Categories
Options
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Polling boost for beleaguered Theresa as the Tory conference o
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Polling boost for beleaguered Theresa as the Tory conference opens in Birmingham
Opinium fieldwprk Sept 26-29 CON 39+2 LAB 36-3 LD 9=
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
The more so as his nibs and herself were tripping the light fantastic through to the early hours, albeit in a somewhat more sedate fashion than in former years. It seems there is life in this old dog yet ....
https://twitter.com/elizabethforma/status/1046182608734810112 One I can live with, the other is to put it mildly annoying. We need Trump out.
(I'm sure HYUFD will be along shortly to pontificate endlessly about Sanders, Warren and Biden. And possibly Boris. This time I intend to ignore him. There's only so many times somebody can talk utter rubbish and refuse to be corrected.)
I fear the Tories are going to have several days of bickering about Brexit with any other new thinking being drowned out or struggling to get a hearing. I suspect that Labour will be back in the lead shortly after the conference is over.
Be careful what you wish for!
She really should check her own job description some time.
It certainly looks as though he doesn't like Democrats:
“This whole two-week effort has been a calculated and orchestrated political hit, fueled with apparent pent-up anger about President Trump and the 2016 election, fear that has been unfairly stoked about my judicial record, revenge on behalf of the Clintons, and millions of dollars in money from outside left-wing opposition groups,” an emotional Kavanaugh said. “This is a circus.”
But apparently SC judges can be impeached too:
http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow/watch/kavanaugh-rant-raises-questions-about-his-political-impartiality-1332534851612?v=railb&
I have just been reading the first review of the county season. Unfortunately it is by the Hefferlump and therefore a bit rubbish, but he did have one interesting idea. He suggested that any Test hosting county that signs a player from a non-Test hosting county should be docked 10 points for the following season.
He mentioned Nottinghamshire, who have signed Ben Duckett (Northants) Ben Slater (Derbyshire) and Joe Clarke (Worcestershire). Nottinghamshire are an especially interesting case because although they boast about how many of their squad play for England, only one player actually developed by Notts (Samit Patel) has played for England in the last 30 years (discounting Paul Franks who played only one match). Given their size and wealth, that's an appalling record. And it's largely because instead of producing their own players they snap up tried and tested players from smaller counties (or countries, in the case of Brendan Taylor) so there is no path for local talent.
Warwickshire have a somewhat better record - no county that produced Woakes and Bell could be considered a failure - but even they are snapping up other players (in this case, two bowlers from Gloucestershire, one of them illegally tapped up while under contract - guess what penalty was imposed for this)? And this has wrecked Gloucestershire's chances of promotion next season. If they lose Bracey too, they lose the spine of their batting lineup.
I'm not sure that points deductions are the way to go, but clearly this is both inequitable and damaging. While it may fit the mindset of Colin Graves to have ten first class counties and damn the rest, that merely confirms that he's an idiot. If we had first class teams in the same ratio to population as Australia, we would have 25 of them. We should be looking to expand the size of the pool, not diminish it (although the dumb decision to take cricket off free-to-air is also responsible for that).
Would there perhaps be mileage in saying any Test county who signs a player from a non-Test county should pay a transfer fee of one year's salary to the club that developed the player, or two years if that player was still under contract? Think what that would do to even up the contest between Leicestershire and Nottinghamshire...
On Boris, it’s called “enough rope” - and Boris obliged. The real beneficiary of that is Hunt, who daily reminds us what having a competent FS is like.
Which is why I want the Blues to retake the White House.
If they pick Warren they will have decided that they should have won it last time with an old, white, privileged, pompous, not over-bright lawyer who should win because she's a woman so let's double down.
I can't help wondering how screwed America is if this is the best they can offer.
"What America saw before the Senate Judiciary Committee was an injudicious man, an angry brat veering from fury to sniveling sobs, a judge so bereft of composure and proportion that it was difficult not to squirm.......
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/28/opinion/kavanaugh-supreme-court-temperament.html
I think it's more likely, though, that the "no surrender" stuff by May during the week caught public attention more than the "routine" conference", and the Tory lead will endure until that comes apart.
Thanks, but no thanks. He wouldn't persuade me to vote for Corbyn but he would drive me to the Liberal Democrats.
Bottas podium, Ocon points, Safety Car to appear, Hartley not to be classified, at 7.
Bottas is likely to get a podium. He starts on pole, after all. Ocon starts 6th. Even allowing for Red Bull and Renault (on pace and tyres, respectively) improving, he should still do well. A safety car isn't certain but is probable. And Hartley can be clumsy on the first lap.
However, there are quite a few contingencies there and it only takes one to fail. The last two in particular seem like they could easily go either way. (A safety car is more likely than not, whereas Hartley is more likely to be classified than not).
If so she was still wrong because of the unusual nature of her premiership, but it was a plausible theory.
America is in a bad place, and Kavanagh on SCOTUS will make it harder to get out of that hole.
Donning my tin foil hat, is the leaky app Australian because all British computer programmers are card-carrying members of the Labour Party or are the Tories back in touch with Lynton Crosby in case there is another snap election?
Warren and Sanders are the competition for the left vote, and and one of the two is going to be at least a contender. I think the Kavanaugh affair makes it very unlikely to be Sanders.
Seumas Milne is a good Communist.
He's already richer than Croesus.
https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/ng-interactive/2018/sep/24/our-time-is-now-world-youth-poll-reveals-unexpected-optimism
And the next poll showed a six point fall in Tory support.
I think, as with @NickPalmer, the problem is people do not love politicians and especially find self-obsessed naval gazing coupled with ideas that may politely be characterised as veering from the incoherent to the batshit crazy to be off-putting.
As I recall Cameron once said he wanted to get rid of party conferences and have bi-monthly weekend meetings in different areas as a replacement. I think he had the right idea and it's a shame he never followed it up.
The county game, though remarkable resilient, is not in great shape - and denying it the best part of the summer will slowly kill it. It’s hardly surprising that a player like (say) Rashid doesn’t want to play the four day game when much of it is in April and September.
The factionalism annoys me, but of all the things the country needs sorting out, renationalising the utilities is on page 94. Renationalise the NHS outsourcing, sort out an integrated social care system, build housing and green energy, have a stronger regional development policy and a softer Brexit, but skip the clause 4 stuff in the first term, and shut up about Palestine as its nothing we can usefully contribute to. It is about priorities.
As far I can see it is pretty close to what it has been for a long time, both parties not far off 40, Tories generally slightly ahead.
Given the polling before the last election you could argue that either this isn't anything to worry about and when the campaign starts and neutrality rules kick in is when it matters or that this is a pretty good position to be in considering where we started last time.
The most exciting thing is I am pretty sure we will be fully able to test our hypothesis out when the actual next election takes place as Labour members aren't going to be scared off by one poll showing a few point deficit and another a one point lead.
Personally although I would like Labour in the lead either consistently across the polls or on average over them I am fairly happy with the current position.
Mr. B, true, but given the polygraph is practically worthless it's alarming that some actually care what it would say. It misses deceit and 'spots' false positives all the time. It's barely better than tossing a coin.
That is not to say, of course that I regard Colin Graves thoughts and policies for cricket as other than bordering (at least) on deranged.
Historically to win from opposition, you need to be multiple points ahead midterm, so you end up still ahead on polling day.
Mr. Doethur, yet another point against the polygraph.
Mr. B, to be fair, he's probably an idiot.
If the Tories lead was what it is now at the start of the last election then they would have lost badly from the resulting movement. Obviously that isn't going to happen again (or very very unlikely anyway) but that is because Labour will be starting the campaign with a lot more support to begin with, it is a completely different ball game.
'05 '10 and '15 all took place when the Labour trajectory (from the last election) had been downwards and the Conservative trajectory upwards. That isn't the case next time.
Not that I think that will decide the election either. These things can be useful indicators but the mass of voters who ultimately decide matters do not make their decisions based on these things. If they did then 2017 would have gone the way all the indicators before the campaign showed it would. It didn't.
https://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/409104-trump-kim-jong-un-and-i-fell-in-love
Trump: Kim Jong Un and I 'fell in love'
https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/news/3279797/alex-salmond-complaints-five-years-ago-bute-house-january/
He will not be leader at anytime. The next leader has to be a unity candidate of Javid or Hunt
Interesting Sky data polling this mornings
Voters nationally more likely to vote for May 40% Johnson 24%
Conservative voters May 49% Johnson 33%
Hunt was very good on his far East tour, spot on in Myanmar, and his Twitter Q and A afterwards was far more intelligent than Boris's sub Churchillian waffle. Hunt does his homework and tries to understand the issues.
He is top of my book for Tory leader, but I am not good a leadership betting as my own opinions never seem to match party opinions. In advance of the 2015 contest, I frequently pointed out here that May was a charisma free zone, and with an inflexibility that made her unsuitable for a high role. I simply didn't think the Tories could be stupid enough to pick her, but was wrong on that point.
Having a chantable name isn't enough.
That said, the age (just past 80) was probably what stopped Antigonus Monopthalmus successfully seeing off Lysimachus before reinforcements arrived for the Battle of Ipsus.
I agree with you that for number of reasons 2017 was an unusual election. However, I think I am also right in saying it was the first election since 1951 where a party increased its vote share yet still suffered a net loss of seats. The point that may be decisive - and this is where history is a poor guide - is who hangs on to more of their vote share. I can easily see the Conservatives dropping two points and Labour five, so increasing the Tory seat tally. Equally, if Corbyn goes I can see Labour dropping five and the Tories ten.
God help us all if he is the future of the Tory Party
Take rail nationalisation. The public quite like the idea until you say
Do you trust Corbyn/McDonnell/McCluskey to run our railways and there is a resounding Noooooooo
I do expect a politician who tells me that University tuition should be free or a National Care Service for all can be provided to understand how much it will cost (I am happy for them to be vaguer about the origin of the money).
The order of magnitude sums are not difficult -- but Nick Palmer's PhD in mathematics notwithstanding -- no-one left in the Labour Party seems to be able to add up.
If you are trying to do something ambitious, and the budget is wrong at outset, then the project will likely end in failure.
For me, that is a greater impediment to voting for Corbyn than the claims of antisemitism (which I believe have been guilefully created by his political opponents).
The problem is the Tories have 3 factors which I think are more likely to see them losing votes. They are the government, they have to do something with Brexit and will bear the consequences of that and they also have voters who are more passionate on the issue. Lastly given the age divide in voting more Tory 2017 voters will have either passed away or become too ill to vote than Labour voters.
That doesn't actually decide the election but the Tories have the more difficult job in retention and in terms of deaths in the electorate have to actually win over voters to stand still.
And he's still playing the organ (no, not that sort of organ)...
I hope I can play Bach as well as this aged 96 (and in the intervening 65 years I may even have learned all the notes!
https://youtu.be/PepI8wfKW1c
OT. If you get the chance take a look at 'The Wife'. Flawed but Oscar winning performance by Glenn Close.
So nothing was proven at the GE although Labour will not feel as rattled by being a little behind (though it means claiming the country is crying out for a change is harder - if we believe the polls the Tories are more popular).
We’ve had a pretty good innings, mining a deep seam.
There is a season for everything.
I think they key point is I expect the Tories to lose votes. But I think Labour is running a high risk of losing more votes. That doesn't have to be through switching. It could be through apathy. Will all those students who voted last time after Corbyn promised them free money vote again now he's admitted he was lying? I don't think that can be taken for granted.
The reason momentum (no pun intended) traditionally goes one way when a party starts losing seats is because they keep losing votes. But both parties have some way to fall next time, and the question is, 'who will fall further?' The one who falls least should win comfortably given the number of tight marginals available.
This is one reason I thought the anti-semitism row all summer long would be hugely damaging for Labour. It doesn't need to turn people into mini-Moggs. If it turns 2% into non-voters it will cost Labour dear in the Midlands and the suburbs.