    nunu2 said:

    Could this Scottish seat be a suprise Tory gain?

    https://mobile.twitter.com/ShonaHaslam/status/1190990809178480640

    Could be if Labour voters put pegs on their nose and vote Tory to stop the SNP.
    Any Labour supporters doing that are fecking idiots.
    Some people will be unionists before anything else, there's nothing wrong with that anymore than someone being nationalists first. Can't say I'd expect much of it though.
  • Options
    Back from mobile penury and no vanilla comments... anyone know the odds on ex-Tory Dorrell for Buckingham?
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,226
    It would help if vanilla could display the threads in time order
  • Options
    YBarddCwscYBarddCwsc Posts: 7,172
    edited November 2019
    Labour (probably) will still have most seats after the GE.

    To beat them, the Tories have to take all their targets down to Newport East, which means almost everything will have to go right with the Tory campaign, and almost everything wrong with Labour.

    The Remain Alliance will have almost zero effect. Only babbling idiots in the South England (who probably cooked the scheme up) could think it would have any effect. LibDem voters and Plaid Cymru voters have almost nothing in common. The Remain alliance definitely will depress the Plaid Cymru vote (which is why the effect is "almost zero" -- the main effect will actually be the opposite of what was intended).

    My predictions are the Plaid Cymru will lose Ceredigion to the LibDems; the LibDems will lose Brecon & Radnorshire to the Tories; Labour will lose (at least) Gower, Vale of Clwyd & Wrecsam to the Tories. I think Ynys Mon (internecine 3 way marginal) will change hands, but I am not sure who to.

    If Labour escape with 3 losses, they will have dodged at least another 7 bullets.
  • Options
    "Some people will be unionists before anything else, there's nothing wrong with that anymore than someone being nationalists first. Can't say I'd expect much of it though."

    I'd expect tory gains in Scotland - Kezia here telling it like it is.

    https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/jeremy-corbyns-indyref2-stance-makes-election-harder-for-scottish-labour-kezia-dugdale/ar-AAJLAKA?ocid=spartanntp
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,109

    Labour (probably) will still have most seats after the GE.

    To beat them, the Tories have to take all their targets down to Newport East, which means almost everything will have to go right with the Tory campaign, and almost everything wrong with Labour.

    The Remain Alliance will have almost zero effect. Only babbling idiots in the South England (who probably cooked the scheme up) could think it would have any effect. LibDem voters and Plaid Cymru voters have almost nothing in common. The Remain alliance definitely will depress the Plaid Cymru vote (which is why the effect is "almost zero" -- the main effect will actually be the opposite of what was intended).

    My predictions are the Plaid Cymru will lose Ceredigion to the LibDems; the LibDems will lose Brecon & Radnorshire to the Tories; Labour will lose (at least) Gower, Vale of Clwyd & Wrecsam to the Tories. I think Ynys Mon (internecine 3 way marginal) will change hands, but I am not sure who to.

    If Labour escape with 3 losses, they will have dodged at least another 7 bullets.

    I still think Bridgend is value, although I know you disagree.
  • Options

    Back from mobile penury and no vanilla comments... anyone know the odds on ex-Tory Dorrell for Buckingham?

    No odds available as far as I can see.

    If you're itching to place a bet, I'm tempted to put my money on Spurs winning and four goals in the match this afternoon another bet on Son to score two at 18/1

    Honestly if you cannot beat Everton you deserve to be relegated.
  • Options
    YBarddCwscYBarddCwsc Posts: 7,172
    ydoethur said:

    Labour (probably) will still have most seats after the GE.

    To beat them, the Tories have to take all their targets down to Newport East, which means almost everything will have to go right with the Tory campaign, and almost everything wrong with Labour.

    The Remain Alliance will have almost zero effect. Only babbling idiots in the South England (who probably cooked the scheme up) could think it would have any effect. LibDem voters and Plaid Cymru voters have almost nothing in common. The Remain alliance definitely will depress the Plaid Cymru vote (which is why the effect is "almost zero" -- the main effect will actually be the opposite of what was intended).

    My predictions are the Plaid Cymru will lose Ceredigion to the LibDems; the LibDems will lose Brecon & Radnorshire to the Tories; Labour will lose (at least) Gower, Vale of Clwyd & Wrecsam to the Tories. I think Ynys Mon (internecine 3 way marginal) will change hands, but I am not sure who to.

    If Labour escape with 3 losses, they will have dodged at least another 7 bullets.

    I still think Bridgend is value, although I know you disagree.
    Although my uncle used to live there, I don't know Bridgend very well.

    On reflection, though, you may be right. It may be more likely to go than the nominally more marginal Cardiff North.
  • Options
    SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 20,581
    BBC running a story on their website about real people pretending to be 'Boris bots'.

    Thank goodness we don't have that problem here on PB...
  • Options
    nunu2 said:

    Could this Scottish seat be a suprise Tory gain?

    https://mobile.twitter.com/ShonaHaslam/status/1190990809178480640

    No.
  • Options
    CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,157
    I have worked with, investigated and interviewed many people like Boris. Getting the truth out of them is like trying to nail jelly to a wall.

    I have absolutely no doubt that had Boris gone into the City he would have ended up being investigated by people like me. I am therefore completely immune to his charms, though I recognise that others aren't. Wholly untrustworthy, IMO. Note that untrustworthy people often have other talents. The pity of them is that if they had integrity they would not get themselves or others into trouble and could use their talents wisely and effectively. But I'm afraid that, for me, the lack of integrity is a big no-no.

    It is probably naive - or touchingly hopeful - of me to believe, as I was told when I was a child, that your lies eventually catch up with you.
  • Options
    AndrewAndrew Posts: 2,900

    BBC running a story on their website about real people pretending to be 'Boris bots'.

    Thank goodness we don't have that problem here on PB...


    //"Brilliant Fantastic"&name="Boris"
  • Options
    ydoethur said:

    malcolmg said:

    ydoethur said:

    malcolmg said:

    ydoethur said:

    Alistair said:

    AndyJS said:

    If Tories in Ross, Skye & Lochaber decide to hold their nose and vote LD to get rid of the SNP, it's possible Blackford could lose his seat.

    Why would the second place vote for the third place to unseat the incumbent? If it was to happen it would be the most sensational set of swings over the last 3 elections

    2010
    LibDem 52.6
    Con 12.2

    2015
    LibDem 35.9
    Con 6.2

    2017
    LibDem 20.9
    Con 24.8


    It would be interesting a bit closer to the election to see a constituency poll for this one. My answer would be that there are probably a number of Conservatives and SNP who are willing to vote Liberal Democrat, but very few Liberal Democrats and still fewer SNP who would be willing to vote Conservative. Therefore the Tories are at their ceiling while the Liberal Democrats - who after all held the seat just five years ago - are not.

    But for that to happen it has to become clear that the LibDems are the main challengers again so they can rally a unionist vote behind them.
    Hard to see SNP voting LD's given it is an election on Indyref2
    That’s precisely why they might do so Malcolm. Is every supporter of the SNP also a supporter of independence? Logic would suggest yes. But it is worth remembering that 3% of Brexit Party supporters are Remainers.

    The danger for Sturgeon in making this a single issue election is if there is still a majority against independence there is a risk she will get clobbered by it.

    The advantage is she then doesn’t have to talk about the exhausted volcanoes aspect of the SNP’s domestic agenda.
    She has to go all out for it , any more delay will be very bad for her. SNP for sure will increase seats, just a case of how many. She will then have to fight Westminster big time.
    Which will also be advantageous for her as it means independence will dominate the debate leading up to the Scottish Parliament elections next year (I think I’m right in saying they will be next year, not 2021). And that unquestionably is where she is strong.

    It will also remove the focus from domestic weakness on, for example, education or policing.
    The next Scottish general election is due to be held on 6 May 2021. Per Scottish Elections (Dates) Act 2016. (Supported IIRC by all parties.)
  • Options
    YBarddCwscYBarddCwsc Posts: 7,172
    Cyclefree said:

    I have worked with, investigated and interviewed many people like Boris. Getting the truth out of them is like trying to nail jelly to a wall.

    I have absolutely no doubt that had Boris gone into the City he would have ended up being investigated by people like me. I am therefore completely immune to his charms, though I recognise that others aren't. Wholly untrustworthy, IMO. Note that untrustworthy people often have other talents. The pity of them is that if they had integrity they would not get themselves or others into trouble and could use their talents wisely and effectively. But I'm afraid that, for me, the lack of integrity is a big no-no.

    It is probably naive - or touchingly hopeful - of me to believe, as I was told when I was a child, that your lies eventually catch up with you.

    Whoever told you that as a child was ... err ... lying.

    All the evidence of modern politics is that liars prosper enormously (see Blair, Clinton, Trump, Johnson).

    Stodgy people without the facility of glib & charming mendacity are usually failures (Brown, May).

    It is one of the reasons why I am braced for a Tory majority.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,109
    edited November 2019

    ydoethur said:

    malcolmg said:

    ydoethur said:

    malcolmg said:

    ydoethur said:

    Alistair said:

    AndyJS said:

    If Tories in Ross, Skye & Lochaber decide to hold their nose and vote LD to get rid of the SNP, it's possible Blackford could lose his seat.

    Why would the second place vote for the third place to unseat the incumbent? If it was to happen it would be the most sensational set of swings over the last 3 elections

    2010
    LibDem 52.6
    Con 12.2

    2015
    LibDem 35.9
    Con 6.2

    2017
    LibDem 20.9
    Con 24.8


    It would be interesting a bit closer to the election to see a constituency poll for this one. My answer would be that there are probably a number of Conservatives and SNP who are willing to vote Liberal Democrat, but very few Liberal Democrats and still fewer SNP who would be willing to vote Conservative. Therefore the Tories are at their ceiling while the Liberal Democrats - who after all held the seat just five years ago - are not.

    But for that to happen it has to become clear that the LibDems are the main challengers again so they can rally a unionist vote behind them.
    Hard to see SNP voting LD's given it is an election on Indyref2
    That’s precisely why they might do so Malcolm. Is every supporter of the SNP also a supporter of independence? Logic would suggest yes. But it is worth remembering that 3% of Brexit Party supporters are Remainers.

    The danger for Sturgeon in making this a single issue election is if there is still a majority against independence there is a risk she will get clobbered by it.

    The advantage is she then doesn’t have to talk about the exhausted volcanoes aspect of the SNP’s domestic agenda.
    She has to go all out for it , any more delay will be very bad for her. SNP for sure will increase seats, just a case of how many. She will then have to fight Westminster big time.
    Which will also be advantageous for her as it means independence will dominate the debate leading up to the Scottish Parliament elections next year (I think I’m right in saying they will be next year, not 2021). And that unquestionably is where she is strong.

    It will also remove the focus from domestic weakness on, for example, education or policing.
    The next Scottish general election is due to be held on 6 May 2021. Per Scottish Elections (Dates) Act 2016. (Supported IIRC by all parties.)
    Thanks. So that means 18 months of arguments about independence to distract from domestic issues.

    I assume that applies to Wales as well?
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,109

    Cyclefree said:

    I have worked with, investigated and interviewed many people like Boris. Getting the truth out of them is like trying to nail jelly to a wall.

    I have absolutely no doubt that had Boris gone into the City he would have ended up being investigated by people like me. I am therefore completely immune to his charms, though I recognise that others aren't. Wholly untrustworthy, IMO. Note that untrustworthy people often have other talents. The pity of them is that if they had integrity they would not get themselves or others into trouble and could use their talents wisely and effectively. But I'm afraid that, for me, the lack of integrity is a big no-no.

    It is probably naive - or touchingly hopeful - of me to believe, as I was told when I was a child, that your lies eventually catch up with you.

    Whoever told you that as a child was ... err ... lying.

    All the evidence of modern politics is that liars prosper enormously (see Blair, Clinton, Trump, Johnson).

    Stodgy people without the facility of glib & charming mendacity are usually failures (Brown, May).

    It is one of the reasons why I am braced for a Tory majority.
    Be fair. Brown was a liar as well.
  • Options
    YBarddCwscYBarddCwsc Posts: 7,172
    ydoethur said:

    Cyclefree said:

    I have worked with, investigated and interviewed many people like Boris. Getting the truth out of them is like trying to nail jelly to a wall.

    I have absolutely no doubt that had Boris gone into the City he would have ended up being investigated by people like me. I am therefore completely immune to his charms, though I recognise that others aren't. Wholly untrustworthy, IMO. Note that untrustworthy people often have other talents. The pity of them is that if they had integrity they would not get themselves or others into trouble and could use their talents wisely and effectively. But I'm afraid that, for me, the lack of integrity is a big no-no.

    It is probably naive - or touchingly hopeful - of me to believe, as I was told when I was a child, that your lies eventually catch up with you.

    Whoever told you that as a child was ... err ... lying.

    All the evidence of modern politics is that liars prosper enormously (see Blair, Clinton, Trump, Johnson).

    Stodgy people without the facility of glib & charming mendacity are usually failures (Brown, May).

    It is one of the reasons why I am braced for a Tory majority.
    Be fair. Brown was a liar as well.
    Not a good one.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,109
    Scott_P said:
    So in a month or so’s time both of them will be unemployed.

    Should add spice to any libel action that may occur.
  • Options
    FloaterFloater Posts: 14,195
    Jonathan said:

    Increasingly there are no safe seats. Politics is just too volatile. Maybe not this time, but the joyous day will come when the blues lose their grip on their safe seats.

    Perhaps when Labour come to their senses

    Going to be a long wait then
  • Options
    viewcodeviewcode Posts: 18,631
    edited November 2019
    @Byronic FPT

    Question: Four draws, from a pack of 78 cards, what is the probability that the same card appears in each draw?

    Answer: I'm going to make some simplifying assumptions here. I assume you don't care which is the "same card" beforehand. I assume that you don't replace the card once picked. OK, your draws will look like this (order not relevant)

    Draw 1:
    * A,B,C. Probability p is 1.

    Draw 2:
    * one of them must be A, B or C,
    * which is 1-(all of them must not be A,B nor C)
    * so p = 1-(75/78*74/77*73/76)
    * => p = 1-0.887599243
    * => p = 0.112400757

    Draw 3:
    * as draw 2
    * so p = 0.112400757

    Draw 4:
    * as draw 2
    * so p = 0.112400757

    So the probability p is 1*0.112400757*0.112400757*0.112400757
    = 0.001420063
    = 0.14% to two decimal places

    NOTE
    * Please acknowledge receipt
    * This calculation might be bollocks. I have not checked it and I take no responsibility if it is right or wrong. Please ask other people to check it. If you want me to do a better calculation, please pay me.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,109

    ydoethur said:

    Cyclefree said:

    I have worked with, investigated and interviewed many people like Boris. Getting the truth out of them is like trying to nail jelly to a wall.

    I have absolutely no doubt that had Boris gone into the City he would have ended up being investigated by people like me. I am therefore completely immune to his charms, though I recognise that others aren't. Wholly untrustworthy, IMO. Note that untrustworthy people often have other talents. The pity of them is that if they had integrity they would not get themselves or others into trouble and could use their talents wisely and effectively. But I'm afraid that, for me, the lack of integrity is a big no-no.

    It is probably naive - or touchingly hopeful - of me to believe, as I was told when I was a child, that your lies eventually catch up with you.

    Whoever told you that as a child was ... err ... lying.

    All the evidence of modern politics is that liars prosper enormously (see Blair, Clinton, Trump, Johnson).

    Stodgy people without the facility of glib & charming mendacity are usually failures (Brown, May).

    It is one of the reasons why I am braced for a Tory majority.
    Be fair. Brown was a liar as well.
    Not a good one.
    Well, no, but you had to admire somebody with the sheer gumption to claim he had never said something there was video footage of him saying 47 times in the Commons alone.
  • Options
    viewcodeviewcode Posts: 18,631
    egg said:

    David Lamy. Writing in one of the Mirror Group tabloids today.

    “equality has not extended to African soldiers who helped to win the war. There are amazing cemeteries in Kenya and Tanzania with great dedication to British soldiers but not to Africans. They were thrown into unmarked graves, this was policy by Winston Churchill’s government their graves thrown to nature. What was disturbing was the lengths to ensure Africans not buried alongside British soldiers, macabre things like measuring skulls.”

    What? Does he actually have history on his side here in his attack on Churchill’s government and the War Graves Commission?

    I am beginning to really dislike the 21st century... :(
  • Options
    FloaterFloater Posts: 14,195

    AndyJS said:

    nunu2 said:

    Could this Scottish seat be a suprise Tory gain?

    https://mobile.twitter.com/ShonaHaslam/status/1190990809178480640

    Could be if Labour voters put pegs on their nose and vote Tory to stop the SNP.
    Any Labour supporters doing that are fecking idiots.
    Any Labour supporter voting (marxist) Labour are fecking idiots too
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,811

    Wales Thread - Yawn. SNP under 50.5 is where the actions at.

    LOL, Tories happy that SNP are going to only get 80% of the seats available, you could not make it up.
  • Options
    FloaterFloater Posts: 14,195
    ydoethur said:

    Cyclefree said:

    I have worked with, investigated and interviewed many people like Boris. Getting the truth out of them is like trying to nail jelly to a wall.

    I have absolutely no doubt that had Boris gone into the City he would have ended up being investigated by people like me. I am therefore completely immune to his charms, though I recognise that others aren't. Wholly untrustworthy, IMO. Note that untrustworthy people often have other talents. The pity of them is that if they had integrity they would not get themselves or others into trouble and could use their talents wisely and effectively. But I'm afraid that, for me, the lack of integrity is a big no-no.

    It is probably naive - or touchingly hopeful - of me to believe, as I was told when I was a child, that your lies eventually catch up with you.

    Whoever told you that as a child was ... err ... lying.

    All the evidence of modern politics is that liars prosper enormously (see Blair, Clinton, Trump, Johnson).

    Stodgy people without the facility of glib & charming mendacity are usually failures (Brown, May).

    It is one of the reasons why I am braced for a Tory majority.
    Be fair. Brown was a liar as well.
    A liar and a vicious bully
  • Options
    malcolmg said:

    Wales Thread - Yawn. SNP under 50.5 is where the actions at.

    LOL, Tories happy that SNP are going to only get 80% of the seats available, you could not make it up.
    Happy to take money off the moronic nationalist betfairers
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,109
    Floater said:

    Jonathan said:

    Increasingly there are no safe seats. Politics is just too volatile. Maybe not this time, but the joyous day will come when the blues lose their grip on their safe seats.

    Perhaps when Labour come to their senses

    Going to be a long wait then
    The Tories have held Horsham continuously since 1880, and won it at every General Election since 1868 (interrupted by two by-election defeats).

    How’s that for a long wait for change?
  • Options
    StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 12,146
    edited November 2019
    Scott_P said:
    Makes this market worth a look:

    Aberdeen South (incumbent Ross Thomson MP, SCon, Maj 4,752, not standing for re-election)

    SNP 2/5
    Con 2/1
    LD 25/1

    (Hills, Ladbrokes, Smarkets)
  • Options
    BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 7,987
    I follow the NOM market as an indicator of how the various campaigns are going.

    It has shortened this afternoon to 2.02 and Tory Majority has lengthened to 2.2.

    Has anything happened today? Is it the BXP ad?
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,811

    "Some people will be unionists before anything else, there's nothing wrong with that anymore than someone being nationalists first. Can't say I'd expect much of it though."

    I'd expect tory gains in Scotland - Kezia here telling it like it is.

    https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/jeremy-corbyns-indyref2-stance-makes-election-harder-for-scottish-labour-kezia-dugdale/ar-AAJLAKA?ocid=spartanntp

    Loons are out in force today, her word is almost as bad as McTernan's.
    Was she not going to be FM once , before the Messiah claimed it would be her and was seen off. How many times do these nutters need to be thrashed to understand they are going nowhere.
  • Options
    malcolmg said:

    "Some people will be unionists before anything else, there's nothing wrong with that anymore than someone being nationalists first. Can't say I'd expect much of it though."

    I'd expect tory gains in Scotland - Kezia here telling it like it is.

    https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/jeremy-corbyns-indyref2-stance-makes-election-harder-for-scottish-labour-kezia-dugdale/ar-AAJLAKA?ocid=spartanntp

    Loons are out in force today, her word is almost as bad as McTernan's.
    Was she not going to be FM once , before the Messiah claimed it would be her and was seen off. How many times do these nutters need to be thrashed to understand they are going nowhere.
    You benefit from a non-split vote. Nationalists vote SNP but unfortunately for them they'll never get above 50pc in any election or referendum.
  • Options
    Barnesian said:

    I follow the NOM market as an indicator of how the various campaigns are going.

    It has shortened this afternoon to 2.02 and Tory Majority has lengthened to 2.2.

    Has anything happened today? Is it the BXP ad?

    I think the rather dampened headlines on the weekend polls might have something to do with it.

    We are in a bit of a holding pattern at the moment, and the Tories do not want to be seen as triumphalist. I can understand the market being rather cautious too: we’ve not had manifesto launches, debates, any real skirmishes yet.
  • Options
    AndrewAndrew Posts: 2,900
    edited November 2019
    Barnesian said:

    I follow the NOM market as an indicator of how the various campaigns are going.

    It has shortened this afternoon to 2.02 and Tory Majority has lengthened to 2.2.

    Has anything happened today? Is it the BXP ad?


    Spreads have nudged up to 324 - 213 though, and probably they'll increase by a seat each day while the polls remain as they are.
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,095
    Jonathan said:

    Increasingly there are no safe seats. Politics is just too volatile. Maybe not this time, but the joyous day will come when the blues lose their grip on their safe seats.

    Likely to be after Labour have lost their grip on many of theirs (outside English city centres).
  • Options
    Barnesian said:

    I follow the NOM market as an indicator of how the various campaigns are going.

    It has shortened this afternoon to 2.02 and Tory Majority has lengthened to 2.2.

    Has anything happened today? Is it the BXP ad?

    Wise. The NOM market is the key one to keep an eye on.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,109

    malcolmg said:

    "Some people will be unionists before anything else, there's nothing wrong with that anymore than someone being nationalists first. Can't say I'd expect much of it though."

    I'd expect tory gains in Scotland - Kezia here telling it like it is.

    https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/jeremy-corbyns-indyref2-stance-makes-election-harder-for-scottish-labour-kezia-dugdale/ar-AAJLAKA?ocid=spartanntp

    Loons are out in force today, her word is almost as bad as McTernan's.
    Was she not going to be FM once , before the Messiah claimed it would be her and was seen off. How many times do these nutters need to be thrashed to understand they are going nowhere.
    You benefit from a non-split vote. Nationalists vote SNP but unfortunately for them they'll never get above 50pc in any election or referendum.
    That’s rather a bold statement. We all thought that about Leave as well, with the honourable exception of @SouthamObserver.

    I would have said the real risk however to the SNP in this election - and one of the reasons they are being so aggressive about independence - is they have been in power for twelve years and their domestic agenda is currently more or less ground to a halt, without noticeable successes and without even making full use of the powers they already have. Like Johnson (in this one respect) they are being kept afloat by the weakness and ineptitude of the opposition not by their own efforts. At some point, that will come to a sudden end. At Westminster, their pitch is to be independent and vigorous in standing up for Scotland’s interests. But ultimately, they have been mostly an irrelevance for the last four years while the DUP (unfortunately) have exerted an influence far out of proportion to their smaller numbers of MPs. That also makes their record a tough sell.

    But of course for most SNP supporters they won’t be bothered about losing power or even about damage to Scotland’s society and economy by poor government if they achieve independence first, because that is all they really care about.
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,811

    malcolmg said:

    "Some people will be unionists before anything else, there's nothing wrong with that anymore than someone being nationalists first. Can't say I'd expect much of it though."

    I'd expect tory gains in Scotland - Kezia here telling it like it is.

    https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/jeremy-corbyns-indyref2-stance-makes-election-harder-for-scottish-labour-kezia-dugdale/ar-AAJLAKA?ocid=spartanntp

    Loons are out in force today, her word is almost as bad as McTernan's.
    Was she not going to be FM once , before the Messiah claimed it would be her and was seen off. How many times do these nutters need to be thrashed to understand they are going nowhere.
    You benefit from a non-split vote. Nationalists vote SNP but unfortunately for them they'll never get above 50pc in any election or referendum.
    unionists are cacking their breeks
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,811

    malcolmg said:

    "Some people will be unionists before anything else, there's nothing wrong with that anymore than someone being nationalists first. Can't say I'd expect much of it though."

    I'd expect tory gains in Scotland - Kezia here telling it like it is.

    https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/jeremy-corbyns-indyref2-stance-makes-election-harder-for-scottish-labour-kezia-dugdale/ar-AAJLAKA?ocid=spartanntp

    Loons are out in force today, her word is almost as bad as McTernan's.
    Was she not going to be FM once , before the Messiah claimed it would be her and was seen off. How many times do these nutters need to be thrashed to understand they are going nowhere.
    You benefit from a non-split vote. Nationalists vote SNP but unfortunately for them they'll never get above 50pc in any election or referendum.
    They benefit from having policies for Scotland , unlike the London sockpuppets.
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,532
    Nice away win. Soyuncu and Vardeh.

    £80 million for our 3rd best Centre Back. Nice business! :smiley:
  • Options
    justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    Philip_Thompson said:

    'Are you trying to have a go at women's rights?'

    I have never believed in Abortion on Demand on the same basis that I deny the right of a mother to kill her own children. Nor do I adhere to the ultra-Catholic position of no abortion under any circumstances.It should certainly not be made available as a form of contraception
  • Options
    CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,157

    Cyclefree said:

    I have worked with, investigated and interviewed many people like Boris. Getting the truth out of them is like trying to nail jelly to a wall.

    I have absolutely no doubt that had Boris gone into the City he would have ended up being investigated by people like me. I am therefore completely immune to his charms, though I recognise that others aren't. Wholly untrustworthy, IMO. Note that untrustworthy people often have other talents. The pity of them is that if they had integrity they would not get themselves or others into trouble and could use their talents wisely and effectively. But I'm afraid that, for me, the lack of integrity is a big no-no.

    It is probably naive - or touchingly hopeful - of me to believe, as I was told when I was a child, that your lies eventually catch up with you.

    Whoever told you that as a child was ... err ... lying.

    All the evidence of modern politics is that liars prosper enormously (see Blair, Clinton, Trump, Johnson).

    Stodgy people without the facility of glib & charming mendacity are usually failures (Brown, May).

    It is one of the reasons why I am braced for a Tory majority.
    It is possible to be a person of integrity without being stodgy. May was not particularly truthful either - or Brown, come to that.

    I still think trying to be a person of integrity is worth while and the only decent way to live your life, even if you fall short.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,109
    On that basis, I look forward to he day he rules out resigning. May it not be long delayed...
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,027
    justin124 said:

    Philip_Thompson said:

    'Are you trying to have a go at women's rights?'

    I have never believed in Abortion on Demand on the same basis that I deny the right of a mother to kill her own children. Nor do I adhere to the ultra-Catholic position of no abortion under any circumstances.It should certainly not be made available as a form of contraception

    So you’d ban the morning after pill?
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,109
    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:

    I have worked with, investigated and interviewed many people like Boris. Getting the truth out of them is like trying to nail jelly to a wall.

    I have absolutely no doubt that had Boris gone into the City he would have ended up being investigated by people like me. I am therefore completely immune to his charms, though I recognise that others aren't. Wholly untrustworthy, IMO. Note that untrustworthy people often have other talents. The pity of them is that if they had integrity they would not get themselves or others into trouble and could use their talents wisely and effectively. But I'm afraid that, for me, the lack of integrity is a big no-no.

    It is probably naive - or touchingly hopeful - of me to believe, as I was told when I was a child, that your lies eventually catch up with you.

    Whoever told you that as a child was ... err ... lying.

    All the evidence of modern politics is that liars prosper enormously (see Blair, Clinton, Trump, Johnson).

    Stodgy people without the facility of glib & charming mendacity are usually failures (Brown, May).

    It is one of the reasons why I am braced for a Tory majority.
    It is possible to be a person of integrity without being stodgy. May was not particularly truthful either - or Brown, come to that.

    I still think trying to be a person of integrity is worth while and the only decent way to live your life, even if you fall short.
    Who was the last totally honest politician to achieve high political office? I’m struggling to think of one. Callaghan or Home would come closest, but not necessarily close.
  • Options
    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    "Some people will be unionists before anything else, there's nothing wrong with that anymore than someone being nationalists first. Can't say I'd expect much of it though."

    I'd expect tory gains in Scotland - Kezia here telling it like it is.

    https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/jeremy-corbyns-indyref2-stance-makes-election-harder-for-scottish-labour-kezia-dugdale/ar-AAJLAKA?ocid=spartanntp

    Loons are out in force today, her word is almost as bad as McTernan's.
    Was she not going to be FM once , before the Messiah claimed it would be her and was seen off. How many times do these nutters need to be thrashed to understand they are going nowhere.
    You benefit from a non-split vote. Nationalists vote SNP but unfortunately for them they'll never get above 50pc in any election or referendum.
    They benefit from having policies for Scotland , unlike the London sockpuppets.
    Like increased alcohol prices - well canny; increasing alcohol prices for the Scots. You couldn't make it up if you tried. The should really be called the Anti-Scots in Holyrood party.
  • Options
    ydoethur said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:

    I have worked with, investigated and interviewed many people like Boris. Getting the truth out of them is like trying to nail jelly to a wall.

    I have absolutely no doubt that had Boris gone into the City he would have ended up being investigated by people like me. I am therefore completely immune to his charms, though I recognise that others aren't. Wholly untrustworthy, IMO. Note that untrustworthy people often have other talents. The pity of them is that if they had integrity they would not get themselves or others into trouble and could use their talents wisely and effectively. But I'm afraid that, for me, the lack of integrity is a big no-no.

    It is probably naive - or touchingly hopeful - of me to believe, as I was told when I was a child, that your lies eventually catch up with you.

    Whoever told you that as a child was ... err ... lying.

    All the evidence of modern politics is that liars prosper enormously (see Blair, Clinton, Trump, Johnson).

    Stodgy people without the facility of glib & charming mendacity are usually failures (Brown, May).

    It is one of the reasons why I am braced for a Tory majority.
    It is possible to be a person of integrity without being stodgy. May was not particularly truthful either - or Brown, come to that.

    I still think trying to be a person of integrity is worth while and the only decent way to live your life, even if you fall short.
    Who was the last totally honest politician to achieve high political office? I’m struggling to think of one. Callaghan or Home would come closest, but not necessarily close.
    Thatcher, surely. She came out and said what she thought most of the time.
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,027

    ydoethur said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:

    I have worked with, investigated and interviewed many people like Boris. Getting the truth out of them is like trying to nail jelly to a wall.

    I have absolutely no doubt that had Boris gone into the City he would have ended up being investigated by people like me. I am therefore completely immune to his charms, though I recognise that others aren't. Wholly untrustworthy, IMO. Note that untrustworthy people often have other talents. The pity of them is that if they had integrity they would not get themselves or others into trouble and could use their talents wisely and effectively. But I'm afraid that, for me, the lack of integrity is a big no-no.

    It is probably naive - or touchingly hopeful - of me to believe, as I was told when I was a child, that your lies eventually catch up with you.

    Whoever told you that as a child was ... err ... lying.

    All the evidence of modern politics is that liars prosper enormously (see Blair, Clinton, Trump, Johnson).

    Stodgy people without the facility of glib & charming mendacity are usually failures (Brown, May).

    It is one of the reasons why I am braced for a Tory majority.
    It is possible to be a person of integrity without being stodgy. May was not particularly truthful either - or Brown, come to that.

    I still think trying to be a person of integrity is worth while and the only decent way to live your life, even if you fall short.
    Who was the last totally honest politician to achieve high political office? I’m struggling to think of one. Callaghan or Home would come closest, but not necessarily close.
    Thatcher, surely. She came out and said what she thought most of the time.
    Although apparently when she said our destiny was in Europe as part of the community, she was just young and naive and this wasn’t at all what she thought.
  • Options
    ReggieCideReggieCide Posts: 4,312
    ydoethur said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:

    I have worked with, investigated and interviewed many people like Boris. Getting the truth out of them is like trying to nail jelly to a wall.

    I have absolutely no doubt that had Boris gone into the City he would have ended up being investigated by people like me. I am therefore completely immune to his charms, though I recognise that others aren't. Wholly untrustworthy, IMO. Note that untrustworthy people often have other talents. The pity of them is that if they had integrity they would not get themselves or others into trouble and could use their talents wisely and effectively. But I'm afraid that, for me, the lack of integrity is a big no-no.

    It is probably naive - or touchingly hopeful - of me to believe, as I was told when I was a child, that your lies eventually catch up with you.

    Whoever told you that as a child was ... err ... lying.

    All the evidence of modern politics is that liars prosper enormously (see Blair, Clinton, Trump, Johnson).

    Stodgy people without the facility of glib & charming mendacity are usually failures (Brown, May).

    It is one of the reasons why I am braced for a Tory majority.
    It is possible to be a person of integrity without being stodgy. May was not particularly truthful either - or Brown, come to that.

    I still think trying to be a person of integrity is worth while and the only decent way to live your life, even if you fall short.
    Who was the last totally honest politician to achieve high political office? I’m struggling to think of one. Callaghan or Home would come closest, but not necessarily close.
    politician - honest - dream on
  • Options
    CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,157
    ydoethur said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:

    I have worked with, investigated and interviewed many people like Boris. Getting the truth out of them is like trying to nail jelly to a wall.

    I have absolutely no doubt that had Boris gone into the City he would have ended up being investigated by people like me. I am therefore completely immune to his charms, though I recognise that others aren't. Wholly untrustworthy, IMO. Note that untrustworthy people often have other talents. The pity of them is that if they had integrity they would not get themselves or others into trouble and could use their talents wisely and effectively. But I'm afraid that, for me, the lack of integrity is a big no-no.

    It is probably naive - or touchingly hopeful - of me to believe, as I was told when I was a child, that your lies eventually catch up with you.

    Whoever told you that as a child was ... err ... lying.

    All the evidence of modern politics is that liars prosper enormously (see Blair, Clinton, Trump, Johnson).

    Stodgy people without the facility of glib & charming mendacity are usually failures (Brown, May).

    It is one of the reasons why I am braced for a Tory majority.
    It is possible to be a person of integrity without being stodgy. May was not particularly truthful either - or Brown, come to that.

    I still think trying to be a person of integrity is worth while and the only decent way to live your life, even if you fall short.
    Who was the last totally honest politician to achieve high political office? I’m struggling to think of one. Callaghan or Home would come closest, but not necessarily close.

    I don't know about total honesty. Major was OK. Thatcher didn't strike me as a fundamentally dishonest person, in the way that Boris does. Was Heath particularly dishonest?
  • Options
    ydoethur said:

    malcolmg said:

    "Some people will be unionists before anything else, there's nothing wrong with that anymore than someone being nationalists first. Can't say I'd expect much of it though."

    I'd expect tory gains in Scotland - Kezia here telling it like it is.

    https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/jeremy-corbyns-indyref2-stance-makes-election-harder-for-scottish-labour-kezia-dugdale/ar-AAJLAKA?ocid=spartanntp

    Loons are out in force today, her word is almost as bad as McTernan's.
    Was she not going to be FM once , before the Messiah claimed it would be her and was seen off. How many times do these nutters need to be thrashed to understand they are going nowhere.
    You benefit from a non-split vote. Nationalists vote SNP but unfortunately for them they'll never get above 50pc in any election or referendum.
    That’s rather a bold statement. We all thought that about Leave as well, with the honourable exception of @SouthamObserver.

    I would have said the real risk however to the SNP in this election - and one of the reasons they are being so aggressive about independence - is they have been in power for twelve years and their domestic agenda is currently more or less ground to a halt, without noticeable successes and without even making full use of the powers they already have. Like Johnson (in this one respect) they are being kept afloat by the weakness and ineptitude of the opposition not by their own efforts. At some point, that will come to a sudden end. At Westminster, their pitch is to be independent and vigorous in standing up for Scotland’s interests. But ultimately, they have been mostly an irrelevance for the last four years while the DUP (unfortunately) have exerted an influence far out of proportion to their smaller numbers of MPs. That also makes their record a tough sell.

    But of course for most SNP supporters they won’t be bothered about losing power or even about damage to Scotland’s society and economy by poor government if they achieve independence first, because that is all they really care about.
    For what it's worth I will be betting heavily on a Yes to Independence vote as insurance against being paid in Scottish groats.
  • Options

    Scott_P said:
    Makes this market worth a look:

    Aberdeen South (incumbent Ross Thomson MP, SCon, Maj 4,752, not standing for re-election)

    SNP 2/5
    Con 2/1
    LD 25/1

    (Hills, Ladbrokes, Smarkets)
    This is the seat where my father was a Lib Dem councillor many years ago. The Lib Dem’s won’t win it but may well get a second. Supporting neither Brexit nor independence is a good place to be in many parts of Scotland and only one party has that policy
  • Options
    This election comes down to just how good Boris is going to be and the last few weeks when Carrie will be alongside him apparently. She has taken six weeks off work, initially to campaign with conservative female candidates in individual marginal seats and then step in alongside Boris.

    This will cause a 'stir' if it happens as the media will be enthralled with the important things in an election, like what Carrie is wearing but no doubt her strong green credentials. Indeed I believe this is where the fracking moratorium has come from

    The question then will be one of how a presidential style campaign is received

  • Options
    TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 39,966
    edited November 2019

    Scott_P said:
    Makes this market worth a look:

    Aberdeen South (incumbent Ross Thomson MP, SCon, Maj 4,752, not standing for re-election)

    SNP 2/5
    Con 2/1
    LD 25/1

    (Hills, Ladbrokes, Smarkets)
    SCon odds probably marginally better with generic candidate X (assuming X isn't a Brexiteer Borisophile groper).
  • Options
    BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 7,987
    Andrew said:

    Barnesian said:

    I follow the NOM market as an indicator of how the various campaigns are going.

    It has shortened this afternoon to 2.02 and Tory Majority has lengthened to 2.2.

    Has anything happened today? Is it the BXP ad?


    Spreads have nudged up to 324 - 213 though, and probably they'll increase by a seat each day while the polls remain as they are.
    Interesting. Thanks. Is there a link to the spreads?
  • Options
    This isn't surprising. Leave won the referendum by persuading a load of people who don't normally vote to support them. The "take back control" slogan attracted people who dislike representative democracy, I suspect, the kind of people who think MPs are "all on the take" and "all the same" (low information voters, in other words).
  • Options
    viewcodeviewcode Posts: 18,631
    ydoethur said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:

    I have worked with, investigated and interviewed many people like Boris. Getting the truth out of them is like trying to nail jelly to a wall.

    I have absolutely no doubt that had Boris gone into the City he would have ended up being investigated by people like me. I am therefore completely immune to his charms, though I recognise that others aren't. Wholly untrustworthy, IMO. Note that untrustworthy people often have other talents. The pity of them is that if they had integrity they would not get themselves or others into trouble and could use their talents wisely and effectively. But I'm afraid that, for me, the lack of integrity is a big no-no.

    It is probably naive - or touchingly hopeful - of me to believe, as I was told when I was a child, that your lies eventually catch up with you.

    Whoever told you that as a child was ... err ... lying.

    All the evidence of modern politics is that liars prosper enormously (see Blair, Clinton, Trump, Johnson).

    Stodgy people without the facility of glib & charming mendacity are usually failures (Brown, May).

    It is one of the reasons why I am braced for a Tory majority.
    It is possible to be a person of integrity without being stodgy. May was not particularly truthful either - or Brown, come to that.

    I still think trying to be a person of integrity is worth while and the only decent way to live your life, even if you fall short.
    Who was the last totally honest politician to achieve high political office? I’m struggling to think of one. Callaghan or Home would come closest, but not necessarily close.
    If I may politey disagree. Most of them have told us what they honestly believed to be the truth. Sometimes they have not volunteered the full truth (Callaghan and Chevaline, Major and IRA negotiation) or deluded themselves (Blair and Iraq) , but they rarely full-on lie. Wasn't Eden the last one to lie about something really important with he intent to decieve? Or does Blair's elision/exaggeration of the 45-minute thing count as a lie?
  • Options
    Posted less than 24 hrs ago. Life comes at ye fast in Scotpol.

    https://twitter.com/RossThomson_MP/status/1190697327478149120?s=20
  • Options
    CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,157

    This election comes down to just how good Boris is going to be and the last few weeks when Carrie will be alongside him apparently. She has taken six weeks off work, initially to campaign with conservative female candidates in individual marginal seats and then step in alongside Boris.

    This will cause a 'stir' if it happens as the media will be enthralled with the important things in an election, like what Carrie is wearing but no doubt her strong green credentials. Indeed I believe this is where the fracking moratorium has come from

    The question then will be one of how a presidential style campaign is received

    Oh goodie. We're meant to be enthralled, are we, by policy being dictated by the PM's latest squeeze, an unelected person with no scientific credentials to her name......
  • Options

    ydoethur said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:

    I have worked with, investigated and interviewed many people like Boris. Getting the truth out of them is like trying to nail jelly to a wall.

    I have absolutely no doubt that had Boris gone into the City he would have ended up being investigated by people like me. I am therefore completely immune to his charms, though I recognise that others aren't. Wholly untrustworthy, IMO. Note that untrustworthy people often have other talents. The pity of them is that if they had integrity they would not get themselves or others into trouble and could use their talents wisely and effectively. But I'm afraid that, for me, the lack of integrity is a big no-no.

    It is probably naive - or touchingly hopeful - of me to believe, as I was told when I was a child, that your lies eventually catch up with you.

    Whoever told you that as a child was ... err ... lying.

    All the evidence of modern politics is that liars prosper enormously (see Blair, Clinton, Trump, Johnson).

    Stodgy people without the facility of glib & charming mendacity are usually failures (Brown, May).

    It is one of the reasons why I am braced for a Tory majority.
    It is possible to be a person of integrity without being stodgy. May was not particularly truthful either - or Brown, come to that.

    I still think trying to be a person of integrity is worth while and the only decent way to live your life, even if you fall short.
    Who was the last totally honest politician to achieve high political office? I’m struggling to think of one. Callaghan or Home would come closest, but not necessarily close.
    Thatcher, surely. She came out and said what she thought most of the time.
    Although apparently when she said our destiny was in Europe as part of the community, she was just young and naive and this wasn’t at all what she thought.
    I think she genuinely did change her mind on Europe, or adapted it at least. I think she always believed in the free trade aspects of Europe, she was deeply suspicious of the political integration that was picking up speed in the late 80s and early 90s.
  • Options
    hamiltonacehamiltonace Posts: 642
    edited November 2019

    Scott_P said:
    Makes this market worth a look:

    Aberdeen South (incumbent Ross Thomson MP, SCon, Maj 4,752, not standing for re-election)

    SNP 2/5
    Con 2/1
    LD 25/1

    (Hills, Ladbrokes, Smarkets)
    This is the seat where my father was a Lib Dem councillor many years ago. The Lib Dem’s won’t win it but may well get a second. Supporting neither Brexit nor independence is a good place to be in many parts of Scotland and only one party has that policy
    One thing that has not really been mentioned on this website is that for Scotland this election is not really about the nhs as that is under the Scottish elections. As such there is less of a fear for tories like me that a vote for Lib Dem will let Corbyn in.

    Another thing to mention is that Ross Thomson’s support for a hard brexit angered a lot of Scottish tories and he was out even without this unfortunate event
  • Options
    franklynfranklyn Posts: 297
    I live in NE Bedfordshire, Alistair Burt's old constituency. It has always had an enormous Conservative majority, but Alistair was enormously well regarded, and people were distraught when he was booted out. I have just had the second set of Lib Dem campaign literature through my letterbox, and the Lib Dems have a strong presence on the local council. It would take an earthquake for the Conservatives to lose this seat, but earthquakes do happen; perhaps more to the point, if the Conservatives have to direct resources to a seat like this it takes resources away from other seats. Indeed the local Conservatives haven't even chose a candidate yet, or appeared to update their website
  • Options
    JBriskinindyref2JBriskinindyref2 Posts: 1,775
    edited November 2019
    Interesting to note that the Separatist triad are not adverse to posting on a Welsh thread as they are on a Scottish thread.

    Anyway, that's enough from me I've got a KFC coming to munch with the footie while we wait for Lewis's big race.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,109

    ydoethur said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:

    I have worked with, investigated and interviewed many people like Boris. Getting the truth out of them is like trying to nail jelly to a wall.

    I have absolutely no doubt that had Boris gone into the City he would have ended up being investigated by people like me. I am therefore completely immune to his charms, though I recognise that others aren't. Wholly untrustworthy, IMO. Note that untrustworthy people often have other talents. The pity of them is that if they had integrity they would not get themselves or others into trouble and could use their talents wisely and effectively. But I'm afraid that, for me, the lack of integrity is a big no-no.

    It is probably naive - or touchingly hopeful - of me to believe, as I was told when I was a child, that your lies eventually catch up with you.

    Whoever told you that as a child was ... err ... lying.

    All the evidence of modern politics is that liars prosper enormously (see Blair, Clinton, Trump, Johnson).

    Stodgy people without the facility of glib & charming mendacity are usually failures (Brown, May).

    It is one of the reasons why I am braced for a Tory majority.
    It is possible to be a person of integrity without being stodgy. May was not particularly truthful either - or Brown, come to that.

    I still think trying to be a person of integrity is worth while and the only decent way to live your life, even if you fall short.
    Who was the last totally honest politician to achieve high political office? I’m struggling to think of one. Callaghan or Home would come closest, but not necessarily close.
    Thatcher, surely. She came out and said what she thought most of the time.
    Although apparently when she said our destiny was in Europe as part of the community, she was just young and naive and this wasn’t at all what she thought.
    I think she genuinely did change her mind on Europe, or adapted it at least. I think she always believed in the free trade aspects of Europe, she was deeply suspicious of the political integration that was picking up speed in the late 80s and early 90s.
    TBH, I think the real reason she turned against the EU was because Jacques Delors said people shouldn’t worry about Thatcher’s reforms as he would reimpose lots of the regulations she had repealed on the UK via EU mechanisms, making her look a fool.

    She looked especially silly because she herself had been heavily involved in getting him appointed.
  • Options
    JohnOJohnO Posts: 4,214

    ydoethur said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:

    I have worked with, investigated and interviewed many people like Boris. Getting the truth out of them is like trying to nail jelly to a wall.

    I have absolutely no doubt that had Boris gone into the City he would have ended up being investigated by people like me. I am therefore completely immune to his charms, though I recognise that others aren't. Wholly untrustworthy, IMO. Note that untrustworthy people often have other talents. The pity of them is that if they had integrity they would not get themselves or others into trouble and could use their talents wisely and effectively. But I'm afraid that, for me, the lack of integrity is a big no-no.

    It is probably naive - or touchingly hopeful - of me to believe, as I was told when I was a child, that your lies eventually catch up with you.

    Whoever told you that as a child was ... err ... lying.

    All the evidence of modern politics is that liars prosper enormously (see Blair, Clinton, Trump, Johnson).

    Stodgy people without the facility of glib & charming mendacity are usually failures (Brown, May).

    It is one of the reasons why I am braced for a Tory majority.
    It is possible to be a person of integrity without being stodgy. May was not particularly truthful either - or Brown, come to that.

    I still think trying to be a person of integrity is worth while and the only decent way to live your life, even if you fall short.
    Who was the last totally honest politician to achieve high political office? I’m struggling to think of one. Callaghan or Home would come closest, but not necessarily close.
    Thatcher, surely. She came out and said what she thought most of the time.
    And Clem Attlee too.
  • Options
    ByronicByronic Posts: 3,578
    viewcode said:

    @Byronic FPT

    Question: Four draws, from a pack of 78 cards, what is the probability that the same card appears in each draw?

    Answer: I'm going to make some simplifying assumptions here. I assume you don't care which is the "same card" beforehand. I assume that you don't replace the card once picked. OK, your draws will look like this (order not relevant)

    Draw 1:
    * A,B,C. Probability p is 1.

    Draw 2:
    * one of them must be A, B or C,
    * which is 1-(all of them must not be A,B nor C)
    * so p = 1-(75/78*74/77*73/76)
    * => p = 1-0.887599243
    * => p = 0.112400757

    Draw 3:
    * as draw 2
    * so p = 0.112400757

    Draw 4:
    * as draw 2
    * so p = 0.112400757

    So the probability p is 1*0.112400757*0.112400757*0.112400757
    = 0.001420063
    = 0.14% to two decimal places

    NOTE
    * Please acknowledge receipt
    * This calculation might be bollocks. I have not checked it and I take no responsibility if it is right or wrong. Please ask other people to check it. If you want me to do a better calculation, please pay me.

    lol. thanks very much!

    Interesting.

    Perhaps I didn't write my explanation very well. But the card is always replaced into the pack (it's a Tarot pack, that's how they work).

    Let's say the card I got were these:

    I do a traditional three card Tarot spread.

    First spread, of a row of 3 cards, drawn from a totally shuffled pack of 78 cards:

    Death Reversed, The Fool Upright, Magician Upright

    i then replace all the cards, shuffle again, and draw 3 more cards from the pack of 78, and I get:

    Lovers Reversed, The Fool Upright, Ace of Pentangles Reversed

    Again the cards go back, pack is shuffled, next draw:

    Fool Upright, Knight of Wands Reversed, 8 of Cups Reversed

    Again the cards go back, pack is shuffled, next draw:

    Fool Upright, Lovers Upright, King of Cups Reversed


    I have now received the Fool Card, Upright, in four draw of 3 cards in sequence.

    In my maths, which I believe is probably wrong, the chances of this happening are 1 in 140,608, or 0.00000711197%



  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,109
    JohnO said:

    ydoethur said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:

    I have worked with, investigated and interviewed many people like Boris. Getting the truth out of them is like trying to nail jelly to a wall.

    I have absolutely no doubt that had Boris gone into the City he would have ended up being investigated by people like me. I am therefore completely immune to his charms, though I recognise that others aren't. Wholly untrustworthy, IMO. Note that untrustworthy people often have other talents. The pity of them is that if they had integrity they would not get themselves or others into trouble and could use their talents wisely and effectively. But I'm afraid that, for me, the lack of integrity is a big no-no.

    It is probably naive - or touchingly hopeful - of me to believe, as I was told when I was a child, that your lies eventually catch up with you.

    Whoever told you that as a child was ... err ... lying.

    All the evidence of modern politics is that liars prosper enormously (see Blair, Clinton, Trump, Johnson).

    Stodgy people without the facility of glib & charming mendacity are usually failures (Brown, May).

    It is one of the reasons why I am braced for a Tory majority.
    It is possible to be a person of integrity without being stodgy. May was not particularly truthful either - or Brown, come to that.

    I still think trying to be a person of integrity is worth while and the only decent way to live your life, even if you fall short.
    Who was the last totally honest politician to achieve high political office? I’m struggling to think of one. Callaghan or Home would come closest, but not necessarily close.
    Thatcher, surely. She came out and said what she thought most of the time.
    And Clem Attlee too.
    Clement Attlee also left office 68 years ago.
  • Options
    On labours 'mad cap' scheme to insulate, double glaze and update heating in all UK homes by 2030 at a cost of 250 billion, 60 billion borrowed now but the rest coming from unidentified sources, you do have to wonder if they ever get out into the real world

    The scheme will be free to everyone on benefits but they are 'kindly' offering interest free loans to everyone else. I assume this scheme will be mandatory, otherwise it will fall apart at the seams, so are they going to force homeowners to take out unwanted loans
  • Options
    Byronic said:

    viewcode said:

    @Byronic FPT

    Question: Four draws, from a pack of 78 cards, what is the probability that the same card appears in each draw?

    Answer: I'm going to make some simplifying assumptions here. I assume you don't care which is the "same card" beforehand. I assume that you don't replace the card once picked. OK, your draws will look like this (order not relevant)

    Draw 1:
    * A,B,C. Probability p is 1.

    Draw 2:
    * one of them must be A, B or C,
    * which is 1-(all of them must not be A,B nor C)
    * so p = 1-(75/78*74/77*73/76)
    * => p = 1-0.887599243
    * => p = 0.112400757

    Draw 3:
    * as draw 2
    * so p = 0.112400757

    Draw 4:
    * as draw 2
    * so p = 0.112400757

    So the probability p is 1*0.112400757*0.112400757*0.112400757
    = 0.001420063
    = 0.14% to two decimal places

    NOTE
    * Please acknowledge receipt
    * This calculation might be bollocks. I have not checked it and I take no responsibility if it is right or wrong. Please ask other people to check it. If you want me to do a better calculation, please pay me.

    lol. thanks very much!

    Interesting.

    Perhaps I didn't write my explanation very well. But the card is always replaced into the pack (it's a Tarot pack, that's how they work).

    Let's say the card I got were these:

    I do a traditional three card Tarot spread.

    First spread, of a row of 3 cards, drawn from a totally shuffled pack of 78 cards:

    Death Reversed, The Fool Upright, Magician Upright

    i then replace all the cards, shuffle again, and draw 3 more cards from the pack of 78, and I get:

    Lovers Reversed, The Fool Upright, Ace of Pentangles Reversed

    Again the cards go back, pack is shuffled, next draw:

    Fool Upright, Knight of Wands Reversed, 8 of Cups Reversed

    Again the cards go back, pack is shuffled, next draw:

    Fool Upright, Lovers Upright, King of Cups Reversed


    I have now received the Fool Card, Upright, in four draw of 3 cards in sequence.

    In my maths, which I believe is probably wrong, the chances of this happening are 1 in 140,608, or 0.00000711197%



    Tarot cards??? Shouldn't you have posted this on hipppydippy.com or something?
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,109
    edited November 2019

    On labours 'mad cap' scheme to insulate, double glaze and update heating in all UK homes by 2030 at a cost of 250 billion, 60 billion borrowed now but the rest coming from unidentified sources, you do have to wonder if they ever get out into the real world

    The scheme will be free to everyone on benefits but they are 'kindly' offering interest free loans to everyone else. I assume this scheme will be mandatory, otherwise it will fall apart at the seams, so are they going to force homeowners to take out unwanted loans

    You wonder whether that’s the idea - force people to take out loans, make them default and then repossess the house. That’s not far away from what Russell-Moyle was proposing last year.
  • Options
    ByronicByronic Posts: 3,578

    Byronic said:

    viewcode said:

    @Byronic FPT

    Question: Four draws, from a pack of 78 cards, what is the probability that the same card appears in each draw?

    Answer: I'm going to make some simplifying assumptions here. I assume you don't care which is the "same card" beforehand. I assume that you don't replace the card once picked. OK, your draws will look like this (order not relevant)

    Draw 1:
    * A,B,C. Probability p is 1.

    Draw 2:
    * one of them must be A, B or C,
    * which is 1-(all of them must not be A,B nor C)
    * so p = 1-(75/78*74/77*73/76)
    * => p = 1-0.887599243
    * => p = 0.112400757

    Draw 3:
    * as draw 2
    * so p = 0.112400757

    Draw 4:
    * as draw 2
    * so p = 0.112400757

    So the probability p is 1*0.112400757*0.112400757*0.112400757
    = 0.001420063
    = 0.14% to two decimal places

    NOTE
    * Please acknowledge receipt
    * This calculation might be bollocks. I have not checked it and I take no responsibility if it is right or wrong. Please ask other people to check it. If you want me to do a better calculation, please pay me.

    lol. thanks very much!

    Interesting.

    Perhaps I didn't write my explanation very well. But the card is always replaced into the pack (it's a Tarot pack, that's how they work).

    Let's say the card I got were these:

    I do a traditional three card Tarot spread.

    First spread, of a row of 3 cards, drawn from a totally shuffled pack of 78 cards:

    Death Reversed, The Fool Upright, Magician Upright

    i then replace all the cards, shuffle again, and draw 3 more cards from the pack of 78, and I get:

    Lovers Reversed, The Fool Upright, Ace of Pentangles Reversed

    Again the cards go back, pack is shuffled, next draw:

    Fool Upright, Knight of Wands Reversed, 8 of Cups Reversed

    Again the cards go back, pack is shuffled, next draw:

    Fool Upright, Lovers Upright, King of Cups Reversed


    I have now received the Fool Card, Upright, in four draw of 3 cards in sequence.

    In my maths, which I believe is probably wrong, the chances of this happening are 1 in 140,608, or 0.00000711197%



    Tarot cards??? Shouldn't you have posted this on hipppydippy.com or something?
    They're still cards and this is a betting site that loves probability maths!
  • Options
    On these betting sites what does NOM mean? Does it mean no party that reaches 326 seats? It seems to me de facto majority is lower than 326 seats since one can count on SF not taking their seats.
  • Options
    ByronicByronic Posts: 3,578

    Byronic said:

    viewcode said:

    @Byronic FPT

    Question: Four draws, from a pack of 78 cards, what is the probability that the same card appears in each draw?

    Answer: I'm going to make some simplifying assumptions here. I assume you don't care which is the "same card" beforehand. I assume that you don't replace the card once picked. OK, your draws will look like this (order not relevant)

    Draw 1:
    * A,B,C. Probability p is 1.

    Draw 2:
    * one of them must be A, B or C,
    * which is 1-(all of them must not be A,B nor C)
    * so p = 1-(75/78*74/77*73/76)
    * => p = 1-0.887599243
    * => p = 0.112400757

    Draw 3:
    * as draw 2
    * so p = 0.112400757

    Draw 4:
    * as draw 2
    * so p = 0.112400757

    So the probability p is 1*0.112400757*0.112400757*0.112400757
    = 0.001420063
    = 0.14% to two decimal places

    NOTE
    * Please acknowledge receipt
    * This calculation might be bollocks. I have not checked it and I take no responsibility if it is right or wrong. Please ask other people to check it. If you want me to do a better calculation, please pay me.

    lol. thanks very much!

    Interesting.

    Perhaps I didn't write my explanation very well. But the card is always replaced into the pack (it's a Tarot pack, that's how they work).

    Let's say the card I got were these:

    I do a traditional three card Tarot spread.

    First spread, of a row of 3 cards, drawn from a totally shuffled pack of 78 cards:

    Death Reversed, The Fool Upright, Magician Upright

    i then replace all the cards, shuffle again, and draw 3 more cards from the pack of 78, and I get:

    Lovers Reversed, The Fool Upright, Ace of Pentangles Reversed

    Again the cards go back, pack is shuffled, next draw:

    Fool Upright, Knight of Wands Reversed, 8 of Cups Reversed

    Again the cards go back, pack is shuffled, next draw:

    Fool Upright, Lovers Upright, King of Cups Reversed


    I have now received the Fool Card, Upright, in four draw of 3 cards in sequence.

    In my maths, which I believe is probably wrong, the chances of this happening are 1 in 140,608, or 0.00000711197%



    Tarot cards??? Shouldn't you have posted this on hipppydippy.com or something?
    PS don't laugh at Tarot cards. While their clairvoyant ability is - to put it mildly - rather moot, they are a wonderful tool for drawing out your subconscious anxieties and desires, on a difficult subject. They can tell you what you really think, they give voice to the inarticulate speech of the heart.

    I have used them at several critical moments in my life, and they have been brilliantly effective.
  • Options
    Cyclefree said:

    This election comes down to just how good Boris is going to be and the last few weeks when Carrie will be alongside him apparently. She has taken six weeks off work, initially to campaign with conservative female candidates in individual marginal seats and then step in alongside Boris.

    This will cause a 'stir' if it happens as the media will be enthralled with the important things in an election, like what Carrie is wearing but no doubt her strong green credentials. Indeed I believe this is where the fracking moratorium has come from

    The question then will be one of how a presidential style campaign is received

    Oh goodie. We're meant to be enthralled, are we, by policy being dictated by the PM's latest squeeze, an unelected person with no scientific credentials to her name......
    I am sure you can do better than that.

    We all know the media will go overboard in circumstances like this and will latch onto the trivia

    I am sure you won't be enthralled but do you think the media will not report on her green credentials, many unelected people are involved in our political discourse
  • Options
    FloaterFloater Posts: 14,195

    Cyclefree said:

    This election comes down to just how good Boris is going to be and the last few weeks when Carrie will be alongside him apparently. She has taken six weeks off work, initially to campaign with conservative female candidates in individual marginal seats and then step in alongside Boris.

    This will cause a 'stir' if it happens as the media will be enthralled with the important things in an election, like what Carrie is wearing but no doubt her strong green credentials. Indeed I believe this is where the fracking moratorium has come from

    The question then will be one of how a presidential style campaign is received

    Oh goodie. We're meant to be enthralled, are we, by policy being dictated by the PM's latest squeeze, an unelected person with no scientific credentials to her name......
    I am sure you can do better than that.

    We all know the media will go overboard in circumstances like this and will latch onto the trivia

    I am sure you won't be enthralled but do you think the media will not report on her green credentials, many unelected people are involved in our political discourse
    Boris seems a little like Brexit sending otherwise rational people off the deep end.
  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,129
    Annoying betting post from me. Yesterday you could do a juicy arb, SI vs BF, on Labour most seats. It's gone now. SI have adjusted to come in line.
  • Options
    Perceptions of the Conservatives stewardship of the economy are similar to previous elections. Johnson and Javid hold an 18 point lead over Corbyn and McDonnell in trust to handle the economy. https://t.co/sFVn2LYrI4
  • Options
    viewcode said:

    ydoethur said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:

    I have worked with, investigated and interviewed many people like Boris. Getting the truth out of them is like trying to nail jelly to a wall.

    I have absolutely no doubt that had Boris gone into the City he would have ended up being investigated by people like me. I am therefore completely immune to his charms, though I recognise that others aren't. Wholly untrustworthy, IMO. Note that untrustworthy people often have other talents. The pity of them is that if they had integrity they would not get themselves or others into trouble and could use their talents wisely and effectively. But I'm afraid that, for me, the lack of integrity is a big no-no.

    It is probably naive - or touchingly hopeful - of me to believe, as I was told when I was a child, that your lies eventually catch up with you.

    Whoever told you that as a child was ... err ... lying.

    All the evidence of modern politics is that liars prosper enormously (see Blair, Clinton, Trump, Johnson).

    Stodgy people without the facility of glib & charming mendacity are usually failures (Brown, May).

    It is one of the reasons why I am braced for a Tory majority.
    It is possible to be a person of integrity without being stodgy. May was not particularly truthful either - or Brown, come to that.

    I still think trying to be a person of integrity is worth while and the only decent way to live your life, even if you fall short.
    Who was the last totally honest politician to achieve high political office? I’m struggling to think of one. Callaghan or Home would come closest, but not necessarily close.
    If I may politey disagree. Most of them have told us what they honestly believed to be the truth. Sometimes they have not volunteered the full truth (Callaghan and Chevaline, Major and IRA negotiation) or deluded themselves (Blair and Iraq) , but they rarely full-on lie. Wasn't Eden the last one to lie about something really important with he intent to decieve? Or does Blair's elision/exaggeration of the 45-minute thing count as a lie?
    The Hutton Report concluded that he did not actually lie, although he did everything but.
  • Options
    FloaterFloater Posts: 14,195

    ydoethur said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:

    I have worked with, investigated and interviewed many people like Boris. Getting the truth out of them is like trying to nail jelly to a wall.

    I have absolutely no doubt that had Boris gone into the City he would have ended up being investigated by people like me. I am therefore completely immune to his charms, though I recognise that others aren't. Wholly untrustworthy, IMO. Note that untrustworthy people often have other talents. The pity of them is that if they had integrity they would not get themselves or others into trouble and could use their talents wisely and effectively. But I'm afraid that, for me, the lack of integrity is a big no-no.

    It is probably naive - or touchingly hopeful - of me to believe, as I was told when I was a child, that your lies eventually catch up with you.

    Whoever told you that as a child was ... err ... lying.

    All the evidence of modern politics is that liars prosper enormously (see Blair, Clinton, Trump, Johnson).

    Stodgy people without the facility of glib & charming mendacity are usually failures (Brown, May).

    It is one of the reasons why I am braced for a Tory majority.
    It is possible to be a person of integrity without being stodgy. May was not particularly truthful either - or Brown, come to that.

    I still think trying to be a person of integrity is worth while and the only decent way to live your life, even if you fall short.
    Who was the last totally honest politician to achieve high political office? I’m struggling to think of one. Callaghan or Home would come closest, but not necessarily close.
    politician - honest - dream on
    That about sums it up
  • Options
    Cyclefree said:

    I have worked with, investigated and interviewed many people like Boris. Getting the truth out of them is like trying to nail jelly to a wall.

    I have absolutely no doubt that had Boris gone into the City he would have ended up being investigated by people like me. I am therefore completely immune to his charms, though I recognise that others aren't. Wholly untrustworthy, IMO. Note that untrustworthy people often have other talents. The pity of them is that if they had integrity they would not get themselves or others into trouble and could use their talents wisely and effectively. But I'm afraid that, for me, the lack of integrity is a big no-no.

    It is probably naive - or touchingly hopeful - of me to believe, as I was told when I was a child, that your lies eventually catch up with you.

    Our mutual acquaintance and former college friend of Johnson, Noah Richler, is of the opinion that Boris has enormous talents which if put to some worthwhile purpose could have brought great benefits to many, and not just himself.

    I'm inclined to agree with that.
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,095

    viewcode said:

    ydoethur said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:

    I have worked with, investigated and interviewed many people like Boris. Getting the truth out of them is like trying to nail jelly to a wall.

    I have absolutely no doubt that had Boris gone into the City he would have ended up being investigated by people like me. I am therefore completely immune to his charms, though I recognise that others aren't. Wholly untrustworthy, IMO. Note that untrustworthy people often have other talents. The pity of them is that if they had integrity they would not get themselves or others into trouble and could use their talents wisely and effectively. But I'm afraid that, for me, the lack of integrity is a big no-no.

    It is probably naive - or touchingly hopeful - of me to believe, as I was told when I was a child, that your lies eventually catch up with you.

    Whoever told you that as a child was ... err ... lying.

    All the evidence of modern politics is that liars prosper enormously (see Blair, Clinton, Trump, Johnson).

    Stodgy people without the facility of glib & charming mendacity are usually failures (Brown, May).

    It is one of the reasons why I am braced for a Tory majority.
    It is possible to be a person of integrity without being stodgy. May was not particularly truthful either - or Brown, come to that.

    I still think trying to be a person of integrity is worth while and the only decent way to live your life, even if you fall short.
    Who was the last totally honest politician to achieve high political office? I’m struggling to think of one. Callaghan or Home would come closest, but not necessarily close.
    If I may politey disagree. Most of them have told us what they honestly believed to be the truth. Sometimes they have not volunteered the full truth (Callaghan and Chevaline, Major and IRA negotiation) or deluded themselves (Blair and Iraq) , but they rarely full-on lie. Wasn't Eden the last one to lie about something really important with he intent to decieve? Or does Blair's elision/exaggeration of the 45-minute thing count as a lie?
    The Hutton Report concluded that he did not actually lie, although he did everything but.
    And nobody believes the Hutton Report got close to the truth.
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,811

    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    "Some people will be unionists before anything else, there's nothing wrong with that anymore than someone being nationalists first. Can't say I'd expect much of it though."

    I'd expect tory gains in Scotland - Kezia here telling it like it is.

    https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/jeremy-corbyns-indyref2-stance-makes-election-harder-for-scottish-labour-kezia-dugdale/ar-AAJLAKA?ocid=spartanntp

    Loons are out in force today, her word is almost as bad as McTernan's.
    Was she not going to be FM once , before the Messiah claimed it would be her and was seen off. How many times do these nutters need to be thrashed to understand they are going nowhere.
    You benefit from a non-split vote. Nationalists vote SNP but unfortunately for them they'll never get above 50pc in any election or referendum.
    They benefit from having policies for Scotland , unlike the London sockpuppets.
    Like increased alcohol prices - well canny; increasing alcohol prices for the Scots. You couldn't make it up if you tried. The should really be called the Anti-Scots in Holyrood party.
    There has been virtually no change apart from mental cider varieties. You get 12 large tins for a tenner and you can get a pint in Weatherspoons for £1.89. Anyone concerned about that should be thanking them for making it harder to kill themselves.
    WTF do you drink to have noticed price increases, you say you drink Carling which is piss water and will have had no increase due to the low alcohol content.
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,095
    franklyn said:

    I live in NE Bedfordshire, Alistair Burt's old constituency. It has always had an enormous Conservative majority, but Alistair was enormously well regarded, and people were distraught when he was booted out. I have just had the second set of Lib Dem campaign literature through my letterbox, and the Lib Dems have a strong presence on the local council. It would take an earthquake for the Conservatives to lose this seat, but earthquakes do happen; perhaps more to the point, if the Conservatives have to direct resources to a seat like this it takes resources away from other seats. Indeed the local Conservatives haven't even chose a candidate yet, or appeared to update their website

    Boris has banned fracking to stop earthquakes.

    Just sayin'.....
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,027

    franklyn said:

    I live in NE Bedfordshire, Alistair Burt's old constituency. It has always had an enormous Conservative majority, but Alistair was enormously well regarded, and people were distraught when he was booted out. I have just had the second set of Lib Dem campaign literature through my letterbox, and the Lib Dems have a strong presence on the local council. It would take an earthquake for the Conservatives to lose this seat, but earthquakes do happen; perhaps more to the point, if the Conservatives have to direct resources to a seat like this it takes resources away from other seats. Indeed the local Conservatives haven't even chose a candidate yet, or appeared to update their website

    Boris has banned fracking to stop earthquakes.

    Just sayin'.....
    Sadly he fracked the Brexit Party, so a political earthquake is surely around the corner.
This discussion has been closed.