Anybody (if they're a punter as well as a pundit) who reckons Makerfield will be close should consider lumping on REF. You can get better than 7 on Betfair.
I've spent around five hours canvassing in Makerfield. There is a little Restore support (2%?), but it's basically a Lab/Ref battle. I didn't meet a single voter planning to vote Tory, Green or LibDem, and I'm sure they will all lose their deposits.
As for the result, I think it's a toss-up. There is a huge Labour volunteer turnout - nearly all roads have now been canvassed three times - but the betting showing Labour clearly ahead is IMO a bit optimistic. A notable touch is that Andy is campaigning on his record in Greater Manchester, and some leaflets don't even mention Labour. Conversely Reform's leaflets largely ignore their candidate, even though he's local. Voters don't seem very exercised by local issues, even though flooding has adversely affected parts - it comes down to liking Andy+disliking Reform vs "time for a change".
In Makerfield there is a sense of voters having made their minds up at the start of the campaign, a Labour source said, with Reform candidate Rob Kenyon’s unearthed social media remarks not moving the dial:
“I don’t know that it matters that much to the people voting Reform”
I've spent around five hours canvassing in Makerfield. There is a little Restore support (2%?), but it's basically a Lab/Ref battle. I didn't meet a single voter planning to vote Tory, Green or LibDem, and I'm sure they will all lose their deposits.
As for the result, I think it's a toss-up. There is a huge Labour volunteer turnout - nearly all roads have now been canvassed three times - but the betting showing Labour clearly ahead is IMO a bit optimistic. A notable touch is that Andy is campaigning on his record in Greater Manchester, and some leaflets don't even mention Labour. Conversely Reform's leaflets largely ignore their candidate, even though he's local. Voters don't seem very exercised by local issues, even though flooding has adversely affected parts - it comes down to liking Andy+disliking Reform vs "time for a change".
I suspect it will be close, too close to risk a bet. Do you have any evidence of differential turnout?
I'm tempted to bet on Reform so that I have some kind of consolation prize if they win but be basically hoping I lose my fiver.
Trouble with that is £30 is meagre compensation for the country falling off a cliff.
I've spent around five hours canvassing in Makerfield. There is a little Restore support (2%?), but it's basically a Lab/Ref battle. I didn't meet a single voter planning to vote Tory, Green or LibDem, and I'm sure they will all lose their deposits.
As for the result, I think it's a toss-up. There is a huge Labour volunteer turnout - nearly all roads have now been canvassed three times - but the betting showing Labour clearly ahead is IMO a bit optimistic. A notable touch is that Andy is campaigning on his record in Greater Manchester, and some leaflets don't even mention Labour. Conversely Reform's leaflets largely ignore their candidate, even though he's local. Voters don't seem very exercised by local issues, even though flooding has adversely affected parts - it comes down to liking Andy+disliking Reform vs "time for a change".
In Makerfield there is a sense of voters having made their minds up at the start of the campaign, a Labour source said, with Reform candidate Rob Kenyon’s unearthed social media remarks not moving the dial:
“I don’t know that it matters that much to the people voting Reform”
I've spent around five hours canvassing in Makerfield. There is a little Restore support (2%?), but it's basically a Lab/Ref battle. I didn't meet a single voter planning to vote Tory, Green or LibDem, and I'm sure they will all lose their deposits.
As for the result, I think it's a toss-up. There is a huge Labour volunteer turnout - nearly all roads have now been canvassed three times - but the betting showing Labour clearly ahead is IMO a bit optimistic. A notable touch is that Andy is campaigning on his record in Greater Manchester, and some leaflets don't even mention Labour. Conversely Reform's leaflets largely ignore their candidate, even though he's local. Voters don't seem very exercised by local issues, even though flooding has adversely affected parts - it comes down to liking Andy+disliking Reform vs "time for a change".
In Makerfield there is a sense of voters having made their minds up at the start of the campaign, a Labour source said, with Reform candidate Rob Kenyon’s unearthed social media remarks not moving the dial:
“I don’t know that it matters that much to the people voting Reform”
I've spent around five hours canvassing in Makerfield. There is a little Restore support (2%?), but it's basically a Lab/Ref battle. I didn't meet a single voter planning to vote Tory, Green or LibDem, and I'm sure they will all lose their deposits.
As for the result, I think it's a toss-up. There is a huge Labour volunteer turnout - nearly all roads have now been canvassed three times - but the betting showing Labour clearly ahead is IMO a bit optimistic. A notable touch is that Andy is campaigning on his record in Greater Manchester, and some leaflets don't even mention Labour. Conversely Reform's leaflets largely ignore their candidate, even though he's local. Voters don't seem very exercised by local issues, even though flooding has adversely affected parts - it comes down to liking Andy+disliking Reform vs "time for a change".
I suspect it will be close, too close to risk a bet. Do you have any evidence of differential turnout?
I'm tempted to bet on Reform so that I have some kind of consolation prize if they win but be basically hoping I lose my fiver.
That’s the bit Casino always misses when optimising his otherwise wisely pitched betting strategy here.
You need to put a cash value on the happiness you will get from certain outcomes, or the opposite, and then factor that into your NEV. Hence I tend to bet against the LibDems because if they do badly my bet comes off and I have money to spend, and if they do well then the value to me of the resulting happiness cancels out the adverse financial consequences.
Anybody (if they're a punter as well as a pundit) who reckons Makerfield will be close should consider lumping on REF. You can get better than 7 on Betfair.
I hadn’t realised Reform were at such long odds.
Yep. They opened at 2.8 and have drifted to 7.2. That's huge if it's close.
He's ludicrous. I am bewildered that the US takes him even vaguely seriously.
That they’ve elected him twice having seen what happened the first time really beggars belief. It would be like Brits voting for Brexit and then later voting into office the same guy who missold it to us.
Anybody (if they're a punter as well as a pundit) who reckons Makerfield will be close should consider lumping on REF. You can get better than 7 on Betfair.
I hadn’t realised Reform were at such long odds.
Yep. They opened at 2.8 and have drifted to 7.2. That's huge if it's close.
But it’s not. On PB those who understand politics have backed Burnham from the start, whereas our now banned colleague is really the only one who thinks Reform might still win.
I've spent around five hours canvassing in Makerfield. There is a little Restore support (2%?), but it's basically a Lab/Ref battle. I didn't meet a single voter planning to vote Tory, Green or LibDem, and I'm sure they will all lose their deposits.
As for the result, I think it's a toss-up. There is a huge Labour volunteer turnout - nearly all roads have now been canvassed three times - but the betting showing Labour clearly ahead is IMO a bit optimistic. A notable touch is that Andy is campaigning on his record in Greater Manchester, and some leaflets don't even mention Labour. Conversely Reform's leaflets largely ignore their candidate, even though he's local. Voters don't seem very exercised by local issues, even though flooding has adversely affected parts - it comes down to liking Andy+disliking Reform vs "time for a change".
I suspect it will be close, too close to risk a bet. Do you have any evidence of differential turnout?
I'm tempted to bet on Reform so that I have some kind of consolation prize if they win but be basically hoping I lose my fiver.
Trouble with that is £30 is meagre compensation for the country falling off a cliff.
That just tells us you’ve missized your bet by failing to assess the actual NEV to you of those adverse political outcomes.
I've spent around five hours canvassing in Makerfield. There is a little Restore support (2%?), but it's basically a Lab/Ref battle. I didn't meet a single voter planning to vote Tory, Green or LibDem, and I'm sure they will all lose their deposits.
As for the result, I think it's a toss-up. There is a huge Labour volunteer turnout - nearly all roads have now been canvassed three times - but the betting showing Labour clearly ahead is IMO a bit optimistic. A notable touch is that Andy is campaigning on his record in Greater Manchester, and some leaflets don't even mention Labour. Conversely Reform's leaflets largely ignore their candidate, even though he's local. Voters don't seem very exercised by local issues, even though flooding has adversely affected parts - it comes down to liking Andy+disliking Reform vs "time for a change".
In Makerfield there is a sense of voters having made their minds up at the start of the campaign, a Labour source said, with Reform candidate Rob Kenyon’s unearthed social media remarks not moving the dial:
“I don’t know that it matters that much to the people voting Reform”
The question with Reform voters is not who they will vote for, it's will they turn out and vote..
The lesson of the locals is the opposite - propensity to vote among current Reform voters is actually high, and the question is whether Labour leaning supporters will turn out and vote.
Anybody (if they're a punter as well as a pundit) who reckons Makerfield will be close should consider lumping on REF. You can get better than 7 on Betfair.
I hadn’t realised Reform were at such long odds.
Yep. They opened at 2.8 and have drifted to 7.2. That's huge if it's close.
But it’s not. On PB those who understand politics have backed Burnham from the start, whereas our now banned colleague is really the only one who thinks Reform might still win.
Is my feeling too. But there are plenty of 'it's close' takes around. Albeit not being supported with £££ given the big Reform price.
I've spent around five hours canvassing in Makerfield. There is a little Restore support (2%?), but it's basically a Lab/Ref battle. I didn't meet a single voter planning to vote Tory, Green or LibDem, and I'm sure they will all lose their deposits.
As for the result, I think it's a toss-up. There is a huge Labour volunteer turnout - nearly all roads have now been canvassed three times - but the betting showing Labour clearly ahead is IMO a bit optimistic. A notable touch is that Andy is campaigning on his record in Greater Manchester, and some leaflets don't even mention Labour. Conversely Reform's leaflets largely ignore their candidate, even though he's local. Voters don't seem very exercised by local issues, even though flooding has adversely affected parts - it comes down to liking Andy+disliking Reform vs "time for a change".
I suspect it will be close, too close to risk a bet. Do you have any evidence of differential turnout?
I'm tempted to bet on Reform so that I have some kind of consolation prize if they win but be basically hoping I lose my fiver.
Trouble with that is £30 is meagre compensation for the country falling off a cliff.
That just tells us you’ve missized your bet by failing to assess the actual NEV to you of those adverse political outcomes.
I've spent around five hours canvassing in Makerfield. There is a little Restore support (2%?), but it's basically a Lab/Ref battle. I didn't meet a single voter planning to vote Tory, Green or LibDem, and I'm sure they will all lose their deposits.
As for the result, I think it's a toss-up. There is a huge Labour volunteer turnout - nearly all roads have now been canvassed three times - but the betting showing Labour clearly ahead is IMO a bit optimistic. A notable touch is that Andy is campaigning on his record in Greater Manchester, and some leaflets don't even mention Labour. Conversely Reform's leaflets largely ignore their candidate, even though he's local. Voters don't seem very exercised by local issues, even though flooding has adversely affected parts - it comes down to liking Andy+disliking Reform vs "time for a change".
That's within my prediction for Restore Britain of 2% to 12% (or so).
If his staff are sensible they will have rigged up a fake nuclear button in their bunker that makes lots of impressive noises when it’s pressed but otherwise connects to absolutely nothing at all.
Re: AMOC collapse. It's worth making a few points.
Firstly, the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans both have mid-latitude storm tracks, even though the Pacific doesn't have an equivalent to the AMOC. The storm tracks exist because the tropics are warmer than the poles, and the coriolis force limits the poleward extent of the Hadley circulation. Therefore you have a strong temperature gradient which creates a strong westerly thermal wind, a large amount of baroclinic instability and consequently a storm track, which has two effects which are relevant to us here: it mixes a lot of heat towards the poles, and it creates an ocean gyre circulation (which is why the west coast of North America is warmer than the east coast of Asia).
If the AMOC collapses the Atlantic will still have a storm track and it will still have an ocean gyre circulation that makes the west coast of Europe warmer than the east coast of North America.
What might change is the latitude of the storm track. The Atlantic storm track has a more pronounced SW to NE tilt than the Pacific storm track and it's not obvious how much of that is due to differences in the shape of the ocean basins, or due to changes in SSTs due to the AMOC. So the storm track could shift south and Britain might see both a reduction in warming from the AMOC directly, and end up on the poleward side of the storm track and miss out on the heating from that too.
There are lots of other effects at play too. I did see one paper arguing for a link between reduced solar activity and more frequent winter easterlies over Britain, for example.
The other thing to point out is that these effects would be much more influential in winter. So a reduction in winter mean temperatures of 15C, but little difference the rest of the year, would equate to an annual mean temperature change of 3.75C. Similarly, an annual mean temperature change of 1.5C could equate to a winter mean temperature change of 4C.
For context, the warmest winter in the Central England temperature record had a mean temperature of 6.83C (2016) and the coldest winter had a mean temperature of -1.17C (1684), a difference of only 8C. The coldest winter this century was 2.53C (2010). [Meteorological winters, DJF, are by convention dated by the year of January, so winter 2016 was December 2015 - February 2016.]
The most important thing to do is to improve the insulation of British homes. We'd better survive the direct impact of an AMOC collapse, it would reduce home heating costs, improve living temperatures and reduce damp in homes, improving winter health, reduce fossil fuel use, and make British homes more suitable to be heated by heat pumps rather than fossil fuels, helping to reduce the greenhouse gas emissions that may tip the AMOC over the edge.
This has, of course, been obvious for decades, and progress has been relatively poor.
Instead, many pensioners are provided with a winter fuel allowance to spend on fossil fuels. Go figure.
I've spent around five hours canvassing in Makerfield. There is a little Restore support (2%?), but it's basically a Lab/Ref battle. I didn't meet a single voter planning to vote Tory, Green or LibDem, and I'm sure they will all lose their deposits.
As for the result, I think it's a toss-up. There is a huge Labour volunteer turnout - nearly all roads have now been canvassed three times - but the betting showing Labour clearly ahead is IMO a bit optimistic. A notable touch is that Andy is campaigning on his record in Greater Manchester, and some leaflets don't even mention Labour. Conversely Reform's leaflets largely ignore their candidate, even though he's local. Voters don't seem very exercised by local issues, even though flooding has adversely affected parts - it comes down to liking Andy+disliking Reform vs "time for a change".
I suspect it will be close, too close to risk a bet. Do you have any evidence of differential turnout?
I'm tempted to bet on Reform so that I have some kind of consolation prize if they win but be basically hoping I lose my fiver.
Trouble with that is £30 is meagre compensation for the country falling off a cliff.
That just tells us you’ve missized your bet by failing to assess the actual NEV to you of those adverse political outcomes.
Mmm. So I'd need to put £500k on!
Lol.
Logically, if the probability of economic devastation after a Reform by-election win were very high, and your personal exposure to economic calamity also very high, then yes, you absolutely should. But of course it’s just a by-election, a Reform win might not have any more long-term consequences than all those Liberal/SDP alliance by-election wins in times past, maybe a Reform government would be just as hemmed in as to what it can or cannot do as all our other governments, and maybe you’re not as personally exposed to financial downturn as many more ordinary folks?
If you did all these sums properly you should be able to zero in on the range of an appropriately sized bet.
If his staff are sensible they will have rigged up a fake nuclear button in their bunker that makes lots of impressive noises when it’s pressed but otherwise connects to absolutely nothing at all.
And, if we can then say to Mr President that he can never, ever, leave that bunker because it's too radioactive outside... an elegant solution to our problems presents itself.
Persuading JDV of the same thing as well would be even better.
If his staff are sensible they will have rigged up a fake nuclear button in their bunker that makes lots of impressive noises when it’s pressed but otherwise connects to absolutely nothing at all.
They made "arrangements" for Nixon near the end. Let us hope they have made arrangements this time.
I've spent around five hours canvassing in Makerfield. There is a little Restore support (2%?), but it's basically a Lab/Ref battle. I didn't meet a single voter planning to vote Tory, Green or LibDem, and I'm sure they will all lose their deposits.
As for the result, I think it's a toss-up. There is a huge Labour volunteer turnout - nearly all roads have now been canvassed three times - but the betting showing Labour clearly ahead is IMO a bit optimistic. A notable touch is that Andy is campaigning on his record in Greater Manchester, and some leaflets don't even mention Labour. Conversely Reform's leaflets largely ignore their candidate, even though he's local. Voters don't seem very exercised by local issues, even though flooding has adversely affected parts - it comes down to liking Andy+disliking Reform vs "time for a change".
It's great when PB turns up posts like this, reminds me why I still scroll here most days.
Threw a few quid on Reform on the back of this at 6/1. I still expect to lose, and frankly, if Reform do win here I think it's probably my final kick up the arse to emigrate before the fourth reich are upon us. But a value bet is a value bet.
My guess is it will still be Burnham but a lot closer than the odds suggest.
Just in case you weren’t aware, the so called “patriots” are now calling Henry Nowak’s sister a “mud shark race traitor” because she has a mixed race child.
The “protests” in Southampton aren’t about his death.
Just in case you weren’t aware, the so called “patriots” are now calling Henry Nowak’s sister a “mud shark race traitor” because she has a mixed race child.
The “protests” in Southampton aren’t about his death.
I've spent around five hours canvassing in Makerfield. There is a little Restore support (2%?), but it's basically a Lab/Ref battle. I didn't meet a single voter planning to vote Tory, Green or LibDem, and I'm sure they will all lose their deposits.
As for the result, I think it's a toss-up. There is a huge Labour volunteer turnout - nearly all roads have now been canvassed three times - but the betting showing Labour clearly ahead is IMO a bit optimistic. A notable touch is that Andy is campaigning on his record in Greater Manchester, and some leaflets don't even mention Labour. Conversely Reform's leaflets largely ignore their candidate, even though he's local. Voters don't seem very exercised by local issues, even though flooding has adversely affected parts - it comes down to liking Andy+disliking Reform vs "time for a change".
I've spent around five hours canvassing in Makerfield. There is a little Restore support (2%?), but it's basically a Lab/Ref battle. I didn't meet a single voter planning to vote Tory, Green or LibDem, and I'm sure they will all lose their deposits.
As for the result, I think it's a toss-up. There is a huge Labour volunteer turnout - nearly all roads have now been canvassed three times - but the betting showing Labour clearly ahead is IMO a bit optimistic. A notable touch is that Andy is campaigning on his record in Greater Manchester, and some leaflets don't even mention Labour. Conversely Reform's leaflets largely ignore their candidate, even though he's local. Voters don't seem very exercised by local issues, even though flooding has adversely affected parts - it comes down to liking Andy+disliking Reform vs "time for a change".
I suspect it will be close, too close to risk a bet. Do you have any evidence of differential turnout?
I'm tempted to bet on Reform so that I have some kind of consolation prize if they win but be basically hoping I lose my fiver.
Trouble with that is £30 is meagre compensation for the country falling off a cliff.
That just tells us you’ve missized your bet by failing to assess the actual NEV to you of those adverse political outcomes.
Mmm. So I'd need to put £500k on!
Lol.
Logically, if the probability of economic devastation after a Reform by-election win were very high, and your personal exposure to economic calamity also very high, then yes, you absolutely should. But of course it’s just a by-election, a Reform win might not have any more long-term consequences than all those Liberal/SDP alliance by-election wins in times past, maybe a Reform government would be just as hemmed in as to what it can or cannot do as all our other governments, and maybe you’re not as personally exposed to financial downturn as many more ordinary folks?
If you did all these sums properly you should be able to zero in on the range of an appropriately sized bet.
But how to price the emotional distress of this country that I love going bad? Very tricky modelling task.
Any case, not to worry, Burnham's winning and I'm on at 1.68.
Re: AMOC collapse. It's worth making a few points.
Firstly, the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans both have mid-latitude storm tracks, even though the Pacific doesn't have an equivalent to the AMOC. The storm tracks exist because the tropics are warmer than the poles, and the coriolis force limits the poleward extent of the Hadley circulation. Therefore you have a strong temperature gradient which creates a strong westerly thermal wind, a large amount of baroclinic instability and consequently a storm track, which has two effects which are relevant to us here: it mixes a lot of heat towards the poles, and it creates an ocean gyre circulation (which is why the west coast of North America is warmer than the east coast of Asia).
If the AMOC collapses the Atlantic will still have a storm track and it will still have an ocean gyre circulation that makes the west coast of Europe warmer than the east coast of North America.
What might change is the latitude of the storm track. The Atlantic storm track has a more pronounced SW to NE tilt than the Pacific storm track and it's not obvious how much of that is due to differences in the shape of the ocean basins, or due to changes in SSTs due to the AMOC. So the storm track could shift south and Britain might see both a reduction in warming from the AMOC directly, and end up on the poleward side of the storm track and miss out on the heating from that too.
There are lots of other effects at play too. I did see one paper arguing for a link between reduced solar activity and more frequent winter easterlies over Britain, for example.
The other thing to point out is that these effects would be much more influential in winter. So a reduction in winter mean temperatures of 15C, but little difference the rest of the year, would equate to an annual mean temperature change of 3.75C. Similarly, an annual mean temperature change of 1.5C could equate to a winter mean temperature change of 4C.
For context, the warmest winter in the Central England temperature record had a mean temperature of 6.83C (2016) and the coldest winter had a mean temperature of -1.17C (1684), a difference of only 8C. The coldest winter this century was 2.53C (2010). [Meteorological winters, DJF, are by convention dated by the year of January, so winter 2016 was December 2015 - February 2016.]
The most important thing to do is to improve the insulation of British homes. We'd better survive the direct impact of an AMOC collapse, it would reduce home heating costs, improve living temperatures and reduce damp in homes, improving winter health, reduce fossil fuel use, and make British homes more suitable to be heated by heat pumps rather than fossil fuels, helping to reduce the greenhouse gas emissions that may tip the AMOC over the edge.
This has, of course, been obvious for decades, and progress has been relatively poor.
Instead, many pensioners are provided with a winter fuel allowance to spend on fossil fuels. Go figure.
A couple of weeks back I spent a fair few days lying in bed looking at was clearly the underside of the roof tiles that lined the roof of the Italian property I was staying in, built in modern times but intended to be sympathetic to the medieval village to which is was adjacent. They hadn’t seen any need to insulate the roof beneath its surface at all, and had one of the toof tiles been removed I would have been in bed looking straight up at the sky. I didn’t finish thinking through whether this made sense, given their climate, or not.
Just in case you weren’t aware, the so called “patriots” are now calling Henry Nowak’s sister a “mud shark race traitor” because she has a mixed race child.
The “protests” in Southampton aren’t about his death.
It goes without saying that the lying murderer was a very bad man who used a vile racial ploy to hoodwink the police. He is a c***, but I don't know if he is a racist.
That's actually quite a good letter (considerably better than her standard social media postings). The question, though, is how much impact it's had/ will have. I did note that the polling shows a considerable gender split in the support for Reform, so may have had some.
Just in case you weren’t aware, the so called “patriots” are now calling Henry Nowak’s sister a “mud shark race traitor” because she has a mixed race child.
The “protests” in Southampton aren’t about his death.
That's actually quite a good letter (considerably better than her standard social media postings). The question, though, is how much impact it's had/ will have. I did note that the polling shows a considerable gender split in the support for Reform, so may have had some.
Perhaps a bigger question is does this set a precedent that could lead to people of wealth and influence bypassing electoral spending rules? You can’t pay people to vote by Musk organised a lottery for people who registered.
What’s to stop a celebrity backed by a Crypto investor abroad writing a “Heartfelt!” Letter in an election campaign?
That's actually quite a good letter (considerably better than her standard social media postings). The question, though, is how much impact it's had/ will have. I did note that the polling shows a considerable gender split in the support for Reform, so may have had some.
I'd put it at "some votes at the margins" - maybe up to hundreds on top of other factors. I can see women thinking about their daughters being influenced, and Carol Vorderman has profile amongst older people from 26 years of Countdown, and also online. The British Crime Survey numbers are that the percentage of women who report sexual harassment in one form or another is a large majority. Voting is also an act that can be done without having to deal with police or personal consequences.
But others here are far better at that sort of estimate than me, and know far better how voters behave.
Just in case you weren’t aware, the so called “patriots” are now calling Henry Nowak’s sister a “mud shark race traitor” because she has a mixed race child.
The “protests” in Southampton aren’t about his death.
If his staff are sensible they will have rigged up a fake nuclear button in their bunker that makes lots of impressive noises when it’s pressed but otherwise connects to absolutely nothing at all.
They made "arrangements" for Nixon near the end. Let us hope they have made arrangements this time.
Anyway, if true, Reform (like The Greens) really needs to professionalise their vetting.
‘ EXCLUSIVE: Reform UK is vetting candidates for the Greater Manchester mayoral position.
Andy Burnham, the current Mayor of Greater Manchester, is Labour’s candidate for the Makerfield by-election. In the event that he wins the by-election, he will have to resign from his position as Mayor of Greater Manchester.
Sources at Reform HQ have told me that the party believes Andy Burnham will win with a "massive majority." One source added: "Restore Britain has lost us this election. We have to learn and understand why people are choosing them over us."
The party wants to select a local candidate for the mayoral race potentially someone like Dan Barker, who stood for the position in 2024 and is a member of the party’s board.
That's actually quite a good letter (considerably better than her standard social media postings). The question, though, is how much impact it's had/ will have. I did note that the polling shows a considerable gender split in the support for Reform, so may have had some.
Perhaps a bigger question is does this set a precedent that could lead to people of wealth and influence bypassing electoral spending rules? You can’t pay people to vote by Musk organised a lottery for people who registered.
What’s to stop a celebrity backed by a Crypto investor abroad writing a “Heartfelt!” Letter in an election campaign?
Peter.
Well, one thing that stops this idea is that it won't persuade most people most of the time. Vorderman was the target of Kenyon's tweeting and that gives her voice some weight. I don't think most random celebrities are going to have much impact.
I don't think we have covered it. Carol Vorderman is very very deep into the left wing/wealth tax/HNH nexus, and her and her associates will have been delighted that there was a personal connection for her to exploit. I see it as contrary to the spirit of election rules if not the letter,
I don't think it will really move the dial, because I think we live in a very cynical age. Those who will be appalled by the content of Carol's letter and not see it as a clever and opportunistic piece of campaigning will fit almost entirely into those already planning to vote for Burnham. With maybe a couple already planning to vote for Lowe.
Anyway, if true, Reform (like The Greens) really needs to professionalise their vetting.
‘ EXCLUSIVE: Reform UK is vetting candidates for the Greater Manchester mayoral position.
Andy Burnham, the current Mayor of Greater Manchester, is Labour’s candidate for the Makerfield by-election. In the event that he wins the by-election, he will have to resign from his position as Mayor of Greater Manchester.
Sources at Reform HQ have told me that the party believes Andy Burnham will win with a "massive majority." One source added: "Restore Britain has lost us this election. We have to learn and understand why people are choosing them over us."
The party wants to select a local candidate for the mayoral race potentially someone like Dan Barker, who stood for the position in 2024 and is a member of the party’s board.
'One source added: "Restore Britain has lost us this election. We have to learn and understand why people are choosing them over us."
Based on some Restore posters on X as too many non white figures at the top of Reform like Yusuf and as Reform aren't hardline enough on mass deportations. So such 'learning' might see Reform have to head even further right, leaving a gap in the centre for the Tories and Labour to occupy
Just in case you weren’t aware, the so called “patriots” are now calling Henry Nowak’s sister a “mud shark race traitor” because she has a mixed race child.
The “protests” in Southampton aren’t about his death.
I don't think we have covered it. Carol Vorderman is very very deep into the left wing/wealth tax/HNH nexus, and her and her associates will have been delighted that there was a personal connection for her to exploit. I see it as contrary to the spirit of election rules if not the letter,
I don't think it will really move the dial, because I think we live in a very cynical age. Those who will be appalled by the content of Carol's letter and not see it as a clever and opportunistic piece of campaigning will fit almost entirely into those already planning to vote for Burnham. With maybe a couple already planning to vote for Lowe.
Oddly enough her anger towards Kenyon over his comment does not seem to be replicated towards the person who posted the original comment.
I don't think we have covered it. Carol Vorderman is very very deep into the left wing/wealth tax/HNH nexus, and her and her associates will have been delighted that there was a personal connection for her to exploit. I see it as contrary to the spirit of election rules if not the letter,
I don't think it will really move the dial, because I think we live in a very cynical age. Those who will be appalled by the content of Carol's letter and not see it as a clever and opportunistic piece of campaigning will fit almost entirely into those already planning to vote for Burnham. With maybe a couple already planning to vote for Lowe.
I think Musk's ramping of Lowe on Twitter represents a greater challenge to the election rules. I don't mean in terms of personally endorsing him, but in terms of how Twitter selectively promotes voices Musk agrees with. Meanwhile, X is paying Lowe over £10,000 per month.
I've spent around five hours canvassing in Makerfield. There is a little Restore support (2%?), but it's basically a Lab/Ref battle. I didn't meet a single voter planning to vote Tory, Green or LibDem, and I'm sure they will all lose their deposits.
As for the result, I think it's a toss-up. There is a huge Labour volunteer turnout - nearly all roads have now been canvassed three times - but the betting showing Labour clearly ahead is IMO a bit optimistic. A notable touch is that Andy is campaigning on his record in Greater Manchester, and some leaflets don't even mention Labour. Conversely Reform's leaflets largely ignore their candidate, even though he's local. Voters don't seem very exercised by local issues, even though flooding has adversely affected parts - it comes down to liking Andy+disliking Reform vs "time for a change".
Can I use this comment for the morning thread ?
Call me a cynic, but don't canvassers always report that "it is very tight" in order to motivate their voters and workers?
I don't think we have covered it. Carol Vorderman is very very deep into the left wing/wealth tax/HNH nexus, and her and her associates will have been delighted that there was a personal connection for her to exploit. I see it as contrary to the spirit of election rules if not the letter,
I don't think it will really move the dial, because I think we live in a very cynical age. Those who will be appalled by the content of Carol's letter and not see it as a clever and opportunistic piece of campaigning will fit almost entirely into those already planning to vote for Burnham. With maybe a couple already planning to vote for Lowe.
Oddly enough her anger towards Kenyon over his comment does not seem to be replicated towards the person who posted the original comment.
The person who posted the original comment is not standing for election.
Bibi no longer fears a backlash from the US. Trump may have got a bit sweary last week but Bibi knows there are no sanctions for Bibi exercising his military strength.
Bibi no longer fears a backlash from the US. Trump may have got a bit sweary last week but Bibi knows there are no sanctions for Bibi exercising his military strength.
I don't think we have covered it. Carol Vorderman is very very deep into the left wing/wealth tax/HNH nexus, and her and her associates will have been delighted that there was a personal connection for her to exploit. I see it as contrary to the spirit of election rules if not the letter,
I don't think it will really move the dial, because I think we live in a very cynical age. Those who will be appalled by the content of Carol's letter and not see it as a clever and opportunistic piece of campaigning will fit almost entirely into those already planning to vote for Burnham. With maybe a couple already planning to vote for Lowe.
Oddly enough her anger towards Kenyon over his comment does not seem to be replicated towards the person who posted the original comment.
The person who posted the original comment is not standing for election.
Comments
Kitty Donaldson
@kitty_donaldson
In Makerfield there is a sense of voters having made their minds up at the start of the campaign, a Labour source said, with Reform candidate Rob Kenyon’s unearthed social media remarks not moving the dial:
“I don’t know that it matters that much to the people voting Reform”
https://x.com/kitty_donaldson/status/2063588877965636073
(Cute, if I do say so myself, but is it true?)
You need to put a cash value on the happiness you will get from certain outcomes, or the opposite, and then factor that into your NEV. Hence I tend to bet against the LibDems because if they do badly my bet comes off and I have money to spend, and if they do well then the value to me of the resulting happiness cancels out the adverse financial consequences.
I was not expecting THAT.
Letter: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HJqrYeDXIAMgcOX?format=jpg&name=medium
Manchester Evening news article:
https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/i-swaying-towards-reform-until-34075678
(Updated)
Tom Nichols
@RadioFreeTom
·
2h
Emotionally unstable man goes on paranoid, babbling rant.
Somewhere in that suit, he has a small card with the codes to 1500 strategic nuclear weapons.
https://x.com/RadioFreeTom/status/2063654813821268011
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PW-DwquXSY8
Firstly, the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans both have mid-latitude storm tracks, even though the Pacific doesn't have an equivalent to the AMOC. The storm tracks exist because the tropics are warmer than the poles, and the coriolis force limits the poleward extent of the Hadley circulation. Therefore you have a strong temperature gradient which creates a strong westerly thermal wind, a large amount of baroclinic instability and consequently a storm track, which has two effects which are relevant to us here: it mixes a lot of heat towards the poles, and it creates an ocean gyre circulation (which is why the west coast of North America is warmer than the east coast of Asia).
If the AMOC collapses the Atlantic will still have a storm track and it will still have an ocean gyre circulation that makes the west coast of Europe warmer than the east coast of North America.
What might change is the latitude of the storm track. The Atlantic storm track has a more pronounced SW to NE tilt than the Pacific storm track and it's not obvious how much of that is due to differences in the shape of the ocean basins, or due to changes in SSTs due to the AMOC. So the storm track could shift south and Britain might see both a reduction in warming from the AMOC directly, and end up on the poleward side of the storm track and miss out on the heating from that too.
There are lots of other effects at play too. I did see one paper arguing for a link between reduced solar activity and more frequent winter easterlies over Britain, for example.
The other thing to point out is that these effects would be much more influential in winter. So a reduction in winter mean temperatures of 15C, but little difference the rest of the year, would equate to an annual mean temperature change of 3.75C. Similarly, an annual mean temperature change of 1.5C could equate to a winter mean temperature change of 4C.
For context, the warmest winter in the Central England temperature record had a mean temperature of 6.83C (2016) and the coldest winter had a mean temperature of -1.17C (1684), a difference of only 8C. The coldest winter this century was 2.53C (2010). [Meteorological winters, DJF, are by convention dated by the year of January, so winter 2016 was December 2015 - February 2016.]
The most important thing to do is to improve the insulation of British homes. We'd better survive the direct impact of an AMOC collapse, it would reduce home heating costs, improve living temperatures and reduce damp in homes, improving winter health, reduce fossil fuel use, and make British homes more suitable to be heated by heat pumps rather than fossil fuels, helping to reduce the greenhouse gas emissions that may tip the AMOC over the edge.
This has, of course, been obvious for decades, and progress has been relatively poor.
Instead, many pensioners are provided with a winter fuel allowance to spend on fossil fuels. Go figure.
Logically, if the probability of economic devastation after a Reform by-election win were very high, and your personal exposure to economic calamity also very high, then yes, you absolutely should. But of course it’s just a by-election, a Reform win might not have any more long-term consequences than all those Liberal/SDP alliance by-election wins in times past, maybe a Reform government would be just as hemmed in as to what it can or cannot do as all our other governments, and maybe you’re not as personally exposed to financial downturn as many more ordinary folks?
If you did all these sums properly you should be able to zero in on the range of an appropriately sized bet.
Persuading JDV of the same thing as well would be even better.
Threw a few quid on Reform on the back of this at 6/1. I still expect to lose, and frankly, if Reform do win here I think it's probably my final kick up the arse to emigrate before the fourth reich are upon us. But a value bet is a value bet.
My guess is it will still be Burnham but a lot closer than the odds suggest.
The “protests” in Southampton aren’t about his death.
They’re about rabid racism and male violence.
https://x.com/supertanskiii/status/2063649567405384155
Any case, not to worry, Burnham's winning and I'm on at 1.68.
https://news.sky.com/story/danish-footballer-christian-eriksen-collapses-on-pitch-13551755
I am guessing Tan Smith isn't a PB favourite.
What’s to stop a celebrity backed by a Crypto investor abroad writing a “Heartfelt!” Letter in an election campaign?
Peter.
But others here are far better at that sort of estimate than me, and know far better how voters behave.
https://x.com/rlk303303/status/1955763281035190511?s=61
Looks like the ceasefire is done and, in the words of Chris Morris.
It’s War.
Peter.
He has been right a few times but…..
Anyway, if true, Reform (like The Greens) really needs to professionalise their vetting.
‘ EXCLUSIVE: Reform UK is vetting candidates for the Greater Manchester mayoral position.
Andy Burnham, the current Mayor of Greater Manchester, is Labour’s candidate for the Makerfield by-election. In the event that he wins the by-election, he will have to resign from his position as Mayor of Greater Manchester.
Sources at Reform HQ have told me that the party believes Andy Burnham will win with a "massive majority." One source added: "Restore Britain has lost us this election. We have to learn and understand why people are choosing them over us."
The party wants to select a local candidate for the mayoral race potentially someone like Dan Barker, who stood for the position in 2024 and is a member of the party’s board.
https://x.com/charliesimpsona/status/2063675370356854877?s=61
Israel says it has intercepted all missiles from Iran so far and will retaliate
Bombs raining down on Jerusalem and Tehran.
I don't think it will really move the dial, because I think we live in a very cynical age. Those who will be appalled by the content of Carol's letter and not see it as a clever and opportunistic piece of campaigning will fit almost entirely into those already planning to vote for Burnham. With maybe a couple already planning to vote for Lowe.
Israel is reported, by NYT, to be spying on its allies.
https://x.com/marionawfal/status/2063421429115244613?s=61
Based on some Restore posters on X as too many non white figures at the top of Reform like Yusuf and as Reform aren't hardline enough on mass deportations. So such 'learning' might see Reform have to head even further right, leaving a gap in the centre for the Tories and Labour to occupy
https://radar.cloudflare.com/traffic?dateStart=2026-04-01&dateEnd=2026-06-07
[1] as defined by HTTP requests distribution to HTML content. Other definitions are available.
🤔