Politicians Popularity Betting: week to March 30th
April 1st, 2007
Small changes, small losses
On the whole, I would sooner be a backer than a layer in IG’s Politicians’ Popularity market. We can pick and choose our targets, time our buys and sells, or just keep our money in the pocket if we don’t fancy the odds.
Our amiable adversary, Anthony Wells, has to put up prices whether he wants to or not. He can’t just shrug his shoulders and say, for example, ‘Gordon Brown? Dunno. Too difficult this week.’ The more difficult and volatile the market, the greater are our opportunities.
The one thing he has in his favour is the spread, which IG sets at a modest half point. It is this small margin that we try to beat each week. When the market is quiet and stable, this becomes more difficult and if it didn’t move at all, we could never win.
This week, there was little movement and it is therefore not surprising we recorded a small loss, only our second in the ten weeks since we started. In fact, we were on the right side in four of the six punts but only in the case of Tony Blair was the shift big enough to beat the spread and make a profit.
Straw’s result was a disappointment. Maybe it takes a bit of time for ‘good news’ to be reflected in the poll, or maybe the news wasn’t as good as we thought. Blair’s run of good results seems to have petered out and Brown now seems set on a downward curve. Cameron too seems to be losing some of his gloss and we missed out by deciding, after some discussion, not to propose a sell. We’ll be thinking harder about that one tomorrow when we hope to bring your next week’s suggestions.
I was pleased to learn that a number of PBers improved on our score this week by taking an independent line. This comes as a relief to me as it relieves the burden of responsibility somewhat. It also helps the market. I’m sure IG would prefer to have a range of bets, rather than a uniform plunge.
We’re always open to your ideas and suggestions and if you want to join in the selection process, let us know. Please send any messages to arklebar@talktalk.net
Good luck and best wishes
Peter Smith (Peter the Punter)
MessageSpace Advertising
Right on, pathetic excuse of an MP. He moans about bullying then freezes people out, which is bullying in it’s self.
He knows he cannot win the argument and so due to his “status” he thinks he can deploy, abusive and one sided statements.
He prints nothing more than propaganda to indoctrinate the gullible to his cause. Such a shame a man of ability such as NP being consigned to the back benchers whilst less equal people are on the front bench. A man with a PHD consigned to writing drivel for Labour supporters who support anything the Labour party tell them.
No wonder the Labour party seeks to limit civil liberties, eradicate individualism and curtail economic choice. After leading a bunch of sheep for a hundred years they now want to make us all follow the heard…………………Baarrrrrrrrrr Nick Palmer!
1 Oi! Tarquins not welcome on this thread.
Labour is being examined by the Sunday Times for the pension swindle. The party that Robert Maxwell represented has been caught doing a Maxwell.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article1596819.ece
Balls was reduced to saying that the share prices at the time of the “theft” was doing really well and were high. He neglected to say, which all financial advisers are required by the IFS to advise that share prices can go up as well as down.
2. Sorry! i’ll bugger off for now!
Good piece by the way!
[3] Considering how many 000s of posts you’ve made here, congratulations on at last revealing your true identity
136 [from previous thread]. Oh dear NickP, I always know I’ve got to you, when you make some pompous remark to the effect “I’m not going to reply to SeanT” and then you go on to explain precisely why you’re not going to reply to me in some detail, usually with some insulting little barb thrown in, because you feel all hurt and angry but don’t want to admit it. As here.
Your petticoats are showing, dearie. I’ve posted this on the other thread, too, so you can learn from your elementary debating mistakes.
Shove that up your arse - I am paid £30,000 a year to post bollocks on here!
Peter the Punter.
Good article as always.
I finally took the plunge and opened an Igindex account this week. Had one £10 per point bet on Jack Straw to improve his rating and lost £15 for the privilege. Got on at a half point worse position than as at your original recommendation.
Two questions for you or anyone else who can educate me.
Firstly, in order to place my original bet I had to lodge £200 with IGindex to cover the worst possible outcome. I personally don’t want a credit account even if they offered me this. Presumably anyone following all your recommendations using a £10 unit stake and choosing a debit facility would have to lodge a sum in excess of £1000 with Igindex? Am I correct? And are the rest of you betting on credit?
Secondly, when in the week is the survey done? I think this has already been answered but I have forgotten.
Well done so far and keep up the good work.
8 The survey is carried out throughout the week with I think 400 responswes a day .
1 - “After leading a bunch of sheep for a hundred years they now want to make us all follow the heard…………………Baarrrrrrrrrr Nick Palmer!”
If you want to make these pointlessly insulting comparisons between sheep and MPs, you might find it helpful, for the quality of your future postings, to learn that the collective noun for sheep is actually “flock”.
I’m of an agricultural background so I know these small details…
9. Mark Senior. Thanks for that.
Peter -As a seasoned racing punter, you will appreciate only too well that attempting to “cover the field” is absolutely guaranteed to produce a loss. I just wonder whether there was an element of this in last week’s BrandIndex selections. I appreciate that you are backing some selections whilst laying others, but in each case these are costing half a point on the spread or 3 full points for the 6 selections concerned. In finishing just 2.8 points down on the week, effectively a moral victory, you were beaten entirely by the spread.
What I suppose I am suggesting, in a roundabout way, is that you might consider restricting the number of selections to a maximum of 3 or 4 each week. You could always nominate a couple of “reserve” candidates should you so wish for pb.comers to consider should they not fancy your main picks - rather like “nap” and “next best” selections in racing parlance.
Clearly, in such circumstances, the profit/loss outcome each week would be calculated only on your nap selections.
What think you?
12 ….I suppose the contrary view to my suggestion above is that “if it aint broke, don’t fix it.”
8 Thanks StJohn and sorry you joined us on our second losing week!
Obviously I can’t speak for others but I have a debit account with IG which stands at about £1,500. That just about covers 6 points worth of bets each week, depending on their price. I would actually prefer a credit account (I have one with Sporting Index and it works perfectly well) but last time I enquired it was all too complicated and I didn’t bother. I’m not crazy about having £1,500 tied up with IG but since the ‘bank’ is a few hundred quid bigger than when I started, I can cope. The real problem would be if I wanted to raise my standard stake much above £10 per point but I don’t really want to do that because I regard this market as a bit of fun and also I reckon my judgement might be affected if I was betting above my comfort zone.
As to when the soundings are taken, I’m not 100% sure but I think Mark at (8) above is right. It’s a big factor and may explain why Straw didn’t get quite the lift we were expecting. Some of the interviews may have taken place too soon. Conversely, maybe Brown’s score was better than it might have been. I’ll try to find out more.
14. How’d the dog make out.
re 14. Given that the BI betting is likely to continue then those serious about it should consider setting up a credit account. This takes a week or so to set up and IG want some proof of your assets but once it is in place it makes betting so much simpler.
So all the profits I’ve made in recent weeks have not required me to put any money at all up front. In fact all I have done is withdraw the cash as the winnings have piled up.
What I really like doing is betting on my credit account, then coming out when the prices have changed pocketing my profits.
Of course you have to cover losing bets but only when the loss has happened or when the in running price has moved to such a level that your credit limit has been exhausted.
Many thanks for the article Peter the punter and some of the following questions and answers!
12 PfP
You would be right with a normal traditional betting market but this is a spread and works entirely differently. Here, the market maker has to take a view and although he will adjust his prices in response to demand, it is not only possible but likely that he will be unable to balance his book. Supposing for example we sold every name on the Index. It is perfectly possible that they could all be winning bets. There is nothing to stop the public from marking down all the politicians in the same week.
Similarly, if everybody decided to back the same candidate, the market maker’s possible response is relatively limited. Say we all decide to back DC. OK, IG would shift his price up to bring in sellers but he couldn’t guarantee to balance off his book. In fact he could quite easily lose out to both buyers and sellers, depending on the result and the point at which sentiment started to change. Nor would it help to alter the price of other runners. They would have no relevance to our view of the value in DC’s price.
In short, he has to act like a punter and simply take a view and bear the risk. Spread betting is notoriously risky for the punter but it’s riskier for the bookie!
In one way, however, you are right. In a fairly placid market (and some of the popularity graphs barely move from one week to the next) we are probably reducing our chances by spreading our bets. It optimises the value of IG’s half point spread. You are therefore right that we would be better off focusing on fewer targets - and maybe ‘napping’ more by going for more points per bet. In fact, we’ve rather tended to do this anyway but for a different reason. We’ve concentrated on the names in the news - Blair, Brown, Cameron. This isn’t due to lack of imagination, it’s just that these tend to be the big movers. We’d like to spread it around a bit more, if only for variety, but there’s no mileage in it. Hewitt, Johnson and Harman just don’t offer much betting appeal. IG could help by putting up odds for Milliband, Hain and one or two others but it’s their call (not Anthony’s) and so far they’ve seen fit to limit our options.
Maybe if we keep winning, they’ll change their mind!
15 The dog is in the dog house, Punter.
Peter the punter Get some food down his Gregory before next time. Never know your Donald.
19 - What that hound of yours needs is a bit of TLC, not the constant unremitting and increasingly intimidating pressure to perform
19. Have you tried owning a horse……..
14 and 16.
Thanks Peter and Mike. I will consider applying for a credit account. However I will probably do as you have done Peter and tie up some cash.
I’ve been giving these Politician’s Popularity Polls some thought recently, given the panel’s successes to date.
My reluctance to get involved so far has been based upon a perhaps mistaken view that there is a longer latent period for political “events” to impact on public opinion? But your successes to date suggest a more immediate impact? Would welcome views on this.
Iraq now seems to have a greater impact on public opinion than it did at the last election. Personally I was surprised that it didn’t figure more then. Probably because the awfulness of it all is cumulatively recognised.
23 Our success has surprised me, StJohn. There has to be an element of luck but I’m beginning to think that maybe we are doing something right.
There’s usually four of us involved and we each have a different approach. Aaron is hot on the stats, Andrea is characteristically cerebral, I tend to trust my instincts and Mike is just plain greedy. The amount of input from each varies from week to week and that probably helps, if only so that we don’t have a sterotyped approach. (If Anthony ever figures out how we’re doing it, we’re sunk.) We also take note of ideas and suggestions from any PBers who can be bothered to comment and we actively encourage a broader involvement.
The timing thing is one of the trickiest to consider. It’s easy to see how this week’s news may not reflect itself in poll ratings until next week or later. Don’t forget though that the name of the game is outguessing Anthony. He has to get it right first. All we have to do is figure when he’s got it wrong.
You can see why I’d sooner be a player than a layer!
18 PtP - Your second and third paras had me reaching for the Kleenex in sympathy for IG! The fact is that they make their money from the spreads, it’s as simple as that.
I liken the situation to the time when I used to have several goal superiority bets on the footie every weekend, where the spread is 0.2 of a goal. Obviously some weeks I won, others I lost, but I found over time (surprise, surprise) that I was losing by effectively giving IG/Sporting a whole goal start on, say, 5 selections - just like conventional fixed odds betting you can’t expect to consistently beat the book with multiple selections.
These days, I am far more selective, betting on perhaps 2 or 3 games per month, usually involving live matches where I can trade in running and I bet if possible on Cantor Spreadfair, where I can often halve the spreads offered by the mainstream spreadbetting firms, since it operates, in theory, on a punter vs punter basis, like the exchanges.
20/21 Last night he was lucky not to a kick up the Khaiba.
22 Not allowed to run horses at Walthamstow, Punter.
25 Oh yes, I’m not arguing with that PfP. The same princile applies here as it does in all betting - you’ve got to back the value and there has to be enough value to eliminate the bookie’s margin, and a bit more besides. All I’m saying is that a spread is different to ‘traditional’ betting in that you could back the field and still win - in theory at least, and probably in practice too. (Last week Aaron pointed out that it looked like a week in which sells would outnumber buys and it looks like he was right, although I haven’t seen all the results yet.) You couldn’t do that in a conventional betting event, unless the bookie stuffed up or you played one off against the other.
Shame we can’t use Cantor for this market. That would make it even more fun. They’re very innovative.
27 - PtP Innovative yes, but unfortunately often very inactive, making it difficult to trade a bet you are “offering” to the market, as opposed to simply taking what’s already there.
Incidentally, they are the only spreadbetting firm, so far as I am aware, with a market on the number of seats to be won by each of the major parties at the next GE, where I think there may be some value, if you’re prepared to wait for up to 3 years, although such bets can of course be traded along the way.
It is disturbing to see Nick Palmer prediction (164 last thread)that the BNP are likely to have candidates in Broxtowe in the May local elections. Has anyone else evidence of an upsurge elsewhere in the East Midlands?
PtP - 24. What’s this about “Mike is just plain greedy”? I don’t run my betting to improve the profits of any bookmaker and if I see value I go for it. I also like to get out of position before the results are known - better to take a profit you can see rather than wait for the outcome.
Last week I closed my Brown sell position on the Friday morning and the was half a point better than the actual BI numbers. This week I was buying Brown but got cold feet after the Friday YouGov poll showed his position was deteriorating.I closed with a small profit at 63.5 - Brown finished at 62.
This week I stayed in with my Tony Blair buy because Friday’s YouGov poll seemed quite positive. Again this proved to be the right call.
29 - I understand that the BNP are standing a number of candidates here in Lincoln (they’ve said they’ll contest every ward - though that might be bluster).
They scored around 16% in a city council by-election here last year. They have no history of previous activity here in Lincoln so this is quite a disturbing development.
29. Any views on May.
26 - You just try!
29 BNP have certainly been saying they are putting up many more candidates all over the country not just the East Midlands this May . Whether they will succeed in finding enough candidates willing to stand for them , their calibre and ability to fight on such a wide spread we won’t be able to tell until nearer the day .
18… though there are spread markets which are complete… like the General Election seats totals. Having said that the free market Spreadfair totalled more seats than there actually were for months on end before the last election.
‘Childish MP’ is almost certainly the poster known as ‘Scallywag’ UKPaul. Surprisingly not a member of the extended Herbert family!
Congratulations to Snowfake and Benedict for their ‘Nobel Prize’ of blogging. Admission to the PB.Com sidebar!. It would be interesting to do a comparative review of the excellent and fragrant Labour blog from Snowflake and compare it to that of the Mid Sussex Tory Slugger Benedict. If you’re looking for impartiality……
From the last thread two fine posts from Snowflake and Tpfkar on the subject of Clark. I wish I could express myself as clearly as Tpfkar. So easy to read.
7. “Shove that up your arse - I am paid £30,000 a year to post bollocks on here!”
If you get paid on performance £30,000 doesn’t sound enough
31 They have no history of previous activity here in Lincoln so this is quite a disturbing development
Whilst I would never vote for the BNP, what is always overlooked is that for them to actually win seats, as opposed to simply fielding any number of candidates, means that more ordinary men and women choose to vote for them than for any of the mainstream parties.
Instead of all the hand-wringing, politicians should ask themselves why. It surely cannot be argued that a significant proportion of voters are racist, yet they must clearly feel sufficiently aggrieved to persuade them vote in such a way and in such large numbers. Understand people’s concerns and you are half way to resolving them. Until then, we live in a free country and people are entitled to vote in the manner they chose.
PtP. “Instead of all the hand-wringing, politicians should ask themselves why?”
Many people think foreigners (of all complexions) are stealing their space. The BNP give the promise that they’ll stop them coming in and with a secret ballot Bobs your uncle….You can either stop immigration-which would be silly-or you have to accept that the BNP will pick up some votes and not worry about it.
The worst thing to do would be for mainstream parties to try to ape their policies like Michael Howard did before the last election.
36. You ever thought of starting up a blog Rog?
35 Jon - If you think Spreadfair are overstating the actual number of Parliamentary seats to be contested, then you can always sell accordingly, although I very much doubt this was the case since it would be tantamount to offering free money. Of course the total of the “buy” prices will always slightly exceed the number of seats, just as the total “sell” prices will be correspongingly fewer - simply as a result of the spreadbetting firm’s spreads on each party.
roger - he’s definitely a member of the extended proper family (as his subsequent name showed), wag became scallwyag (I think and they have a sense of humour and, more tellingly, sanity.
Why does he post when nobody takes him seriously? Who knows? Anyone here a psychologist?
39 Roger - I certainly wasn’t suggesting that the main parties should attempt to “ape” the BNP’s policies.
Instead, politicians should try to understand people’s concerns and to address them - as I said, the vast majority of ordinary, decent people in this country are not racist.
One reason people vote for the BNP is that it’s clearly the best way to irritate the political classes; it’s the ideal protest vote in that it actually gets noted in a way that, say, abstention does not.
44 - That’s a good point Cookie. If the BNP pick up even 20-30 extra seats in May I’m sure it’ll get a disproportionate amount of coverage relative to the political influence it gives them.
Ian. How about ‘Cooking with Cameron’?
42 I don’t think we want psychologists looking into why people post here
I do think there should be a word count on posts though - ColinW’s major effort the other day was not only pointless but took to long to scroll past. It normally takes only a second or so to bypass his posts but that one took forever. Also I would like to see ‘cut and paste’ essays banned. This would impact on snowflake more than others but scrolling past exercise is easier. 10 lines max. Posted so that PtP isn’t the only one to get slagged of for being the site’s conscience
7 - Clearly a spoof posting. There is no way the Conservatives can afford to pay £30 grand salaries to staffers AND afford advertisments on Pb.com.
Had Hearts to beat the Green Brazil today at 2/1. Our first win at the Leith San Giro in four and a half years. Carlsberg don’t do bookmaking but if they did . . . . .
48 oh yes we can! we pay Steve Hilton £250 grand a year for… being Steve Hilton, so 30 grand for a few Tarquins is peanuts.
39 Your post indicates part of the why - in most polls people place immigration in the top three issues. Your wholly wrong comparison of Michael Howard’s proposals with the BNP (aping the BNP) shows a state of mind where any discussion of immigration is exploited as racist/BNP/facist. So the new Cameron Tories stay off the subject, Labour makes speeches (ofeten directly ‘aping’ Howards words) but takes no action and who knows the Lib Dem view.
So one of the voting publics concerns is not addressed by the big three parties - there’s a vacuum and only two fringe parties make any attempt to address it. Of course people are going to support extremists if the centre parties do nothing to address voters concerns.
Those concerns may not actually be about immigration IMHO it’s a scapegoat in many cases for results of social exclusion, poor housing, bad education, lack of jobs for under-educated kids. Doesn’t help when the Labour Government brings immigration and NHS shortages togerther in speeches (need ID cards to stop immigrants criminally accessing the NHS says…). The facts are that in the last decade the UK has experienced unprecedented levels of immigration - mostly peacefully and to its benefit - and it’s a real issue to many voters.
Betting - if you had inside info, ie you were David Miliband’s mum and you knew he was going to stand, would it be illegal to bet on the basis of the inside info or is that only for companies?
51 - I don’t think it’s illegal. I remember a couple of MP’s (Frank Roy was one IIRC) betting, and winning, on the outcome of the election of the speaker.
49 Thoroughly agree with your post .
46. Rog, you should register CookingWithCameron.com!
47. ColinW’s posts are hilarious. I never bypass them.
52 - correct, bets on non-financial outcomes aren’t ‘investments’ within the scope of legislation against insider trading.
52 Thanks.
53 - there had to come a time when we agreed on something!
Think I know whats wrong with your dog Peter. Last night he was in Box 5 and finished 5th - Tell him that he is number 1 and see what happens.
Re the Poularity Betting shouldn’t you wait until, say, Wednesday afternoon before placing the bets. I dont think Anthony moves the prices very much during the week, once he has decided his position. By Wednesday you should be able to see whether it is “Plucky Blair stands up to the Iranians” or useless “Blair gives into the mullahs”.
58 Anthony doesn’t move the prices beyond the initial pich - IG decide on price movements, depending on the weight of money placed on each market.
58 If he doesn’t win next time his number won’t be 5, or 1, it will be up.
If people want the piece on Wednesday, we can do that. The prices do move, but only I think in response to the weight of money. I don’t think Anthony would move them just in response to, say, a bad PMQ or riots over the Iran stand-off. Betting is pretty light and I’m fairly sure most of it is coming from PBers, so if we deferred to Wednesday I think we would still be impacting the prices.
Would we gain much of an edge by waiting till Wednesday? I doubt it but if that’s what Aladin wants, just rub the lamp.
Forgive me for being dense here - I get how buying Hague at above his new value represents a loss, but why does selling Ming above HIS new value ALSO represent a loss?
57 Do you post as Ted as well then . LOL
Labour Leadership Election - Good article
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labour_Party_%28UK%29_leadership_election%2C_2007
What a load Wikibollocks!
61 Well spotted, Paul D.
The sell figure is wrong. It should be 77.5. Even so, the loss is still wrong. The result was 77.6, so that’s a loss of 0.1 instead of 0.4 - the loss has been overstated by 0.3. It’s hardly material but we do like to get these things right.
I’ll have a word with the culprit.
Book Value @ 55. I have insider information on the identity of JackW. May we have a competition please and some odds?
66 Some chance! Even Jack doesn’t know who he is.
Peter @ 67. It’s an excellent chance if the arb is so good.
re Wikipedia (63) - an elaborate April Fool methinks
66. Some pretty big clues to that were posted on here a while back.
68 Nah, if there’s an arb to be had, Jack’s sure to mop it up himself.
Totally OT has anyone seen the April Fools spoof by Goggle for their wireless internet service based around your toilet?
Google…..so what if i cant type.
Were there any April fool posts today…excluding the usual spoofs from Roger?
Hobbler @ 70. I’ve only been lurking from time to time over the past few months and I don’t recall those clues.
72 - No, although I’m beginning to think that the current West Indies side is an elaborate spoof… simply shocking.
re 66. That’s not fair Poly. If Jack wants to reveal his true identity then that is up to Jack. He makes a major contribution to the site and PB was the poorer when because of illness he was out of action for a couple of months at the turn of the year.
75. Ah well you will have to trawl back through the old threads then, mucker.
62 - think you mixed up post numbers in your agreement with me (I was 50, Max was 49) and you said 49.
79 - Nope don’t think Mark was agreeing with me. Unless he’s a closet Jambo of course.
79 Oops yes Ted did mean your post lol .
The true identity of Jack W is….aaaargh
(falls to ground with Jacobite Claymore protruding from his back)
Re 72, Yokel.no I haven’t got a link?
77 I think I solved it - found this pic of Andrea, Herbert Proper and Jack W at the Pb.co Caribbean evening
http://www.movieweb.com/movies/film/34/2834/gal2594/01.php
Mike @ 77. I apologize, it wasn’t my intention to cause mischief. I’ll return to lurking.
83. Check out the google uk home page and click to their ‘breakthrough broadband’ link.
86
very good april fool…
On the subject of April Fools - I was amused to read in the Times this morning that Gromit (of Wallace and Gromit fame) is to replace ‘Nipper’ as HMV’s dog (you know, the one looking into the gramophone). Thought this a very good April 1st story. But now the BBC are reporting it: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/6516235.stm
So is this real? Or has the BBC been duped? Or is the BBC just being lazy and subcontracting out its April Fools?
85 No need to apologize, Poly. It’s not as if it’s any great secret anyway. I mean, how many 104 year old members of The Jacobite Liberation Front can there be?
Re 86, Yokel, very funny!
88. I have no idea on that one because logically its a gem of a marketing idea but the date suggests…..
81 you mean even on Steve Hilton’s salary we don’t agree
Golly gosh it has gone quiet here!
Still, there is always this for bedtime reading:
http://aconservatives.blogspot.com/
And it is now in the sidebar as well!
The BNP sightings in my patch cover most of the northern half of the borough - four tough-looking blokes delivering leaflets in different wards. They are asking for feedback to a PO Box.
I’ve always taken the view that we should define what’s legal and then not discriminate against any party which operates within that definition, so if they avoid inciting racial hatred they’re entitled to stand anywhere they like as far as I’m concerned. But I don’t expect them to do very well with their scattergun approach - among other places they are standing in Trowell, a village with near-zero crime and near-zero immigration: the local LibDem councillor got something like 70% of the vote last time. I think Labour will see their national officer off in Brinsley too, even though she got 43% last time, but we’ll see.
O/T
Jerusalem Post: ‘US ready to strike Iran on Good Friday’
Good Night everyone
The Times pushing their Gordon/pensions story hard. They rang me yesterday to ask if I thought it made a challenge more likely. I said no, I didn’t. They quote three unnamed MPs, but only those who agree with the paper…
Tories up to no good again:
http://www.libdemvoice.org/conservatives-accused-in-poll-fixing-scandal-644.html
Re 94, Nick Palmer, “I’ve always taken the view that we should define what’s legal and then not discriminate against any party which operates within that definition,”
Here we disagree. In this countries legal tradition we define what is legal, and therefore all else is legal. Any party which does nothing that is legal is free to stand.
So far I have heard nothing of the BNP in my patch but then I have heard naff all of the Lib dems as well!
Re 96, Nick, newspapers only carrying the evidence which supports their view shock!
98 Erm . . . Benedict, don’t you mean to say
“In this countries legal tradition we define what is ILLEGAL, and therefore all else is legal. Any party which does nothing that is ILLEGAL is free to stand.”
Re 99, Gladstone yes I did, Sheesh I’ll get me coat!
Except that countries is the plural you should have written country’s (possessive) so I can still probably hang on with a bit of pedantry!
96- nick i just saw the times story,they are really pushing it,what happened with the murdoch-brown love?
Re 101. Me, it appears to be a love hate relationship! With a bit of luck if Brown gets the job he will reduce Murdoch’s influence just before an election so that we don’t have to afterwards!
100 Quite right, I made a mistake! I didn’t mean to be hyper critical of you in this the holiest of weeks.
Also, I fully agree with the sentiments that you were putting forward. Very old fashioned. Very British.
Not a very good European, am I? I won’t lose any sleep over that, though.
On the subject of which . . .it’s off to Uncle Ned.
101&102. Nick was not joking, after two years of fighting for the information the Times is not about to let go quickly!
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article1599964.ece
Re 103, Gladstone, to be fair you pointed out that what I wrote was complete b*llocks as written! That said you understood it!
I just tried to save face
104. A couple of interesting comments from the Times story.
“Pensions campaigners claim it shows that he deliberately went about destroying what was at that time one of the best pension systems in the world.”
“The Chancellor has been accused of attempting to bury the news by releasing it late on Friday afternoon, while Parliament was in recess and he was out of the country.”
This type of behaviour does reinforce the tag Macavity Brown.
102-i think you’re right…now i just want to see the next poll,is this going to have a big impact?or no?
Re 107, Me,it’s hard to tell. To some extent those who already have been hit probably blame the government already, that said it does push the issue and will make more people aware of it so I think it will force the poll ratings down.
On that note I am off to bed!
Meanwhile on Planet Grauniad, an article by a gentleman hitherto famous for being a wee bit too close to the KGB during the cold war. The jist of this latest masterpiece is that we should hand back the Falklands because, well, that’s the way things were back in 1833. On the same basis, presumably he advocates the reintroduction of slavery in the US deep south.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/story/0,,2047981,00.html
Nick Palmer MP: -
Do you believe aliens have ever visited the planet?
Are the government in contact with aliens?
I’ve posted the relevant sections from the Acts re the choice of first ministers at the end of the previous thread.