By the way @IanB2 , you can no longer just ‘slip it into the box’ on the day. That was changed in 2022. You now have to go to the staff and complete a supplementary form which includes explaining why your postal vote has not been posted.
They certainly check postal votes and they certainly can cancel them. Poor @OldKingCole had his vote in May rejected because of non-matching signature.
Confirmed, Heath. That is exactly what happened to me when I failed to post my vote at the locals, and went in person instead.
It was all kind of impressive in its own way. I've encountered less formality when taking out a mortgage, but the job was done, and done properly.
• Labour: 37 per cent of the Britain-wide vote, 400 seats • Conservative: 24 per cent, 155 seats • Liberal Democrats: 13 per cent, 50 seats • Reform UK: 13 per cent, 2 seats • Green: 7 per cent, 2 seats • SNP: 33 per cent in Scotland, 18 seats • Other (including Northern Ireland): 23 seats • Labour majority: 150
Looks credible, but we just don't know.
In GE2019 the exit poll/result was in line with the polls, but in GE2017 and GE2015 it really wasn't.
I think that makes a very credible forecast, with some pullback from the smaller parties as the Tory and tabloid last-minute scares bite.
It would put all of the in-campaign ELE chat in the same category as the Tories gain Bootle chat that was prevalent as Mrs May bestrode the world during the early 2017 campaign. Which is fair enough - campaign excitement at imminent extreme results fades into a more pedestrian outcome (not that Labour getting 400 is at all pedestrian, historically) as polling day approaches.
It makes the odds on Tory seats over 100 and over 140 very attractive, and I am putting some money on, partly for some consultation when the eagerly anticipated and we’ll deserved ELE doesn’t quite materialise.
I'm still mulling over buying at 100+ seats.
My instinct tells me it's a buy, but I also don't want to lose my shirt in case a revolution is brewing.
Every single registered voter on my mail route has received their postal vote or ballot card on the day that they've been given to me to deliver
Royal Mail might be part of the late delivery problem, but I'm not
Our household will be disenfranchised unless we can persuade our council to reissue our postal votes before the election and get them to us before the election - something they've managed to fail to do in the 10 days since they sent them out - or allow us to vote in person.
To say that we are pissed off is an understatement. A example of the fucking ineptitude of this country.
That doesn't sound good. I'd replace postal voting (on demand, anyway) with early voting in person as we do with the recall petitions.
It’s 2024! Why on earth haven’t we introduced online voting?
Security and accuracy. Would you trust Fujitsu with our democratic process?
Currently you're trusting the Post Office...
The Post Office are only losing votes. Online you're creating the potential for anyone to add lots of votes, anywhere and everywhere.
I did suggest early voting a few days ago, but I'm wondering whether I was right. Essentially, any time that you make voting easier, you also make electoral fraud easier.
Being slightly pedantic as I’m grumpy (very loud wedding reception directly below my hotel room!) but you mean Royal Mail don’t you, rather than the Post Office?
I agree with you though. Much as I’d love to see the system go electronic it’s too open to fraud and hacking.
Estonia has had a very secure e-voting system since 2005 (bearing in mind its eastern neighbour, the country needs to have very strong security around everything online). In 2023 more than half of votes cast were done online. There are several back ups in security and you can also change your mind online or deliver a paper vote to the polling place on the election day itself, which cancels your online vote. The system has been criticised by mostly foreign analysts, but the points they have made do not seem to undermine the overall integrity of the ballot, and there is a high level of trust in the system.
However, what Estonia has, which the UK does not is a a very strong digital ID system. it is based upon a chip token (either on the national ID card or on a validated mobile smart phone), together with an entry PIN and a validation PIN, so it is more secure than getting into say, a bank account.
So far it has worked very well, and has been popular and probably boosted turnout. It is seen here as generally a very positive thing. So far thee has not been a move towards direct democracy, or even more referenda, and though some would like to see this, there is a mistrust of changing the constitution to allow it. Estonia knows from its time under Soviet occupation, how popular votes h´can be rigged, and is therefore quite constitutionally conservative.
Validation of ID online is something that has proven to be a very strong tool and has drastically reduced administration costs for both government and the private sector. It is something that the UK should actively consider.
I like all of that, except …
I am strongly opposed to national ID cards as a point of civil liberty.
I find it an affront that by law people are “required” to register, or tell DVLA where they live even if they don’t drive, or complete a census. I enjoyed telling them to f-off about the census.
Civil liberties are constantly being eroded and I want to fight further intrusions.
Harrow East I find interesting because it's always had a decent Conservative vote in the 30-35% range even in its worst years, and has gone as high as 55%.
4/1 for a hold. Must be in play (or nominally in play) if Rishi has visited it.
So I've had a taste.
Good call.
There may be a lot of value in seats where Labour are vulnerable to ‘ethnic’ splintering.
The Kellner prediction is interesting (morning all!). On the one hand it looks like relative success for the Tories given the campaign and mood music. On the other its one seat worse than their very worst (deliberately i imagine!) In my neck of the woods, 155 seats would mean a big Norfolk shrug as we stay mostly blue outside the city. And yet its a prediction right on that spot - 1% swing from horror and catastrophe and 1% swing from better than 2001/solid opposition.
That's also the only case I know of since Ireland in 1918 where there were validated allegations of impersonation at voting stations.
Over the years there have been various instances that gave rise to concern, such as party activists hand delivering batches of postal vote envelopes to the town hall, and the rules around PVs have been tightened up - introducing the signature cross-check, restricting how many PVs anyone can deliver, and conduct rules restricting party activists from handling PVs for other voters - to try and address them.
I'm pissed off. So many shops have closed that the only ones within reach are Betfred and LadbrokesCoral (eliding the two to prevent disclosure). Either the constituency bets aren't available in the shops or the VERY NICE IF NOT FULLY INFORMED PEOPLE behind the desk just don't know and get confused when you ask...and confused people are very difficult to get service from.
So I'm a bit fucked. I appreciate few people on PB actually bet in shops instead of online, but does *anybody* know an actual physical shop that offers constituency bets?
Guys, I think you do/have bet in a physical shop. Do you know of a named physical shop that takes constituency bets? (eg shop X on Y street in town Z)
Never had a problem betting on a constitency market in a physical shop.
You have to write out the slip carefully, being very specific as to names, party and dates. Do not assume the staff will know there is a general election on. When you hand the slip in they will look puzzled and go to one of their computer screens to look it up and check the price. This will take time and you will probably have to help them ('How to you spell Islington?') but in due course you will get there and when they see on the screen the same details that you have written on your slip they will be happy, take your money and stamp your slip.
If the bet is large (say over £50) they will certainly phone head office for clearance. Again, this will take time while Head Office finds the appropriate expert (i.e. someone who knows who the PM is) but again if you show enough patience you should get on ok.
Expect similar delays when you go to collect your winnings, but it does work, believe me.
One of the best bits of in person betting is getting banned for winning too much. I was actually putting bets on for some experts (themselves banned), a long time ago, but the way the manager delivered the news still sticks with me.
• Labour: 37 per cent of the Britain-wide vote, 400 seats • Conservative: 24 per cent, 155 seats • Liberal Democrats: 13 per cent, 50 seats • Reform UK: 13 per cent, 2 seats • Green: 7 per cent, 2 seats • SNP: 33 per cent in Scotland, 18 seats • Other (including Northern Ireland): 23 seats • Labour majority: 150
I think CON would breath a big sigh of relief after all the MRP polls we've seen if that was the outcome...
So Kellner thinks the polls are wrong.
Does he indicate why?
Baxtered, those shares give 430/103/68 and a majority of 210. Now we all know Baxter's little tool is somewhat crude, but it does not necessarily lean one way rather than the other. It as likely as not to underestimate the majority as overestimate it.
So a little bit of narrative explanation from PK would be helpful.
He thinks Reform will undercook (I agree, based on the evidence I've seen - and illustrious pb'ers like Alistair Meeks and Sean Fear have identified the same) and the Tories tend to ever slightly outperform share on the day, and this would only be by 2-3%, and Labour underperform? Possibly due to real turnout?
We've also had polls showing Labour in the 37-39% range. OGH used to have a rule about that.
He has cherry picked the Lab/Con figures. The others are pretty much what most of the polls are predicting.
His calculation of seats on those numbers is very different to Baxter and probably other models too, so that needs some explanation. Betfair go 2.76 on their over/under 100 seats market. That's consistent with 112/118 on the spreads (when you factor in risk/reward).
Harrow East I find interesting because it's always had a decent Conservative vote in the 30-35% range even in its worst years, and has gone as high as 55%.
4/1 for a hold. Must be in play (or nominally in play) if Rishi has visited it.
So I've had a taste.
That's a bold statement given the ineptitude of his campaign so far.
The ineptitude is in the execution of the campaign, not in the data analysis.
Harrow East I find interesting because it's always had a decent Conservative vote in the 30-35% range even in its worst years, and has gone as high as 55%.
4/1 for a hold. Must be in play (or nominally in play) if Rishi has visited it.
So I've had a taste.
That's a bold statement given the ineptitude of his campaign so far.
The ineptitude is in the execution of the campaign, not in the data analysis.
• Labour: 37 per cent of the Britain-wide vote, 400 seats • Conservative: 24 per cent, 155 seats • Liberal Democrats: 13 per cent, 50 seats • Reform UK: 13 per cent, 2 seats • Green: 7 per cent, 2 seats • SNP: 33 per cent in Scotland, 18 seats • Other (including Northern Ireland): 23 seats • Labour majority: 150
I think CON would breath a big sigh of relief after all the MRP polls we've seen if that was the outcome...
So Kellner thinks the polls are wrong.
Does he indicate why?
Baxtered, those shares give 430/103/68 and a majority of 210. Now we all know Baxter's little tool is somewhat crude, but it does not necessarily lean one way rather than the other. It as likely as not to underestimate the majority as overestimate it.
So a little bit of narrative explanation from PK would be helpful.
Thats in line with YouGovs first MRP output with a smidgen off Labour/slight Con overperformance
Every single registered voter on my mail route has received their postal vote or ballot card on the day that they've been given to me to deliver
Royal Mail might be part of the late delivery problem, but I'm not
Our household will be disenfranchised unless we can persuade our council to reissue our postal votes before the election and get them to us before the election - something they've managed to fail to do in the 10 days since they sent them out - or allow us to vote in person.
To say that we are pissed off is an understatement. A example of the fucking ineptitude of this country.
That doesn't sound good. I'd replace postal voting (on demand, anyway) with early voting in person as we do with the recall petitions.
It’s 2024! Why on earth haven’t we introduced online voting?
Security and accuracy. Would you trust Fujitsu with our democratic process?
Currently you're trusting the Post Office...
The Post Office are only losing votes. Online you're creating the potential for anyone to add lots of votes, anywhere and everywhere.
I did suggest early voting a few days ago, but I'm wondering whether I was right. Essentially, any time that you make voting easier, you also make electoral fraud easier.
Being slightly pedantic as I’m grumpy (very loud wedding reception directly below my hotel room!) but you mean Royal Mail don’t you, rather than the Post Office?
I agree with you though. Much as I’d love to see the system go electronic it’s too open to fraud and hacking.
Estonia has had a very secure e-voting system since 2005 (bearing in mind its eastern neighbour, the country needs to have very strong security around everything online). In 2023 more than half of votes cast were done online. There are several back ups in security and you can also change your mind online or deliver a paper vote to the polling place on the election day itself, which cancels your online vote. The system has been criticised by mostly foreign analysts, but the points they have made do not seem to undermine the overall integrity of the ballot, and there is a high level of trust in the system.
However, what Estonia has, which the UK does not is a a very strong digital ID system. it is based upon a chip token (either on the national ID card or on a validated mobile smart phone), together with an entry PIN and a validation PIN, so it is more secure than getting into say, a bank account.
So far it has worked very well, and has been popular and probably boosted turnout. It is seen here as generally a very positive thing. So far thee has not been a move towards direct democracy, or even more referenda, and though some would like to see this, there is a mistrust of changing the constitution to allow it. Estonia knows from its time under Soviet occupation, how popular votes h´can be rigged, and is therefore quite constitutionally conservative.
Validation of ID online is something that has proven to be a very strong tool and has drastically reduced administration costs for both government and the private sector. It is something that the UK should actively consider.
I like all of that, except …
I am strongly opposed to national ID cards as a point of civil liberty.
I find it an affront that by law people are “required” to register, or tell DVLA where they live even if they don’t drive, or complete a census. I enjoyed telling them to f-off about the census.
Civil liberties are constantly being eroded and I want to fight further intrusions.
I have generally been with you on civil liberties, especially concerning ID cards. However, the online world has become rather different, and it is a matter of individual protection to be able to prove that spammers and other nefarious crooks are not you, so I think there really is a national conversation we need to have. UK systems are built on very week foundations, and are very vulnerable to cyberattacks by Russia and other bad actors. Creating a secure communications channel online is I think very important to protect citizens and secure the state systems.
Estonia is a thriving democracy, with bitter memories of how democracies fall, so I think there is something we can learn here.
I am no friend or ally of Nigel Farage, and I hope very few people vote for his Reform Party, because it isn’t very nice and because Reform votes will aid Labour. But I must stand up for Mr Farage over the issue of the Ukraine war. The distinguished American Russia hawk Robert Kagan, who knows his onions in this region, agrees with Mr Farage that Russia was provoked....
Anyone who questions it is accused of being a Kremlin agent. Well, this is how dissent is treated in Russia, an example we should not follow. I think the near-hysterical allegations of ‘Putin shill’ and ‘Kremlin parrot’ levelled against dissenters are a sign that our governing class lack confidence in their Russia policy. As well they might. It is a foolish and ignorant one....
• Labour: 37 per cent of the Britain-wide vote, 400 seats • Conservative: 24 per cent, 155 seats • Liberal Democrats: 13 per cent, 50 seats • Reform UK: 13 per cent, 2 seats • Green: 7 per cent, 2 seats • SNP: 33 per cent in Scotland, 18 seats • Other (including Northern Ireland): 23 seats • Labour majority: 150
I think CON would breath a big sigh of relief after all the MRP polls we've seen if that was the outcome...
So Kellner thinks the polls are wrong.
Does he indicate why?
Baxtered, those shares give 430/103/68 and a majority of 210. Now we all know Baxter's little tool is somewhat crude, but it does not necessarily lean one way rather than the other. It as likely as not to underestimate the majority as overestimate it.
So a little bit of narrative explanation from PK would be helpful.
He thinks Reform will undercook (I agree, based on the evidence I've seen - and illustrious pb'ers like Alistair Meeks and Sean Fear have identified the same) and the Tories tend to ever slightly outperform share on the day, and this would only be by 2-3%, and Labour underperform? Possibly due to real turnout?
We've also had polls showing Labour in the 37-39% range. OGH used to have a rule about that.
That all makes sense to me, though I think Reform may go a touch lower and the LibDems higher. Tactical LD voting and the Green 7% are the key numbers that explain the Labour one. Labour will lose a decent chunk of votes to the left in its safe inner city constituencies. The usual Green squeeze will not occur. Kellner must also be predicting a Corbyn win in Islington North - unless he feels there will be a Plaid Cymru surge.
By the way @IanB2 , you can no longer just ‘slip it into the box’ on the day. That was changed in 2022. You now have to go to the staff and complete a supplementary form which includes explaining why your postal vote has not been posted.
They certainly check postal votes and they certainly can cancel them. Poor @OldKingCole had his vote in May rejected because of non-matching signature.
Confirmed, Heath. That is exactly what happened to me when I failed to post my vote at the locals, and went in person instead.
It was all kind of impressive in its own way. I've encountered less formality when taking out a mortgage, but the job was done, and done properly.
Yes, but when I said 'slip it into the box' I meant illicitly. Which is most unlikely to be spotted.
I am no friend or ally of Nigel Farage, and I hope very few people vote for his Reform Party, because it isn’t very nice and because Reform votes will aid Labour. But I must stand up for Mr Farage over the issue of the Ukraine war. The distinguished American Russia hawk Robert Kagan, who knows his onions in this region, agrees with Mr Farage that Russia was provoked....
Anyone who questions it is accused of being a Kremlin agent. Well, this is how dissent is treated in Russia, an example we should not follow. I think the near-hysterical allegations of ‘Putin shill’ and ‘Kremlin parrot’ levelled against dissenters are a sign that our governing class lack confidence in their Russia policy....
Dissent in Russia is treated by the dissenter accidentally falling out of the 12th floor.....but heh, Hitchens has to hitch.
• Labour: 37 per cent of the Britain-wide vote, 400 seats • Conservative: 24 per cent, 155 seats • Liberal Democrats: 13 per cent, 50 seats • Reform UK: 13 per cent, 2 seats • Green: 7 per cent, 2 seats • SNP: 33 per cent in Scotland, 18 seats • Other (including Northern Ireland): 23 seats • Labour majority: 150
Looks credible, but we just don't know.
In GE2019 the exit poll/result was in line with the polls, but in GE2017 and GE2015 it really wasn't.
I think that makes a very credible forecast, with some pullback from the smaller parties as the Tory and tabloid last-minute scares bite.
It would put all of the in-campaign ELE chat in the same category as the Tories gain Bootle chat that was prevalent as Mrs May bestrode the world during the early 2017 campaign. Which is fair enough - campaign excitement at imminent extreme results fades into a more pedestrian outcome (not that Labour getting 400 is at all pedestrian, historically) as polling day approaches.
It makes the odds on Tory seats over 100 and over 140 very attractive, and I am putting some money on, partly for some consultation when the eagerly anticipated and we’ll deserved ELE doesn’t quite materialise.
I'm still mulling over buying at 100+ seats.
My instinct tells me it's a buy, but I also don't want to lose my shirt in case a revolution is brewing.
[probably isn't]
I’ve just placed a bet on Cons 100-149 seats @ 3/1 with Betfair
I reckon that’s great value.
I may be completely wrong but I suspect some of the doomsday and ELE talk is wildly misplaced. And this will be the election when MRPs are generally derided.
I'm pissed off. So many shops have closed that the only ones within reach are Betfred and LadbrokesCoral (eliding the two to prevent disclosure). Either the constituency bets aren't available in the shops or the VERY NICE IF NOT FULLY INFORMED PEOPLE behind the desk just don't know and get confused when you ask...and confused people are very difficult to get service from.
So I'm a bit fucked. I appreciate few people on PB actually bet in shops instead of online, but does *anybody* know an actual physical shop that offers constituency bets?
Guys, I think you do/have bet in a physical shop. Do you know of a named physical shop that takes constituency bets? (eg shop X on Y street in town Z)
Never had a problem betting on a constitency market in a physical shop.
You have to write out the slip carefully, being very specific as to names, party and dates. Do not assume the staff will know there is a general election on. When you hand the slip in they will look puzzled and go to one of their computer screens to look it up and check the price. This will take time and you will probably have to help them ('How to you spell Islington?') but in due course you will get there and when they see on the screen the same details that you have written on your slip they will be happy, take your money and stamp your slip.
If the bet is large (say over £50) they will certainly phone head office for clearance. Again, this will take time while Head Office finds the appropriate expert (i.e. someone who knows who the PM is) but again if you show enough patience you should get on ok.
Expect similar delays when you go to collect your winnings, but it does work, believe me.
One of the best bits of in person betting is getting banned for winning too much. I was actually putting bets on for some experts (themselves banned), a long time ago, but the way the manager delivered the news still sticks with me.
The best advert for Piers Corbyns long range weather forecasts is that he started the business after being banned by the bookies for winning once too often in long range weather bets.
I am no friend or ally of Nigel Farage, and I hope very few people vote for his Reform Party, because it isn’t very nice and because Reform votes will aid Labour. But I must stand up for Mr Farage over the issue of the Ukraine war. The distinguished American Russia hawk Robert Kagan, who knows his onions in this region, agrees with Mr Farage that Russia was provoked....
Anyone who questions it is accused of being a Kremlin agent. Well, this is how dissent is treated in Russia, an example we should not follow. I think the near-hysterical allegations of ‘Putin shill’ and ‘Kremlin parrot’ levelled against dissenters are a sign that our governing class lack confidence in their Russia policy....
I don't understand this argument.
Ukraine is as sovereign a nation as Russia. It is allowed to join NATO. It is allowed to join the EU.
If your neighbour wants nothing to do with you and would rather be with someone else... well, maybe you should look at your own behaviour rather than blaming someone else.
I am no friend or ally of Nigel Farage, and I hope very few people vote for his Reform Party, because it isn’t very nice and because Reform votes will aid Labour. But I must stand up for Mr Farage over the issue of the Ukraine war. The distinguished American Russia hawk Robert Kagan, who knows his onions in this region, agrees with Mr Farage that Russia was provoked....
Anyone who questions it is accused of being a Kremlin agent. Well, this is how dissent is treated in Russia, an example we should not follow. I think the near-hysterical allegations of ‘Putin shill’ and ‘Kremlin parrot’ levelled against dissenters are a sign that our governing class lack confidence in their Russia policy....
Or that there is a large scale propaganda and subversion attack against our political discourse by Russian inspired and funded bad actors. The evidence for this is pretty clear, so to ignore it is extremely foolish. The bovine Mr Hitchens has proven reliably wrong in most of his commentary, so I think we should note that Russia is attempting to subvert our democracy and that it does have a network of active agents of influence, even if Peter Hitchens is more useful idiot than active agent.
• Labour: 37 per cent of the Britain-wide vote, 400 seats • Conservative: 24 per cent, 155 seats • Liberal Democrats: 13 per cent, 50 seats • Reform UK: 13 per cent, 2 seats • Green: 7 per cent, 2 seats • SNP: 33 per cent in Scotland, 18 seats • Other (including Northern Ireland): 23 seats • Labour majority: 150
Looks credible, but we just don't know.
In GE2019 the exit poll/result was in line with the polls, but in GE2017 and GE2015 it really wasn't.
I think that makes a very credible forecast, with some pullback from the smaller parties as the Tory and tabloid last-minute scares bite.
It would put all of the in-campaign ELE chat in the same category as the Tories gain Bootle chat that was prevalent as Mrs May bestrode the world during the early 2017 campaign. Which is fair enough - campaign excitement at imminent extreme results fades into a more pedestrian outcome (not that Labour getting 400 is at all pedestrian, historically) as polling day approaches.
It makes the odds on Tory seats over 100 and over 140 very attractive, and I am putting some money on, partly for some consultation when the eagerly anticipated and we’ll deserved ELE doesn’t quite materialise.
I'm still mulling over buying at 100+ seats.
My instinct tells me it's a buy, but I also don't want to lose my shirt in case a revolution is brewing.
[probably isn't]
If there is a swingback it would probably be at the LibDems' expense, with a string of near misses across the Home Counties, rather than Labour, which probably has its 400 seats nailed on. Late LibDem disappointment would fit with the pattern of previous elections, and there will invariably be people settled on voting LibDem who get squeezed back to the larger parties on polling day. Thus betting 'under' on the higher LibDem estimates is probably the same bet as 'over' on Tory.
• Labour: 37 per cent of the Britain-wide vote, 400 seats • Conservative: 24 per cent, 155 seats • Liberal Democrats: 13 per cent, 50 seats • Reform UK: 13 per cent, 2 seats • Green: 7 per cent, 2 seats • SNP: 33 per cent in Scotland, 18 seats • Other (including Northern Ireland): 23 seats • Labour majority: 150
I think CON would breath a big sigh of relief after all the MRP polls we've seen if that was the outcome...
So Kellner thinks the polls are wrong.
Does he indicate why?
Baxtered, those shares give 430/103/68 and a majority of 210. Now we all know Baxter's little tool is somewhat crude, but it does not necessarily lean one way rather than the other. It as likely as not to underestimate the majority as overestimate it.
So a little bit of narrative explanation from PK would be helpful.
He thinks Reform will undercook (I agree, based on the evidence I've seen - and illustrious pb'ers like Alistair Meeks and Sean Fear have identified the same) and the Tories tend to ever slightly outperform share on the day, and this would only be by 2-3%, and Labour underperform? Possibly due to real turnout?
We've also had polls showing Labour in the 37-39% range. OGH used to have a rule about that.
Funny thing. We fundamentally disagree on politics, have been very rude to each other, and yet when it comes to punting* we’re not so far apart after all
Agree with everything you have posted here. In fact I’m beginning to think my 39% Labour is too high.
I'm pissed off. So many shops have closed that the only ones within reach are Betfred and LadbrokesCoral (eliding the two to prevent disclosure). Either the constituency bets aren't available in the shops or the VERY NICE IF NOT FULLY INFORMED PEOPLE behind the desk just don't know and get confused when you ask...and confused people are very difficult to get service from.
So I'm a bit fucked. I appreciate few people on PB actually bet in shops instead of online, but does *anybody* know an actual physical shop that offers constituency bets?
Guys, I think you do/have bet in a physical shop. Do you know of a named physical shop that takes constituency bets? (eg shop X on Y street in town Z)
Never had a problem betting on a constitency market in a physical shop.
You have to write out the slip carefully, being very specific as to names, party and dates. Do not assume the staff will know there is a general election on. When you hand the slip in they will look puzzled and go to one of their computer screens to look it up and check the price. This will take time and you will probably have to help them ('How to you spell Islington?') but in due course you will get there and when they see on the screen the same details that you have written on your slip they will be happy, take your money and stamp your slip.
If the bet is large (say over £50) they will certainly phone head office for clearance. Again, this will take time while Head Office finds the appropriate expert (i.e. someone who knows who the PM is) but again if you show enough patience you should get on ok.
Expect similar delays when you go to collect your winnings, but it does work, believe me.
One of the best bits of in person betting is getting banned for winning too much. I was actually putting bets on for some experts (themselves banned), a long time ago, but the way the manager delivered the news still sticks with me.
One of my best friends - and co-founders of Betgenius/Genius Sports - was a professional gambler for a while. He was first banned from online. Then from all the bookmakers near him.
He then took to getting on his bike every morning and riding 5 or 10 miles (he lived in Camden) to bookmakers in other parts of London to put bets on.
One day, he cycled for an hour to Colindale, to an independent bookmaker he had never bet with before, and saw his picture pinned up behind the counter. That was when he knew his professional gambling days were behind him.
I'm pissed off. So many shops have closed that the only ones within reach are Betfred and LadbrokesCoral (eliding the two to prevent disclosure). Either the constituency bets aren't available in the shops or the VERY NICE IF NOT FULLY INFORMED PEOPLE behind the desk just don't know and get confused when you ask...and confused people are very difficult to get service from.
So I'm a bit fucked. I appreciate few people on PB actually bet in shops instead of online, but does *anybody* know an actual physical shop that offers constituency bets?
Guys, I think you do/have bet in a physical shop. Do you know of a named physical shop that takes constituency bets? (eg shop X on Y street in town Z)
Never had a problem betting on a constitency market in a physical shop.
You have to write out the slip carefully, being very specific as to names, party and dates. Do not assume the staff will know there is a general election on. When you hand the slip in they will look puzzled and go to one of their computer screens to look it up and check the price. This will take time and you will probably have to help them ('How to you spell Islington?') but in due course you will get there and when they see on the screen the same details that you have written on your slip they will be happy, take your money and stamp your slip.
If the bet is large (say over £50) they will certainly phone head office for clearance. Again, this will take time while Head Office finds the appropriate expert (i.e. someone who knows who the PM is) but again if you show enough patience you should get on ok.
Expect similar delays when you go to collect your winnings, but it does work, believe me.
One of the best bits of in person betting is getting banned for winning too much. I was actually putting bets on for some experts (themselves banned), a long time ago, but the way the manager delivered the news still sticks with me.
The best advert for Piers Corbyns long range weather forecasts is that he started the business after being banned by the bookies for winning once too often in long range weather bets.
Do you have any evidence for this? I mean, how many long range weather forecast bets can you find on Ladbrokes.com?
In last year's Distict elections in my area turnout of Postal votes was 62% -well above the about 40% of total voter turnout
4% of postal votes were rejected:
Total Voters 73,529 Postal Votes (PV) issued 14,785 PV counted 9,197 PV rejected missing signature – 62 PV rejected missing DOB – 37 PV rejected both above – 73 PV rejected mismatched signature – 27 PV rejected mismatched DOB – 36 PV rejected both of above – 8 PV rejected ballot paper unreturned – 36 PV rejected postal voting statement unreturned – 20
Total received too late to be included In count up to 10 days after poll - 67
In a GE you'd expect nearer 80%. And, yes, postal votes are routinely rejected nowadays, as your data shows. The mismatching signatures are probably a mix of people with shaky handwriting or who for some other reason are unable to maintain a consistent signature (if you have a medical condition that makes this likely there is an exemption procedure you can apply for), people whose partners or family have filled in the forms for them in their absence, in good faith with permission thinking that this is OK, and isolated instances of opportunist fraud - people who have come by unused postal ballots (for example lying about in HMO postboxes, or student post rooms) and filled them in on inpulse. Where the DOBs don't match this does suggest the latter. Some genuine PV'ers struggle to follow the instructions and complete the paperwork properly, as the data shows.
• Labour: 37 per cent of the Britain-wide vote, 400 seats • Conservative: 24 per cent, 155 seats • Liberal Democrats: 13 per cent, 50 seats • Reform UK: 13 per cent, 2 seats • Green: 7 per cent, 2 seats • SNP: 33 per cent in Scotland, 18 seats • Other (including Northern Ireland): 23 seats • Labour majority: 150
Looks credible, but we just don't know.
In GE2019 the exit poll/result was in line with the polls, but in GE2017 and GE2015 it really wasn't.
I think that makes a very credible forecast, with some pullback from the smaller parties as the Tory and tabloid last-minute scares bite.
It would put all of the in-campaign ELE chat in the same category as the Tories gain Bootle chat that was prevalent as Mrs May bestrode the world during the early 2017 campaign. Which is fair enough - campaign excitement at imminent extreme results fades into a more pedestrian outcome (not that Labour getting 400 is at all pedestrian, historically) as polling day approaches.
It makes the odds on Tory seats over 100 and over 140 very attractive, and I am putting some money on, partly for some consultation when the eagerly anticipated and we’ll deserved ELE doesn’t quite materialise.
I'm still mulling over buying at 100+ seats.
My instinct tells me it's a buy, but I also don't want to lose my shirt in case a revolution is brewing.
[probably isn't]
I’ve just placed a bet on Cons 100-149 seats @ 3/1 with Betfair
I reckon that’s great value.
I may be completely wrong but I suspect some of the doomsday and ELE talk is wildly misplaced. And this will be the election when MRPs are generally derided.
I am on Cons 150-200 at 7-1, and think that is amazing value.
• Labour: 37 per cent of the Britain-wide vote, 400 seats • Conservative: 24 per cent, 155 seats • Liberal Democrats: 13 per cent, 50 seats • Reform UK: 13 per cent, 2 seats • Green: 7 per cent, 2 seats • SNP: 33 per cent in Scotland, 18 seats • Other (including Northern Ireland): 23 seats • Labour majority: 150
I think CON would breath a big sigh of relief after all the MRP polls we've seen if that was the outcome...
So Kellner thinks the polls are wrong.
Does he indicate why?
Baxtered, those shares give 430/103/68 and a majority of 210. Now we all know Baxter's little tool is somewhat crude, but it does not necessarily lean one way rather than the other. It as likely as not to underestimate the majority as overestimate it.
So a little bit of narrative explanation from PK would be helpful.
Thats in line with YouGovs first MRP output with a smidgen off Labour/slight Con overperformance
Yes, but that's a vote share towards the outer range of the many on offer, and inconsistent with their update. The implied seat share is also suspect, but no doubt he can explain.
I am no friend or ally of Nigel Farage, and I hope very few people vote for his Reform Party, because it isn’t very nice and because Reform votes will aid Labour. But I must stand up for Mr Farage over the issue of the Ukraine war. The distinguished American Russia hawk Robert Kagan, who knows his onions in this region, agrees with Mr Farage that Russia was provoked....
Anyone who questions it is accused of being a Kremlin agent. Well, this is how dissent is treated in Russia, an example we should not follow. I think the near-hysterical allegations of ‘Putin shill’ and ‘Kremlin parrot’ levelled against dissenters are a sign that our governing class lack confidence in their Russia policy. As well they might. It is a foolish and ignorant one....
Robert Kagan has not, as far as I can see, ever said that Russia was provoked. Instead, he's been the loudest in saying that it was the blundering withdrawal from Afghanistan greenlit the invasion.
And, indeed, he's been very hawkish on the US supporting Ukraine against Russia, even to the extent of heavily criticising Trump's vacillation on the subject and comparing him (not in a good way) to Neville Chamberlain.
Kremlin shills online have been claiming Kagan said it, but are curiously reluctant to provide links.
So Hitchens is quoting pro-Kremlin propaganda to make a point he thinks is valid.
I am no friend or ally of Nigel Farage, and I hope very few people vote for his Reform Party, because it isn’t very nice and because Reform votes will aid Labour. But I must stand up for Mr Farage over the issue of the Ukraine war. The distinguished American Russia hawk Robert Kagan, who knows his onions in this region, agrees with Mr Farage that Russia was provoked....
Anyone who questions it is accused of being a Kremlin agent. Well, this is how dissent is treated in Russia, an example we should not follow. I think the near-hysterical allegations of ‘Putin shill’ and ‘Kremlin parrot’ levelled against dissenters are a sign that our governing class lack confidence in their Russia policy. As well they might. It is a foolish and ignorant one....
The Farage argument is that while absolute sovereignty is good for the UK, it is not good for the countries of central and eastern Europe. They should not have the agency to decide their own futures in the way we do. This is Putinism, which is based on the belief Russia has the right to impose its will on the countries that surround it.
• Labour: 37 per cent of the Britain-wide vote, 400 seats • Conservative: 24 per cent, 155 seats • Liberal Democrats: 13 per cent, 50 seats • Reform UK: 13 per cent, 2 seats • Green: 7 per cent, 2 seats • SNP: 33 per cent in Scotland, 18 seats • Other (including Northern Ireland): 23 seats • Labour majority: 150
I think CON would breath a big sigh of relief after all the MRP polls we've seen if that was the outcome...
So Kellner thinks the polls are wrong.
Does he indicate why?
Baxtered, those shares give 430/103/68 and a majority of 210. Now we all know Baxter's little tool is somewhat crude, but it does not necessarily lean one way rather than the other. It as likely as not to underestimate the majority as overestimate it.
So a little bit of narrative explanation from PK would be helpful.
He thinks Reform will undercook (I agree, based on the evidence I've seen - and illustrious pb'ers like Alistair Meeks and Sean Fear have identified the same) and the Tories tend to ever slightly outperform share on the day, and this would only be by 2-3%, and Labour underperform? Possibly due to real turnout?
We've also had polls showing Labour in the 37-39% range. OGH used to have a rule about that.
That all makes sense to me, though I think Reform may go a touch lower and the LibDems higher. Tactical LD voting and the Green 7% are the key numbers that explain the Labour one. Labour will lose a decent chunk of votes to the left in its safe inner city constituencies. The usual Green squeeze will not occur. Kellner must also be predicting a Corbyn win in Islington North - unless he feels there will be a Plaid Cymru surge.
Now that Reform's support has apparently subsided, it's looking more possible that they could come fourth in terms of the popular vote. I think that would be a very healthy outcome.
Let’s hope it’s just a photo - you never know with the Bidens, especially if it’s the “in-laws or, er, spouses, their brothers and sisters”. Could get rapey
“Last night Joe Biden said women need to be able to get abortions because so many of them are being raped by their sisters. When you unpack his performance, it actually gets worse:”
I'm pissed off. So many shops have closed that the only ones within reach are Betfred and LadbrokesCoral (eliding the two to prevent disclosure). Either the constituency bets aren't available in the shops or the VERY NICE IF NOT FULLY INFORMED PEOPLE behind the desk just don't know and get confused when you ask...and confused people are very difficult to get service from.
So I'm a bit fucked. I appreciate few people on PB actually bet in shops instead of online, but does *anybody* know an actual physical shop that offers constituency bets?
Guys, I think you do/have bet in a physical shop. Do you know of a named physical shop that takes constituency bets? (eg shop X on Y street in town Z)
Never had a problem betting on a constitency market in a physical shop.
You have to write out the slip carefully, being very specific as to names, party and dates. Do not assume the staff will know there is a general election on. When you hand the slip in they will look puzzled and go to one of their computer screens to look it up and check the price. This will take time and you will probably have to help them ('How to you spell Islington?') but in due course you will get there and when they see on the screen the same details that you have written on your slip they will be happy, take your money and stamp your slip.
If the bet is large (say over £50) they will certainly phone head office for clearance. Again, this will take time while Head Office finds the appropriate expert (i.e. someone who knows who the PM is) but again if you show enough patience you should get on ok.
Expect similar delays when you go to collect your winnings, but it does work, believe me.
One of the best bits of in person betting is getting banned for winning too much. I was actually putting bets on for some experts (themselves banned), a long time ago, but the way the manager delivered the news still sticks with me.
One of my best friends - and co-founders of Betgenius/Genius Sports - was a professional gambler for a while. He was first banned from online. Then from all the bookmakers near him.
He then took to getting on his bike every morning and riding 5 or 10 miles (he lived in Camden) to bookmakers in other parts of London to put bets on.
One day, he cycled for an hour to Colindale, to an independent bookmaker he had never bet with before, and saw his picture pinned up behind the counter. That was when he knew his professional gambling days were behind him.
I still love that Peter Cook line from his brilliant Jeremy Thorpe post-trial satire
‘And it would be a sad day for this country if an election agent cannot spend his expenses in any way he sees fit.’
I sometimes wish I was alive in the days when you could walk into a bookies with a brown envelope stuffed full of fivers
On the subject of the media - and particularly the print media.
An observation from my wife working at the local Co-Op. Normally they have a good handle on how many newspapers they will sell and returns are very low
Since the election campaign started and particularly over the last week, newspaper sales have collapsed. Apparently this is the case across a lot of the branches. Huge numbers of returns because of very few sales. Not sure if it is because people are sick of the political headlines but it looks like what used to be a sales boost for a few weeks is now becoming a liability.
This is really interesting, because it ties in with my own behaviour. I normally buy quite a lot of print newspapers, but I've hardly done so since the election started.
I'm pissed off. So many shops have closed that the only ones within reach are Betfred and LadbrokesCoral (eliding the two to prevent disclosure). Either the constituency bets aren't available in the shops or the VERY NICE IF NOT FULLY INFORMED PEOPLE behind the desk just don't know and get confused when you ask...and confused people are very difficult to get service from.
So I'm a bit fucked. I appreciate few people on PB actually bet in shops instead of online, but does *anybody* know an actual physical shop that offers constituency bets?
Guys, I think you do/have bet in a physical shop. Do you know of a named physical shop that takes constituency bets? (eg shop X on Y street in town Z)
Never had a problem betting on a constitency market in a physical shop.
You have to write out the slip carefully, being very specific as to names, party and dates. Do not assume the staff will know there is a general election on. When you hand the slip in they will look puzzled and go to one of their computer screens to look it up and check the price. This will take time and you will probably have to help them ('How to you spell Islington?') but in due course you will get there and when they see on the screen the same details that you have written on your slip they will be happy, take your money and stamp your slip.
If the bet is large (say over £50) they will certainly phone head office for clearance. Again, this will take time while Head Office finds the appropriate expert (i.e. someone who knows who the PM is) but again if you show enough patience you should get on ok.
Expect similar delays when you go to collect your winnings, but it does work, believe me.
One of the best bits of in person betting is getting banned for winning too much. I was actually putting bets on for some experts (themselves banned), a long time ago, but the way the manager delivered the news still sticks with me.
One of my best friends - and co-founders of Betgenius/Genius Sports - was a professional gambler for a while. He was first banned from online. Then from all the bookmakers near him.
He then took to getting on his bike every morning and riding 5 or 10 miles (he lived in Camden) to bookmakers in other parts of London to put bets on.
One day, he cycled for an hour to Colindale, to an independent bookmaker he had never bet with before, and saw his picture pinned up behind the counter. That was when he knew his professional gambling days were behind him.
Dick Francis actually wrote a novel about the tactics of bookmakers to thwart professional gamblers, called Twice Shy.
On the subject of the media - and particularly the print media.
An observation from my wife working at the local Co-Op. Normally they have a good handle on how many newspapers they will sell and returns are very low
Since the election campaign started and particularly over the last week, newspaper sales have collapsed. Apparently this is the case across a lot of the branches. Huge numbers of returns because of very few sales. Not sure if it is because people are sick of the political headlines but it looks like what used to be a sales boost for a few weeks is now becoming a liability.
This is really interesting, because it ties in with my own behaviour. I normally buy quite a lot of print newspapers, but I've hardly done so since the election started.
I didnt know people still bought newspapers....
Some of them even pay for them with cash.
Crazy, I know.
Surely the more amusing irony would be if they paid using their phones?
This post will be unpopular... But I think we should introduce Electronic voting. But.. But.. But... What about Russian hackers? If Camelot can create very secure online lottery system, why can same infrastructure not be used for voting? Otherwise Russians and Chinese would win all the big lottery jackpots!!!
Send everyone a printed voting slip including voter details (for verification) - just tick the relevant box - and feed it into voting machine which immediately validates details, rejects spoilt ballots etc, and updates count automatically. All accepted ballots are collected into boxes for later checking.
Rejected ballots, missing ballots etc can be updated manually by election officers.
All physical boxes to be kept for manual checking (statistical sample or full manual recount if challenged).
All results to be announced on provisional basis within one hour of voting ended. If all parties agree then provisional result can be accepted as final, but parties can request manual recounts or partial challenges but on limited justifiable basis only.
This should definitely be introduced for STV type elections.
Every single registered voter on my mail route has received their postal vote or ballot card on the day that they've been given to me to deliver
Royal Mail might be part of the late delivery problem, but I'm not
Our household will be disenfranchised unless we can persuade our council to reissue our postal votes before the election and get them to us before the election - something they've managed to fail to do in the 10 days since they sent them out - or allow us to vote in person.
To say that we are pissed off is an understatement. A example of the fucking ineptitude of this country.
That doesn't sound good. I'd replace postal voting (on demand, anyway) with early voting in person as we do with the recall petitions.
It’s 2024! Why on earth haven’t we introduced online voting?
Security and accuracy. Would you trust Fujitsu with our democratic process?
Currently you're trusting the Post Office...
The Post Office are only losing votes. Online you're creating the potential for anyone to add lots of votes, anywhere and everywhere.
I did suggest early voting a few days ago, but I'm wondering whether I was right. Essentially, any time that you make voting easier, you also make electoral fraud easier.
Being slightly pedantic as I’m grumpy (very loud wedding reception directly below my hotel room!) but you mean Royal Mail don’t you, rather than the Post Office?
I agree with you though. Much as I’d love to see the system go electronic it’s too open to fraud and hacking.
Estonia has had a very secure e-voting system since 2005 (bearing in mind its eastern neighbour, the country needs to have very strong security around everything online). In 2023 more than half of votes cast were done online. There are several back ups in security and you can also change your mind online or deliver a paper vote to the polling place on the election day itself, which cancels your online vote. The system has been criticised by mostly foreign analysts, but the points they have made do not seem to undermine the overall integrity of the ballot, and there is a high level of trust in the system.
However, what Estonia has, which the UK does not is a a very strong digital ID system. it is based upon a chip token (either on the national ID card or on a validated mobile smart phone), together with an entry PIN and a validation PIN, so it is more secure than getting into say, a bank account.
So far it has worked very well, and has been popular and probably boosted turnout. It is seen here as generally a very positive thing. So far thee has not been a move towards direct democracy, or even more referenda, and though some would like to see this, there is a mistrust of changing the constitution to allow it. Estonia knows from its time under Soviet occupation, how popular votes h´can be rigged, and is therefore quite constitutionally conservative.
Validation of ID online is something that has proven to be a very strong tool and has drastically reduced administration costs for both government and the private sector. It is something that the UK should actively consider.
I like all of that, except …
I am strongly opposed to national ID cards as a point of civil liberty.
I find it an affront that by law people are “required” to register, or tell DVLA where they live even if they don’t drive, or complete a census. I enjoyed telling them to f-off about the census.
Civil liberties are constantly being eroded and I want to fight further intrusions.
• Labour: 37 per cent of the Britain-wide vote, 400 seats • Conservative: 24 per cent, 155 seats • Liberal Democrats: 13 per cent, 50 seats • Reform UK: 13 per cent, 2 seats • Green: 7 per cent, 2 seats • SNP: 33 per cent in Scotland, 18 seats • Other (including Northern Ireland): 23 seats • Labour majority: 150
Looks credible, but we just don't know.
In GE2019 the exit poll/result was in line with the polls, but in GE2017 and GE2015 it really wasn't.
I think that makes a very credible forecast, with some pullback from the smaller parties as the Tory and tabloid last-minute scares bite.
It would put all of the in-campaign ELE chat in the same category as the Tories gain Bootle chat that was prevalent as Mrs May bestrode the world during the early 2017 campaign. Which is fair enough - campaign excitement at imminent extreme results fades into a more pedestrian outcome (not that Labour getting 400 is at all pedestrian, historically) as polling day approaches.
It makes the odds on Tory seats over 100 and over 140 very attractive, and I am putting some money on, partly for some consultation when the eagerly anticipated and we’ll deserved ELE doesn’t quite materialise.
I'm still mulling over buying at 100+ seats.
My instinct tells me it's a buy, but I also don't want to lose my shirt in case a revolution is brewing.
[probably isn't]
I’ve just placed a bet on Cons 100-149 seats @ 3/1 with Betfair
I reckon that’s great value.
I may be completely wrong but I suspect some of the doomsday and ELE talk is wildly misplaced. And this will be the election when MRPs are generally derided.
Sure. Also quite funny, though, given you've derided me for over a year that an absolutely seismic asteroid that wiped out the dinosaurs catastrophe is coming ("you need to get out on the streets" etc.) that you're now more bullish about the Tories than I am.
• Labour: 37 per cent of the Britain-wide vote, 400 seats • Conservative: 24 per cent, 155 seats • Liberal Democrats: 13 per cent, 50 seats • Reform UK: 13 per cent, 2 seats • Green: 7 per cent, 2 seats • SNP: 33 per cent in Scotland, 18 seats • Other (including Northern Ireland): 23 seats • Labour majority: 150
Looks credible, but we just don't know.
In GE2019 the exit poll/result was in line with the polls, but in GE2017 and GE2015 it really wasn't.
I think that makes a very credible forecast, with some pullback from the smaller parties as the Tory and tabloid last-minute scares bite.
It would put all of the in-campaign ELE chat in the same category as the Tories gain Bootle chat that was prevalent as Mrs May bestrode the world during the early 2017 campaign. Which is fair enough - campaign excitement at imminent extreme results fades into a more pedestrian outcome (not that Labour getting 400 is at all pedestrian, historically) as polling day approaches.
It makes the odds on Tory seats over 100 and over 140 very attractive, and I am putting some money on, partly for some consultation when the eagerly anticipated and we’ll deserved ELE doesn’t quite materialise.
I'm still mulling over buying at 100+ seats.
My instinct tells me it's a buy, but I also don't want to lose my shirt in case a revolution is brewing.
[probably isn't]
I’ve just placed a bet on Cons 100-149 seats @ 3/1 with Betfair
I reckon that’s great value.
I may be completely wrong but I suspect some of the doomsday and ELE talk is wildly misplaced. And this will be the election when MRPs are generally derided.
I am on Cons 150-200 at 7-1, and think that is amazing value.
Me too, but it's money I would be delighted to lose.
I'm pissed off. So many shops have closed that the only ones within reach are Betfred and LadbrokesCoral (eliding the two to prevent disclosure). Either the constituency bets aren't available in the shops or the VERY NICE IF NOT FULLY INFORMED PEOPLE behind the desk just don't know and get confused when you ask...and confused people are very difficult to get service from.
So I'm a bit fucked. I appreciate few people on PB actually bet in shops instead of online, but does *anybody* know an actual physical shop that offers constituency bets?
Guys, I think you do/have bet in a physical shop. Do you know of a named physical shop that takes constituency bets? (eg shop X on Y street in town Z)
Never had a problem betting on a constitency market in a physical shop.
You have to write out the slip carefully, being very specific as to names, party and dates. Do not assume the staff will know there is a general election on. When you hand the slip in they will look puzzled and go to one of their computer screens to look it up and check the price. This will take time and you will probably have to help them ('How to you spell Islington?') but in due course you will get there and when they see on the screen the same details that you have written on your slip they will be happy, take your money and stamp your slip.
If the bet is large (say over £50) they will certainly phone head office for clearance. Again, this will take time while Head Office finds the appropriate expert (i.e. someone who knows who the PM is) but again if you show enough patience you should get on ok.
Expect similar delays when you go to collect your winnings, but it does work, believe me.
One of the best bits of in person betting is getting banned for winning too much. I was actually putting bets on for some experts (themselves banned), a long time ago, but the way the manager delivered the news still sticks with me.
The best advert for Piers Corbyns long range weather forecasts is that he started the business after being banned by the bookies for winning once too often in long range weather bets.
No, that was Piers Corbyn being the fantasist he is and sharing his brother’s talent for spin. He got lucky with one white Christmas in the early 90s. His forecasts, based entirely on variables that have some but limited impact on North Atlantic weather, were little more accurate than random chance and significantly less accurate than Met Office or other agency long range forecasts.
By the mid 90s his weather predictions were becoming increasingly a joke as he forecast apocalyptic storms and wind almost every month.
This post will be unpopular... But I think we should introduce Electronic voting. But.. But.. But... What about Russian hackers? If Camelot can create very secure online lottery system, why can same infrastructure not be used for voting? Otherwise Russians and Chinese would win all the big lottery jackpots!!!
Send everyone a printed voting slip including voter details (for verification) - just tick the relevant box - and feed it into voting machine which immediately validates details, rejects spoilt ballots etc, and updates count automatically. All accepted ballots are collected into boxes for later checking.
Rejected ballots, missing ballots etc can be updated manually by election officers.
All physical boxes to be kept for manual checking (statistical sample or full manual recount if challenged).
All results to be announced on provisional basis within one hour of voting ended. If all parties agree then provisional result can be accepted as final, but parties can request manual recounts or partial challenges but on limited justifiable basis only.
This should definitely be introduced for STV type elections.
Puts on tin helmet and waits for response....
AIUI the lottery is still drawn using balls that fall out of a glorified bucket. Even the Russians and Chinese can’t hack a bucket. The online lottery infrastructure simply allows players to pick which balls they think will fall out.
In other news - and much to my surprise - the Sunday Times has backed Labour.
Not to my surprise. The Eds and Directors of the paper move in hallowed circles in London and want to be able to say to to the new administration that they backed them, against the views of their op-ed writers and, largely, their readership.
• Labour: 37 per cent of the Britain-wide vote, 400 seats • Conservative: 24 per cent, 155 seats • Liberal Democrats: 13 per cent, 50 seats • Reform UK: 13 per cent, 2 seats • Green: 7 per cent, 2 seats • SNP: 33 per cent in Scotland, 18 seats • Other (including Northern Ireland): 23 seats • Labour majority: 150
Looks credible, but we just don't know.
In GE2019 the exit poll/result was in line with the polls, but in GE2017 and GE2015 it really wasn't.
I think that makes a very credible forecast, with some pullback from the smaller parties as the Tory and tabloid last-minute scares bite.
It would put all of the in-campaign ELE chat in the same category as the Tories gain Bootle chat that was prevalent as Mrs May bestrode the world during the early 2017 campaign. Which is fair enough - campaign excitement at imminent extreme results fades into a more pedestrian outcome (not that Labour getting 400 is at all pedestrian, historically) as polling day approaches.
It makes the odds on Tory seats over 100 and over 140 very attractive, and I am putting some money on, partly for some consultation when the eagerly anticipated and we’ll deserved ELE doesn’t quite materialise.
I'm still mulling over buying at 100+ seats.
My instinct tells me it's a buy, but I also don't want to lose my shirt in case a revolution is brewing.
[probably isn't]
I’ve just placed a bet on Cons 100-149 seats @ 3/1 with Betfair
I reckon that’s great value.
I may be completely wrong but I suspect some of the doomsday and ELE talk is wildly misplaced. And this will be the election when MRPs are generally derided.
I am on Cons 150-200 at 7-1, and think that is amazing value.
It really is. Hat tip Robert. Great value. I’ve just joined you there. 7-1 is still available folks at Ladbrokes folks.
Its time we returned to election declarations being delivered outside town halls to the gathered throng of local peasantry so they can carry the news home to their outlying villages
This post will be unpopular... But I think we should introduce Electronic voting. But.. But.. But... What about Russian hackers? If Camelot can create very secure online lottery system, why can same infrastructure not be used for voting? Otherwise Russians and Chinese would win all the big lottery jackpots!!!
Well, look at the British Library, still half crippled eight months after a cyber attack, and ask why they didn't use secure infrastructure when they could have done.
• Labour: 37 per cent of the Britain-wide vote, 400 seats • Conservative: 24 per cent, 155 seats • Liberal Democrats: 13 per cent, 50 seats • Reform UK: 13 per cent, 2 seats • Green: 7 per cent, 2 seats • SNP: 33 per cent in Scotland, 18 seats • Other (including Northern Ireland): 23 seats • Labour majority: 150
Looks credible, but we just don't know.
In GE2019 the exit poll/result was in line with the polls, but in GE2017 and GE2015 it really wasn't.
I think that makes a very credible forecast, with some pullback from the smaller parties as the Tory and tabloid last-minute scares bite.
It would put all of the in-campaign ELE chat in the same category as the Tories gain Bootle chat that was prevalent as Mrs May bestrode the world during the early 2017 campaign. Which is fair enough - campaign excitement at imminent extreme results fades into a more pedestrian outcome (not that Labour getting 400 is at all pedestrian, historically) as polling day approaches.
It makes the odds on Tory seats over 100 and over 140 very attractive, and I am putting some money on, partly for some consultation when the eagerly anticipated and we’ll deserved ELE doesn’t quite materialise.
I'm still mulling over buying at 100+ seats.
My instinct tells me it's a buy, but I also don't want to lose my shirt in case a revolution is brewing.
[probably isn't]
I’ve just placed a bet on Cons 100-149 seats @ 3/1 with Betfair
I reckon that’s great value.
I may be completely wrong but I suspect some of the doomsday and ELE talk is wildly misplaced. And this will be the election when MRPs are generally derided.
I am on Cons 150-200 at 7-1, and think that is amazing value.
It really is. Hat tip Robert. Great value. I’ve just joined you there. 7-1 is still available folks at Ladbrokes folks.
So I’m now green between 100- 200 Cons seats.
Truss hangs on by one vote for 201 overall it is then
• Labour: 37 per cent of the Britain-wide vote, 400 seats • Conservative: 24 per cent, 155 seats • Liberal Democrats: 13 per cent, 50 seats • Reform UK: 13 per cent, 2 seats • Green: 7 per cent, 2 seats • SNP: 33 per cent in Scotland, 18 seats • Other (including Northern Ireland): 23 seats • Labour majority: 150
I think CON would breath a big sigh of relief after all the MRP polls we've seen if that was the outcome...
So Kellner thinks the polls are wrong.
Does he indicate why?
Baxtered, those shares give 430/103/68 and a majority of 210. Now we all know Baxter's little tool is somewhat crude, but it does not necessarily lean one way rather than the other. It as likely as not to underestimate the majority as overestimate it.
So a little bit of narrative explanation from PK would be helpful.
He thinks Reform will undercook (I agree, based on the evidence I've seen - and illustrious pb'ers like Alistair Meeks and Sean Fear have identified the same) and the Tories tend to ever slightly outperform share on the day, and this would only be by 2-3%, and Labour underperform? Possibly due to real turnout?
We've also had polls showing Labour in the 37-39% range. OGH used to have a rule about that.
Funny thing. We fundamentally disagree on politics, have been very rude to each other, and yet when it comes to punting* we’re not so far apart after all
Agree with everything you have posted here. In fact I’m beginning to think my 39% Labour is too high.
I'm pissed off. So many shops have closed that the only ones within reach are Betfred and LadbrokesCoral (eliding the two to prevent disclosure). Either the constituency bets aren't available in the shops or the VERY NICE IF NOT FULLY INFORMED PEOPLE behind the desk just don't know and get confused when you ask...and confused people are very difficult to get service from.
So I'm a bit fucked. I appreciate few people on PB actually bet in shops instead of online, but does *anybody* know an actual physical shop that offers constituency bets?
Guys, I think you do/have bet in a physical shop. Do you know of a named physical shop that takes constituency bets? (eg shop X on Y street in town Z)
Never had a problem betting on a constitency market in a physical shop.
You have to write out the slip carefully, being very specific as to names, party and dates. Do not assume the staff will know there is a general election on. When you hand the slip in they will look puzzled and go to one of their computer screens to look it up and check the price. This will take time and you will probably have to help them ('How to you spell Islington?') but in due course you will get there and when they see on the screen the same details that you have written on your slip they will be happy, take your money and stamp your slip.
If the bet is large (say over £50) they will certainly phone head office for clearance. Again, this will take time while Head Office finds the appropriate expert (i.e. someone who knows who the PM is) but again if you show enough patience you should get on ok.
Expect similar delays when you go to collect your winnings, but it does work, believe me.
One of the best bits of in person betting is getting banned for winning too much. I was actually putting bets on for some experts (themselves banned), a long time ago, but the way the manager delivered the news still sticks with me.
One of my best friends - and co-founders of Betgenius/Genius Sports - was a professional gambler for a while. He was first banned from online. Then from all the bookmakers near him.
He then took to getting on his bike every morning and riding 5 or 10 miles (he lived in Camden) to bookmakers in other parts of London to put bets on.
One day, he cycled for an hour to Colindale, to an independent bookmaker he had never bet with before, and saw his picture pinned up behind the counter. That was when he knew his professional gambling days were behind him.
• Labour: 37 per cent of the Britain-wide vote, 400 seats • Conservative: 24 per cent, 155 seats • Liberal Democrats: 13 per cent, 50 seats • Reform UK: 13 per cent, 2 seats • Green: 7 per cent, 2 seats • SNP: 33 per cent in Scotland, 18 seats • Other (including Northern Ireland): 23 seats • Labour majority: 150
I think CON would breath a big sigh of relief after all the MRP polls we've seen if that was the outcome...
So Kellner thinks the polls are wrong.
Does he indicate why?
Baxtered, those shares give 430/103/68 and a majority of 210. Now we all know Baxter's little tool is somewhat crude, but it does not necessarily lean one way rather than the other. It as likely as not to underestimate the majority as overestimate it.
So a little bit of narrative explanation from PK would be helpful.
He thinks Reform will undercook (I agree, based on the evidence I've seen - and illustrious pb'ers like Alistair Meeks and Sean Fear have identified the same) and the Tories tend to ever slightly outperform share on the day, and this would only be by 2-3%, and Labour underperform? Possibly due to real turnout?
We've also had polls showing Labour in the 37-39% range. OGH used to have a rule about that.
He has cherry picked the Lab/Con figures. The others are pretty much what most of the polls are predicting.
His calculation of seats on those numbers is very different to Baxter and probably other models too, so that needs some explanation. Betfair go 2.76 on their over/under 100 seats market. That's consistent with 112/118 on the spreads (when you factor in risk/reward).
Wouldn't argue with either myself.
I think this interesting and I think, if anything RefUK might be even below this number.
There is one risk in this forecast though. Anecdotally my friends of the ground are saying that the Tory vote is not just shy, it is unfindable. Bear in mind that these are very experienced, even cynical, canvassers, but they are struggling to find Tory voters. This may be a regional thing, but I am beginning to think that the Tory vote is very fragile indeed.
The Sunday papers are talking about a Conservative advertising blitz against the Lib Dems in the last three days, however this time the Tory advantage in voter ID technology seems to be much lower and Labour and the Lib Dems can match them.
So, to recap. Sunak launched a surprise campaign which caught his own party unprepared, with insufficient money and lacking the advantage in data that Voter Vault etc once provided. There have been a series of gaffes which only reinforced the narrative of Tory incompetence and corruption. Despite silly smears, the Tories have not been able to scare voters about a government led by SKS, and their campaign narrative of being less bad than Labour has fallen totally flat.
We are now getting noise from around the country that the Tory vote seems to be going AWOL. Last time they got 42.4% of the vote. John Major in 1997 got 30.7%. It is clear that the 2024 vote will probably be worse than that. Yet 25% doesn´t seem bad enough to me.
This post will be unpopular... But I think we should introduce Electronic voting. But.. But.. But... What about Russian hackers? If Camelot can create very secure online lottery system, why can same infrastructure not be used for voting? Otherwise Russians and Chinese would win all the big lottery jackpots!!!
Send everyone a printed voting slip including voter details (for verification) - just tick the relevant box - and feed it into voting machine which immediately validates details, rejects spoilt ballots etc, and updates count automatically. All accepted ballots are collected into boxes for later checking.
Rejected ballots, missing ballots etc can be updated manually by election officers.
All physical boxes to be kept for manual checking (statistical sample or full manual recount if challenged).
All results to be announced on provisional basis within one hour of voting ended. If all parties agree then provisional result can be accepted as final, but parties can request manual recounts or partial challenges but on limited justifiable basis only.
This should definitely be introduced for STV type elections.
Puts on tin helmet and waits for response....
AIUI the lottery is still drawn using balls that fall out of a glorified bucket. Even the Russians and Chinese can’t hack a bucket. The online lottery infrastructure simply allows players to pick which balls they think will fall out.
• Labour: 37 per cent of the Britain-wide vote, 400 seats • Conservative: 24 per cent, 155 seats • Liberal Democrats: 13 per cent, 50 seats • Reform UK: 13 per cent, 2 seats • Green: 7 per cent, 2 seats • SNP: 33 per cent in Scotland, 18 seats • Other (including Northern Ireland): 23 seats • Labour majority: 150
I think CON would breath a big sigh of relief after all the MRP polls we've seen if that was the outcome...
So Kellner thinks the polls are wrong.
Does he indicate why?
Baxtered, those shares give 430/103/68 and a majority of 210. Now we all know Baxter's little tool is somewhat crude, but it does not necessarily lean one way rather than the other. It as likely as not to underestimate the majority as overestimate it.
So a little bit of narrative explanation from PK would be helpful.
He thinks Reform will undercook (I agree, based on the evidence I've seen - and illustrious pb'ers like Alistair Meeks and Sean Fear have identified the same) and the Tories tend to ever slightly outperform share on the day, and this would only be by 2-3%, and Labour underperform? Possibly due to real turnout?
We've also had polls showing Labour in the 37-39% range. OGH used to have a rule about that.
That all makes sense to me, though I think Reform may go a touch lower and the LibDems higher. Tactical LD voting and the Green 7% are the key numbers that explain the Labour one. Labour will lose a decent chunk of votes to the left in its safe inner city constituencies. The usual Green squeeze will not occur. Kellner must also be predicting a Corbyn win in Islington North - unless he feels there will be a Plaid Cymru surge.
I think Corbyn just misses out in Islington North.
It's a left-wing place but Corbyn is yesterday's news and plenty of people there will want to back a new Labour government.
Coldplay - wouldn’t be my favourite band but that set was enjoyable and Arabesque was just majestic. Not sure they’ve done it before live judging by the twittersphere reaction.
Constituency Markets. I feel hamstrung since Bet365 kicked me out. PP have some markets up but not the ones I want. I want Exmouth and South Shropshire among others.
By the way, talking of infringements of civil liberties and the disdain for betting, I received a call from one of my banks three or four years ago asking if I had a gambling addiction.
I’d placed a few bets, can’t remember on what but they were small amounts. I’m also highly selective about betting and bet very infrequently.
Really pissed me off but I did enjoy telling them, ‘Err you do realise I won?'
In other news - and much to my surprise - the Sunday Times has backed Labour.
Not to my surprise. The Eds and Directors of the paper move in hallowed circles in London and want to be able to say to to the new administration that they backed them, against the views of their op-ed writers and, largely, their readership.
They have their careers to think about.
Polling indicates the majority of Times readers want a change of government, doesn't it?
I am no friend or ally of Nigel Farage, and I hope very few people vote for his Reform Party, because it isn’t very nice and because Reform votes will aid Labour. But I must stand up for Mr Farage over the issue of the Ukraine war. The distinguished American Russia hawk Robert Kagan, who knows his onions in this region, agrees with Mr Farage that Russia was provoked....
Anyone who questions it is accused of being a Kremlin agent. Well, this is how dissent is treated in Russia, an example we should not follow. I think the near-hysterical allegations of ‘Putin shill’ and ‘Kremlin parrot’ levelled against dissenters are a sign that our governing class lack confidence in their Russia policy....
I don't understand this argument.
Ukraine is as sovereign a nation as Russia. It is allowed to join NATO. It is allowed to join the EU.
If your neighbour wants nothing to do with you and would rather be with someone else... well, maybe you should look at your own behaviour rather than blaming someone else.
I'm actually inclined to agree with Mearsheimer's view that regional powers tend towards wanting to extend their sphere of influence in their own regions, and much of modern conflict is a result of that. But this is a descriptive view of geopolitics rather than a prescriptive one, i.e. it seeks to describe what happens, rather than what ought to happen.
There's also a huge difference between academic debate of realist theories of international relations, and being a Putin supporting shill because you actually believe in Russia's right to subjugate its neighbours. The former is acceptable, the latter is not. I have an opinion on which category Farage falls under.
• Labour: 37 per cent of the Britain-wide vote, 400 seats • Conservative: 24 per cent, 155 seats • Liberal Democrats: 13 per cent, 50 seats • Reform UK: 13 per cent, 2 seats • Green: 7 per cent, 2 seats • SNP: 33 per cent in Scotland, 18 seats • Other (including Northern Ireland): 23 seats • Labour majority: 150
Looks credible, but we just don't know.
In GE2019 the exit poll/result was in line with the polls, but in GE2017 and GE2015 it really wasn't.
I think that makes a very credible forecast, with some pullback from the smaller parties as the Tory and tabloid last-minute scares bite.
It would put all of the in-campaign ELE chat in the same category as the Tories gain Bootle chat that was prevalent as Mrs May bestrode the world during the early 2017 campaign. Which is fair enough - campaign excitement at imminent extreme results fades into a more pedestrian outcome (not that Labour getting 400 is at all pedestrian, historically) as polling day approaches.
It makes the odds on Tory seats over 100 and over 140 very attractive, and I am putting some money on, partly for some consultation when the eagerly anticipated and we’ll deserved ELE doesn’t quite materialise.
I'm still mulling over buying at 100+ seats.
My instinct tells me it's a buy, but I also don't want to lose my shirt in case a revolution is brewing.
[probably isn't]
I’ve just placed a bet on Cons 100-149 seats @ 3/1 with Betfair
I reckon that’s great value.
I may be completely wrong but I suspect some of the doomsday and ELE talk is wildly misplaced. And this will be the election when MRPs are generally derided.
Sure. Also quite funny, though, given you've derided me for over a year that an absolutely seismic asteroid that wiped out the dinosaurs catastrophe is coming ("you need to get out on the streets" etc.) that you're now more bullish about the Tories than I am.
Heathener's ever-so-occasionally-mentioned Surrey friend is clearly now voting Tory again....
I'm pissed off. So many shops have closed that the only ones within reach are Betfred and LadbrokesCoral (eliding the two to prevent disclosure). Either the constituency bets aren't available in the shops or the VERY NICE IF NOT FULLY INFORMED PEOPLE behind the desk just don't know and get confused when you ask...and confused people are very difficult to get service from.
So I'm a bit fucked. I appreciate few people on PB actually bet in shops instead of online, but does *anybody* know an actual physical shop that offers constituency bets?
Guys, I think you do/have bet in a physical shop. Do you know of a named physical shop that takes constituency bets? (eg shop X on Y street in town Z)
Never had a problem betting on a constitency market in a physical shop.
You have to write out the slip carefully, being very specific as to names, party and dates. Do not assume the staff will know there is a general election on. When you hand the slip in they will look puzzled and go to one of their computer screens to look it up and check the price. This will take time and you will probably have to help them ('How to you spell Islington?') but in due course you will get there and when they see on the screen the same details that you have written on your slip they will be happy, take your money and stamp your slip.
If the bet is large (say over £50) they will certainly phone head office for clearance. Again, this will take time while Head Office finds the appropriate expert (i.e. someone who knows who the PM is) but again if you show enough patience you should get on ok.
Expect similar delays when you go to collect your winnings, but it does work, believe me.
One of the best bits of in person betting is getting banned for winning too much. I was actually putting bets on for some experts (themselves banned), a long time ago, but the way the manager delivered the news still sticks with me.
One of my best friends - and co-founders of Betgenius/Genius Sports - was a professional gambler for a while. He was first banned from online. Then from all the bookmakers near him.
He then took to getting on his bike every morning and riding 5 or 10 miles (he lived in Camden) to bookmakers in other parts of London to put bets on.
One day, he cycled for an hour to Colindale, to an independent bookmaker he had never bet with before, and saw his picture pinned up behind the counter. That was when he knew his professional gambling days were behind him.
Amateur.
He could have had plastic surgery.
Would you mind if I snip this and show it to him in a week or so when I'm in London? He will piss himself.
• Labour: 37 per cent of the Britain-wide vote, 400 seats • Conservative: 24 per cent, 155 seats • Liberal Democrats: 13 per cent, 50 seats • Reform UK: 13 per cent, 2 seats • Green: 7 per cent, 2 seats • SNP: 33 per cent in Scotland, 18 seats • Other (including Northern Ireland): 23 seats • Labour majority: 150
Looks credible, but we just don't know.
In GE2019 the exit poll/result was in line with the polls, but in GE2017 and GE2015 it really wasn't.
I think that makes a very credible forecast, with some pullback from the smaller parties as the Tory and tabloid last-minute scares bite.
It would put all of the in-campaign ELE chat in the same category as the Tories gain Bootle chat that was prevalent as Mrs May bestrode the world during the early 2017 campaign. Which is fair enough - campaign excitement at imminent extreme results fades into a more pedestrian outcome (not that Labour getting 400 is at all pedestrian, historically) as polling day approaches.
It makes the odds on Tory seats over 100 and over 140 very attractive, and I am putting some money on, partly for some consultation when the eagerly anticipated and we’ll deserved ELE doesn’t quite materialise.
I'm still mulling over buying at 100+ seats.
My instinct tells me it's a buy, but I also don't want to lose my shirt in case a revolution is brewing.
[probably isn't]
I’ve just placed a bet on Cons 100-149 seats @ 3/1 with Betfair
I reckon that’s great value.
I may be completely wrong but I suspect some of the doomsday and ELE talk is wildly misplaced. And this will be the election when MRPs are generally derided.
I am on Cons 150-200 at 7-1, and think that is amazing value.
It really is. Hat tip Robert. Great value. I’ve just joined you there. 7-1 is still available folks at Ladbrokes folks.
So I’m now green between 100- 200 Cons seats.
There's a lag factor with BetfairEx as so many punters let their early bets ride. On Ladbrokes, Tories 140 or over is now only 4/1
• Labour: 37 per cent of the Britain-wide vote, 400 seats • Conservative: 24 per cent, 155 seats • Liberal Democrats: 13 per cent, 50 seats • Reform UK: 13 per cent, 2 seats • Green: 7 per cent, 2 seats • SNP: 33 per cent in Scotland, 18 seats • Other (including Northern Ireland): 23 seats • Labour majority: 150
Looks credible, but we just don't know.
In GE2019 the exit poll/result was in line with the polls, but in GE2017 and GE2015 it really wasn't.
I think that makes a very credible forecast, with some pullback from the smaller parties as the Tory and tabloid last-minute scares bite.
It would put all of the in-campaign ELE chat in the same category as the Tories gain Bootle chat that was prevalent as Mrs May bestrode the world during the early 2017 campaign. Which is fair enough - campaign excitement at imminent extreme results fades into a more pedestrian outcome (not that Labour getting 400 is at all pedestrian, historically) as polling day approaches.
It makes the odds on Tory seats over 100 and over 140 very attractive, and I am putting some money on, partly for some consultation when the eagerly anticipated and we’ll deserved ELE doesn’t quite materialise.
I'm still mulling over buying at 100+ seats.
My instinct tells me it's a buy, but I also don't want to lose my shirt in case a revolution is brewing.
[probably isn't]
My position is most green on Con over 100 seats and 22% share.
I was expecting some swingback, which doesn't look to have happened in the polls, but I think Tory voters more likely to turn out than Reform blowhards.
Its time we returned to election declarations being delivered outside town halls to the gathered throng of local peasantry so they can carry the news home to their outlying villages
In those days, said peasants had all been told, bribed or threatened how to vote, and hardly needed to stay up late to find out!
This post will be unpopular... But I think we should introduce Electronic voting. But.. But.. But... What about Russian hackers? If Camelot can create very secure online lottery system, why can same infrastructure not be used for voting? Otherwise Russians and Chinese would win all the big lottery jackpots!!!
Well, look at the British Library, still half crippled eight months after a cyber attack, and ask why they didn't use secure infrastructure when they could have done.
It staggers me that the British Library system is still not restored to full functionality yet. See also the attack on the London Hospitals recently. That seriously delayed treatment for one of my oldest friends who was in a coma after problems with open heart surgery as the team relied upon blood data to assess the best way forward for him.
Its time we returned to election declarations being delivered outside town halls to the gathered throng of local peasantry so they can carry the news home to their outlying villages
In those days, said peasants had all been told, bribed or threatened how to vote, and hardly needed to stay up late to find out!
(1) In those days most peasants didn't have the vote;
(2) By definition, if it had a town hall it was a Borough not a county constituency so there would be no outlying villages to carry the news to.
Let’s hope Keller is wrong. Imagine staying up til 6am and “the Tories do OK, considering”
Ugh
The exit polls will allow you an early night. They are rarely much out.
If the exit polls show extinction or at least catastrophe I’m definitely staying up for the lolz. In the last two years my attitude to the Tories has gone from indifference to disdain to visceral hatred. I hate them even more than Gareth Southgate - it’s now borderline irrational
But I hate them and I would be delighted if they are wiped out forever. Fingers x’d
• Labour: 37 per cent of the Britain-wide vote, 400 seats • Conservative: 24 per cent, 155 seats • Liberal Democrats: 13 per cent, 50 seats • Reform UK: 13 per cent, 2 seats • Green: 7 per cent, 2 seats • SNP: 33 per cent in Scotland, 18 seats • Other (including Northern Ireland): 23 seats • Labour majority: 150
I think CON would breath a big sigh of relief after all the MRP polls we've seen if that was the outcome...
So Kellner thinks the polls are wrong.
Does he indicate why?
Baxtered, those shares give 430/103/68 and a majority of 210. Now we all know Baxter's little tool is somewhat crude, but it does not necessarily lean one way rather than the other. It as likely as not to underestimate the majority as overestimate it.
So a little bit of narrative explanation from PK would be helpful.
He thinks Reform will undercook (I agree, based on the evidence I've seen - and illustrious pb'ers like Alistair Meeks and Sean Fear have identified the same) and the Tories tend to ever slightly outperform share on the day, and this would only be by 2-3%, and Labour underperform? Possibly due to real turnout?
We've also had polls showing Labour in the 37-39% range. OGH used to have a rule about that.
He has cherry picked the Lab/Con figures. The others are pretty much what most of the polls are predicting.
His calculation of seats on those numbers is very different to Baxter and probably other models too, so that needs some explanation. Betfair go 2.76 on their over/under 100 seats market. That's consistent with 112/118 on the spreads (when you factor in risk/reward).
Wouldn't argue with either myself.
I think this interesting and I think, if anything RefUK might be even below this number.
There is one risk in this forecast though. Anecdotally my friends of the ground are saying that the Tory vote is not just shy, it is unfindable. Bear in mind that these are very experienced, even cynical, canvassers, but they are struggling to find Tory voters. This may be a regional thing, but I am beginning to think that the Tory vote is very fragile indeed.
The Sunday papers are talking about a Conservative advertising blitz against the Lib Dems in the last three days, however this time the Tory advantage in voter ID technology seems to be much lower and Labour and the Lib Dems can match them.
So, to recap. Sunak launched a surprise campaign which caught his own party unprepared, with insufficient money and lacking the advantage in data that Voter Vault etc once provided. There have been a series of gaffes which only reinforced the narrative of Tory incompetence and corruption. Despite silly smears, the Tories have not been able to scare voters about a government led by SKS, and their campaign narrative of being less bad than Labour has fallen totally flat.
We are now getting noise from around the country that the Tory vote seems to be going AWOL. Last time they got 42.4% of the vote. John Major in 1997 got 30.7%. It is clear that the 2024 vote will probably be worse than that. Yet 25% doesn´t seem bad enough to me.
It may be closer to 20% after all.
That's the counter-argument. Because we're now all projecting 'what normally happens' onto this election, when the election is already in 'this never happens' territory.
The Tories have tried "he hasn't got a plan!", when they haven't got a plan. They've tried "he will wreck the country!", when they've already wrecked the country, and they've tried "he will put up taxes!" when that has, and will, prove to be true whoever wins. What else can they try, except for letting the Daily Mail run its usual election week scares (remember, "Nick Clegg's nazi connections revealed..."?) and pray?
I am no friend or ally of Nigel Farage, and I hope very few people vote for his Reform Party, because it isn’t very nice and because Reform votes will aid Labour. But I must stand up for Mr Farage over the issue of the Ukraine war. The distinguished American Russia hawk Robert Kagan, who knows his onions in this region, agrees with Mr Farage that Russia was provoked....
Anyone who questions it is accused of being a Kremlin agent. Well, this is how dissent is treated in Russia, an example we should not follow. I think the near-hysterical allegations of ‘Putin shill’ and ‘Kremlin parrot’ levelled against dissenters are a sign that our governing class lack confidence in their Russia policy. As well they might. It is a foolish and ignorant one....
The only people who provoked Russia and Putin were the Ukrainian people who had the temerity to reject a Russian stooge as their leader and the likelihood of a future using outdoor toilets as loyal subjects of the Russkiy Mir whilst being robbed blind by the oligarchy. They looked west to the progress made in the former bloc and chose that for their future in a legitimate election. It began with the Maidan revolution - a pure demonstration of self determination. Hitchens, not unusually, is wrong.
This post will be unpopular... But I think we should introduce Electronic voting. But.. But.. But... What about Russian hackers? If Camelot can create very secure online lottery system, why can same infrastructure not be used for voting? Otherwise Russians and Chinese would win all the big lottery jackpots!!!
Send everyone a printed voting slip including voter details (for verification) - just tick the relevant box - and feed it into voting machine which immediately validates details, rejects spoilt ballots etc, and updates count automatically. All accepted ballots are collected into boxes for later checking.
Rejected ballots, missing ballots etc can be updated manually by election officers.
All physical boxes to be kept for manual checking (statistical sample or full manual recount if challenged).
All results to be announced on provisional basis within one hour of voting ended. If all parties agree then provisional result can be accepted as final, but parties can request manual recounts or partial challenges but on limited justifiable basis only.
This should definitely be introduced for STV type elections.
Puts on tin helmet and waits for response....
What do we get for the obviously increased risk? Fast results? Who does that benefit?
• Labour: 37 per cent of the Britain-wide vote, 400 seats • Conservative: 24 per cent, 155 seats • Liberal Democrats: 13 per cent, 50 seats • Reform UK: 13 per cent, 2 seats • Green: 7 per cent, 2 seats • SNP: 33 per cent in Scotland, 18 seats • Other (including Northern Ireland): 23 seats • Labour majority: 150
Looks credible, but we just don't know.
In GE2019 the exit poll/result was in line with the polls, but in GE2017 and GE2015 it really wasn't.
I think that makes a very credible forecast, with some pullback from the smaller parties as the Tory and tabloid last-minute scares bite.
It would put all of the in-campaign ELE chat in the same category as the Tories gain Bootle chat that was prevalent as Mrs May bestrode the world during the early 2017 campaign. Which is fair enough - campaign excitement at imminent extreme results fades into a more pedestrian outcome (not that Labour getting 400 is at all pedestrian, historically) as polling day approaches.
It makes the odds on Tory seats over 100 and over 140 very attractive, and I am putting some money on, partly for some consultation when the eagerly anticipated and we’ll deserved ELE doesn’t quite materialise.
I'm still mulling over buying at 100+ seats.
My instinct tells me it's a buy, but I also don't want to lose my shirt in case a revolution is brewing.
[probably isn't]
I’ve just placed a bet on Cons 100-149 seats @ 3/1 with Betfair
I reckon that’s great value.
I may be completely wrong but I suspect some of the doomsday and ELE talk is wildly misplaced. And this will be the election when MRPs are generally derided.
Sure. Also quite funny, though, given you've derided me for over a year that an absolutely seismic asteroid that wiped out the dinosaurs catastrophe is coming ("you need to get out on the streets" etc.) that you're now more bullish about the Tories than I am.
Heathener's ever-so-occasionally-mentioned Surrey friend is clearly now voting Tory again....
I have a tory friend in Surrey?
Actually I don’t think she is but I may find out today as I’m on my way there soon from Salisbury for the week. She’s very disillusioned with the party that she feels has left her behind not the other way around.
However, I think some of this ELE talk is wild. In some ways I hope I’m wrong, although I don’t want to see Reform surging either.
Cons 100-200 seats feels remarkably solid ground to me given the available odds.
I'm pissed off. So many shops have closed that the only ones within reach are Betfred and LadbrokesCoral (eliding the two to prevent disclosure). Either the constituency bets aren't available in the shops or the VERY NICE IF NOT FULLY INFORMED PEOPLE behind the desk just don't know and get confused when you ask...and confused people are very difficult to get service from.
So I'm a bit fucked. I appreciate few people on PB actually bet in shops instead of online, but does *anybody* know an actual physical shop that offers constituency bets?
Guys, I think you do/have bet in a physical shop. Do you know of a named physical shop that takes constituency bets? (eg shop X on Y street in town Z)
Never had a problem betting on a constitency market in a physical shop.
You have to write out the slip carefully, being very specific as to names, party and dates. Do not assume the staff will know there is a general election on. When you hand the slip in they will look puzzled and go to one of their computer screens to look it up and check the price. This will take time and you will probably have to help them ('How to you spell Islington?') but in due course you will get there and when they see on the screen the same details that you have written on your slip they will be happy, take your money and stamp your slip.
If the bet is large (say over £50) they will certainly phone head office for clearance. Again, this will take time while Head Office finds the appropriate expert (i.e. someone who knows who the PM is) but again if you show enough patience you should get on ok.
Expect similar delays when you go to collect your winnings, but it does work, believe me.
One of the best bits of in person betting is getting banned for winning too much. I was actually putting bets on for some experts (themselves banned), a long time ago, but the way the manager delivered the news still sticks with me.
The best advert for Piers Corbyns long range weather forecasts is that he started the business after being banned by the bookies for winning once too often in long range weather bets.
Do you have any evidence for this? I mean, how many long range weather forecast bets can you find on Ladbrokes.com?
@rcs1000 will this do (after a few conjuncting words banged into Google)?
Evidence is there if you look for it. For example this 1999 article by Wired.
"Another sign he's not your everyday weatherman: the conspicuously displayed photocopy of a check for £2,291 hanging on the wall. Unique among meteorologists, Corbyn bets on his forecasts. Unusual among bettors of any stripe, he wins regularly. The check on the wall is a payout from London bookmaker William Hill on one of their monthly bets."
And from Graham Sharpe formerly of William Hill, in the Oldie, 21 years later in 2020.
"YOU BET THERE'S something problematic about Corbyns - specifically when it comes to gambling odds..
When he won the 2015 election to become leader of the Labour Party, Jeremy Corbyn had started the race as a 200/1 no-hoper in the betting book I was then promoting in my role at William Hill...
I should have known betting against a Corbyn was likely to prove costly, I suppose - after all, Jeremy's brother Piers had been taking money from my company for years.
But Piers hadn't been doing so by standing for election - no, his path to profit was a meteorological one.....
Eventually, Piers' betting business became uneconomic enough for us to decide that maybe his weather wagers were too hot to handle on a regular basis as they were becoming wide-ranging and difficult to adjudicate on.
However, to this day, Piers' website for the WeatherAction forecasting service declares:
'The unique power of the forecasts has also been proven by the profits on Scientific Weather Bets with William Hill at odds and verification organized independently by the UK Met Office.
In 4,000 Weather Test Bets over 12 years with William Hill, Weather Action forecasts made a profit of some 40% (£20,000). The Odds were statistically fair and set by the Met Office before being shortened by William Hill by a standard 20%; the results were then provided by the Met Office for William Hill to settle each bet.'"
Let’s hope Keller is wrong. Imagine staying up til 6am and “the Tories do OK, considering”
Ugh
The exit polls will allow you an early night. They are rarely much out.
If the exit polls show extinction or at least catastrophe I’m definitely staying up for the lolz. In the last two years my attitude to the Tories has gone from indifference to disdain to visceral hatred. I hate them even more than Gareth Southgate - it’s now borderline irrational
But I hate them and I would be delighted if they are wiped out forever. Fingers x’d
Just a shame that "borderline irrational" is actually the sensible end of your range.
In other news - and much to my surprise - the Sunday Times has backed Labour.
Not to my surprise. The Eds and Directors of the paper move in hallowed circles in London and want to be able to say to to the new administration that they backed them, against the views of their op-ed writers and, largely, their readership.
They have their careers to think about.
Have you got numbers for how Sunday Times readers are likely to vote? Can't find any myself, but Labour were ahead with Telegraph readers in April,
and I'd be surprised if the Sunday Times was more loyal Conservative than that. Agree about the op-ed team, though that speaks more to having discarded centre-left voices from the Times stable over the last few years. Which looked shrewd in 2019 but is perhaps less clever now
But boy, the endorsement is lukewarm. It boils down to "the Conservatives simply can't have another term, not after the last five years, and whatever our doubts about Starmer, he is the only alternative".
Which, to be fair, is probably where the median voter is.
Anecdotally I don’t know anyone that is voting Tory. My friends and family are a very mixed group of right and left and probably half are Tories - or can be persuaded that way sometimes
Usually a few of them will admit this. Now none. I suppose one or two might be hiding it - must be - but that does concur with the polls. 20% could be what they get. Which is virtual wipeout?
Coldplay - wouldn’t be my favourite band but that set was enjoyable and Arabesque was just majestic. Not sure they’ve done it before live judging by the twittersphere reaction.
Constituency Markets. I feel hamstrung since Bet365 kicked me out. PP have some markets up but not the ones I want. I want Exmouth and South Shropshire among others.
We're all only one or two good wins from the bookies kicking us out.
If I do well this time that might happen to me by Bet365 too.
Anecdotally I don’t know anyone that is voting Tory. My friends and family are a very mixed group of right and left and probably half are Tories - or can be persuaded that way sometimes
Usually a few of them will admit this. Now none. I suppose one or two might be hiding it - must be - but that does concur with the polls. 20% could be what they get. Which is virtual wipeout?
🤞🙏
I am voting Tory.
You are planning to vote Labour to spite your face.
Something you'll spend the next 5 years complaining about.
I will not be shy of telling you: "you voted for it."
Anecdotally I don’t know anyone that is voting Tory. My friends and family are a very mixed group of right and left and probably half are Tories - or can be persuaded that way sometimes
Usually a few of them will admit this. Now none. I suppose one or two might be hiding it - must be - but that does concur with the polls. 20% could be what they get. Which is virtual wipeout?
🤞🙏
I know quite a few who will vote Tory, particularly Indian doctors, but also old school Tories like my uncle in Lake.
There are a lot of low information voters at a GE who don't see the polls etc.
• Labour: 37 per cent of the Britain-wide vote, 400 seats • Conservative: 24 per cent, 155 seats • Liberal Democrats: 13 per cent, 50 seats • Reform UK: 13 per cent, 2 seats • Green: 7 per cent, 2 seats • SNP: 33 per cent in Scotland, 18 seats • Other (including Northern Ireland): 23 seats • Labour majority: 150
Looks credible, but we just don't know.
In GE2019 the exit poll/result was in line with the polls, but in GE2017 and GE2015 it really wasn't.
I think that makes a very credible forecast, with some pullback from the smaller parties as the Tory and tabloid last-minute scares bite.
It would put all of the in-campaign ELE chat in the same category as the Tories gain Bootle chat that was prevalent as Mrs May bestrode the world during the early 2017 campaign. Which is fair enough - campaign excitement at imminent extreme results fades into a more pedestrian outcome (not that Labour getting 400 is at all pedestrian, historically) as polling day approaches.
It makes the odds on Tory seats over 100 and over 140 very attractive, and I am putting some money on, partly for some consultation when the eagerly anticipated and we’ll deserved ELE doesn’t quite materialise.
I'm still mulling over buying at 100+ seats.
My instinct tells me it's a buy, but I also don't want to lose my shirt in case a revolution is brewing.
[probably isn't]
I’ve just placed a bet on Cons 100-149 seats @ 3/1 with Betfair
I reckon that’s great value.
I may be completely wrong but I suspect some of the doomsday and ELE talk is wildly misplaced. And this will be the election when MRPs are generally derided.
Sure. Also quite funny, though, given you've derided me for over a year that an absolutely seismic asteroid that wiped out the dinosaurs catastrophe is coming ("you need to get out on the streets" etc.) that you're now more bullish about the Tories than I am.
Heathener's ever-so-occasionally-mentioned Surrey friend is clearly now voting Tory again....
I have a tory friend in Surrey?
Actually I don’t think she is but I may find out today as I’m on my way there soon from Salisbury for the week. She’s very disillusioned with the party that she feels has left her behind not the other way around.
However, I think some of this ELE talk is wild. In some ways I hope I’m wrong, although I don’t want to see Reform surging either.
Cons 100-200 seats feels remarkably solid ground to me given the available odds.
Morning Heathener!
It all comes down to this 3 way choice: will there be a sudden surge to the Tories? will the middle view of polls hold? will tactical voting deliver ELE?
What surely is just observable fact now is that the Tory vote appears to have collapsed. How far it has collapsed is unclear, but it’s in the low 20s with MORE applied on top They *may* come back. At the very last minute. But they may not. And to make double jeopardy we’re also seeing plenty of evidence that people are planning to punish beat the Tories by voting tactically.
Tories could end up on 50 seats, they could end up on 150 seats. We just don’t know…
In other news - and much to my surprise - the Sunday Times has backed Labour.
Not to my surprise. The Eds and Directors of the paper move in hallowed circles in London and want to be able to say to to the new administration that they backed them, against the views of their op-ed writers and, largely, their readership.
They have their careers to think about.
Have you got numbers for how Sunday Times readers are likely to vote? Can't find any myself, but Labour were ahead with Telegraph readers in April,
and I'd be surprised if the Sunday Times was more loyal Conservative than that. Agree about the op-ed team, though that speaks more to having discarded centre-left voices from the Times stable over the last few years. Which looked shrewd in 2019 but is perhaps less clever now
But boy, the endorsement is lukewarm. It boils down to "the Conservatives simply can't have another term, not after the last five years, and whatever our doubts about Starmer, he is the only alternative".
Which, to be fair, is probably where the median voter is.
That doesn't tell you a left/right split, though.
Lots of those readers might be disillusioned Conservatives and 31% for Labour, whilst higher than expected, isn't anything like a majority.
It was done at the behest of America by an American ally so Britain is highly possible
This is another of those “lab leak/senile Biden” hypotheses - things which are obviously very very plausible - at least - yet still people, supposedly intelligent, bend over backwards to disbelieve them, contorting themselves evermore ridiculously to do so
I'm pissed off. So many shops have closed that the only ones within reach are Betfred and LadbrokesCoral (eliding the two to prevent disclosure). Either the constituency bets aren't available in the shops or the VERY NICE IF NOT FULLY INFORMED PEOPLE behind the desk just don't know and get confused when you ask...and confused people are very difficult to get service from.
So I'm a bit fucked. I appreciate few people on PB actually bet in shops instead of online, but does *anybody* know an actual physical shop that offers constituency bets?
Guys, I think you do/have bet in a physical shop. Do you know of a named physical shop that takes constituency bets? (eg shop X on Y street in town Z)
Never had a problem betting on a constitency market in a physical shop.
You have to write out the slip carefully, being very specific as to names, party and dates. Do not assume the staff will know there is a general election on. When you hand the slip in they will look puzzled and go to one of their computer screens to look it up and check the price. This will take time and you will probably have to help them ('How to you spell Islington?') but in due course you will get there and when they see on the screen the same details that you have written on your slip they will be happy, take your money and stamp your slip.
If the bet is large (say over £50) they will certainly phone head office for clearance. Again, this will take time while Head Office finds the appropriate expert (i.e. someone who knows who the PM is) but again if you show enough patience you should get on ok.
Expect similar delays when you go to collect your winnings, but it does work, believe me.
One of the best bits of in person betting is getting banned for winning too much. I was actually putting bets on for some experts (themselves banned), a long time ago, but the way the manager delivered the news still sticks with me.
The best advert for Piers Corbyns long range weather forecasts is that he started the business after being banned by the bookies for winning once too often in long range weather bets.
Do you have any evidence for this? I mean, how many long range weather forecast bets can you find on Ladbrokes.com?
@rcs1000 will this do (after a few conjuncting words banged into Google)?
Evidence is there if you look for it. For example this 1999 article by Wired.
"Another sign he's not your everyday weatherman: the conspicuously displayed photocopy of a check for £2,291 hanging on the wall. Unique among meteorologists, Corbyn bets on his forecasts. Unusual among bettors of any stripe, he wins regularly. The check on the wall is a payout from London bookmaker William Hill on one of their monthly bets."
And from Graham Sharpe formerly of William Hill, in the Oldie, 21 years later in 2020.
"YOU BET THERE'S something problematic about Corbyns - specifically when it comes to gambling odds..
When he won the 2015 election to become leader of the Labour Party, Jeremy Corbyn had started the race as a 200/1 no-hoper in the betting book I was then promoting in my role at William Hill...
I should have known betting against a Corbyn was likely to prove costly, I suppose - after all, Jeremy's brother Piers had been taking money from my company for years.
But Piers hadn't been doing so by standing for election - no, his path to profit was a meteorological one.
Eventually, Piers' betting business became uneconomic enough for us to decide that maybe his weather wagers were too hot to handle on a regular basis as they were becoming wide-ranging and difficult to adjudicate on.
However, to this day, Piers' website for the WeatherAction forecasting service declares:
'The unique power of the forecasts has also been proven by the profits on Scientific Weather Bets with William Hill at odds and verification organized independently by the UK Met Office.
In 4,000 Weather Test Bets over 12 years with William Hill, Weather Action forecasts made a profit of some 40% (£20,000). The Odds were statistically fair and set by the Met Office before being shortened by William Hill by a standard 20%; the results were then provided by the Met Office for William Hill to settle each bet.'"
The world of weather forecasting has changed enormously in the last 25 years.
The other article is perhaps more interesting... except that the words don't really make sense. Like "The Odds were statistically fair and set by the Met Office before being shortened by William Hill by a standard 20%".
What does that even mean? The odds were set by that famous bookmaker the Met Office?
Or are you saying that the Met Office made forecasts, and if you'd used their probability predictions rather than the actual odds, then you'd have made money? Which might well be true. Just as if my Aunt Sarah was called Simon. And had balls. And a wife. Then she'd be my Uncle.
In other news - and much to my surprise - the Sunday Times has backed Labour.
Not to my surprise. The Eds and Directors of the paper move in hallowed circles in London and want to be able to say to to the new administration that they backed them, against the views of their op-ed writers and, largely, their readership.
They have their careers to think about.
Have you got numbers for how Sunday Times readers are likely to vote? Can't find any myself, but Labour were ahead with Telegraph readers in April,
and I'd be surprised if the Sunday Times was more loyal Conservative than that. Agree about the op-ed team, though that speaks more to having discarded centre-left voices from the Times stable over the last few years. Which looked shrewd in 2019 but is perhaps less clever now
But boy, the endorsement is lukewarm. It boils down to "the Conservatives simply can't have another term, not after the last five years, and whatever our doubts about Starmer, he is the only alternative".
Which, to be fair, is probably where the median voter is.
Redfield Wilton did a piece on it this June. Times readers are a plurality for Labour at 42%
I am no friend or ally of Nigel Farage, and I hope very few people vote for his Reform Party, because it isn’t very nice and because Reform votes will aid Labour. But I must stand up for Mr Farage over the issue of the Ukraine war. The distinguished American Russia hawk Robert Kagan, who knows his onions in this region, agrees with Mr Farage that Russia was provoked....
Anyone who questions it is accused of being a Kremlin agent. Well, this is how dissent is treated in Russia, an example we should not follow. I think the near-hysterical allegations of ‘Putin shill’ and ‘Kremlin parrot’ levelled against dissenters are a sign that our governing class lack confidence in their Russia policy. As well they might. It is a foolish and ignorant one....
The only people who provoked Russia and Putin were the Ukrainian people who had the temerity to reject a Russian stooge as their leader and the likelihood of a future using outdoor toilets as loyal subjects of the Russkiy Mir whilst being robbed blind by the oligarchy. They looked west to the progress made in the former bloc and chose that for their future in a legitimate election. It began with the Maidan revolution - a pure demonstration of self determination. Hitchens, not unusually, is wrong.
Anecdotally I don’t know anyone that is voting Tory. My friends and family are a very mixed group of right and left and probably half are Tories - or can be persuaded that way sometimes
Usually a few of them will admit this. Now none. I suppose one or two might be hiding it - must be - but that does concur with the polls. 20% could be what they get. Which is virtual wipeout?
🤞🙏
You, and many of the polls, may well be correct. I might be living in recency & history bias.
I do know a few people voting Cons, not just from this forum.
Anecdotally I don’t know anyone that is voting Tory. My friends and family are a very mixed group of right and left and probably half are Tories - or can be persuaded that way sometimes
Usually a few of them will admit this. Now none. I suppose one or two might be hiding it - must be - but that does concur with the polls. 20% could be what they get. Which is virtual wipeout?
🤞🙏
I am voting Tory.
You are planning to vote Labour to spite your face.
Something you'll spend the next 5 years complaining about.
I will not be shy of telling you: "you voted for it."
Let’s hope Keller is wrong. Imagine staying up til 6am and “the Tories do OK, considering”
Ugh
The exit polls will allow you an early night. They are rarely much out.
Though they could be this year, look at the variability in the MRPs.
Every election surprises us in surprising ways. Except 2019 which didn’t really surprise anyone, so much so that it was quite a surprise not to have any surprises.
Maybe 2024 will be the year the exit poll is surprisingly inaccurate.
I'm pissed off. So many shops have closed that the only ones within reach are Betfred and LadbrokesCoral (eliding the two to prevent disclosure). Either the constituency bets aren't available in the shops or the VERY NICE IF NOT FULLY INFORMED PEOPLE behind the desk just don't know and get confused when you ask...and confused people are very difficult to get service from.
So I'm a bit fucked. I appreciate few people on PB actually bet in shops instead of online, but does *anybody* know an actual physical shop that offers constituency bets?
Guys, I think you do/have bet in a physical shop. Do you know of a named physical shop that takes constituency bets? (eg shop X on Y street in town Z)
Never had a problem betting on a constitency market in a physical shop.
You have to write out the slip carefully, being very specific as to names, party and dates. Do not assume the staff will know there is a general election on. When you hand the slip in they will look puzzled and go to one of their computer screens to look it up and check the price. This will take time and you will probably have to help them ('How to you spell Islington?') but in due course you will get there and when they see on the screen the same details that you have written on your slip they will be happy, take your money and stamp your slip.
If the bet is large (say over £50) they will certainly phone head office for clearance. Again, this will take time while Head Office finds the appropriate expert (i.e. someone who knows who the PM is) but again if you show enough patience you should get on ok.
Expect similar delays when you go to collect your winnings, but it does work, believe me.
One of the best bits of in person betting is getting banned for winning too much. I was actually putting bets on for some experts (themselves banned), a long time ago, but the way the manager delivered the news still sticks with me.
One of my best friends - and co-founders of Betgenius/Genius Sports - was a professional gambler for a while. He was first banned from online. Then from all the bookmakers near him.
He then took to getting on his bike every morning and riding 5 or 10 miles (he lived in Camden) to bookmakers in other parts of London to put bets on.
One day, he cycled for an hour to Colindale, to an independent bookmaker he had never bet with before, and saw his picture pinned up behind the counter. That was when he knew his professional gambling days were behind him.
Amateur.
He could have had plastic surgery.
Would you mind if I snip this and show it to him in a week or so when I'm in London? He will piss himself.
In other news - and much to my surprise - the Sunday Times has backed Labour.
Not to my surprise. The Eds and Directors of the paper move in hallowed circles in London and want to be able to say to to the new administration that they backed them, against the views of their op-ed writers and, largely, their readership.
They have their careers to think about.
Polling indicates the majority of Times readers want a change of government, doesn't it?
The readership of The Times and The Sunday Times is slightly different.
Every single registered voter on my mail route has received their postal vote or ballot card on the day that they've been given to me to deliver
Royal Mail might be part of the late delivery problem, but I'm not
Our household will be disenfranchised unless we can persuade our council to reissue our postal votes before the election and get them to us before the election - something they've managed to fail to do in the 10 days since they sent them out - or allow us to vote in person.
To say that we are pissed off is an understatement. A example of the fucking ineptitude of this country.
That doesn't sound good. I'd replace postal voting (on demand, anyway) with early voting in person as we do with the recall petitions.
It’s 2024! Why on earth haven’t we introduced online voting?
You have! I've been doing online voting in British elections since 2001. *
However it's a fairly convoluted form of online voting where the steps are that the returning officer in Oxford sends a ballot paper to my brother in Leeds, my brother sends me a scan of the ballot paper (originally email, last one was Signal because he's quite tech savvy), I reply with an instruction about what mark to make on the ballot paper, he makes the mark I request (I hope he does this although I have no proof) and sends the paper back to Oxford via the totally reliable medium of the British Post Office.
I definitely see the argument for not involving computers in things since there are various ways you could break this, for example if there was malware on my computer someone could intercept the vote before it gets to me and cast it themselves, or they could guess which way I would vote and stop me getting the vote, and maybe send me a fake one. But we still have this in the current system, we just have a bunch of other steps as well.
I think you could easily design a system way safer than the current one. The problem is that it's not necessarily the one the government would choose...
* with a gap in between for when Labour disfranchized me
I don't see why online voting should be a bigger security risk or more problematic than online banking to which everyone commits their life finances without a second thought.
Edit it only needs to be more secure than postal and proxy voting that aren't secure at all.
Anecdotally I don’t know anyone that is voting Tory. My friends and family are a very mixed group of right and left and probably half are Tories - or can be persuaded that way sometimes
Usually a few of them will admit this. Now none. I suppose one or two might be hiding it - must be - but that does concur with the polls. 20% could be what they get. Which is virtual wipeout?
🤞🙏
I know quite a few who will vote Tory, particularly Indian doctors, but also old school Tories like my uncle in Lake.
There are a lot of low information voters at a GE who don't see the polls etc.
Fair enough. I do wonder how many Tories will crawl back to them at the end. eg my sister (really quite Tory) has gone awfully quiet. Usually she’s happy to tell us her vote (Tory). For the last year she’s been denouncing them
Now she’s all quiet. Hmmm. I suspect she’s reluctantly returning to the fold. If there are 2-3 million like her the Tories will be fine. Defeated but fine
Comments
It was all kind of impressive in its own way. I've encountered less formality when taking out a mortgage, but the job was done, and done properly.
My instinct tells me it's a buy, but I also don't want to lose my shirt in case a revolution is brewing.
[probably isn't]
I am strongly opposed to national ID cards as a point of civil liberty.
I find it an affront that by law people are “required” to register, or tell DVLA where they live even if they don’t drive, or complete a census. I enjoyed telling them to f-off about the census.
Civil liberties are constantly being eroded and I want to fight further intrusions.
(I think this is an area where @Richard_Tyndall and I agree)
There may be a lot of value in seats where Labour are vulnerable to ‘ethnic’ splintering.
In my neck of the woods, 155 seats would mean a big Norfolk shrug as we stay mostly blue outside the city. And yet its a prediction right on that spot - 1% swing from horror and catastrophe and 1% swing from better than 2001/solid opposition.
His calculation of seats on those numbers is very different to Baxter and probably other models too, so that needs some explanation. Betfair go 2.76 on their over/under 100 seats market. That's consistent with 112/118 on the spreads (when you factor in risk/reward).
Wouldn't argue with either myself.
Estonia is a thriving democracy, with bitter memories of how democracies fall, so I think there is something we can learn here.
I am no friend or ally of Nigel Farage, and I hope very few people vote for his Reform Party, because it isn’t very nice and because Reform votes will aid Labour. But I must stand up for Mr Farage over the issue of the Ukraine war. The distinguished American Russia hawk Robert Kagan, who knows his onions in this region, agrees with Mr Farage that Russia was provoked....
Anyone who questions it is accused of being a Kremlin agent. Well, this is how dissent is treated in Russia, an example we should not follow. I think the near-hysterical allegations of ‘Putin shill’ and ‘Kremlin parrot’ levelled against dissenters are a sign that our governing class lack confidence in their Russia policy. As well they might. It is a foolish and ignorant one....
I reckon that’s great value.
I may be completely wrong but I suspect some of the doomsday and ELE talk is wildly misplaced. And this will be the election when MRPs are generally derided.
4% of postal votes were rejected:
Total Voters 73,529
Postal Votes (PV) issued 14,785
PV counted 9,197
PV rejected missing signature – 62
PV rejected missing DOB – 37
PV rejected both above – 73
PV rejected mismatched signature – 27
PV rejected mismatched DOB – 36
PV rejected both of above – 8
PV rejected ballot paper unreturned – 36
PV rejected postal voting statement unreturned – 20
Total received too late to be included In count up to 10 days after poll - 67
Ukraine is as sovereign a nation as Russia. It is allowed to join NATO. It is allowed to join the EU.
If your neighbour wants nothing to do with you and would rather be with someone else... well, maybe you should look at your own behaviour rather than blaming someone else.
Agree with everything you have posted here. In fact I’m beginning to think my 39% Labour is too high.
(*p.s. and also about Coldplay obvs
He then took to getting on his bike every morning and riding 5 or 10 miles (he lived in Camden) to bookmakers in other parts of London to put bets on.
One day, he cycled for an hour to Colindale, to an independent bookmaker he had never bet with before, and saw his picture pinned up behind the counter. That was when he knew his professional gambling days were behind him.
Apologies if already discussed, but it seems that the cock and balls party is doing well:
'You wouldn't believe the amount of dicks': Secrets of a ballot counter
https://news.sky.com/story/you-wouldnt-believe-the-amount-of-dicks-secrets-of-a-ballot-counter-13151941
And, indeed, he's been very hawkish on the US supporting Ukraine against Russia, even to the extent of heavily criticising Trump's vacillation on the subject and comparing him (not in a good way) to Neville Chamberlain.
Kremlin shills online have been claiming Kagan said it, but are curiously reluctant to provide links.
So Hitchens is quoting pro-Kremlin propaganda to make a point he thinks is valid.
Not great.
Kagan sets out his views in more detail here:
https://www.wsj.com/podcasts/opinion-free-expression/russia-invasion-of-ukraine-one-year-later/de0f0e95-1073-4869-a42a-b901b80985b2
“Last night Joe Biden said women need to be able to get abortions because so many of them are being raped by their sisters. When you unpack his performance, it actually gets worse:”
https://x.com/claytravis/status/1806680465916522839?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw
‘And it would be a sad day for this country if an election agent cannot spend his expenses in any way he sees fit.’
I sometimes wish I was alive in the days when you could walk into a bookies with a brown envelope stuffed full of fivers
Crazy, I know.
It was quite interesting.
But.. But.. But... What about Russian hackers? If Camelot can create very secure online lottery system, why can same infrastructure not be used for voting? Otherwise Russians and Chinese would win all the big lottery jackpots!!!
Send everyone a printed voting slip including voter details (for verification) - just tick the relevant box - and feed it into voting machine which immediately validates details, rejects spoilt ballots etc, and updates count automatically. All accepted ballots are collected into boxes for later checking.
Rejected ballots, missing ballots etc can be updated manually by election officers.
All physical boxes to be kept for manual checking (statistical sample or full manual recount if challenged).
All results to be announced on provisional basis within one hour of voting ended. If all parties agree then provisional result can be accepted as final, but parties can request manual recounts or partial challenges but on limited justifiable basis only.
This should definitely be introduced for STV type elections.
Puts on tin helmet and waits for response....
By the mid 90s his weather predictions were becoming increasingly a joke as he forecast apocalyptic storms and wind almost every month.
They have their careers to think about.
So I’m now green between 100- 200 Cons seats.
No hard feelings.
He could have had plastic surgery.
There is one risk in this forecast though. Anecdotally my friends of the ground are saying that the Tory vote is not just shy, it is unfindable. Bear in mind that these are very experienced, even cynical, canvassers, but they are struggling to find Tory voters. This may be a regional thing, but I am beginning to think that the Tory vote is very fragile indeed.
The Sunday papers are talking about a Conservative advertising blitz against the Lib Dems in the last three days, however this time the Tory advantage in voter ID technology seems to be much lower and Labour and the Lib Dems can match them.
So, to recap. Sunak launched a surprise campaign which caught his own party unprepared, with insufficient money and lacking the advantage in data that Voter Vault etc once provided. There have been a series of gaffes which only reinforced the narrative of Tory incompetence and corruption. Despite silly smears, the Tories have not been able to scare voters about a government led by SKS, and their campaign narrative of being less bad than Labour has fallen totally flat.
We are now getting noise from around the country that the Tory vote seems to be going AWOL. Last time they got 42.4% of the vote. John Major in 1997 got 30.7%. It is clear that the 2024 vote will probably be worse than that. Yet 25% doesn´t seem bad enough to me.
It may be closer to 20% after all.
It's a left-wing place but Corbyn is yesterday's news and plenty of people there will want to back a new Labour government.
Constituency Markets. I feel hamstrung since Bet365 kicked me out. PP have some markets up but not the ones I want. I want Exmouth and South Shropshire among others.
I’d placed a few bets, can’t remember on what but they were small amounts. I’m also highly selective about betting and bet very infrequently.
Really pissed me off but I did enjoy telling them, ‘Err you do realise I won?'
There's also a huge difference between academic debate of realist theories of international relations, and being a Putin supporting shill because you actually believe in Russia's right to subjugate its neighbours. The former is acceptable, the latter is not. I have an opinion on which category Farage falls under.
It’s quite nice.
My connected Laboury friend tells me David Lammy is not going to be FS, and that SKS is considering David Miliband or Jonathan Powell.
No, no evidence of fraud.
Ugh
I was expecting some swingback, which doesn't look to have happened in the polls, but I think Tory voters more likely to turn out than Reform blowhards.
Green on Reform less than 14% too.
(2) By definition, if it had a town hall it was a Borough not a county constituency so there would be no outlying villages to carry the news to.
#pedanticbetting.com
But I hate them and I would be delighted if they are wiped out forever. Fingers x’d
The Tories have tried "he hasn't got a plan!", when they haven't got a plan. They've tried "he will wreck the country!", when they've already wrecked the country, and they've tried "he will put up taxes!" when that has, and will, prove to be true whoever wins. What else can they try, except for letting the Daily Mail run its usual election week scares (remember, "Nick Clegg's nazi connections revealed..."?) and pray?
Actually I don’t think she is but I may find out today as I’m on my way there soon from Salisbury for the week. She’s very disillusioned with the party that she feels has left her behind not the other way around.
However, I think some of this ELE talk is wild. In some ways I hope I’m wrong, although I don’t want to see Reform surging either.
Cons 100-200 seats feels remarkably solid ground to me given the available odds.
Evidence is there if you look for it. For example this 1999 article by Wired.
"Another sign he's not your everyday weatherman: the conspicuously displayed photocopy of a check for £2,291 hanging on the wall. Unique among meteorologists, Corbyn bets on his forecasts. Unusual among bettors of any stripe, he wins regularly. The check on the wall is a payout from London bookmaker William Hill on one of their monthly bets."
https://www.wired.com/1999/02/weather-2/
And from Graham Sharpe formerly of William Hill, in the Oldie, 21 years later in 2020.
"YOU BET THERE'S something problematic about Corbyns - specifically when it comes to gambling odds..
When he won the 2015 election to become leader of the Labour Party, Jeremy Corbyn had started the race as a 200/1 no-hoper in the betting book I was then promoting in my role at William Hill...
I should have known betting against a Corbyn was likely to prove costly, I suppose - after all, Jeremy's brother Piers had been taking money from my company for years.
But Piers hadn't been doing so by standing for election - no, his path to profit was a meteorological one.....
Eventually, Piers' betting business became uneconomic enough for us to decide that maybe his weather wagers were too hot to handle on a regular basis as they were becoming wide-ranging and difficult to adjudicate on.
However, to this day, Piers' website for the WeatherAction forecasting service declares:
'The unique power of the forecasts has also been proven by the profits on Scientific Weather Bets with William Hill at odds and verification organized independently by the UK Met Office.
In 4,000 Weather Test Bets over 12 years with William Hill, Weather Action forecasts made a profit of some 40% (£20,000). The Odds were statistically fair and set by the Met Office before being shortened by William Hill by a standard 20%; the results were then provided by the Met Office for William Hill to settle each bet.'"
https://www.theoldie.co.uk/blog/cor-jeremys-brother-loves-a-weather-wager
Thought @Leon might be interested to hear that.
https://www.bestforbritain.org/the_read_wall
and I'd be surprised if the Sunday Times was more loyal Conservative than that. Agree about the op-ed team, though that speaks more to having discarded centre-left voices from the Times stable over the last few years. Which looked shrewd in 2019 but is perhaps less clever now
But boy, the endorsement is lukewarm. It boils down to "the Conservatives simply can't have another term, not after the last five years, and whatever our doubts about Starmer, he is the only alternative".
Which, to be fair, is probably where the median voter is.
Usually a few of them will admit this. Now none. I suppose one or two might be hiding it - must be - but that does concur with the polls. 20% could be what they get. Which is virtual wipeout?
🤞🙏
If I do well this time that might happen to me by Bet365 too.
You are planning to vote Labour to spite your face.
Something you'll spend the next 5 years complaining about.
I will not be shy of telling you: "you voted for it."
There are a lot of low information voters at a GE who don't see the polls etc.
It all comes down to this 3 way choice:
will there be a sudden surge to the Tories?
will the middle view of polls hold?
will tactical voting deliver ELE?
What surely is just observable fact now is that the Tory vote appears to have collapsed. How far it has collapsed is unclear, but it’s in the low 20s with MORE applied on top
They *may* come back. At the very last minute.
But they may not. And to make double jeopardy we’re also seeing plenty of evidence that people are planning to punish beat the Tories by voting tactically.
Tories could end up on 50 seats, they could end up on 150 seats. We just don’t know…
Lots of those readers might be disillusioned Conservatives and 31% for Labour, whilst higher than expected, isn't anything like a majority.
This is another of those “lab leak/senile Biden” hypotheses - things which are obviously very very plausible - at least - yet still people, supposedly intelligent, bend over backwards to disbelieve them, contorting themselves evermore ridiculously to do so
The world of weather forecasting has changed enormously in the last 25 years.
The other article is perhaps more interesting... except that the words don't really make sense. Like "The Odds were statistically fair and set by the Met Office before being shortened by William Hill by a standard 20%".
What does that even mean? The odds were set by that famous bookmaker the Met Office?
Or are you saying that the Met Office made forecasts, and if you'd used their probability predictions rather than the actual odds, then you'd have made money? Which might well be true. Just as if my Aunt Sarah was called Simon. And had balls. And a wife. Then she'd be my Uncle.
https://redfieldandwiltonstrategies.com/westminster-voting-intention-by-media-consumption-7-10-june/
I do know a few people voting Cons, not just from this forum.
Maybe 2024 will be the year the exit poll is surprisingly inaccurate.
Edit it only needs to be more secure than postal and proxy voting that aren't secure at all.
Now she’s all quiet. Hmmm. I suspect she’s reluctantly returning to the fold. If there are 2-3 million like her the Tories will be fine. Defeated but fine