FlyTheNest

RobertSnozers wrote:

WelshIan wrote: The seat spread from the bookies is

Take the latest odds, which come following the seven-way leadership debate. The ‘spread’ on seats has hardened to 284-88 (Tory) and softened to 269-73 (Labour). The SNP are marginally better (41-43), Ukip are unchanged (5-7), but the LibDems have weakened notably (23-25).

His 'analysis' seems to be what he wants to happen, there is no explanation for how he gets to his figures from the bookies figures. It's complete and utter bollocks.

That's a good point. Most of the comments BTL have focussed on the ludicrous Scottish prediction, but I don't see how he goes from a spread of 284-88 to 302 for the Tories and 269-73 to 248 for Labour. Perhaps he's expecting a NickyB style 'crossover'. Aaaany day now.

Moreover, I thought the betting had moved Labour's way recently? At least on the PM question.

RobertSnozers wrote:

pk1 wrote:

RobertSnozers wrote: And here's the BBC report on that story http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-32346214" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

She & Osborne could of course, tell the truth; that the reason the economy has recovered to this extent is because Osborne had to pull back from his plan & adopt Alistair Darling's plan.

Well, it's partly that, but she wholeheartedly supported Osborne even when Plan A was underway. And there are still big questions in my mind about the performance of the economy. It's even more reliant on services than it was in 2010, the labour market has been casualised, we've lurched from too much inflation to deflation, private indebtedness has increased, and growth has only really picked up to the sort of levels you'd expect in the last couple of quarters. The economy as it stands simply doesn't warrant Lagarde's effusiveness - and neither do the IMF's own figures.

Jack Jazz
‏@JackkJazz

#BBCDebate The Sun shows even more contempt for its readers!
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CCuoToVXIAE1vSh.jpg" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

SpinningHugo wrote:Best odds, if seriously considering a bet, are now evens

http://www.oddschecker.com/politics/bri ... l-election" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I took 5/4 last week, but plan no further investment.

The odds market has barely flickered since the campaign began. The big shifts came last autumn with the SNP surge.

Graun wrote:Miliband says he will not be the kind of leader, like David Cameron, who puts a wind turbine on his roof before an election, and then brings in a moratorium on wind turbines afterwards.

AnatolyKasparov wrote:Five years ago, betting significantly overstated the number of Tory seats (it had them on the cusp of a majority) and had Labour too low.

AnatolyKasparov wrote:There is also the fact that lots of rich people with money to burn on this sort of stuff are also committed Tories

Visit from Alan Rickman

I've known Alan Rickman for a long time and he's coming to Hove on Saturday to thank the people who are making this campaign so special. He also wants to buy a drink for our hard-working volunteers! For those of who have been out canvassing during the day, and would like to join the star of films like Die Hard, Harry Potter and Truly, Madly, Deeply, Alan will be around to offer you a drink and hear your stories from the doorstep when you return in the evening.

WelshIan wrote:

SpinningHugo wrote:Best odds, if seriously considering a bet, are now evens

http://www.oddschecker.com/politics/bri ... l-election" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I took 5/4 last week, but plan no further investment.

The odds market has barely flickered since the campaign began. The big shifts came last autumn with the SNP surge.

I've been toying with the idea of a bet on a Labour majority, you can get 25-1 out to 33-1 with quite a few of the betting sites. Could be worth a punt?

Jim Murphy in Graun wrote:Standing up for Scotland means standing up for working class Scots. It also means making common cause with working class people across the UK. We believe in that old trade union idea that an injury to one is an injury to all.

Joe Murphy ‏@JoeMurphyLondon 2h2 hours ago
Spot the Difference! Before, "Simon Hughes & the Liberal Democrats". After, just Simon Hughes.

PorFavor wrote:"Flexible contracts" should be the new name for "zero hours contracts" says Iain Smith, breaking cover on the BBC.

rebeccariots2 wrote:

Joe Murphy ‏@JoeMurphyLondon 2h2 hours ago
Spot the Difference! Before, "Simon Hughes & the Liberal Democrats". After, just Simon Hughes.

Mark Ferguson @Markfergusonuk · 1h 1 hour ago
A quick look at the Tory Thesaurus

Poll Tax = Community Charge
Bedroom Tax = Spare Room Subsidy
Zero hours contracts = flexible contracts

rebeccariots2 wrote:

Mark Ferguson @Markfergusonuk · 1h 1 hour ago
A quick look at the Tory Thesaurus

Poll Tax = Community Charge
Bedroom Tax = Spare Room Subsidy
Zero hours contracts = flexible contracts

tinyclanger2 wrote:

Jim Murphy in Graun wrote:Standing up for Scotland means standing up for working class Scots. It also means making common cause with working class people across the UK. We believe in that old trade union idea that an injury to one is an injury to all.

When I raised the notion of a common cause (of socialism) btl pre-referendum the Scots just basically said "tough, you live in a country with a strong minority of Tories who own the press so you're on your own".

This is what the Tories are so afraid of. The Brits ever standing together to against the elite. And it's what the SNP are seemingly determined to help them (Tories) avoid.

Alastair Sloan ‏@alastairsloan 5m5 minutes ago
Before Telegraph reported Axelrod was a "non-dom" - they called a tax expert who said it was a non-story..... http://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2015 ... ch+UK+2%29" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; …

I am all in favour of debate on tax and tax abuse but this is ridiculous.

I can also say that the Telegraph knows this because one of the two journalists who wrote this story called me yesterday. I said three things.

The first was that David Axelrod was, as far as I know, US resident so paid tax there on his worldwide income. And if, as was likely, he used a US corporation many of these are what are called ‘tax transparent’ so do not save the individual tax, unlike here.

Second, as far as I knew he did not spend much time here and so was unlikely to be UK resident.

And third, therefore, tax could not be due in the UK. I explained that his services were imported into the UK and imported services do not make the supplier tax resident in the country to which they supply their expertise.

I explained this using a personal example: I have supplied services paid for by the EU on a number of occasions but that has never once made me Belgian resident and it would be absurd to suggest it did, or that I should pay tax in Belgium as a result.

This though was ignored by the Telegraph and the demand has been made that a supply of services should make people taxable in the state to which they supply them.

AnatolyKasparov wrote:Must say I am surprised at the gloomy tone of some on here this morning......

The consensus before last night was that Ed was stupid to take part in this latest debate, and that he would be ganged up on and made to look weak and feeble.

Fair to say it didn't happen

As for the bias in much of the MSM, what's new? They are becoming ever more flailing and desperate as they see their old power draining away.

ChrisDean wrote:Hi All

Just popping in to ask a question.

Are any of you still waiting for your "Hell Yes" tee shirt?

PorFavor wrote:

ChrisDean wrote:Hi All

Just popping in to ask a question.

Are any of you still waiting for your "Hell Yes" tee shirt?

Hell, yes. But I think it's still within the time-frame that was outlined.

Hello, there!

tinyclanger2 wrote:

PorFavor wrote:

ChrisDean wrote:Hi All

Just popping in to ask a question.

Are any of you still waiting for your "Hell Yes" tee shirt?

Hell, yes. But I think it's still within the time-frame that was outlined.

Hello, there!

me too

adam wrote:I can't find much about this but the other thing worth saying about coalition arithmatic is that I think it's far from given that the DUP would line up with the Conservatives - that a quick view of them might come from a harshly sectarian 'NEVER!' past but actually - like a lot of their fellow NI parties right across all of the divides - they are more of an old working class party. They certainly have talked from time to time about the possibility of supporting a labour government.

Mr Robinson also said it would be unwise for either Labour or the Conservatives to seek the support of Scottish or Welsh nationalists in the event of a hung parliament.

"We certainly don't believe that it will be sensible to allow a lever on government by those who are separatists and want to break up the United Kingdom," he said.

PorFavor wrote:

rebeccariots2 wrote:

Mark Ferguson @Markfergusonuk · 1h 1 hour ago
A quick look at the Tory Thesaurus

Poll Tax = Community Charge
Bedroom Tax = Spare Room Subsidy
Zero hours contracts = flexible contracts

Add to that list -

IDS on TV = Shit or Bust

SpinningHugo wrote:

WelshIan wrote:

SpinningHugo wrote:Best odds, if seriously considering a bet, are now evens

http://www.oddschecker.com/politics/bri ... l-election" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I took 5/4 last week, but plan no further investment.

The odds market has barely flickered since the campaign began. The big shifts came last autumn with the SNP surge.

I've been toying with the idea of a bet on a Labour majority, you can get 25-1 out to 33-1 with quite a few of the betting sites. Could be worth a punt?

You can get 47/1 on betfair

http://www.oddschecker.com/politics/bri ... l-majority" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Isn't going to happen, dont throw your money away.

Ed to be PM a much safer bet.

tinyclanger2 wrote:When I raised the notion of a common cause (of socialism) btl pre-referendum the Scots just basically said "tough, you live in a country with a strong minority of Tories who own the press so you're on your own".

AnatolyKasparov wrote:Final pre-GE review is up in the usual place. Good result for Labour, too

One local council byelection yesterday, the last before the GE - and pleasingly enough it just happens to be in my neck of the woods:

Cumbria CC - Labour hold, with a small increase in their share since 2013 and a modest swing to them from the Tories, who dropped to third behind UKIP (who also advanced on two years ago) This division is identical to the Barrow BC ward, which means those results can also be compared - and they show Labour winning here from 2002 to 2005 (though sometimes by narrow margins) until the Tories made their breakthrough in 2006, taking both vacancies in a "double" election and then winning the last Labour seat in 2007 before taking all three in the 2008 "all out" elections in Barrow (though the boundaries here were unchanged) and then the CC seat in 2009 with a substantial swing. Labour won a seat back in 2010, though, and then took all three in 2011 when Barrow switched to all-out elections every four years. Comparing with past CC elections, yesterday's result showed a swing of over 30% from Tory to Labour since 2009 and a double figure swing even since 2005 - so this year's electoral contests before May 7 end on a happy note for the reds.

Besides the GE and the regular local elections, in three weeks time there will be over 50 local by-elections - I may get round to reporting them if we aren't totally drowned out by other stuff, though I have a suspicion we might be......

Until then, happy campaigning

WelshIan wrote:

SpinningHugo wrote:

WelshIan wrote: I've been toying with the idea of a bet on a Labour majority, you can get 25-1 out to 33-1 with quite a few of the betting sites. Could be worth a punt?

You can get 47/1 on betfair

http://www.oddschecker.com/politics/bri ... l-majority" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Isn't going to happen, dont throw your money away.

Ed to be PM a much safer bet.

I'm a bit more hopeful of the chance of a Labour majority!

I don't believe that Scotland will return almost all SNP MPs. I know what the polls say but I don't think it will translate into seats - my belief is that they will have 30 or so at the most, 5-10 Lib Dem and the rest Labour (20+).

The marginals are where it is at. Labour have a good ground campaign, Ed is appearing more Prime Ministerial as we go along and the Labour message is designed to appeal to people in these seats.

The Tories are having a bad campaign - there is nothing in their message to appeal beyond their core vote, their personal attacks on Ed are putting a lot of people off (they really should listen to Ken Clarke on that!). They have 3 more weeks and they seem to have no ideas.

The MSM is the Tories secret weapon - the only reason they are still in with a chance is because of the amount of support the Tories gain from them. The BBC especially, as non-political people still view it as being neutral or even left wing.

I am quite confident that Labour will be the biggest party, and that they have a better than 25-1 chance (or even 47-1) to form a majority.

SpinningHugo wrote:

WelshIan wrote:

SpinningHugo wrote:Best odds, if seriously considering a bet, are now evens

http://www.oddschecker.com/politics/bri ... l-election" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I took 5/4 last week, but plan no further investment.

The odds market has barely flickered since the campaign began. The big shifts came last autumn with the SNP surge.

I've been toying with the idea of a bet on a Labour majority, you can get 25-1 out to 33-1 with quite a few of the betting sites. Could be worth a punt?

You can get 47/1 on betfair

http://www.oddschecker.com/politics/bri ... l-majority" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Isn't going to happen, dont throw your money away.

Ed to be PM a much safer bet.