Also, to enlarge upon your point about Communists -they are a precise example. People who have allowed themselves to demonise their 'enemies', and cease seeing them as people, thus giving them license to kill huge swathes of them to create a 'better' world. Audreyeanne has said she 'hates' UKIP. Can she therefore be relied upon to support their right to free speech? Their right to adopt children? What modifications to the democratic process would she assent to in order to prevent such loathsome individuals from gaining power? Would she tolerate them being given a good slap every now and again to stop them getting above themselves -for the greater good? These are the things that hatred gradually opens the door too.
That's interesting and it's going mainstream. Of course, the electors in the electoral college don't HAVE to vote as they were delegated, they can swap their votes if they choose.
Audreyeanne has said she 'hates' UKIP. Can she therefore be relied upon to support their right to free speech?
I have consistently said that an irony of democracy is that in order to protect freedom you have to restrict it.
As it happens in the case of UKIP I don't think they're too malicious in the way that, for instance, the BNP or ISIL are, although I think we should watch this space of signs of homophobia and xenophobia bordering on incitements. Generally they don't seem to cross the boundaries of what's acceptable in a democracy.
Inflation rate for sept. released today was 1.2% or 1.3%. Briskin and co's analysis is that the base rate will remain unchanged until post-election (GE15)
This is the big by-election of the Parliament, and it's scarcely an exaggeration to say that its outcome could well determine the next general election.
Interesting mid prices, Shadsy isn't expecting Reckless to get a Carswellesque share of the vote.
They aren't really comparable, they are just derivatives of the chances of a ukip win
What would have been interesting is shadsys prices for Carswells % five weeks before Election Day when ukip were about 1/5
The opening prices on Carswell to win were similar to the Reckless price now, but the vote % prices for clacton were only introduced when Carswell was about 1/25, so comparing these is pointless
This is the big by-election of the Parliament, and it's scarcely an exaggeration to say that its outcome could well determine the next general election.
Eh?
Ukip came within 620 votes of doing a by-election double. The Carswell principle has been established.
Also, to enlarge upon your point about Communists -they are a precise example. People who have allowed themselves to demonise their 'enemies', and cease seeing them as people, thus giving them license to kill huge swathes of them to create a 'better' world. Audreyeanne has said she 'hates' UKIP. Can she therefore be relied upon to support their right to free speech? Their right to adopt children? What modifications to the democratic process would she assent to in order to prevent such loathsome individuals from gaining power? Would she tolerate them being given a good slap every now and again to stop them getting above themselves -for the greater good? These are the things that hatred gradually opens the door too.
I think to some extent one has to acknowledge the spectrum of meanings available for a word like "hate". It can mean anything from mild dislike - "I hate those bloody singing Have-I-Got-PPI" radio ads" - through to "I hate X so much that I honestly think the world would be a better place if X could somehow be removed from it."
It's also possible to fail to hate things that reasonable people would agree do, in fact, meet the latter definition. Environmentalism; Ian Hislop; Amsterdam.
I doubt many people actually hate UKIP in the latter sense, or indeed very much else. As you say, look at what it opens the door to.
Interestingly, though, one of the things you instance as something a UKIP-hater might oppose - "Their right to adopt children?" - actually has been opposed; by left wing council officials in Rotherham - yes, that Rotherham. Employees of the same ineptocracy reportedly blocked adoption because the prospective parents were UKIP supporters. They were fine with those same children being left in care to be raped by Pakistani minicab drivers, however.
So while audrey and I and most others don't literally hate UKIP, there are those on the left who obviously do. How else could you regard a foster parent being a UKIP supporter as a greater evil than paedophile rapists?
As with the sympathy with Communism, the left has pretty much a monopoly on moral incompetence in this area.
Audreyeanne has said she 'hates' UKIP. Can she therefore be relied upon to support their right to free speech?
I have consistently said that an irony of democracy is that in order to protect freedom you have to restrict it.
As it happens in the case of UKIP I don't think they're too malicious in the way that, for instance, the BNP or ISIL are, although I think we should watch this space of signs of homophobia and xenophobia bordering on incitements. Generally they don't seem to cross the boundaries of what's acceptable in a democracy.
That has nothing to do with hating UKIP though.
Good luck with that hatred then. I fear it will affect you more then it affects them.
I posted on September 24th that I thought Shadsy had got the Clacton bands wrong, and I made a guesstimate for the vote shares (as it happens, quite accurately):
This is the big by-election of the Parliament, and it's scarcely an exaggeration to say that its outcome could well determine the next general election.
You don't literally mean determine, do you? Do you mean foreshadow or prefigure?
I posted on September 24th that I thought Shadsy had got the Clacton bands wrong, and I made a guesstimate for the vote shares (as it happens, quite accurately):
Short listing between two women is a clever move given UKIP's gender problem.
Female Keynote Speakers at Autumn Party Political Conferences
Labour 10 UKIP 5 Conservatives 4 LD 3
Irrevelant.
Women don't vote for UKIP in the same way women do. And historically speaking in this county the women generally always back the winning party.
'Generally' or 'always'? Link?
The Indyref is the most recent example, I'll try and dig out the academic research paper on it going back a few elections
I think, if my memory is correct both Robert Waller and a few other books have looked at this.
Gist is, women are less partisan, and less party affiliated than men, so there's more female floating voters than male floating voters.
OK, are women also more moderate politically or more small 'c' conservative? More likely to stick with the status quo and more likely to vote for established parties?
Cowardly Cameron trying to derail debates. Perhaps someone could ask Miliband if they really are a good way of engaging the public in the first place.
What has Cameron said about the debates to derail them? I must have missed his quotes, as all I heard from him was he thought it was hard to justify the omission of the Greens and he thinks they should be spread over a longer (and earlier) period.
This is the big by-election of the Parliament, and it's scarcely an exaggeration to say that its outcome could well determine the next general election.
You don't literally mean determine, do you? Do you mean foreshadow or prefigure?
In the sense that a good win for UKIP could result in sufficient disarray in the Conservative party to make a Labour victory inevitable. A victory for the Conservatives could result in a halting of the UKIP bandwagon and consequent steadying of the Conservatives such that enabled them to put up a halfway decent fight.
A close win for UKIP would be the most interesting of the outcomes. As things stand, it's the most likely outcome too (though not by all that much).
I actually tipped backing 40-50 50-60 and 60-70 at a combined 2/11
Although I did say the best bet was the 7/2 60-70 which is a loser isn't it? He got 59.8 I think
My first instinct here is to back 35-40 and 40-45 at a combined 8/13
In the end I decided to back only 50% to 60% in Clacton, at 2/1.
That was quite nice, and more than made up for slightly underestimating turnout and also screwing up my trading on H + M (although that came close to being an 8/1 winner).
Short listing between two women is a clever move given UKIP's gender problem.
Female Keynote Speakers at Autumn Party Political Conferences
Labour 10 UKIP 5 Conservatives 4 LD 3
Irrevelant.
Women don't vote for UKIP in the same way women do. And historically speaking in this county the women generally always back the winning party.
'Generally' or 'always'? Link?
The Indyref is the most recent example, I'll try and dig out the academic research paper on it going back a few elections
I think, if my memory is correct both Robert Waller and a few other books have looked at this.
Gist is, women are less partisan, and less party affiliated than men, so there's more female floating voters than male floating voters.
OK, are women also more moderate politically or more small 'c' conservative? More likely to stick with the status quo and more likely to vote for established parties?
Women are 1) less risk averse 2) when it comes to politics, women tend to focus on issues like Schools and Hospital, and not other things like Europe.
Hmmm...both ladies sensible, presentable, intelligent, good back story, normal. If only all MP candidates were such....Shame one is going to lose really. (and of course the winner may then lose to Reckless!)
Survation/MoS poll has 30.3% of men backing UKIP compared with 18.9% of women
You see, I think this could be highly highly significant.
Question for the boffs: what's the largest non-female share in the past 50 years that has still led to an overall GE or by election win? To put that more felicitously: has any party won power with a greater overall percentage of male than female support, and if so by how much? I guess we don't have a Clacton breakdown?
I accept that with UKIP no-one expects them to win but it's still significant, especially as those 'extra' women, and fewer men, are presumably going elsewhere.
Cybernat in Bath getting worked up this PM cos Cameron, Miliband haven't turned up at today's debate.
It was a sheer delight to listen to Salmond on R4 Today this morning, wailing and gnashing away in his usual style about a sell-out on "The Vow" (that hasn't happened and won't happen), knowing that his overblown rhetoric was all for nothing this side of the referendum vote.
Which he lost, btw.
That said, I suppose I must lend him my support now, as the SNP's crucial task is to decimate Labour in Scotland in the hope it somehow leaves the Tories the largest party in a hung parliament next May.
I actually tipped backing 40-50 50-60 and 60-70 at a combined 2/11
Although I did say the best bet was the 7/2 60-70 which is a loser isn't it? He got 59.8 I think
My first instinct here is to back 35-40 and 40-45 at a combined 8/13
In the end I decided to back only 50% to 60% in Clacton, at 2/1.
That was quite nice, and more than made up for slightly underestimating turnout and also screwing up my trading on H + M (although that came close to being an 8/1 winner).
Lucky enough I didn't back the 60-70... Would have been quite galling to see 60% quoted everywhere as the ukip vote but the bet be a loser
Ahem I think you made money on the spreads too... And if you will go against my advice on turnout well... You can't say I didn't try and help...
This is the big by-election of the Parliament, and it's scarcely an exaggeration to say that its outcome could well determine the next general election.
You don't literally mean determine, do you? Do you mean foreshadow or prefigure?
In the sense that a good win for UKIP could result in sufficient disarray in the Conservative party to make a Labour victory inevitable. A victory for the Conservatives could result in a halting of the UKIP bandwagon and consequent steadying of the Conservatives such that enabled them to put up a halfway decent fight.
A close win for UKIP would be the most interesting of the outcomes. As things stand, it's the most likely outcome too (though not by all that much).
Would 40 UKIP 35 Tories be a close win or a "good" win ?
This is the big by-election of the Parliament, and it's scarcely an exaggeration to say that its outcome could well determine the next general election.
You don't literally mean determine, do you? Do you mean foreshadow or prefigure?
In the sense that a good win for UKIP could result in sufficient disarray in the Conservative party to make a Labour victory inevitable. A victory for the Conservatives could result in a halting of the UKIP bandwagon and consequent steadying of the Conservatives such that enabled them to put up a halfway decent fight.
A close win for UKIP would be the most interesting of the outcomes. As things stand, it's the most likely outcome too (though not by all that much).
Would 40 UKIP 35 Tories be a close win or a "good" win ?
The 1922 Committee's decision on that question is final.
Cowardly Cameron trying to derail debates. Perhaps someone could ask Miliband if they really are a good way of engaging the public in the first place.
What has Cameron said about the debates to derail them? I must have missed his quotes, as all I heard from him was he thought it was hard to justify the omission of the Greens and he thinks they should be spread over a longer (and earlier) period.
It may be that Cameron is using the UKIP/Green representation issue to try and derail it. But perhaps I should have prefaced the Cowardly Cameron with a quotation mark.
This is the big by-election of the Parliament, and it's scarcely an exaggeration to say that its outcome could well determine the next general election.
You don't literally mean determine, do you? Do you mean foreshadow or prefigure?
In the sense that a good win for UKIP could result in sufficient disarray in the Conservative party to make a Labour victory inevitable. A victory for the Conservatives could result in a halting of the UKIP bandwagon and consequent steadying of the Conservatives such that enabled them to put up a halfway decent fight.
A close win for UKIP would be the most interesting of the outcomes. As things stand, it's the most likely outcome too (though not by all that much).
Would 40 UKIP 35 Tories be a close win or a "good" win ?
The 1922 Committee's decision on that question is final.
Hmmm...both ladies sensible, presentable, intelligent, good back story, normal. If only all MP candidates were such....Shame one is going to lose really. (and of course the winner may then lose to Reckless!)
Did people in Braintree think along those lines -successful academically, lives locally, happily married with 5 kids, loving father...
Hmmm...both ladies sensible, presentable, intelligent, good back story, normal. If only all MP candidates were such....Shame one is going to lose really. (and of course the winner may then lose to Reckless!)
Did people in Braintree think along those lines -successful academically, lives locally, happily married with 5 kids, loving father...
Hmmm...both ladies sensible, presentable, intelligent, good back story, normal. If only all MP candidates were such....Shame one is going to lose really. (and of course the winner may then lose to Reckless!)
Did people in Braintree think along those lines -successful academically, lives locally, happily married with 5 kids, loving father...
Cowardly Cameron trying to derail debates. Perhaps someone could ask Miliband if they really are a good way of engaging the public in the first place.
What has Cameron said about the debates to derail them? I must have missed his quotes, as all I heard from him was he thought it was hard to justify the omission of the Greens and he thinks they should be spread over a longer (and earlier) period.
It may be that Cameron is using the UKIP/Green representation issue to try and derail it. But perhaps I should have prefaced the Cowardly Cameron with a quotation mark.
I think Cameron is pretty much in tune with popular opinion re Greens. So sending in your 'Negotiating Team', as is the Labour response is different and better from expressing a couple of concerns in public (no doubt before sending in your negotiating team).
Survation/MoS poll has 30.3% of men backing UKIP compared with 18.9% of women
You see, I think this could be highly highly significant.
Question for the boffs: what's the largest non-female share in the past 50 years that has still led to an overall GE or by election win? To put that more felicitously: has any party won power with a greater overall percentage of male than female support, and if so by how much? I guess we don't have a Clacton breakdown?
I accept that with UKIP no-one expects them to win but it's still significant, especially as those 'extra' women, and fewer men, are presumably going elsewhere.
In the latest MOS poll women voters outnumber men for Labour, Libdems, Greens, Plaid and Others. Sadly for the Tories they still have a women problem of their own. Of course if a few more fellows come across to UKIP that would resolve it for the Tories.....
Survation/MoS poll has 30.3% of men backing UKIP compared with 18.9% of women
You see, I think this could be highly highly significant.
Question for the boffs: what's the largest non-female share in the past 50 years that has still led to an overall GE or by election win? To put that more felicitously: has any party won power with a greater overall percentage of male than female support, and if so by how much? I guess we don't have a Clacton breakdown?
I accept that with UKIP no-one expects them to win but it's still significant, especially as those 'extra' women, and fewer men, are presumably going elsewhere.
Sadly for the Tories they still have a women problem of their own. Of course if a few more fellows come across to UKIP that would resolve it for the Tories.....
It seems to me that resigning your seat and standing for a new party creates several problems for those who want to unseat you. The main one being attacking someone they so recently endorsed. It doesn't work the opposite way -defectors seem to be able to slate their former parties with abandon.
This is a really interesting wiki page of floor crossings (apols if posted already):
I count 4 resignings of the whip and re-standing under different colours in an immediate by-elections now, 3 successful (Carswell, Lady Sylvia Hermon, Dick Taverne), one not (Bruce Douglas-Mann). That's quite a good record now.
OK, let's apply the same kind of guesstimate as last time.
Rochester & Strood 2010: Con 49.2%, Lab 28.5%, LD 16%, English Democrats 4.5%, Green 1.5%.
LD are going to collapse, Lab are going to fall back considerably. Let's assume Lab go down to 18%, LD to 3%. I'm going to allocate those lost Lab voters equally to Tory + UKIP as they tactically vote against each other. I'm going to do the same for the lost LibDems except slightly more LibDems will go Tory, especially if it's a nice local girl like Cllr Tolhurst, who won't scare the horses. So 5%+7% to the Tory tally, 5%+6% to the UKIP tally. I'm also going to give all the English Democrats to Reckless (he's welcome to them!). So far 12% Tory, 16% UKIP.
Now the big one. In Clacton I guessed two-thirds for Carswell, one third staying loyally blue. There's no way it's going to be anything like that this time, with Reckless much less popular and regarded as unpleasantly disloyal in a way Carswell wasn't, and with the Tories throwing the kitchen sink at it. I'm going to guesstimate the shares will be the other way round. That's 33% for the Tories and 16% for UKIP.
Net guesstimate:
Con 45% UKIP 32% Lab 18% Other 5%
If you assume the Tory vote splitting 50-50, it ends up with Con 37% UKIP 40%.
My conclusion is that UKIP 30% to 35% at 6/1 is an absolute snip, but 35-40% and 40% to 45% are reasonable bets too. I'd be amazed if the winner is not one of those three.
Also note that you can get 3/1 (or even more if you're patient on Betfair) on the Tories winning. If the Tories win UKIP will be in the 30% to 40% range. A combination bet of the Tories winning outright and UKIP on 40% to 45% would seem to cover most of the probability distribution.
OK, let's apply the same kind of guesstimate as last time.
Rochester & Strood 2010: Con 49.2%, Lab 28.5%, LD 16%, English Democrats 4.5%, Green 1.5%.
LD are going to collapse, Lab are going to fall back considerably. Let's assume Lab go down to 18%, LD to 3%. I'm going to allocate those lost Lab voters equally to Tory + UKIP as they tactically vote against each other. I'm going to do the same for the lost LibDems except slightly more LibDems will go Tory, especially if it's a nice local girl like Cllr Tolhurst, who won't scare the horses. So 5%+7% to the Tory tally, 5%+6% to the UKIP tally. I'm also going to give all the English Democrats to Reckless (he's welcome to them!). So far 12% Tory, 16% UKIP.
Now the big one. In Clacton I guessed two-thirds for Carswell, one third staying loyally blue. There's no way it's going to be anything like that this time, with Reckless much less popular and regarded as unpleasantly disloyal in a way Carswell wasn't, and with the Tories throwing the kitchen sink at it. I'm going to guesstimate the shares will be the other way round. That's 33% for the Tories and 16% for UKIP.
Net guesstimate:
Con 45% UKIP 32% Lab 18% Other 5%
If you assume the Tory vote splitting 50-50, it ends up with Con 37% UKIP 40%.
My conclusion is that UKIP 30% to 35% at 6/1 is an absolute snip, but 35-40% and 40% to 45% are reasonable bets too. I'd be amazed if the winner is not one of those three.
Also note that you can get 3/1 (or even more if you're patient on Betfair) on the Tories winning. If the Tories win UKIP will be in the 30% to 40% range. A combination bet of the Tories winning outright and UKIP on 40% to 45% would seem to cover most of the probability distribution.
Those are the three bets I would have... I first of all thought the 6/1 was the best bet, then thought combining 35-40 & 40-45 (8/13) is better
UKIP didn't stand last time, is that factored in? Aren't you leaving out DNVs?
At the moment I think I'd prefer Tolhurst to be the Tory candidate. Nothing against Firth, but she does seem to have a bit too much in common with Reckless: privately educated, ex-banker & barrister. I don't know much about Tolhurst, except that she loves sailing.
I found this old blog of Reckless's http://markreckless.blogspot.co.uk/2010/06/cllr-mark-reckless-mp-for-rochester-and.html which has a picture of Tolhurst and Reckless together about a year before she won her council seat (I think the one he vacated) and says "Mark was particularly delighted to meet up with the Tolhurst family from Borstal, including Kelly Tolhurst who took charge of leading the Little Ships into Dunkirk harbour last week"
I'm not sure why I like the fact that she's from Borstal, home of the borstal.
OK, let's apply the same kind of guesstimate as last time.
Rochester & Strood 2010: Con 49.2%, Lab 28.5%, LD 16%, English Democrats 4.5%, Green 1.5%.
LD are going to collapse, Lab are going to fall back considerably. Let's assume Lab go down to 18%, LD to 3%. I'm going to allocate those lost Lab voters equally to Tory + UKIP as they tactically vote against each other. I'm going to do the same for the lost LibDems except slightly more LibDems will go Tory, especially if it's a nice local girl like Cllr Tolhurst, who won't scare the horses. So 5%+7% to the Tory tally, 5%+6% to the UKIP tally. I'm also going to give all the English Democrats to Reckless (he's welcome to them!). So far 12% Tory, 16% UKIP.
Now the big one. In Clacton I guessed two-thirds for Carswell, one third staying loyally blue. There's no way it's going to be anything like that this time, with Reckless much less popular and regarded as unpleasantly disloyal in a way Carswell wasn't, and with the Tories throwing the kitchen sink at it. I'm going to guesstimate the shares will be the other way round. That's 33% for the Tories and 16% for UKIP.
Net guesstimate:
Con 45% UKIP 32% Lab 18% Other 5%
If you assume the Tory vote splitting 50-50, it ends up with Con 37% UKIP 40%.
My conclusion is that UKIP 30% to 35% at 6/1 is an absolute snip, but 35-40% and 40% to 45% are reasonable bets too. I'd be amazed if the winner is not one of those three.
Also note that you can get 3/1 (or even more if you're patient on Betfair) on the Tories winning. If the Tories win UKIP will be in the 30% to 40% range. A combination bet of the Tories winning outright and UKIP on 40% to 45% would seem to cover most of the probability distribution.
Is Gordon doing some kind of filibuster? Wishart unhappy
Conor Burns MP @Conor_BurnsMP 7m7 minutes ago Gordon Brown speaking in chamber. Screen says he started at 14.32 and it is now 14.47 Screen also says 6min limit on backbench speech???
I agree with antifrank and indeed said something similar about a week ago. If the tories cannot win this by election it is extremely difficult to see a path to victory in May. A UKIP win is very likely to trigger further defections, it will boost UKIP at the expense of the Tories in a lot of marginal seats, many of which would go Labour as a result, and it would engender panic in Tory HQ with a consequential jerk to the right to try and compensate enhancing Labour's advantage with ex Lib Dems. Pretty grim all round really.
Conversely, a tory win makes further Tory defections (other than possibly someone like Hannan) unlikely, will damage UKIP momentum and make staying near the centre ground much easier.
Labour might still win the most seats in May but it would then be a genuine contest. There is a lot to play for here. It is a biggie.
It seems to me that resigning your seat and standing for a new party creates several problems for those who want to unseat you. The main one being attacking someone they so recently endorsed. It doesn't work the opposite way -defectors seem to be able to slate their former parties with abandon.
This is a really interesting wiki page of floor crossings (apols if posted already):
I count 4 resignings of the whip and re-standing under different colours in an immediate by-elections now, 3 successful (Carswell, Lady Sylvia Hermon, Dick Taverne), one not (Bruce Douglas-Mann). That's quite a good record now.
However, Lady Hermon didn't stand in an immediate by-election, she was re-elected at the 2010 GE.
My conclusion is that UKIP 30% to 35% at 6/1 is an absolute snip, but 35-40% and 40% to 45% are reasonable bets too. I'd be amazed if the winner is not one of those three.
Also note that you can get 3/1 (or even more if you're patient on Betfair) on the Tories winning. If the Tories win UKIP will be in the 30% to 40% range. A combination bet of the Tories winning outright and UKIP on 40% to 45% would seem to cover most of the probability distribution.
Astonishing post. That flies in the face of the only opinion poll so far released. Your methods feel slightly back of fag packet but you're not someone I'd bet against being right, especially given your track record. Can I hug you if you are indeed right? I'd love this to be true, and from a betting pov that's also a top tip.
So, you're basically saying that Mark Reckless is likely to poll between 50% and 75% of Douglas Carswell's share. That's quite a call.
I'll pass on this occasion but only because I already have an awful lot riding on the outcome of this election, and I want to concentrate on the markets I've already invested in.
£76,000 has already been traded on Betfair. This promises to be one hell of a betting heat.
OK, let's apply the same kind of guesstimate as last time.
Rochester & Strood 2010: Con 49.2%, Lab 28.5%, LD 16%, English Democrats 4.5%, Green 1.5%.
LD are going to collapse, Lab are going to fall back considerably. Let's assume Lab go down to 18%, LD to 3%. I'm going to allocate those lost Lab voters equally to Tory + UKIP as they tactically vote against each other. I'm going to do the same for the lost LibDems except slightly more LibDems will go Tory, especially if it's a nice local girl like Cllr Tolhurst, who won't scare the horses. So 5%+7% to the Tory tally, 5%+6% to the UKIP tally. I'm also going to give all the English Democrats to Reckless (he's welcome to them!). So far 12% Tory, 16% UKIP.
Now the big one. In Clacton I guessed two-thirds for Carswell, one third staying loyally blue. There's no way it's going to be anything like that this time, with Reckless much less popular and regarded as unpleasantly disloyal in a way Carswell wasn't, and with the Tories throwing the kitchen sink at it. I'm going to guesstimate the shares will be the other way round. That's 33% for the Tories and 16% for UKIP.
Net guesstimate:
Con 45% UKIP 32% Lab 18% Other 5%
If you assume the Tory vote splitting 50-50, it ends up with Con 37% UKIP 40%.
My conclusion is that UKIP 30% to 35% at 6/1 is an absolute snip, but 35-40% and 40% to 45% are reasonable bets too. I'd be amazed if the winner is not one of those three.
Also note that you can get 3/1 (or even more if you're patient on Betfair) on the Tories winning. If the Tories win UKIP will be in the 30% to 40% range. A combination bet of the Tories winning outright and UKIP on 40% to 45% would seem to cover most of the probability distribution.
I disagree, for these reasons.
Survation @Survation · Oct 4 Where is the UKIP vote coming from? For starters, 42% of people who say they will vote UKIP in the by-election voted Conservative in 2010.
Survation @Survation · Oct 4 UKIP voters told us the reason for voting Reckless,was liking UKIP and their policies (70%) vs protest (18%) or liking Reckless (12%).
In the tables almost no one from 2010 LAB switches to Tories with 1/6 going to UKIP. With slightly more 2010 LD going UKIP than Tory.
My guess estimate is the reverse of yours, UKIP 45, CON 32 which is based on the only poll there so far.
Comments
Either way, I'm going to campaign for them, and hopefully beat the modern day Kim Philby that is Mark Reckless.
There's plan for this to change American Presidential elections
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Popular_Vote_Interstate_Compact
(He'd be a genuine Wallace doppelganger if he did!)
Labour 10
UKIP 5
Conservatives 4
LD 3
@Bond_James_Bond
Also, to enlarge upon your point about Communists -they are a precise example. People who have allowed themselves to demonise their 'enemies', and cease seeing them as people, thus giving them license to kill huge swathes of them to create a 'better' world. Audreyeanne has said she 'hates' UKIP. Can she therefore be relied upon to support their right to free speech? Their right to adopt children? What modifications to the democratic process would she assent to in order to prevent such loathsome individuals from gaining power? Would she tolerate them being given a good slap every now and again to stop them getting above themselves -for the greater good? These are the things that hatred gradually opens the door too.
Women don't vote for UKIP in the same way women do. And historically speaking in this county the women generally always back the winning party.
Of course, the electors in the electoral college don't HAVE to vote as they were delegated, they can swap their votes if they choose.
https://www.change.org/p/bbc-itv-channel-4-sky-include-the-green-party-in-the-tv-leaders-debates-ahead-of-the-2015-general-election
As it happens in the case of UKIP I don't think they're too malicious in the way that, for instance, the BNP or ISIL are, although I think we should watch this space of signs of homophobia and xenophobia bordering on incitements. Generally they don't seem to cross the boundaries of what's acceptable in a democracy.
That has nothing to do with hating UKIP though.
More on this issue please Mike / TSE / David H. Think it's got the potential to be significant not just at R&S but the GE.
Ah, got it now.
Poland vs Scotland 1945 (Sky, pub)
Denmark vs Portugal 1945 (Itv4)
Inflation rate for sept. released today was 1.2% or 1.3%. Briskin and co's analysis is that the base rate will remain unchanged until post-election (GE15)
What would have been interesting is shadsys prices for Carswells % five weeks before Election Day when ukip were about 1/5
The opening prices on Carswell to win were similar to the Reckless price now, but the vote % prices for clacton were only introduced when Carswell was about 1/25, so comparing these is pointless
Link?
Ukip came within 620 votes of doing a by-election double. The Carswell principle has been established.
Please clarify what you mean.
Kind regards,
JBriskin (of Briskin and co fame)
http://press.labour.org.uk/post/99990995259/ed-milibands-response-to-broadcasters-letter-on-tv
Cowardly Cameron trying to derail debates. Perhaps someone could ask Miliband if they really are a good way of engaging the public in the first place.
What does that even mean?
Over under prices anyone?
Very poor turnout in the clacton meeting I think
So that exempts me and Mike. Now, which one is the baldy....?
It's also possible to fail to hate things that reasonable people would agree do, in fact, meet the latter definition. Environmentalism; Ian Hislop; Amsterdam.
I doubt many people actually hate UKIP in the latter sense, or indeed very much else. As you say, look at what it opens the door to.
Interestingly, though, one of the things you instance as something a UKIP-hater might oppose - "Their right to adopt children?" - actually has been opposed; by left wing council officials in Rotherham - yes, that Rotherham. Employees of the same ineptocracy reportedly blocked adoption because the prospective parents were UKIP supporters. They were fine with those same children being left in care to be raped by Pakistani minicab drivers, however.
So while audrey and I and most others don't literally hate UKIP, there are those on the left who obviously do. How else could you regard a foster parent being a UKIP supporter as a greater evil than paedophile rapists?
As with the sympathy with Communism, the left has pretty much a monopoly on moral incompetence in this area.
I think, if my memory is correct both Robert Waller and a few other books have looked at this.
Gist is, women are less partisan, and less party affiliated than men, so there's more female floating voters than male floating voters.
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/nick-cohen/2014/10/why-hasnt-labour-sacked-ed-miliband/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=why-hasnt-labour-sacked-ed-miliband&utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter
http://politicalbetting.vanillaforums.com/discussion/comment/411189/#Comment_411189
I think there's even better value in this market.
Explanation to follow, once I've placed my bets!
Survation/MoS poll has 30.3% of men backing UKIP compared with 18.9% of women
Is it Swahili Tuesday on PB ?
Although I did say the best bet was the 7/2 60-70 which is a loser isn't it? He got 59.8 I think
My first instinct here is to back 35-40 and 40-45 at a combined 8/13
I may try this time.
I was about to be a pedant Luke, but you spotted it
I've not been impressed with the female barrister MPs we've had to endure - the awful Thornberry and Soubry most notably...
Although the one who represented Finchley in years past did alright. :-)
A close win for UKIP would be the most interesting of the outcomes. As things stand, it's the most likely outcome too (though not by all that much).
That was quite nice, and more than made up for slightly underestimating turnout and also screwing up my trading on H + M (although that came close to being an 8/1 winner).
He said soon.
Question for the boffs: what's the largest non-female share in the past 50 years that has still led to an overall GE or by election win? To put that more felicitously: has any party won power with a greater overall percentage of male than female support, and if so by how much? I guess we don't have a Clacton breakdown?
I accept that with UKIP no-one expects them to win but it's still significant, especially as those 'extra' women, and fewer men, are presumably going elsewhere.
Which he lost, btw.
That said, I suppose I must lend him my support now, as the SNP's crucial task is to decimate Labour in Scotland in the hope it somehow leaves the Tories the largest party in a hung parliament next May.
Ahem I think you made money on the spreads too... And if you will go against my advice on turnout well... You can't say I didn't try and help...
Labour has said it will not take part in cross-party discussions about "English votes for English laws".
With the Commons debating devolution, Labour said it would boycott a body set up by David Cameron to examine the future role of English MPs.
BBC news
http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/politics/pm-david-cameron-questions-the-format-for-tv-debate-30661062.html
Lab 35.1
Con 31.3
UKIP 13.3
LD 11.2
UKIP should really be 13%, not 14%.
Likewise, for Lord Ashcroft's 32, 28, 19, 8, I get:
Lab 32.0
Con 27.8
UKIP 18.2
LD 9.6
UKIP should really be 18%, not 19%, and LD 10%, not 8%!
The RSPB has membership figures political parties would die for.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/sep/30/ukip-nightingales-labour-rochester-ramsgate-migrants-farage
So sending in your 'Negotiating Team', as is the Labour response is different and better from expressing a couple of concerns in public (no doubt before sending in your negotiating team).
If that is what you wish to believe, so be it.
This is a really interesting wiki page of floor crossings (apols if posted already):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_British_politicians_who_have_crossed_the_floor
I count 4 resignings of the whip and re-standing under different colours in an immediate by-elections now, 3 successful (Carswell, Lady Sylvia Hermon, Dick Taverne), one not (Bruce Douglas-Mann). That's quite a good record now.
Rochester & Strood 2010: Con 49.2%, Lab 28.5%, LD 16%, English Democrats 4.5%, Green 1.5%.
LD are going to collapse, Lab are going to fall back considerably. Let's assume Lab go down to 18%, LD to 3%. I'm going to allocate those lost Lab voters equally to Tory + UKIP as they tactically vote against each other. I'm going to do the same for the lost LibDems except slightly more LibDems will go Tory, especially if it's a nice local girl like Cllr Tolhurst, who won't scare the horses. So 5%+7% to the Tory tally, 5%+6% to the UKIP tally. I'm also going to give all the English Democrats to Reckless (he's welcome to them!). So far 12% Tory, 16% UKIP.
Now the big one. In Clacton I guessed two-thirds for Carswell, one third staying loyally blue. There's no way it's going to be anything like that this time, with Reckless much less popular and regarded as unpleasantly disloyal in a way Carswell wasn't, and with the Tories throwing the kitchen sink at it. I'm going to guesstimate the shares will be the other way round. That's 33% for the Tories and 16% for UKIP.
Net guesstimate:
Con 45%
UKIP 32%
Lab 18%
Other 5%
If you assume the Tory vote splitting 50-50, it ends up with Con 37% UKIP 40%.
My conclusion is that UKIP 30% to 35% at 6/1 is an absolute snip, but 35-40% and 40% to 45% are reasonable bets too. I'd be amazed if the winner is not one of those three.
Also note that you can get 3/1 (or even more if you're patient on Betfair) on the Tories winning. If the Tories win UKIP will be in the 30% to 40% range. A combination bet of the Tories winning outright and UKIP on 40% to 45% would seem to cover most of the probability distribution.
Briskin and co - we understand he is referencing EVEL
UKIP didn't stand last time, is that factored in? Aren't you leaving out DNVs?
I found this old blog of Reckless's http://markreckless.blogspot.co.uk/2010/06/cllr-mark-reckless-mp-for-rochester-and.html which has a picture of Tolhurst and Reckless together about a year before she won her council seat (I think the one he vacated) and says "Mark was particularly delighted to meet up with the Tolhurst family from Borstal, including Kelly Tolhurst who took charge of leading the Little Ships into Dunkirk harbour last week"
I'm not sure why I like the fact that she's from Borstal, home of the borstal.
Cameron shoots himself in the foot on the rural vote
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2014/10/cameron-shoots-himself-in-the-foot-on-the-rural-vote/
Gordon Brown speaking in chamber. Screen says he started at 14.32 and it is now 14.47 Screen also says 6min limit on backbench speech???
Conversely, a tory win makes further Tory defections (other than possibly someone like Hannan) unlikely, will damage UKIP momentum and make staying near the centre ground much easier.
Labour might still win the most seats in May but it would then be a genuine contest. There is a lot to play for here. It is a biggie.
So, you're basically saying that Mark Reckless is likely to poll between 50% and 75% of Douglas Carswell's share. That's quite a call.
Thanks Richard, that all makes perfect sense.
I'll pass on this occasion but only because I already have an awful lot riding on the outcome of this election, and I want to concentrate on the markets I've already invested in.
£76,000 has already been traded on Betfair. This promises to be one hell of a betting heat.
Many thanks.
Max Keiser retweeted
Stalingrad & Poorski @Stalingrad_Poor 2m2 minutes ago
The selling will continue until morale improves.
Survation @Survation · Oct 4
Where is the UKIP vote coming from? For starters, 42% of people who say they will vote UKIP in the by-election voted Conservative in 2010.
Survation @Survation · Oct 4
UKIP voters told us the reason for voting Reckless,was liking UKIP and their policies (70%) vs protest (18%) or liking Reckless (12%).
In the tables almost no one from 2010 LAB switches to Tories with 1/6 going to UKIP.
With slightly more 2010 LD going UKIP than Tory.
My guess estimate is the reverse of yours, UKIP 45, CON 32 which is based on the only poll there so far.
Betfair have opened up a Rochester & Strood UKIP Vote Percentage market. The square root of bugger all has been matched.
http://www.betfair.com/exchange/politics/market?id=1.115925336
I predict 50% turnout in the by-election.
It will be pretty active soon, I expect.