I've just put a lump on Zac at 5/4 with William Hill - even though I'll be doing my damnest to help the LibDems win (I'm out with the first delivery tomorrow).
Remember Zac had a 23,000 majority.
My reasoning is as follows:
20% probability that Richmond Tory Association will chose a Tory to stand against Zac in which case probability of LibDem win is 80%+.
If no Tory stands against Zac then probability of LibDem win in my opinion is about 25% based on analysis of potential Lab and Green squeeze, plus Tory switchers because of Brexit, and LHR.
So overall probability of LibDem win is 20% x 80% + 80% x 25% i.e. about 36%.
I think 5/4 on Zac is excellent value at the moment.
The odds will change on Thursday when the local Tory Association makes known their decision.
I don;t know if anyone follows Zero hedge but they are running a report on possible voting irregularities in Texas
One tweeter posted over 100 documented reports of voter fraud - its endemic. Check out MicroSpookyLeaks https://twitter.com/wdfx2eu7
Philadelphia's the most outrageous site of Dem electoral corruption. In many voting districts in 2012 Obama got 100 % of the vote to Romney's 0 %. Makes Tower Hamlets and North Korea look honest. I can see Hillary hitting 125 % in some neighborhoods.
Dear Lord, every US election since Bush vs Gore both sides have accused each other of electoral fraud/fiddling the vote machines/intimidation etc. It's as big a tradition as Thanksgiving and Halloween. You're beginning to sound as tinfoilhatty as Ms P.
Mayor Daley knew a thing or two about voting.
Made all the difference between President Nixon and President Kennedy in 1960. Every little counts.
Urban myth. Kennedy would have won even if Illinois had gone the other way.
Unlike Joe Kennedy to waste money " Don't buy a single vote more than necessary. I'll be damned if I'm going to pay for a landslide."
I don;t know if anyone follows Zero hedge but they are running a report on possible voting irregularities in Texas
One tweeter posted over 100 documented reports of voter fraud - its endemic. Check out MicroSpookyLeaks https://twitter.com/wdfx2eu7
Philadelphia's the most outrageous site of Dem electoral corruption. In many voting districts in 2012 Obama got 100 % of the vote to Romney's 0 %. Makes Tower Hamlets and North Korea look honest. I can see Hillary hitting 125 % in some neighborhoods.
Dear Lord, every US election since Bush vs Gore both sides have accused each other of electoral fraud/fiddling the vote machines/intimidation etc. It's as big a tradition as Thanksgiving and Halloween. You're beginning to sound as tinfoilhatty as Ms P.
Mayor Daley knew a thing or two about voting.
Made all the difference between President Nixon and President Kennedy in 1960. Every little counts.
Urban myth. Kennedy would have won even if Illinois had gone the other way.
The charge at the time was that Kennedy fixed both Illinois AND Texas.
Con 1: We shouldn't do anything to assist the FibDems - like splitting the Tory vote. Like · Reply · 1 · 2 hrs Con 2 If Zac stands as an independent it is he who is splitting the Tory vote.
If Zak stands as an independent Con have to field their own candidate (that would be the difference with David Davis who remained a Con candidate in 2008)
Yes, it will probably give the Lib-Dems the seat but there's a principle at stake and a clear message needs to be sent to other MP's how fancy flouncing off for whatever reason...
F1: hmm, the circuit's got more straights than I thought.
I still dislike the new official F1 site, but will give it praise for the onboard pole lap from last year, which is useful. Fair bit of twisty stuff too, but a couple of long straights will be the prime opportunity for overtaking.
Only 4 retirements last year. Hard to use a single instance as a sample size, but that's pretty low.
I should stress all the below is just idle musing, not tips.
Perez at 200/1 each way to win (top 2) is interesting. He did rather well at Monaco, is good at street circuits and has the right engine for the straights.
Red Bull at 6 to top score was something I considered before seeing the straights. That said, there may be value as the Mercedes does not like running in traffic and the Red Bull was close to matching the Silver Arrows last time out.
Ricciardo to lead lap 1 at 10 is a bit self-explanatory.
Perez for a podium is 15. Similar to the above each way winner bet, though my issue with both is the degree of luck required for this to come off. Even given he's got a good car and likes street circuits, at best his car is 4th fastest. But then, that's why it's 15.
Williams, double points finish 2.75. Perhaps a little tight, but on pace they should be able to do it. A problem with such tight odds and the double nature is that it only takes one of them to bugger it up.
I've just put a lump on Zac at 5/4 with William Hill - even though I'll be doing my damnest to help the LibDems win (I'm out with the first delivery tomorrow).
Remember Zac had a 23,000 majority.
My reasoning is as follows:
20% probability that Richmond Tory Association will chose a Tory to stand against Zac in which case probability of LibDem win is 80%+.
If no Tory stands against Zac then probability of LibDem win in my opinion is about 25% based on analysis of potential Lab and Green squeeze, plus Tory switchers because of Brexit, and LHR.
So overall probability of LibDem win is 20% x 80% + 80% x 25% i.e. about 36%.
I think 5/4 on Zac is excellent value at the moment.
The odds will change on Thursday when the local Tory Association makes known their decision.
Betting against your own side.
Just as well you aren't a footballer or cricketer.
I don;t know if anyone follows Zero hedge but they are running a report on possible voting irregularities in Texas
One tweeter posted over 100 documented reports of voter fraud - its endemic. Check out MicroSpookyLeaks https://twitter.com/wdfx2eu7
Philadelphia's the most outrageous site of Dem electoral corruption. In many voting districts in 2012 Obama got 100 % of the vote to Romney's 0 %. Makes Tower Hamlets and North Korea look honest. I can see Hillary hitting 125 % in some neighborhoods.
Dear Lord, every US election since Bush vs Gore both sides have accused each other of electoral fraud/fiddling the vote machines/intimidation etc. It's as big a tradition as Thanksgiving and Halloween. You're beginning to sound as tinfoilhatty as Ms P.
Mayor Daley knew a thing or two about voting.
Made all the difference between President Nixon and President Kennedy in 1960. Every little counts.
Urban myth. Kennedy would have won even if Illinois had gone the other way.
Unlike Joe Kennedy to waste money " Don't buy a single vote more than necessary. I'll be damned if I'm going to pay for a landslide."
Contrary to legend, he wasn't sure of the result in advance, then.
F1: hmm, the circuit's got more straights than I thought.
I still dislike the new official F1 site, but will give it praise for the onboard pole lap from last year, which is useful. Fair bit of twisty stuff too, but a couple of long straights will be the prime opportunity for overtaking.
Only 4 retirements last year. Hard to use a single instance as a sample size, but that's pretty low.
I should stress all the below is just idle musing, not tips.
Perez at 200/1 each way to win (top 2) is interesting. He did rather well at Monaco, is good at street circuits and has the right engine for the straights.
Red Bull at 6 to top score was something I considered before seeing the straights. That said, there may be value as the Mercedes does not like running in traffic and the Red Bull was close to matching the Silver Arrows last time out.
Ricciardo to lead lap 1 at 10 is a bit self-explanatory.
Perez for a podium is 15. Similar to the above each way winner bet, though my issue with both is the degree of luck required for this to come off. Even given he's got a good car and likes street circuits, at best his car is 4th fastest. But then, that's why it's 15.
Williams, double points finish 2.75. Perhaps a little tight, but on pace they should be able to do it. A problem with such tight odds and the double nature is that it only takes one of them to bugger it up.
360 kph straight; the Merc engined cars have a decent advantage, then.
So, a LibDem elected to replace Zac is going to stop Brexit in its tracks is it?
Hur hur hur.....
Will they have the decency to resign and cause a by-election if they fail to do so? If not, they are just a hypocrite.
You've really got it in for the LDs at the moment, haven't you ?
Little rattled after Witney perhaps...
Nothing new. I've always got it in for the LibDems. They have always been the most obnoxious bunch of shits.
I find Labour quite decent folk by comparison.
My experience is that political activists all get on with each other when delivering leaflets or at the count. If anything it is the activists against the rest of the population who don't participate.
I've just put a lump on Zac at 5/4 with William Hill - even though I'll be doing my damnest to help the LibDems win (I'm out with the first delivery tomorrow).
Remember Zac had a 23,000 majority.
My reasoning is as follows:
20% probability that Richmond Tory Association will chose a Tory to stand against Zac in which case probability of LibDem win is 80%+.
If no Tory stands against Zac then probability of LibDem win in my opinion is about 25% based on analysis of potential Lab and Green squeeze, plus Tory switchers because of Brexit, and LHR.
So overall probability of LibDem win is 20% x 80% + 80% x 25% i.e. about 36%.
I think 5/4 on Zac is excellent value at the moment.
The odds will change on Thursday when the local Tory Association makes known their decision.
Betting against your own side.
Just as well you aren't a footballer or cricketer.
My head always beats my heart. That's why I won on Brexit, - though with Hillary, head and heart coincide.
But I hope Zac loses, even though I like and respect him. This about sending a message to the Government - it's emphatically not about Zac.
Mr. B, yes... although Ferrari are damned close (but will lose out in the twisty bit) and Renault are ok too (and may well be faster in the twisty bit).
I don;t know if anyone follows Zero hedge but they are running a report on possible voting irregularities in Texas
One tweeter posted over 100 documented reports of voter fraud - its endemic. Check out MicroSpookyLeaks https://twitter.com/wdfx2eu7
Philadelphia's the most outrageous site of Dem electoral corruption. In many voting districts in 2012 Obama got 100 % of the vote to Romney's 0 %. Makes Tower Hamlets and North Korea look honest. I can see Hillary hitting 125 % in some neighborhoods.
Dear Lord, every US election since Bush vs Gore both sides have accused each other of electoral fraud/fiddling the vote machines/intimidation etc. It's as big a tradition as Thanksgiving and Halloween. You're beginning to sound as tinfoilhatty as Ms P.
100% to 0 % is in grotesque bad taste. You must agree to that, whatsoever your nonchalance to electoral fraud.
Oh dear, "Additional note for GOP conspiracy theorists/voter fraud types: there were numerous (mostly rather small, the largest I saw had 40 votes for Romney) precincts across Louisiana (and elsewhere) in which President Obama received 0 votes; again, not a conspiracy/voter fraud, but showing just how little support Obama got in many deep South/rural white precincts. Here's a list of some of these precincts:"
As others have already stated, the only significant issue in Richmond is whether the LibDems can win.
All in all, it's a bunch of well-to-do West/South West Londoners with atypical views having a dust up over an airport. It's no more relevant to wider Britain than Corbyn and the Greens having a set-to over guacamole in Islington North.
I don;t know if anyone follows Zero hedge but they are running a report on possible voting irregularities in Texas
One tweeter posted over 100 documented reports of voter fraud - its endemic. Check out MicroSpookyLeaks https://twitter.com/wdfx2eu7
Philadelphia's the most outrageous site of Dem electoral corruption. In many voting districts in 2012 Obama got 100 % of the vote to Romney's 0 %. Makes Tower Hamlets and North Korea look honest. I can see Hillary hitting 125 % in some neighborhoods.
Dear Lord, every US election since Bush vs Gore both sides have accused each other of electoral fraud/fiddling the vote machines/intimidation etc. It's as big a tradition as Thanksgiving and Halloween. You're beginning to sound as tinfoilhatty as Ms P.
100% to 0 % is in grotesque bad taste. You must agree to that, whatsoever your nonchalance to electoral fraud.
Oh dear, "Additional note for GOP conspiracy theorists/voter fraud types: there were numerous (mostly rather small, the largest I saw had 40 votes for Romney) precincts across Louisiana (and elsewhere) in which President Obama received 0 votes; again, not a conspiracy/voter fraud, but showing just how little support Obama got in many deep South/rural white precincts. Here's a list of some of these precincts:"
I've just put a lump on Zac at 5/4 with William Hill - even though I'll be doing my damnest to help the LibDems win (I'm out with the first delivery tomorrow).
Remember Zac had a 23,000 majority.
My reasoning is as follows:
20% probability that Richmond Tory Association will chose a Tory to stand against Zac in which case probability of LibDem win is 80%+.
If no Tory stands against Zac then probability of LibDem win in my opinion is about 25% based on analysis of potential Lab and Green squeeze, plus Tory switchers because of Brexit, and LHR.
So overall probability of LibDem win is 20% x 80% + 80% x 25% i.e. about 36%.
I think 5/4 on Zac is excellent value at the moment.
The odds will change on Thursday when the local Tory Association makes known their decision.
You should also consider the possibility that there is a Con candidate and that it *is* Zac.
I don;t know if anyone follows Zero hedge but they are running a report on possible voting irregularities in Texas
One tweeter posted over 100 documented reports of voter fraud - its endemic. Check out MicroSpookyLeaks https://twitter.com/wdfx2eu7
Philadelphia's the most outrageous site of Dem electoral corruption. In many voting districts in 2012 Obama got 100 % of the vote to Romney's 0 %. Makes Tower Hamlets and North Korea look honest. I can see Hillary hitting 125 % in some neighborhoods.
Dear Lord, every US election since Bush vs Gore both sides have accused each other of electoral fraud/fiddling the vote machines/intimidation etc. It's as big a tradition as Thanksgiving and Halloween. You're beginning to sound as tinfoilhatty as Ms P.
100% to 0 % is in grotesque bad taste. You must agree to that, whatsoever your nonchalance to electoral fraud.
Oh dear, "Additional note for GOP conspiracy theorists/voter fraud types: there were numerous (mostly rather small, the largest I saw had 40 votes for Romney) precincts across Louisiana (and elsewhere) in which President Obama received 0 votes; again, not a conspiracy/voter fraud, but showing just how little support Obama got in many deep South/rural white precincts. Here's a list of some of these precincts:"
Odd. Betfair have a Richmond market with both Zac and 'Conservative' as possible winners, but nothing in the rules to indicate what happens if Zac is the Conservative.
Mr. B, yes... although Ferrari are damned close (but will lose out in the twisty bit) and Renault are ok too (and may well be faster in the twisty bit).
FWIW, I wouldn't be too surprised if the Ferraris finish in from of the Bulls (though there is the added puzzle of which power plant suffers most/least from the high altitude, which is probably down to the efficiency of the regenerative bits). And the huge start straight means Vettel really should avoid his now habitual first corner squabbles... and a poor getaway from the start line is recoverable.
I will be disgusted if the Tories do not have a candidate standing against Zac if he is not the Tory candidate. He may be of course.
From Mrs May's POV this is too good a chance to lose one of the potentially awkward squad to miss. Zac is far too independent minded already. Comes of not needing the money I suspect.
I don;t know if anyone follows Zero hedge but they are running a report on possible voting irregularities in Texas
One tweeter posted over 100 documented reports of voter fraud - its endemic. Check out MicroSpookyLeaks https://twitter.com/wdfx2eu7
Philadelphia's the most outrageous site of Dem electoral corruption. In many voting districts in 2012 Obama got 100 % of the vote to Romney's 0 %. Makes Tower Hamlets and North Korea look honest. I can see Hillary hitting 125 % in some neighborhoods.
Dear Lord, every US election since Bush vs Gore both sides have accused each other of electoral fraud/fiddling the vote machines/intimidation etc. It's as big a tradition as Thanksgiving and Halloween. You're beginning to sound as tinfoilhatty as Ms P.
Mayor Daley knew a thing or two about voting.
Made all the difference between President Nixon and President Kennedy in 1960. Every little counts.
Urban myth. Kennedy would have won even if Illinois had gone the other way.
The charge at the time was that Kennedy fixed both Illinois AND Texas.
I always thought that Texas was delivered by LBJ. One way or another. Pretty much why he was on the ticket.
I don't think it had occurred to Labour that someone might ask them today whether they support or oppose the widely-anticipated government decision.
For Lab you'd have thought it should be a fairly easy decision to support. Although they could have additionally stated that more investment needed to be put into airports in the midlands, north and devolveds.
So, a LibDem elected to replace Zac is going to stop Brexit in its tracks is it?
Hur hur hur.....
Will they have the decency to resign and cause a by-election if they fail to do so? If not, they are just a hypocrite.
You've really got it in for the LDs at the moment, haven't you ?
Little rattled after Witney perhaps...
Nothing new. I've always got it in for the LibDems. They have always been the most obnoxious bunch of shits.
I find Labour quite decent folk by comparison.
My experience is that political activists all get on with each other when delivering leaflets or at the count. If anything it is the activists against the rest of the population who don't participate.
Generally, yes, though there's a minority of messianic types who believe that all other parties and their supporters are evil and who are out to evangelise / demonise at any given opportunity.
This is London. Unlike Witney, the media will be watching.
The Lib Dems have to turn it into a default referendum on Brexit. If they can get their narrative straight, they could get some monentum up.
The only problem is that their narrative is not straight. Aren't they calling for another referendum? I don't think there's much appetite for that. Instead, they need to apply full force to fighting for a soft Brexit, making a bogeyman of Fox et al.
On winning the seat itself, I'd agree with Barnesian. Somewhere around 35 to 40 pc.
I will be disgusted if the Tories do not have a candidate standing against Zac if he is not the Tory candidate. He may be of course.
From Mrs May's POV this is too good a chance to lose one of the potentially awkward squad to miss. Zac is far too independent minded already. Comes of not needing the money I suspect.
Nothing wrong with parliament having independently-minded MPs. It means the government's less likely to do something stupid.
Disagree on the huge straight, though. It means there's more possibility to get swamped off the line before the first corner. That said, it'll also make it easier to clear the field if that happens.
Interesting consideration on the thin air, which I'd forgotten about. I wonder if that'll be a leveller as far as aerodynamics go.
Odd. Betfair have a Richmond market with both Zac and 'Conservative' as possible winners, but nothing in the rules to indicate what happens if Zac is the Conservative.
Presumably, in that case, you win on either? It is odd.
I will be disgusted if the Tories do not have a candidate standing against Zac if he is not the Tory candidate. He may be of course.
From Mrs May's POV this is too good a chance to lose one of the potentially awkward squad to miss. Zac is far too independent minded already. Comes of not needing the money I suspect.
Nothing wrong with parliament having independently-minded MPs. It means the government's less likely to do something stupid.
I don't think it had occurred to Labour that someone might ask them today whether they support or oppose the widely-anticipated government decision.
For Lab you'd have thought it should be a fairly easy decision to support. Although they could have additionally stated that more investment needed to be put into airports in the midlands, north and devolveds.
Except that with Tory rebels and the LibDems, tactically they would be better finding a reason to oppose and hoping the government can be defeated, which is after all (supposed to be) their job. But clearly Andy someoneorother had not been given permission to commit, either way.
I will be disgusted if the Tories do not have a candidate standing against Zac if he is not the Tory candidate. He may be of course.
From Mrs May's POV this is too good a chance to lose one of the potentially awkward squad to miss. Zac is far too independent minded already. Comes of not needing the money I suspect.
This is very much the crux of the matter. IF there is no official Conservative candidate, Goldsmith can stand, call himself an independent Conservative and return as a Conservative Party member to Parliament.
There won't be a problem because neither he nor anyone who supports him will have acted against an official Conservative candidate.
The problem only starts if May decides there needs to be an official Conservative candidate against Goldsmith. IF that happens, and I assume the Conservative Party is like the Liberal Democrats in this regard, it's permissible to vote for another party if there is no official candidate representing your party but if you stand against or vote against or campaign against the official candidate of your party, you are expelled from your own party.
An official anti-Goldsmith Conservative will mean the end for Goldsmith and all those who support him in the Conservative Party and if he wins the by election, he will have to sit as an Independent.
Odd. Betfair have a Richmond market with both Zac and 'Conservative' as possible winners, but nothing in the rules to indicate what happens if Zac is the Conservative.
Just seen that too. If Zac's the Conservative candidate that market's going to get voided IMHO
Can currently lay Zac at 2.4 and back Tory at 4.0.
Disagree on the huge straight, though. It means there's more possibility to get swamped off the line before the first corner. That said, it'll also make it easier to clear the field if that happens.
Interesting consideration on the thin air, which I'd forgotten about. I wonder if that'll be a leveller as far as aerodynamics go.
Presumably will affect both fuel air settings (do they have carburetters any more?) and reduce the down force from wings and skirts.
I don;t know if anyone follows Zero hedge but they are running a report on possible voting irregularities in Texas
One tweeter posted over 100 documented reports of voter fraud - its endemic. Check out MicroSpookyLeaks https://twitter.com/wdfx2eu7
Philadelphia's the most outrageous site of Dem electoral corruption. In many voting districts in 2012 Obama got 100 % of the vote to Romney's 0 %. Makes Tower Hamlets and North Korea look honest. I can see Hillary hitting 125 % in some neighborhoods.
Dear Lord, every US election since Bush vs Gore both sides have accused each other of electoral fraud/fiddling the vote machines/intimidation etc. It's as big a tradition as Thanksgiving and Halloween. You're beginning to sound as tinfoilhatty as Ms P.
100% to 0 % is in grotesque bad taste. You must agree to that, whatsoever your nonchalance to electoral fraud.
Oh dear, "Additional note for GOP conspiracy theorists/voter fraud types: there were numerous (mostly rather small, the largest I saw had 40 votes for Romney) precincts across Louisiana (and elsewhere) in which President Obama received 0 votes; again, not a conspiracy/voter fraud, but showing just how little support Obama got in many deep South/rural white precincts. Here's a list of some of these precincts:"
I will be disgusted if the Tories do not have a candidate standing against Zac if he is not the Tory candidate. He may be of course.
From Mrs May's POV this is too good a chance to lose one of the potentially awkward squad to miss. Zac is far too independent minded already. Comes of not needing the money I suspect.
This is very much the crux of the matter. IF there is no official Conservative candidate, Goldsmith can stand, call himself an independent Conservative and return as a Conservative Party member to Parliament.
There won't be a problem because neither he nor anyone who supports him will have acted against an official Conservative candidate.
The problem only starts if May decides there needs to be an official Conservative candidate against Goldsmith. IF that happens, and I assume the Conservative Party is like the Liberal Democrats in this regard, it's permissible to vote for another party if there is no official candidate representing your party but if you stand against or vote against or campaign against the official candidate of your party, you are expelled from your own party.
An official anti-Goldsmith Conservative will mean the end for Goldsmith and all those who support him in the Conservative Party and if he wins the by election, he will have to sit as an Independent.
Yep, that is pretty much the way I see it. And the added bonus is if Zac wins he will probably vote for the Government most of the time anyway. So not much change then.
Disagree on the huge straight, though. It means there's more possibility to get swamped off the line before the first corner. That said, it'll also make it easier to clear the field if that happens.
Interesting consideration on the thin air, which I'd forgotten about. I wonder if that'll be a leveller as far as aerodynamics go.
Presumably will affect both fuel air settings (do they have carburetters any more?) and reduce the down force from wings and skirts.
No carburettors any more, all very fancy fuel injection systems now. They use Monaco levels of downforce yet get Monza speeds from the cars, thanks to the altitude. It's a power circuit rather than an aero circuit.
Betfair need to sort their market rules out seeing as it is an exchange rather than a bookmakers.
Yep, they need to void it now, when there's only £100 matched. Can either come back when there's confirmation of Zac's position or replace his name with 'independent'.
I will be disgusted if the Tories do not have a candidate standing against Zac if he is not the Tory candidate. He may be of course.
From Mrs May's POV this is too good a chance to lose one of the potentially awkward squad to miss. Zac is far too independent minded already. Comes of not needing the money I suspect.
This is very much the crux of the matter. IF there is no official Conservative candidate, Goldsmith can stand, call himself an independent Conservative and return as a Conservative Party member to Parliament.
There won't be a problem because neither he nor anyone who supports him will have acted against an official Conservative candidate.
The problem only starts if May decides there needs to be an official Conservative candidate against Goldsmith. IF that happens, and I assume the Conservative Party is like the Liberal Democrats in this regard, it's permissible to vote for another party if there is no official candidate representing your party but if you stand against or vote against or campaign against the official candidate of your party, you are expelled from your own party.
An official anti-Goldsmith Conservative will mean the end for Goldsmith and all those who support him in the Conservative Party and if he wins the by election, he will have to sit as an Independent.
Yep, that is pretty much the way I see it. And the added bonus is if Zac wins he will probably vote for the Government most of the time anyway. So not much change then.
A futile exercise in attention-seeking imo. Best option let Zac run as an official Conservative if his association supports him.
I don;t know if anyone follows Zero hedge but they are running a report on possible voting irregularities in Texas
One tweeter posted over 100 documented reports of voter fraud - its endemic. Check out MicroSpookyLeaks https://twitter.com/wdfx2eu7
Philadelphia's the most outrageous site of Dem electoral corruption. In many voting districts in 2012 Obama got 100 % of the vote to Romney's 0 %. Makes Tower Hamlets and North Korea look honest. I can see Hillary hitting 125 % in some neighborhoods.
Dear Lord, every US election since Bush vs Gore both sides have accused each other of electoral fraud/fiddling the vote machines/intimidation etc. It's as big a tradition as Thanksgiving and Halloween. You're beginning to sound as tinfoilhatty as Ms P.
100% to 0 % is in grotesque bad taste. You must agree to that, whatsoever your nonchalance to electoral fraud.
Oh dear, "Additional note for GOP conspiracy theorists/voter fraud types: there were numerous (mostly rather small, the largest I saw had 40 votes for Romney) precincts across Louisiana (and elsewhere) in which President Obama received 0 votes; again, not a conspiracy/voter fraud, but showing just how little support Obama got in many deep South/rural white precincts. Here's a list of some of these precincts:"
What a plonker Goldsmith is. Single constituency votes don't decide national policy. Boring!
Meanwhile, Betfair midprices for the US election, for every candidate or non-candidate whom it's possible to lay as well as back, are as follows:
Clinton 1.205 Sanders 265 Biden 900
Trump 6.1 Pence 825
Sanders is well ahead of the lower-placed possibilities. Who's backing him? Surely if something were to happen to Clinton, her replacement would be Kaine?
I think the actual money going on the more exotic choices is negligible.
But Kaine wouldn't necessarily be the choice were Clinton to die between now and when the electoral college meets. Members of the electoral college pledged to Clinton would need to decide what to do, presumably on advice from the Democrat National Committee. There would be a good case for Kaine (who's on the ballot) but also some case for Sanders (who ran Clinton fairly close in the primaries and still has decent favourability ratings). Or a compromise candidate may emerge (e.g. Biden for continuity if he could be prevailed upon).
Betfair say they will settle the market "according to the candidate that has the most projected Electoral College votes won at the 2016 presidential election" and "(a)ny subsequent events such as a ‘faithless elector’ will have no effect on the settlement of this market." If Clinton were to be out by 8 Nov, I think replacing her with anyone other than Kaine would lose votes. After 8 Nov and before the EC "meets" on 19 Dec the DNC would have a freer hand, but their choice (probably) wouldn't affect who Betfair pay out on.
In a previous election (1880?), Greeley died and votes that were cast for him were assessed by the Senate as null and void in their role of ratifying the result. Precedent would therefore suggest that if a candidate died, they couldn't receive any votes, whether or not any elector cast their vote for him or her - and hence they couldn't have 'the most projected Electoral College votes'. Were Trump or Clinton to die after Nov 8, it shouldn't affect Betfair's settlement as it's fairly clear that they're taking the position as at election day (or night); were they to die beforehand, that'd be a different matter and one would hope that clarification would be given (unless Trump won outright, in which case the Democrats' problems would be irrelevant).
Perhaps if a candidate dies before 8 Nov Betfair will count "their" EC votes as "projected" to be for whoever the party's national committee says "its" electors should vote for instead, even if some of the electors on 19 Dec do something else; or if the national committee later changes its mind. Then there is the case of a candidate withdrawing.
I will be disgusted if the Tories do not have a candidate standing against Zac if he is not the Tory candidate. He may be of course.
From Mrs May's POV this is too good a chance to lose one of the potentially awkward squad to miss. Zac is far too independent minded already. Comes of not needing the money I suspect.
This is very much the crux of the matter. IF there is no official Conservative candidate, Goldsmith can stand, call himself an independent Conservative and return as a Conservative Party member to Parliament.
There won't be a problem because neither he nor anyone who supports him will have acted against an official Conservative candidate.
The problem only starts if May decides there needs to be an official Conservative candidate against Goldsmith. IF that happens, and I assume the Conservative Party is like the Liberal Democrats in this regard, it's permissible to vote for another party if there is no official candidate representing your party but if you stand against or vote against or campaign against the official candidate of your party, you are expelled from your own party.
An official anti-Goldsmith Conservative will mean the end for Goldsmith and all those who support him in the Conservative Party and if he wins the by election, he will have to sit as an Independent.
Yep, that is pretty much the way I see it. And the added bonus is if Zac wins he will probably vote for the Government most of the time anyway. So not much change then.
A futile exercise in attention-seeking imo. Best option let Zac run as an official Conservative if his association supports him.
Agreed. Bit like David Davis and look what that did for his career.
Grant Shapps says that if ZG resigns and restands, the party will stand against him, but if he stays a Tory member and stands as Tory, it won't.
Well yeah, cause Zack will be the Tory candidate...
The only obstacle - assuming he wants to stand at all - is adoption by the local party, which shouldn't be a problem.
Nevertheless it is a personal gamble for him - after his verging-on-disgraceful mayoral campaign, after which he lost nevertheless, to stand and lose again in the same year would undoubtedly finish his political career permanently.
Just seen a number of new polls from a company called Remington Research on RCP. Remington was founded by one Jeff Roe, a Republican strategist and adviser.
Perhaps unsurprisingly, the polls in a number of so-called swing states aren't bad for Trump with leads in OH, NC and NV and a tie in FL. HRC leads in VA. PA and WI.
Elsewhere, Trump leads by 23.5 points in Arkansas so that should be fairly safe. It's about the same margin as Romney won in 2012 so it doesn't tell us a lot.
I do have fond memories of Heathrow as a kid. Mum and dad would drive me all the way from Ilford across central London and then down the M4 several weekends a year just so that I could view the planes from the top of car park 3. Of course, back in the 1980s, parking was something like 20p for a whole afternoon
Me too! But in the '70s and we only had to come from Surbiton. I fondly remember watching Concorde land from the top of the T3 car park.
Just seen a number of new polls from a company called Remington Research on RCP. Remington was founded by one Jeff Roe, a Republican strategist and adviser.
Perhaps unsurprisingly, the polls in a number of so-called swing states aren't bad for Trump with leads in OH, NC and NV and a tie in FL. HRC leads in VA. PA and WI.
Elsewhere, Trump leads by 23.5 points in Arkansas so that should be fairly safe. It's about the same margin as Romney won in 2012 so it doesn't tell us a lot.
hmmm. new gop pollster, is out of sync elsewhwere.
I don;t know if anyone follows Zero hedge but they are running a report on possible voting irregularities in Texas
One tweeter posted over 100 documented reports of voter fraud - its endemic. Check out MicroSpookyLeaks https://twitter.com/wdfx2eu7
Philadelphia's the most outrageous site of Dem electoral corruption. In many voting districts in 2012 Obama got 100 % of the vote to Romney's 0 %. Makes Tower Hamlets and North Korea look honest. I can see Hillary hitting 125 % in some neighborhoods.
Dear Lord, every US election since Bush vs Gore both sides have accused each other of electoral fraud/fiddling the vote machines/intimidation etc. It's as big a tradition as Thanksgiving and Halloween. You're beginning to sound as tinfoilhatty as Ms P.
100% to 0 % is in grotesque bad taste. You must agree to that, whatsoever your nonchalance to electoral fraud.
Oh dear, "Additional note for GOP conspiracy theorists/voter fraud types: there were numerous (mostly rather small, the largest I saw had 40 votes for Romney) precincts across Louisiana (and elsewhere) in which President Obama received 0 votes; again, not a conspiracy/voter fraud, but showing just how little support Obama got in many deep South/rural white precincts. Here's a list of some of these precincts:"
I don't think we appreciate just how small these districts are, probably about quarter of a million of them in total.
What's interesting is how Louisiana appears on both the Obama and Romney list many times. I guess it is a really segregated state.
Louisiana is often ranked as the most corrupt State in the Union. Sad to see the once noble Philadelphia go that way.
Huey Long, the Kingfish. One of the most interesting US politicians ever. Makes Trump look like a choir boy.
I thought Huey coined " the only way I could lose this election is if I’m caught in bed with a dead girl or a live boy " but some say it was Edwin Edwards. Both from Louisiana nevertheless.
I don;t know if anyone follows Zero hedge but they are running a report on possible voting irregularities in Texas
One tweeter posted over 100 documented reports of voter fraud - its endemic. Check out MicroSpookyLeaks https://twitter.com/wdfx2eu7
Philadelphia's the most outrageous site of Dem electoral corruption. In many voting districts in 2012 Obama got 100 % of the vote to Romney's 0 %. Makes Tower Hamlets and North Korea look honest. I can see Hillary hitting 125 % in some neighborhoods.
Dear Lord, every US election since Bush vs Gore both sides have accused each other of electoral fraud/fiddling the vote machines/intimidation etc. It's as big a tradition as Thanksgiving and Halloween. You're beginning to sound as tinfoilhatty as Ms P.
100% to 0 % is in grotesque bad taste. You must agree to that, whatsoever your nonchalance to electoral fraud.
Oh dear, "Additional note for GOP conspiracy theorists/voter fraud types: there were numerous (mostly rather small, the largest I saw had 40 votes for Romney) precincts across Louisiana (and elsewhere) in which President Obama received 0 votes; again, not a conspiracy/voter fraud, but showing just how little support Obama got in many deep South/rural white precincts. Here's a list of some of these precincts:"
The statement implies the office holder is appointed and (basically) fired on the same day. I thought they kept the office until somome else was appointed?
The statement implies the office holder is appointed and (basically) fired on the same day. I thought they kept the office until somome else was appointed?
Zac has resigned from the Three Hundreds of Chiltern presumably because he wants to stand again as an MP (which is useful information for betting purposes, even though expected).
Just seen a number of new polls from a company called Remington Research on RCP. Remington was founded by one Jeff Roe, a Republican strategist and adviser.
Perhaps unsurprisingly, the polls in a number of so-called swing states aren't bad for Trump with leads in OH, NC and NV and a tie in FL. HRC leads in VA. PA and WI.
Elsewhere, Trump leads by 23.5 points in Arkansas so that should be fairly safe. It's about the same margin as Romney won in 2012 so it doesn't tell us a lot.
hmmm. new gop pollster, is out of sync elsewhwere.
not massively convinced
Actually Trump does better than he does nationally with RCP in Ohio, NC and Florida so it is not that exceptional
The statement implies the office holder is appointed and (basically) fired on the same day. I thought they kept the office until somome else was appointed?
Zac has resigned from the Three Hundreds of Chiltern presumably because he wants to stand again as an MP.
I don;t know if anyone follows Zero hedge but they are running a report on possible voting irregularities in Texas
One tweeter posted over 100 documented reports of voter fraud - its endemic. Check out MicroSpookyLeaks https://twitter.com/wdfx2eu7
Philadelphia's the most outrageous site of Dem electoral corruption. In many voting districts in 2012 Obama got 100 % of the vote to Romney's 0 %. Makes Tower Hamlets and North Korea look honest. I can see Hillary hitting 125 % in some neighborhoods.
Dear Lord, every US election since Bush vs Gore both sides have accused each other of electoral fraud/fiddling the vote machines/intimidation etc. It's as big a tradition as Thanksgiving and Halloween. You're beginning to sound as tinfoilhatty as Ms P.
100% to 0 % is in grotesque bad taste. You must agree to that, whatsoever your nonchalance to electoral fraud.
Oh dear, "Additional note for GOP conspiracy theorists/voter fraud types: there were numerous (mostly rather small, the largest I saw had 40 votes for Romney) precincts across Louisiana (and elsewhere) in which President Obama received 0 votes; again, not a conspiracy/voter fraud, but showing just how little support Obama got in many deep South/rural white precincts. Here's a list of some of these precincts:"
I don't think we appreciate just how small these districts are, probably about quarter of a million of them in total.
What's interesting is how Louisiana appears on both the Obama and Romney list many times. I guess it is a really segregated state.
Louisiana is often ranked as the most corrupt State in the Union. Sad to see the once noble Philadelphia go that way.
Huey Long, the Kingfish. One of the most interesting US politicians ever. Makes Trump look like a choir boy.
I thought Huey coined " the only way I could lose this election is if I’m caught in bed with a dead girl or a live boy " but some say it was Edwin Edwards. Both from Louisiana nevertheless.
Mr. T, could be wrong but I think thinner air means less cooling... hmm. Need to check.
Agree on reduced air reducing aerodynamic performance so I'd guess it'll narrow the gaps in aero performance. May help out Ferrari/Williams.
Had a fortuitous win on Bottas for a podium there last year, though they're not as swift this time around.
Couldn't the effect of aero be the opposite? If you start with bad aero it becomes worse than useless, and good aero becomes average? There must be some proportionality in the effect, the winners and losers will be defined by the point at which the thinner air has a proportionally larger effect. I an guessing as I have no aero knowledge.
I don;t know if anyone follows Zero hedge but they are running a report on possible voting irregularities in Texas
One tweeter posted over 100 documented reports of voter fraud - its endemic. Check out MicroSpookyLeaks https://twitter.com/wdfx2eu7
Philadelphia's the most outrageous site of Dem electoral corruption. In many voting districts in 2012 Obama got 100 % of the vote to Romney's 0 %. Makes Tower Hamlets and North Korea look honest. I can see Hillary hitting 125 % in some neighborhoods.
Dear Lord, every US election since Bush vs Gore both sides have accused each other of electoral fraud/fiddling the vote machines/intimidation etc. It's as big a tradition as Thanksgiving and Halloween. You're beginning to sound as tinfoilhatty as Ms P.
100% to 0 % is in grotesque bad taste. You must agree to that, whatsoever your nonchalance to electoral fraud.
Oh dear, "Additional note for GOP conspiracy theorists/voter fraud types: there were numerous (mostly rather small, the largest I saw had 40 votes for Romney) precincts across Louisiana (and elsewhere) in which President Obama received 0 votes; again, not a conspiracy/voter fraud, but showing just how little support Obama got in many deep South/rural white precincts. Here's a list of some of these precincts:"
The statement implies the office holder is appointed and (basically) fired on the same day. I thought they kept the office until somome else was appointed?
Zac has resigned from the Three Hundreds of Chiltern presumably because he wants to stand again as an MP (which is useful information for betting purposes, even though expected).
The fact of his appointment to the Chiltern Hundreds is what disqualifies him from being an MP. Usually a person would hold that position until someone else was appointed to it. That Zac asked to be immediately relieved of the appointment, suggests that he wishes to stand again for Parliament.
Carney says MPC will take Sterling depreciation into account at next meeting. Chances of a further interest rate cut are pretty close to nil in that case. Also rules out negative rates, saying there is something "unnatural" about them. Very sensible.
Howard Davies saying 2026 the most likely year for the demolitiom to start building the runway to start.
What an absolute joke.
By the looks of it there is quite an ambitious building program, including new development in the central terminal area. I suppose this stuff could get underway sooner than the runway. I do agree that another 10 years is utterly ridiculous.
Sensible if true. Maximising chances of keeping Lib Dems out much better for Govt than trying to fight Goldsmith, with likely consequence being that the LD candidate sweeps into the Commons through the gap in the middle.
Carney says MPC will take Sterling depreciation into account at next meeting. Chances of a further interest rate cut are pretty close to nil in that case. Also rules out negative rates, saying there is something "unnatural" about them. Very sensible.
Do any of our legal bods on here know on what grounds there could be legal challenges to the Heathrow decision?
Well the most obvious one is that the decision is incompatible with the Government's legal obligations in respect of air quality. As is the current airport of course.
Comments
Remember Zac had a 23,000 majority.
My reasoning is as follows:
20% probability that Richmond Tory Association will chose a Tory to stand against Zac in which case probability of LibDem win is 80%+.
If no Tory stands against Zac then probability of LibDem win in my opinion is about 25% based on analysis of potential Lab and Green squeeze, plus Tory switchers because of Brexit, and LHR.
So overall probability of LibDem win is 20% x 80% + 80% x 25% i.e. about 36%.
I think 5/4 on Zac is excellent value at the moment.
The odds will change on Thursday when the local Tory Association makes known their decision.
" Don't buy a single vote more than necessary. I'll be damned if I'm going to pay for a landslide."
Yes, it will probably give the Lib-Dems the seat but there's a principle at stake and a clear message needs to be sent to other MP's how fancy flouncing off for whatever reason...
I still dislike the new official F1 site, but will give it praise for the onboard pole lap from last year, which is useful. Fair bit of twisty stuff too, but a couple of long straights will be the prime opportunity for overtaking.
Only 4 retirements last year. Hard to use a single instance as a sample size, but that's pretty low.
I should stress all the below is just idle musing, not tips.
Perez at 200/1 each way to win (top 2) is interesting. He did rather well at Monaco, is good at street circuits and has the right engine for the straights.
Red Bull at 6 to top score was something I considered before seeing the straights. That said, there may be value as the Mercedes does not like running in traffic and the Red Bull was close to matching the Silver Arrows last time out.
Ricciardo to lead lap 1 at 10 is a bit self-explanatory.
Perez for a podium is 15. Similar to the above each way winner bet, though my issue with both is the degree of luck required for this to come off. Even given he's got a good car and likes street circuits, at best his car is 4th fastest. But then, that's why it's 15.
Williams, double points finish 2.75. Perhaps a little tight, but on pace they should be able to do it. A problem with such tight odds and the double nature is that it only takes one of them to bugger it up.
Just as well you aren't a footballer or cricketer.
My experience is that political activists all get on with each other when delivering leaflets or at the count. If anything it is the activists against the rest of the population who don't participate.
But I hope Zac loses, even though I like and respect him. This about sending a message to the Government - it's emphatically not about Zac.
Anyway, I've got my walking boots out.
"Additional note for GOP conspiracy theorists/voter fraud types: there were numerous (mostly rather small, the largest I saw had 40 votes for Romney) precincts across Louisiana (and elsewhere) in which President Obama received 0 votes; again, not a conspiracy/voter fraud, but showing just how little support Obama got in many deep South/rural white precincts. Here's a list of some of these precincts:"
http://hatthief.blogspot.co.uk/2012/11/other-precincts-where-romney-got-0-votes.html?m=1
All in all, it's a bunch of well-to-do West/South West Londoners with atypical views having a dust up over an airport. It's no more relevant to wider Britain than Corbyn and the Greens having a set-to over guacamole in Islington North.
It can't just be us PBers can it?
And the huge start straight means Vettel really should avoid his now habitual first corner squabbles... and a poor getaway from the start line is recoverable.
From Mrs May's POV this is too good a chance to lose one of the potentially awkward squad to miss. Zac is far too independent minded already. Comes of not needing the money I suspect.
If he runs as the Tory, I assume you must get 10-1 on Zac ?
This is London. Unlike Witney, the media will be watching.
The Lib Dems have to turn it into a default referendum on Brexit. If they can get their narrative straight, they could get some monentum up.
The only problem is that their narrative is not straight. Aren't they calling for another referendum? I don't think there's much appetite for that. Instead, they need to apply full force to fighting for a soft Brexit, making a bogeyman of Fox et al.
On winning the seat itself, I'd agree with Barnesian. Somewhere around 35 to 40 pc.
Disagree on the huge straight, though. It means there's more possibility to get swamped off the line before the first corner. That said, it'll also make it easier to clear the field if that happens.
Interesting consideration on the thin air, which I'd forgotten about. I wonder if that'll be a leveller as far as aerodynamics go.
There won't be a problem because neither he nor anyone who supports him will have acted against an official Conservative candidate.
The problem only starts if May decides there needs to be an official Conservative candidate against Goldsmith. IF that happens, and I assume the Conservative Party is like the Liberal Democrats in this regard, it's permissible to vote for another party if there is no official candidate representing your party but if you stand against or vote against or campaign against the official candidate of your party, you are expelled from your own party.
An official anti-Goldsmith Conservative will mean the end for Goldsmith and all those who support him in the Conservative Party and if he wins the by election, he will have to sit as an Independent.
Can currently lay Zac at 2.4 and back Tory at 4.0.
UKIP must be a racing cert to lose theirs and you'd have thought the greens would be squeezed also.
Agree on reduced air reducing aerodynamic performance so I'd guess it'll narrow the gaps in aero performance. May help out Ferrari/Williams.
Had a fortuitous win on Bottas for a podium there last year, though they're not as swift this time around.
In that case, Raikkonen to win each way at 40/1 or for the podium at 4.5 looks intriguing. He's been driving well of late.
Oh, wait a minute.
Nevertheless it is a personal gamble for him - after his verging-on-disgraceful mayoral campaign, after which he lost nevertheless, to stand and lose again in the same year would undoubtedly finish his political career permanently.
Just seen a number of new polls from a company called Remington Research on RCP. Remington was founded by one Jeff Roe, a Republican strategist and adviser.
Perhaps unsurprisingly, the polls in a number of so-called swing states aren't bad for Trump with leads in OH, NC and NV and a tie in FL. HRC leads in VA. PA and WI.
Elsewhere, Trump leads by 23.5 points in Arkansas so that should be fairly safe. It's about the same margin as Romney won in 2012 so it doesn't tell us a lot.
not massively convinced
The statement implies the office holder is appointed and (basically) fired on the same day. I thought they kept the office until somome else was appointed?
Which I take to mean resigned as an MP, rather than as a conservative
The Heathrow Airport (Runways 3 and 4) Act should pass Parliament, followed by the diggers moving in a week later.
Sensible if true. Maximising chances of keeping Lib Dems out much better for Govt than trying to fight Goldsmith, with likely consequence being that the LD candidate sweeps into the Commons through the gap in the middle.