Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Hung parliament now the overwhelming GE15 favourite on the
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Hung parliament now the overwhelming GE15 favourite on the Betfair exchange
On one level the rise of UKIP and to a lesser extent the Greens changes very little when trying to work out the coming election. The main fights are in LAB-CON battlegrounds where, conventionally, all that matters is the gap between the two main parties. You just leave aside others and focus on the blue and red shares.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
http://newstonoone.blogspot.co.uk/2014/11/the-snp-battleground-in-november-2014.html
Tomorrow's piece, fortunately, should be less taxing on my remaining grey cells.
Rother Valley hopefully...
Some others are in for Dudley North, Walsall South etc.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2789512/record-poll-surge-gives-ukip-25-survey-hand-farage-astonishing-128-mps-puts-ed-miliband-new-low.html
http://www.longitudeprize.org/challenge/antibiotics
In order to tackle growing levels of antimicrobial resistance, the challenge set for the Longitude Prize is to create a cost-effective, accurate, rapid and easy-to-use test for bacterial infections that will allow health professionals worldwide to administer the right antibiotics at the right time.
But, as shadsy notes, Labour are currently only favourites to lose 3 seats to the SNP - most of their gains are from the LDs.
If punters' feelings are based on voter dissatisfaction but they underestimate the tendency of FPTP to deliver someone a majority, is the betting value in betting against NOM?
http://www.comres.co.uk/poll/1293/sunday-mirror-independent-on-sunday-poll.htm
*Perhaps the Good Lord will be able to shed further light...
In an attempt to downplay the significance of welfare, all these kind of numbers are being drawn out.
Tell taxpayers they are paying £20bn a year for public sector workers' pensions.
That's over £700 per private sector worker.
But if they lose 13 up there that is a different matter.
All modelling expects a Tory comeback from here, and the mechanism is fairly obvious (reversing losses to UKIP, picking up some of the Labour vote that prefer DC to EM). I'm at a bit of a loss as to where a Labour comeback is going to come from. Squeezing the Green vote seems the best shot.
What's better value? 8/15 Tories most votes with Ladbrokes, or 6/5 Tories most seats on betfair?
I don't think 8-15 Tories most votes is value at present for sure.
Think I'll wait and see on this one, I get the feeling the Labour slide could well halt at parity or slightly below - just a gut feeling that.
http://labourlist.org/2014/09/the-top-100-ukip-leaning-labour-seats/
They don't even have a seat on the Rhondda Council which is 60/75 Labour.
Can't see it myself !
This election is going to be fascinating. So many known unknowns - there's going to be a hell of a lot of longshots that come in, and short priced favourites which lose. I think the key to making money is figuring out the dynamic, and then looking at how it will play out in various seats.
UKIP seem to have stumbled upon a lot of sympathy/support in the labour heartlands, but will these people actually vote? Can ukip realistically develop an effective GOTV operation in such a short time? Can UKIP harness this support without losing their support in the Tory heartlands?
I dunno.
Anyway, from a punting perspective, one bet I'd like to see offered by the bookies is an SNP/UKIP seats match bet. Right now, the SNP would be heavy favourites, but that may change considerably as the election nears.
The problem being that already the UKIP policy proposals in many cases are more attractive to Traditional Tories than the Tory alternatives and UKIP do not suffer from having a track record of being so terribly 'liberal'. In a lot of cases the reason UKIP are out Torying the Tories (Immigration, Aid, Energy etc) is because of the Tories clinging to EU membership. UKIP's big advantage is they are not constrained in their policy making by EU diktat.
It's as if the Tories intend to go into the election with both hands tied behind their back. The only way I can see they will succeed in getting large numbers of former Tories to return at this stage is if the MSM conspire to suppress UKIP's policy offering during the campaign or something goes very wrong for UKIP.
That said, if I was thinking of betting on this then I probably wouldn't back NOM, but I would decide which party I thought would be most likely to have most seats and lay the chances of the other party on winning a majority.
That is rather misleading, because Prime Ministers usually have negative ratings. That's because they actually have to do things and make difficult decisions, whereas opposition leaders have a much easier job - they can pick and choose what issues to highlight, and they can avoid the hard stuff. The striking figure isn't Cameron's rating (which is well within the range of the ratings of Blair and Thatcher excluding the Falklands effect and the Blair honeymoon), but Miliband's, which is down there with the Duncan Smith and Hague ratings when they were opposition leaders:
http://www.slideshare.net/IpsosMORI/ipsos-mori-political-monitor-october-2014/1
On that type of result, Labour would have lost roughly 9% of vote share in 1/12th of the UK, meaning that its national vote share would have dropped by under 1%. So we would not see any great increase in Labour vote efficiency.
As with many others on here, I haven't a clue as to what's going to happen next May. The last time both elements of the duopoly lost support at an election was February 1974 when both Heath and Wilson lost ground to Thorpe's Liberals and the Nationalists.
That huge shift in vote share wasn't reflected in seats as the Liberals and Nationalists only gained 14 seats while Labour, despite losing vote share, actually gained 20 seats.
So it's entirely possible to lose vote share and gain seats. The nadirs for the duopoly in terms of seats (1997 for the Tories and 1983 for Labour) were the result of the other side being dominant. Feb 1974 showed what could happen if neither were dominant.
I think it entirely possible Labour could go to 27% and still gain seats but only IF the Conservatives are around 30%. UKIP can tear chunks out of everyone's vote but still come out with very little - I would posit that at 20% UKIP might win say 10-12 seats. Conversely, the LD vote, while it will disintegrate in hundreds of constituencies, may prove resilient enough to hold on to 30 seats even on 10-12%.
Throw in the conundrum of Scotland and you see the fogbanks of uncertainty hiding the iceberg of disaster for the unwary punter.
OGH's view has long been Labour most seats, Conservative most votes and that's probably still on the cards though the permutations of future Government remain even more elusive.
In any case you can reverse the question. Why should these two groups, who are demographically very different and are switching for different motives, behave in the same way?
IMO This is the biggest unknown of the election; we simply don't know the extent to which the huge chunk of UKIP support currently in the polls will stay with UKIP, disappear like the Cleggasm, or return to Labour and/or the Tories.
FWIW my hunch is that, starting from where we are now, the movement will benefit the Tories (which doesn't of course mean that in aggregate UKIP are not harming the Tories), as ex-Conservative voters swing back more than ex-Labour voters. But I fear the effect won't be enough.
This must be the must fragmented election in living memory, surely?
Even better, a spreadbet...
SPIN? Spreadex? Are you lurking?
Con 33.5%
Lab 27.9%
LD 17.1%
UKIP ??
ignoring any house bias.
20–21 May YouGov/The Sun 27%
19–21 May Opinium/Daily Mail 32%
19–20 May Survation/Mirror 32%
19–20 May YouGov/The Sun 27%
18–19 May YouGov/The Sun 24%
15–19 May TNS 1,217 31%
16–18 May ComRes/ITV News 33%
15–16 May YouGov/Sunday Times 26%
13–16 May Opinium/Daily Mail 31%
14–15 May ICM/Sunday Telegraph 25%
14–15 May ComRes/Sunday Mirror/Independent on Sunday 35%
Unless my maths is wrong:
6 polls over-stated UKIP
5 polls tied with actual result or under-stated
Let's consider (2). The LibDems seem likely to lose seats, but how many? Ladbrokes' favoured band is winning 21-30 seats, so 31 is a plausible number of losses -- could be more, could be fewer. (I'm only going with Ladbrokes numbers as they were easy to find!) The Greens, despite better national polling, on individual constituency polling look likely to win no seats, losing Brighton. Northern Ireland is Northern Ireland. Let's presume Plaid are flat-lining, as polls suggest. On the other hand, UKIP seem likely to gain seats, but, again, how many? 1? 2? Considerably more? Ladbrokes betting suggests 9. And the SNP seem even more likely to gain seats, but how many? Ladbrokes have 16-20 and 21-25 as joint favourite, so let's guess 21 seats, which would be a gain of 15.
So, all-other-parties could be 32 seats down at the next general election from LibDem & Green losses. Are UKIP and the SNP going to gain 33 seats between them? Current betting suggests maybe 24 gains. So, all-other-parties would be down 8 seats.
In other words, even with terrible poll ratings, Lab and Con between them could have 8 more seats next time around, which would make NOM that little bit less likely.
If UKIP only win 2 seats (seems plausible), SNP gains are more limited (let's say 8) and the LibDems lose more (let's say 37), then all-other-parties could easily be down 28 seats on the last election. That would make NOM quite a bit less likely. On the other hand, if UKIP and SNP make bigger gains, the Greens hold Brighton and LibDems stem losses, then all-other-parties could be maybe 10 seats ahead...? Which would make NOM that bit more likely.
Rochester & Strood will be informative in its way.
ENP 5.4, and that included Sinn Fein/whole of Ireland...
Rand Paul combines a dull manner with a Ukip-like insurgent appeal, and it could lead him to presidential candidacy: http://specc.ie/1wGUBwG
"Throw in the conundrum of Scotland and you see the fogbanks of uncertainty hiding the iceberg of disaster for the unwary punter."
Good grief, my dear Stodgy, have you been on a creative writing course?!
Must say I am wholly in agreement with your sentiments though. It is very easy to construct wholly plausible scenarios in which not only does no Party have a Majority, but it is also very difficult to envisage what two-Party coalition might ensure.
Minority Government? Rainbow Coalition?
Buggered if I know.
David Lloyd George 13.4%
De Valera 4.8%
Adamson 21.5%
N/A Cons 5.9%
Asquith 13.3%
No overall majority, Coalition Conservatives Most seats, Coalition Con-LD Gov't.
1922
Junior Gov't partner Lloyd George takes a shellacking at the next election, Cons achieve a majority in their own right... Labour improve but not by enough. Ireland out the equation.
2015 will be no different, unless you think Labour are going to have a lead of 8.5%...
Cameron saw his ratings steadily decline, but they then recovered to be better than when he started and thereafter remained in positive territory. Broadly speaking Miliband initially followed a Cameron pattern. His ratings declined, but he then managed to create a recovery. Unlike Cameron, before he could regain a positive balance the trend reversed again, down to Hague-like levels.
This raises the question of what Miliband did right in the period when he dragged his ratings back up, and how he managed to blow it. Of course, it could simply be a reflection of the perceived economic competence of the government.
Miliband's purple patch roughly coincides with the Omnishambles budget, and his subsequent decline with the improving state of the economy. Cameron's rebound is clearly tied to Brown bottling the 2007 election and the subsequent economic crash. The economy was generally doing well while IDS and Hague struggled in Opposition, and Blair became Labour leader after the government's reputation for economic competence was torn to ribbons by the shambolic exit from the ERM.
Maybe there was nothing that Miliband could have done to have made his position better.
Hidden under the numbers so to speak as it was almost an irrelevance to the UKIP surge but think there definitely was a swing to Labour in H&M and Clacton.
Mr. Me, might just be the very bad 2012 budget and its aftermath coinciding with the calm before the UKIP storm began. Also worth considering the Scottish situation.
In short, Miliband just happened to be around when the Conservatives cocked up the 45% tax rate (and were aided by an idiotic media over the pasty tax) but was helpless to resist when things turned against him.
Ergo, there will be swingback...
It might be a way to get a sort of Grand Coalition of Labour and Conservatives without the leaders of the respective parties actually having to do the deed themselves - the Ministry lead from the Lords would simply have to avoid uniting both of the largest parties in the Commons against it.
Go back to Newark and Labour lost 4.7%, or only a 2.1% Con->Lab swing. Wynthenshawe saw Labour gain 11.2% for a 11.1% Con->Lab swing. In South Shields, they lost 1.6% for a 4.3% Con->Lab swing. And if it has any meaning at all, in Eastleigh, there was a 7.1% Con->Lab swing.
I was at Newmarket on Friday and Kempton yesterday and two different days in terms of weather and punting would be harder to imagine. Glorious sunshine on Friday but had to be taken out on a stretcher suffering from haemorrhaging wallet.
Yesterday I needed a security guard to carry the winnings which just about offset Friday's losses and I missed backing Ryan Moore this morning.
The only certain outcome I have for next year is that East Ham will be a Labour Hold.
Forward looking economic indicators look great for the UK. That relentless Labour slide I and Dan Hodges predicted is all set to continue. Saudi attempts to take out the US shale patch couldn't have been timed better.
I remember in 2008 being told to distraction on another forum that Ron Paul would be the nominee after a brokered convention, and automatically think that would appear to be unlikely.
That said, nothing will ever top the Santorum surge for amusement and profit.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/11207306/Griff-Rhys-Jones-should-pack-up-and-p-off-over-mansion-tax-says-Bonnie-Greer.html
Winning party gets 26%, and every else, only a gnat's fart away from winning.
http://tinyurl.com/PJAndDuncanWereUnderated
Labour 32.0% (-3.3)
Conservative 29.9% (-10.5)
UKIP 27.0% (+23.8)
Greens 5.0% (+4.2)
Lib Dems 4.0% (-12.8)
Others 2.1% (-1.3)
Labour take the seat with a 3.6% swing from the Conservatives.
NOM Lab biggest party
http://electionforecast.co.uk/
If not, are UKIP no longer toxic with the left? Is Farage preferable to Cameron?
The Tories may be the least worst option in some places for the left-inclined voter. It was certainly presented that way in Newark.
Labour would likely have made some losses to the SNP so even given the pick ups from the Tories and Lib Dems would not be ahead on seats. Perhaps c.275 seats. The Lib Dems would likely be sub-30 seats, making it impossible to form a stable majority coalition with the Tories (although I wouldn't totally rule it out) and Cameron gets first dibs as the incumbent Prime Minister.
It's for that reason I backed a Conservative minority government on Ladbrokes a month ago at 10/1, which i thought a very good price. I'm starting to think that might actually now happen.