Categories
Options
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » On current polling the Tories will, surely, suffer net loss
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » On current polling the Tories will, surely, suffer net losses of more than 18 seats
Given the polling showing number of CON held seats with majorities up to 7.8% seeing LAB leads, the threat from UKIP, and the stickiness of the yellows in CON-LD battles then securing 285 MPs seems a big ask. That’s a net loss of just 18 on where the blues stand at the moment.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
He is voter repellant......
However, punters are not betting on the basis of the current snapshot, but on their expectations of how things might change in the next few months.
Those expectations might be wrong (in either direction), of course.
Base number of 303 + c12 Lib Dem gains = 315 (there may be the odd Labour seat too - Itchen) minus 35 losses to a falling Labour (usually overstated by the polls when real results come in) and a few Kippers in addition to Reckless & Carswell.
280-285 seems very plausible.
(In fact I seem to haver moved the market down a point. Sorry folks.)
Must admit, if the eurozone did collapse in the next few months it'd be sooner than I would've expected.
On the plus side, collapse pre-fiscal integration would make it, whilst economically traumatic, much less horrendous than trying to disentangle a superstate's grasping tentacles.
But be aware that in doing so you are ignoring the polls, and a punter who does so is rather like a sailor who ignores the ship's instruments.
I'm still sweet NOM, but I'd much rather be on a Tory Majority than a Labour Majority [at much the same price]. Labour aren't even getting a majority on current polling and they've been in opposition - to two parties! - for 4½ years!
1) Pollster inaccuracy compared to election results in 2014 suggests that the Tories do a bit better than the polls, while Labour do worse;
2) Pollster results when Miliband and cameron are named. YG had a 3 point Tory lead last time;
3) The long term trend since Feb/March 2013 is for the lead to erode at about 0.4-0.5 a month. Five months to go.;
It's also worth keeping an eye on the apparent change of heart among 2010 LDs - the shift to Labour seems to be declining, while Labour vote retention is in decline.
Also, watch the London numbers. Labour's 10 day average in London is now down to 36.8. They polled 36.6% in 2010. The downward drift could conceivably be related to fears of property taxes aimed almost exclusively at London as the polling drop has set in since the autumn.
What we should all do is bet against what we want to happen. Then if events don't go the way we want we at least win some money to compensate.
(And yes I know that OGH and hardened PBers arrange to win money whatever happens, but most punters probably aren't so dedicated)
I'm not sure that the evidence of Governments recovering is quite as unequivocal as you suggest. Recovery depends on events and in the absence of clear signs to the contrary I'd be inclined to assume they will be broadly neutral.
That is called emotional hedging, and is one of the muggiest things to do in gambling.. Bookies pension
That way value lies..... :-)
The fixed term parliament and the fact there are two government parties complicates things further when looking at the past.
Dr. Prasannan, not much disposable cash, alas.
Was very surprised to find that the bet-and-forget income for 2014 (just race/qualifying, discounting title bets) was pretty much the same as the very enjoyable 2012 season. Hedging income was half as much, give or take, but still green.
In political betting, you have no choice but to use your judgement. A simple reading-through of the current polls to the final result is as big an error as ignoring the polls.
That's why the Fisher model is so useful, as it tells us how much swing from here would be a reasonable guesstimate based on past performance (answer: quite a lot still, plus or minus 6.7% at 95% confidence levels).
Also the Electionforecast model:
http://www.electionforecast.co.uk/#information
Their central forecast is currently Con 281 Lab 278 LD 28 SNP 37 UKIP 3 Plaid 3 Green 1, which is compatible with the SPIN prices on the Conservatives but indicates that Labour are a Sell (and the SNP a screaming buy).
Faites vos jeux, mesdames et messieurs.
The current political position is so like 1982 and 1991 and UKIP is the new SDP without the policies or class of leadership. Miliband will prove to be less successful than Michael Foot.
All I'm saying is that you should look at the polls and assume that events between now and May will be broadly neutral. Anything else is guesswork, or wishful thinking.
Now that the by-elections and Autumn Statement are out of the way, I see no major events which are clearly likely to tip the balance, except eventually the debates. So I think a 'straight' reading of recent form is the best indicator of where to put the money down,
"Miliband will prove to be less successful than Michael Foot. "
Well get stuck in there!
Please. As big as you can afford. There will be no shortage of takers, I promise.
In my judgement the most likely changes from the polls now are a net drift from Labour to the Conservatives, a falling back of UKIP, and a fall in the SNP share towards Scottish Labour. I'm pretty confident in this forecast (other perhaps than the UKIP bit), but what I don't know is how big these effects will be.
Swingback isn't just about events and economic data; it's the difference between protesting against the government of the day and deciding who you want to form the next one. The focus will change.
I can't argue with Mike's headline - but all the evidence we do have [models, betting markets, NewsSense™] suggests that May's polling will be more favourable to the Tories than current polling. The question is: by how much?
Ed Miliband on TV every day for 6 weeks counts as a 'big event' and not in a good way...
Bless the SNP and UKIP?
A: I do know that in every GE since at least WW2, after the GE where they lost power, their vote share drops.
So if history repeats Labour's vote share at the next GE "should" end up in the 25% to 28% range.
This far out from the GE, a vote share dropping to that level is very plausible. The unknown question then becomes where the Conservative vote share will be? 32%, 33%, 34% or 35%?
Sometimes this stuff is all so difficult.
http://order-order.com/2014/12/05/green-surge-libdems-slump-to-fifth-place/
Whilst I think Mr. Tapestry may have overestimated the electoral impact of fracking, I wonder if that's the reason behind the Greens doing well, or if the mainstream parties being seen as rubbish is just seeing them benefit as per others.
NickP reports back regularly from footslogging around Broxtowe and he has consistently stated for a long while now that nothing is happening out there - nothing at all. Both main Parties' core support is solid. Nothing is shifting.
And you guys say that this will change when the GE looms looms large? Well, maybe, but that sounds to me just a little bit like the WW1 Generals predicting an imminent breakthrough.
Could be right, of course....
It's a bit the boy who cried wolf. Just because the lupine menace hasn't been seen prowling about doesn't mean the wolf won't be there one day.
But the Village Idiot he ain't, and the polls suggest that if the public don't like him they are nevertheless still inclined to vote for the Party - at least in sufficient numbers for it to be EICIPM.
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/voting-intention-2
I don't think that he's spinning us a line, but I do think there's an element of wishful thinking.
The debates could help Miliband, provided he doesn't have a disaster.
Still no confirmation on how (or even if) they'll proceed, though.
I could be wrong but I time an initial spurt after the Euros (and beating the Lib Dems there), there was a surge in membership in Scotland after the referendum and one in the rest of the UK after the Greens were excluded from the broadcasters' plans for debates (hundreds of thousands of people signed petitions about that raising profile greatly).
Tip...How about holding Farage to account on his policies, and often lack of them, and how lots of things are as simple as you he likes to make out.
They wouldn't want to attack Farage on policy as it would highlight that Dave hardly has any and Ed has none. Zilch. Zero. Diddly squat.
A very interesting piece of detection.
My general response is that his perceived rubbishness must surely be largely built into the current poll numbers and, in fact, isn't it more likely that his personal ratings will get better, not worse - just because there's not much room for them to fall any further.
I looked back at 1983 to back up my argument, but it looks like Labour were generally polling around 33% at this stage before the election, only to wind up with 27%. Oh well.
What % of people selling Con are people who don't vote Con?
What % of people buying Con are people who do vote Con?
99% of people on here just think that what they personally want to happen will indeed actually happen.
I guess it's just wishful thinking / thinking that what they want to happen "should" happen and that voters will ultimately do the "right" thing in their eyes so it will "actually" happen.
The only prediction posts worth reading are where a supporter of Party X thinks Party X will do worse than expected.
https://www.betfair.com/exchange/#/politics/event/26589827/market?marketId=1.101416490
Crossover imminent...
The MLS (Major League Soccer) Cup Final is to take place at 3pm next Sunday live on ESPN.
Sunday is the NFL juggernaut's time. The early games finish between 3.30-4.00pm. The late games start at 4.00-4.25pm.
The NFL totally dominates. There could not be a worse time slot for this game, even if it is Landon Donovan's last game.
The ratings will be dreadful. This is a self-inflicted wound.
Soccer will not take off in the US until there is a credible domestic product. Currently it is unwatchable and there is no money in it.
Of course I do realise we are not dealing with rationality, but in the final analysis will the seats really turn out as predicted??
Secondly, the European elections frankly might have reminded a lot of people just of the Green Party's mere existence. Maybe a lot of people who always had Greenish views a year ago just didn't occur to them that voting Green was an option, but then they got a burst of publicity with the European elections and maybe just thought to themselves "hmm, you know what, why not".
They could also be a right pain in the arse for Labour, depending on where they stand. Again, a Green candidate in every marginal Labour seat could cause disproportionate pain to Labour.
The counter argument would be that most people don't follow politics at all closely and when they answer a how will you vote polling question at the moment they aren't thinking that Labour = Miliband.
After a GE campaign with Miliband on TV every day they (or at least most people) will be much more aware that Labour = Miliband so some will be less likely to vote Labour.
That sort of ties in to a YouGov a few weeks back which had a Con 3% lead with the leaders named in an otherwise standard voting intention question.
My central forecast would be a smaller figure - 20 to 25. However, I think the SNP are a Buy on the spreads because there is a reasonable possibility that they'll do a lot better than the current buy price of 22, and I don't see much risk that they'll do a lot worse. Also, Scottish Labour are not exactly on best fighting form at the moment. But do your own research!