politicalbetting
Home› General

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Sign In Register

Categories

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » What happened when Guido got into an after dinner discussion w

SystemSystem Posts: 12,265
edited November 2016 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » What happened when Guido got into an after dinner discussion with Nigel Farage and Arron Banks on who’ll be President

So dinner; PM said she'd have Boris put down like a dog, Craig Oliver made her retch, bet @Arron_banks & @Nigel_Farage £20,000. G'night. pic.twitter.com/yliVFOUwnn

Read the full story here


«1345

Comments

  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,155
    Glorious first!
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,709
    In the spirit of conciliation and cross-party friendship I'd like to extend a dinner invitation to Nigel Farage and Arron Banks.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,241
    Second! Like REMAIN and YES....
  • vikvik Posts: 159
    New University of Denver poll shows a Tie in Colorado

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/co/colorado_trump_vs_clinton_vs_johnson_vs_stein-5974.html
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,241
    Worth listening to that Osborne clip OGH posted - like "Bob the Builder" May, wittier than you might expect......
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,155
    CarlottaVance said:

    Worth listening to that Osborne clip OGH posted - like "Bob the Builder" May, wittier than you might expect......

    Very good, hah!
  • dogbasketdogbasket Posts: 73
    "If he wants to Paul can offset the wager on Betfair and pocket a nice profit. The current price as I write is 1.41."

    Nice profit? Less than 10%, which is in no way sufficient to offset the risk of one or both of these bets not being paid up.
  • MTimTMTimT Posts: 7,034
    First! Like the Cubs. Well, eighth actually. But well done the cubs. Only 107 years.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    Cracking stuff from George there, not to be missed.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    National - IPSOS/Reuters - Sample 1,772 - 28 Oct - 1 Nov

    Clinton 44.7 .. Trump 37.4

    http://polling.reuters.com/#poll/TM651Y15_26/filters/LIKELY:1
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    dogbasket said:

    "If he wants to Paul can offset the wager on Betfair and pocket a nice profit. The current price as I write is 1.41."

    Nice profit? Less than 10%, which is in no way sufficient to offset the risk of one or both of these bets not being paid up.

    Where else can you get a 10% ROI in under a Fortnight?

    One of these bets will win.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,229
    George very funny. Especially about Gove.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,229
    It seems that Nigel takes his duties as cheerleader for Trump pretty seriously. Now that he has campaigned himself out of 2 jobs (MEP and leader) losing £4.5K is not a trivial sum.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 61,257
    Just heard it.. If Osborne had done a bit more of this prior to the referendum, he might now be in a better place.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 53,270
    JackW said:

    National - IPSOS/Reuters - Sample 1,772 - 28 Oct - 1 Nov

    Clinton 44.7 .. Trump 37.4

    http://polling.reuters.com/#poll/TM651Y15_26/filters/LIKELY:1

    Every pollster seems to be having an outlier....
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,180
    Casino_Royale said:

    Just heard it.. If Osborne had done a bit more of this prior to the referendum, he might now be in a better place.

    A reminder of a huge talent lost to the party - for now....
  • RogerRoger Posts: 20,062
    Casino_Royale said:

    Just heard it.. If Osborne had done a bit more of this prior to the referendum, he might now be in a better place.

    More to the point WE might be in a better place. Remaining in the EU
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 61,257
    Roger said:

    Casino_Royale said:

    Just heard it.. If Osborne had done a bit more of this prior to the referendum, he might now be in a better place.

    More to the point WE might be in a better place. Remaining in the EU
    Yawn.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,920
    dogbasket said:

    "If he wants to Paul can offset the wager on Betfair and pocket a nice profit. The current price as I write is 1.41."

    Nice profit? Less than 10%, which is in no way sufficient to offset the risk of one or both of these bets not being paid up.

    Which one would you be particularly worried about?
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,920
    edited November 2016
    Casino_Royale said:

    Just heard it.. If Osborne had done a bit more of this prior to the referendum, he might now be in a better place.

    How bad a place is he in now, really? He's in his mid 40s, was Chancellor of the Exchequer for six years, during which he kept the UK out of recession through the Eurozone crisis. He could continue as an MP for an indefinite period, while banking non-Exec and speaking fees. And he is still plenty young enough for a second coming.

    Of course, in five years time he'll either be regarded as a prophet or an idiot for his determination to keep the UK in the EU. Who knows which at this point in time?
  • alex.alex. Posts: 4,658
    felix said:

    Casino_Royale said:

    Just heard it.. If Osborne had done a bit more of this prior to the referendum, he might now be in a better place.

    A reminder of a huge talent lost to the party - for now....
    Still at an age before many Prime Ministers had barely started their political careers.

  • alex.alex. Posts: 4,658
    rcs1000 said:

    dogbasket said:

    "If he wants to Paul can offset the wager on Betfair and pocket a nice profit. The current price as I write is 1.41."

    Nice profit? Less than 10%, which is in no way sufficient to offset the risk of one or both of these bets not being paid up.

    Which one would you be particularly worried about?
    Unless their something wrong with my Maths, Mike must have posted this half asleep. Taking the betfair odds at face value, the guaranteed profit is 4% (on the c.£4,330 which would be tied up in Betfair - more like 1% if you had to factor in the £10k on the original bet).

    But factor in Betfair's commission and there's no way to lay off at those odds, except at a loss.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,654
    Greens not standing in Richmond Park, cancels UKIP tbh.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 21,769
    Osborne is the new Hague
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,920
    alex. said:

    rcs1000 said:

    dogbasket said:

    "If he wants to Paul can offset the wager on Betfair and pocket a nice profit. The current price as I write is 1.41."

    Nice profit? Less than 10%, which is in no way sufficient to offset the risk of one or both of these bets not being paid up.

    Which one would you be particularly worried about?
    Unless their something wrong with my Maths, Mike must have posted this half asleep. Taking the betfair odds at face value, the guaranteed profit is 4% (on the c.£4,330 which would be tied up in Betfair - more like 1% if you had to factor in the £10k on the original bet).

    But factor in Betfair's commission and there's no way to lay off at those odds, except at a loss.
    Mike may, of course, have a highly discounted Betfair commission rate...
  • alex.alex. Posts: 4,658
    rcs1000 said:

    alex. said:

    rcs1000 said:

    dogbasket said:

    "If he wants to Paul can offset the wager on Betfair and pocket a nice profit. The current price as I write is 1.41."

    Nice profit? Less than 10%, which is in no way sufficient to offset the risk of one or both of these bets not being paid up.

    Which one would you be particularly worried about?
    Unless their something wrong with my Maths, Mike must have posted this half asleep. Taking the betfair odds at face value, the guaranteed profit is 4% (on the c.£4,330 which would be tied up in Betfair - more like 1% if you had to factor in the £10k on the original bet).

    But factor in Betfair's commission and there's no way to lay off at those odds, except at a loss.
    Mike may, of course, have a highly discounted Betfair commission rate...
    I think you mean Paul... ;)

    But even with a heavily discounted rate we're probably talking a 1-2% return tops. It's not quite 10%!



  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,920
    Brilliant: http://newsthump.com/2016/11/02/british-is-fighter-wondering-if-his-old-job-at-currys-still-available/
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,920
    Jonathan said:

    Osborne is the new Hague

    Does Ffion know?
  • PlatoSaidPlatoSaid Posts: 10,383
    Last night's editions O'Reilly Factor

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qh9Ld3-88K4

    And Megyn

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ruqb7FOFFLY
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    1.41 looks a very good price for Hillary on current polling, never mind 1.45. The other side of the bet is effectively a bet that the polls are systematically wrong and the interpretation placed on early voting data is misplaced. They might be but I wouldn't be rushing to that assumption.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    From previous threads: those that haven't been to Northern Ireland should give it a visit. Don't spend too long in Belfast, the real interest is in the countryside.
  • PlatoSaidPlatoSaid Posts: 10,383
    edited November 2016
    Bill Mitchell
    The fact the FBI leaked to FoxNews all this new stuff on the Clinton Foundation Investigation makes me more sure than ever, she's done.

    Golly

    http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/11/breaking-fbi-now-99-certain-least-5-foreign-services-hacked-hillarys-server/

    And

    https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=1139305239458692&id=141513472571212&_rdr
  • 619619 Posts: 1,784
    PlatoSaid said:

    Bill Mitchell
    The fact the FBI leaked to FoxNews all this new stuff on the Clinton Foundation Investigation makes me more sure than ever, she's done.

    Golly

    http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/11/breaking-fbi-now-99-certain-least-5-foreign-services-hacked-hillarys-server/

    Bill mitchell???

    ha ha ha ha ha ha
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 26,925
    rcs1000 said:

    Casino_Royale said:

    Just heard it.. If Osborne had done a bit more of this prior to the referendum, he might now be in a better place.

    How bad a place is he in now, really? He's in his mid 40s, was Chancellor of the Exchequer for six years, during which he kept the UK out of recession through the Eurozone crisis. He could continue as an MP for an indefinite period, while banking non-Exec and speaking fees. And he is still plenty young enough for a second coming.

    Of course, in five years time he'll either be regarded as a prophet or an idiot for his determination to keep the UK in the EU. Who knows which at this point in time?
    Maybe we could have 'Osborne, The Musical' with the feature song "I'm going to borrow, borrow, borrow".
  • PlatoSaidPlatoSaid Posts: 10,383

    AP: State Department fed info to Clinton campaign after she had left govt & modified draft press release for her https://t.co/RKNcY7GGMb

    https://www.yahoo.com/news/hacked-emails-show-clinton-campaign-165658103.html
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 61,257
    rcs1000 said:

    Casino_Royale said:

    Just heard it.. If Osborne had done a bit more of this prior to the referendum, he might now be in a better place.

    How bad a place is he in now, really? He's in his mid 40s, was Chancellor of the Exchequer for six years, during which he kept the UK out of recession through the Eurozone crisis. He could continue as an MP for an indefinite period, while banking non-Exec and speaking fees. And he is still plenty young enough for a second coming.

    Of course, in five years time he'll either be regarded as a prophet or an idiot for his determination to keep the UK in the EU. Who knows which at this point in time?
    He could still be in the cabinet, or foreign secretary, for example.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,654
    AlastairMeeks said:

    1.41 looks a very good price for Hillary on current polling, never mind 1.45. The other side of the bet is effectively a bet that the polls are systematically wrong and the interpretation placed on early voting data is misplaced. They might be but I wouldn't be rushing to that assumption.

    Given recent polling errm history I'd say 1.41 is a fair price for the sort of "miss" needed actually. I'm reasonably balanced.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,075
    Good morning, everyone.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 39,333
    I think the PM will draft in Osborne sooner rather than later. Gove too. Both have too much talent to be sitting on the back benches. There is definitely something about tents and the direction of piss.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 63,551
    Pulpstar said:

    Greens not standing in Richmond Park, cancels UKIP tbh.

    I was wondering when this would happen. Zac is a green conservative, an endangered breed which needs protection.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    another_richard said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Casino_Royale said:

    Just heard it.. If Osborne had done a bit more of this prior to the referendum, he might now be in a better place.

    How bad a place is he in now, really? He's in his mid 40s, was Chancellor of the Exchequer for six years, during which he kept the UK out of recession through the Eurozone crisis. He could continue as an MP for an indefinite period, while banking non-Exec and speaking fees. And he is still plenty young enough for a second coming.

    Of course, in five years time he'll either be regarded as a prophet or an idiot for his determination to keep the UK in the EU. Who knows which at this point in time?
    Maybe we could have 'Osborne, The Musical' with the feature song "I'm going to borrow, borrow, borrow".
    While Hammond does seem set to increase borrowing, and "spend,spend,spend!". Or is it to be a punishment budget as George forecast?

    The only real alternative to a continuing toxic deficit is tax rises.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,836
    "Michael gove and I remain good friends, because he fortunately never offered me his support."

    Ouch.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    AlastairMeeks said:

    From previous threads: those that haven't been to Northern Ireland should give it a visit. Don't spend too long in Belfast, the real interest is in the countryside.

    There must be some interesting political history for those of us brought up in the Seventies too.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 63,551
    Early voting detail from NV:

    http://www.ktnv.com/news/ralston/the-nevada-early-voting-blog
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,745
    AlastairMeeks said:

    1.41 looks a very good price for Hillary on current polling, never mind 1.45. The other side of the bet is effectively a bet that the polls are systematically wrong and the interpretation placed on early voting data is misplaced. They might be but I wouldn't be rushing to that assumption.

    Broadly I agree, but I don't think much weight should be placed on early voting numbers, for the reasons given by Sean Trende. We should assume that she's about 2-3% ahead.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,836
    foxinsoxuk said:

    another_richard said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Casino_Royale said:

    Just heard it.. If Osborne had done a bit more of this prior to the referendum, he might now be in a better place.

    How bad a place is he in now, really? He's in his mid 40s, was Chancellor of the Exchequer for six years, during which he kept the UK out of recession through the Eurozone crisis. He could continue as an MP for an indefinite period, while banking non-Exec and speaking fees. And he is still plenty young enough for a second coming.

    Of course, in five years time he'll either be regarded as a prophet or an idiot for his determination to keep the UK in the EU. Who knows which at this point in time?
    Maybe we could have 'Osborne, The Musical' with the feature song "I'm going to borrow, borrow, borrow".
    While Hammond does seem set to increase borrowing, and "spend,spend,spend!". Or is it to be a punishment budget as George forecast?

    The only real alternative to a continuing toxic deficit is tax rises.
    We're all pretending otherwise for the moment.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,709
    foxinsoxuk said:

    another_richard said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Casino_Royale said:

    Just heard it.. If Osborne had done a bit more of this prior to the referendum, he might now be in a better place.

    How bad a place is he in now, really? He's in his mid 40s, was Chancellor of the Exchequer for six years, during which he kept the UK out of recession through the Eurozone crisis. He could continue as an MP for an indefinite period, while banking non-Exec and speaking fees. And he is still plenty young enough for a second coming.

    Of course, in five years time he'll either be regarded as a prophet or an idiot for his determination to keep the UK in the EU. Who knows which at this point in time?
    Maybe we could have 'Osborne, The Musical' with the feature song "I'm going to borrow, borrow, borrow".
    While Hammond does seem set to increase borrowing, and "spend,spend,spend!". Or is it to be a punishment budget as George forecast?

    The only real alternative to a continuing toxic deficit is tax rises.
    Or he could just pinch Jeremy Corbyn's policy and print a shitload of money to spend on things the voters like.
  • ChrisChris Posts: 11,783
    PlatoSaid said:


    AP: State Department fed info to Clinton campaign after she had left govt & modified draft press release for her https://t.co/RKNcY7GGMb

    https://www.yahoo.com/news/hacked-emails-show-clinton-campaign-165658103.html

    The State Department provided her with an advance copy of their official response to a newspaper allegation about her, for comment?

    And you've posted this how many times now?
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 9,944
    rottenborough said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Greens not standing in Richmond Park, cancels UKIP tbh.

    I was wondering when this would happen. Zac is a green conservative, an endangered breed which needs protection.
    But the Greens are backing the LibDems.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    edmundintokyo said:

    foxinsoxuk said:

    another_richard said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Casino_Royale said:

    Just heard it.. If Osborne had done a bit more of this prior to the referendum, he might now be in a better place.

    How bad a place is he in now, really? He's in his mid 40s, was Chancellor of the Exchequer for six years, during which he kept the UK out of recession through the Eurozone crisis. He could continue as an MP for an indefinite period, while banking non-Exec and speaking fees. And he is still plenty young enough for a second coming.

    Of course, in five years time he'll either be regarded as a prophet or an idiot for his determination to keep the UK in the EU. Who knows which at this point in time?
    Maybe we could have 'Osborne, The Musical' with the feature song "I'm going to borrow, borrow, borrow".
    While Hammond does seem set to increase borrowing, and "spend,spend,spend!". Or is it to be a punishment budget as George forecast?

    The only real alternative to a continuing toxic deficit is tax rises.
    Or he could just pinch Jeremy Corbyn's policy and print a shitload of money to spend on things the voters like.
    The centrist Tories do seem rather keen on stealing Labour's clothes.

    Lots of lovely sovereignty; but skint.
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 14,158
    foxinsoxuk said:

    AlastairMeeks said:

    From previous threads: those that haven't been to Northern Ireland should give it a visit. Don't spend too long in Belfast, the real interest is in the countryside.

    There must be some interesting political history for those of us brought up in the Seventies too.
    Went to Belfast for a friend's wedding a few years back. Jolly having cocktails in the most bombed hotel in Europe etc - but my Nain was from the Falls Road; a bus tour the following day was unbelievably eye opening.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 20,062
    As you approach you 50,000th post and you ponder the next name change why not "PLATOTHINKS"? It would make a change from litering every thread with unrecycled garbage.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 63,551
    logical_song said:

    rottenborough said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Greens not standing in Richmond Park, cancels UKIP tbh.

    I was wondering when this would happen. Zac is a green conservative, an endangered breed which needs protection.
    But the Greens are backing the LibDems.
    :'(
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 14,158
    Roger said:

    As you approach you 50,000th post and you ponder the next name change why not "PLATOTHINKS"? It would make a change from litering every thread with unrecycled garbage.

    If 1/9 posts are more interesting than this then she'll be out-doing you Roger...
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    National Panel Tracker - LA Times - Sample 2,938 - 3 Nov

    Clinton 42.5 .. Trump 47.5

    Note - Trump winning the 18-34 demographic, the gender divide by 10.3 points and one third more Hispanics than Romney ..... Chortle .... :sunglasses:

    http://graphics.latimes.com/usc-presidential-poll-dashboard/
  • MP_SEMP_SE Posts: 3,642
    Less than 2 hours to wait until we hear the Article 50 verdict. Not that it matters as it will go to the Supreme Court and will have a majority in the House of Commons but exciting nonetheless.
  • BromptonautBromptonaut Posts: 1,113
    No interest on PB over the 10am decision on the Article 50 High Court case.

    Which is interesting in itself.
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 9,944
    Is George W Bush voting for Hillary?
    and George HW Bush too. Looks that way.
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-us-2016-37855894
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,709
    Sean_F said:

    AlastairMeeks said:

    1.41 looks a very good price for Hillary on current polling, never mind 1.45. The other side of the bet is effectively a bet that the polls are systematically wrong and the interpretation placed on early voting data is misplaced. They might be but I wouldn't be rushing to that assumption.

    Broadly I agree, but I don't think much weight should be placed on early voting numbers, for the reasons given by Sean Trende. We should assume that she's about 2-3% ahead.
    There was an article yesterday warning not to put too much emphasis on early voting, in 2010 and 2014 higher than expected early voting by Democrats led some to believe they could hold Congress and the Senate. In 2014 in Iowa for instance Ernst trailed badly in early voting but won comfortably on the night
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    Pile on Hillary

    https://twitter.com/kenrudin/status/793975405690683392
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,075
    F1: some interesting gossip:
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/37822956

    Lance Stroll has long been tipped to take Massa's place at Williams and it seems that, and Bottas' retention, will be announced today.

    Horner's view that more gravel traps and less run off would make track limits matter more as well as avoiding the nonsense of two leading cars missing out the first corner a thing of the past is quite right.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    logical_song said:

    rottenborough said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Greens not standing in Richmond Park, cancels UKIP tbh.

    I was wondering when this would happen. Zac is a green conservative, an endangered breed which needs protection.
    But the Greens are backing the LibDems.
    Of course they are. They're socialists first and foremost not environmentalists. They'd back any polluting lefty over an environmentally friendly Tory every time.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,836
    Bromptonaut said:

    No interest on PB over the 10am decision on the Article 50 High Court case.

    Which is interesting in itself.

    I'm not touching that hot potato. No doubt will be appealed, but even by Brexit standards we'll get overdone whinges or triumph from those who want to stop Brexit or those who do t want parliament involved, never mind involving them need not prevent it and indeed probably wouldn't.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,709
    vik said:

    New University of Denver poll shows a Tie in Colorado

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/co/colorado_trump_vs_clinton_vs_johnson_vs_stein-5974.html

    Colorado is increasingly looking like the pivotal state for both campaigns, win there and you win the Electoral College
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 26,925
    Re Northern Ireland

    From my limited trips there I've thought that the three southern counties of Fermanagh, Armagh and Down are rather reminiscent of SW England while the three northern counties of Londonderry, Tyrone and Antrim feel much more like Scotland.

    IIRC the two areas had rather different settlement patterns in the 17th century.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,075
    Miss Plato, I'd keep your name, but it's up to you, of course.

    Mr. Bromptonaut, it's been delayed ages and we've discussed it a lot. Besides, this is like the starter before the main course of the judgement. And the judgement itself is likely only the first leg ahead of appeal.

    It's ridiculous the judiciary may meddle in politics in this way.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 26,925
    JackW said:

    National Panel Tracker - LA Times - Sample 2,938 - 3 Nov

    Clinton 42.5 .. Trump 47.5

    Note - Trump winning the 18-34 demographic, the gender divide by 10.3 points and one third more Hispanics than Romney ..... Chortle .... :sunglasses:

    http://graphics.latimes.com/usc-presidential-poll-dashboard/

    Maybe so but its often a bad sign when people start mocking subsamples.
  • 619619 Posts: 1,784
    HYUFD said:

    Sean_F said:

    AlastairMeeks said:

    1.41 looks a very good price for Hillary on current polling, never mind 1.45. The other side of the bet is effectively a bet that the polls are systematically wrong and the interpretation placed on early voting data is misplaced. They might be but I wouldn't be rushing to that assumption.

    Broadly I agree, but I don't think much weight should be placed on early voting numbers, for the reasons given by Sean Trende. We should assume that she's about 2-3% ahead.
    There was an article yesterday warning not to put too much emphasis on early voting, in 2010 and 2014 higher than expected early voting by Democrats led some to believe they could hold Congress and the Senate. In 2014 in Iowa for instance Ernst trailed badly in early voting but won comfortably on the night
    hmmm. What about the precious presidential election though? Dems vote more for those.
  • BromptonautBromptonaut Posts: 1,113
    kle4 said:

    Bromptonaut said:

    No interest on PB over the 10am decision on the Article 50 High Court case.

    Which is interesting in itself.

    I'm not touching that hot potato. No doubt will be appealed, but even by Brexit standards we'll get overdone whinges or triumph from those who want to stop Brexit or those who do t want parliament involved, never mind involving them need not prevent it and indeed probably wouldn't.
    Some are saying the Government won't appeal for fear it will end up at the ECJ. Now that would be delicious.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,709
    Saw Osborne at a Tory dinner in Epping Forest a few weeks ago, he can be quite funny when he wants to be
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    Bromptonaut said:

    No interest on PB over the 10am decision on the Article 50 High Court case.

    Which is interesting in itself.

    I'm very interested. The reasoning will be at least as important as the decision. This isn't just about Brexit, it's about how we are governed.
  • ChrisChris Posts: 11,783
    MarqueeMark said:

    JackW said:

    National - IPSOS/Reuters - Sample 1,772 - 28 Oct - 1 Nov

    Clinton 44.7 .. Trump 37.4

    http://polling.reuters.com/#poll/TM651Y15_26/filters/LIKELY:1

    Every pollster seems to be having an outlier....
    Probably the outlier of the day is this one just added to 538 (though concluded nearly two weeks ago):
    Louisiana OCT. 15-21 The Times-Picayune/Lucid (614) C: 40% T: 43% J: 6% Trump +3

    Obviously we have to use averages, not individual polls.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,654
    HYUFD said:

    vik said:

    New University of Denver poll shows a Tie in Colorado

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/co/colorado_trump_vs_clinton_vs_johnson_vs_stein-5974.html

    Colorado is increasingly looking like the pivotal state for both campaigns, win there and you win the Electoral College
    Mike Pence visited yesterday.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,654
    Trump seems confident !

    - Tuesday, November 08, 2016 -
    DONALD J. TRUMP VICTORY PARTY
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,709
    619 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Sean_F said:

    AlastairMeeks said:

    1.41 looks a very good price for Hillary on current polling, never mind 1.45. The other side of the bet is effectively a bet that the polls are systematically wrong and the interpretation placed on early voting data is misplaced. They might be but I wouldn't be rushing to that assumption.

    Broadly I agree, but I don't think much weight should be placed on early voting numbers, for the reasons given by Sean Trende. We should assume that she's about 2-3% ahead.
    There was an article yesterday warning not to put too much emphasis on early voting, in 2010 and 2014 higher than expected early voting by Democrats led some to believe they could hold Congress and the Senate. In 2014 in Iowa for instance Ernst trailed badly in early voting but won comfortably on the night
    hmmm. What about the precious presidential election though? Dems vote more for those.
    In 2012 Obama had a bigger lead in early voting than he won by, in North Carolina he even had a double digit lead but failed to win it
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,836
    Morris_Dancer said:

    Miss Plato, I'd keep your name, but it's up to you, of course.

    Mr. Bromptonaut, it's been delayed ages and we've discussed it a lot. Besides, this is like the starter before the main course of the judgement. And the judgement itself is likely only the first leg ahead of appeal.

    It's ridiculous the judiciary may meddle in politics in this way.

    The judiciary rules on what they are permitted by parliament to rule on following rules parliament are able to define so it's not meddling. No more than luftur rahman or woolas being tossed out despite winning elections, which people complained was judges meddling with politics.
  • ChrisChris Posts: 11,783
    Pulpstar said:

    HYUFD said:

    vik said:

    New University of Denver poll shows a Tie in Colorado

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/co/colorado_trump_vs_clinton_vs_johnson_vs_stein-5974.html

    Colorado is increasingly looking like the pivotal state for both campaigns, win there and you win the Electoral College
    Mike Pence visited yesterday.
    That should firm up the gay vote for Clinton.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 42,384
    Pulpstar said:

    AlastairMeeks said:

    1.41 looks a very good price for Hillary on current polling, never mind 1.45. The other side of the bet is effectively a bet that the polls are systematically wrong and the interpretation placed on early voting data is misplaced. They might be but I wouldn't be rushing to that assumption.

    Given recent polling errm history I'd say 1.41 is a fair price for the sort of "miss" needed actually. I'm reasonably balanced.
    Isn't it more recent polling analysis history?

    https://twitter.com/SeanTrende/status/793876952637550593

    Marvellous to see another SeanT in the world btw.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,709
    Pulpstar said:

    HYUFD said:

    vik said:

    New University of Denver poll shows a Tie in Colorado

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/co/colorado_trump_vs_clinton_vs_johnson_vs_stein-5974.html

    Colorado is increasingly looking like the pivotal state for both campaigns, win there and you win the Electoral College
    Mike Pence visited yesterday.
    Yes Trump campaign still there but Hillary campaign seem to have scaled down activity, they may need to scale it back up
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    Pulpstar said:

    Trump seems confident !

    - Tuesday, November 08, 2016 -
    DONALD J. TRUMP VICTORY PARTY

    Trump is hardly going to call it "Crooked Hillary Victory Party" .... :smile:
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,836
    AlastairMeeks said:

    Bromptonaut said:

    No interest on PB over the 10am decision on the Article 50 High Court case.

    Which is interesting in itself.

    I'm very interested. The reasoning will be at least as important as the decision. This isn't just about Brexit, it's about how we are governed.
    It's an interesting legal question which some woukd prefer to ignore because of the motivations of those who brought the case unfortunately. Frankly, it seems an important question to answer no matter ones politics, and doesn't close off any end one way or another anyway.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 14,063
    Morning all :)

    Musing on the volatility and variations of polls with special regard to some of the quirky numbers coming out of the US at present.

    Most people don't change their minds - even within "events" happen, it or they don't have the impact widely assumed in the immediate aftermath. The tragic and terrible murder of Jo Cox had, I would argue, little or no impact on the result though plenty on here and elsewhere were arguing, in the hours following, it would.

    And the polls moved as if to support that thesis but as OGH argued yesterday, in an emotional age there's a certain taboo to an unemotional response. In the immediate aftermath of the death of Diana in 1997 there was an apparent huge emotional response but for all the emotion we saw, there were a lot of people who didn't have that response yet at the time if you didn't cry or wail, there was something wrong with you.

    I confess I didn't watch the funeral - I went for a walk, I wasn't that bothered.

    In the hot house, we may assume all the other plants outside are growing as fast as we are but they aren't - we may think everyone is talking about Clinton's emails - they probably aren't.

    To move on, in an election where so many can vote before the day, do late polls have any relevance ? If 20-25% of people have already voted, are they included in the late polls or, if you've already voted, are you excluded or do you choose not to respond ?

    LEAVE had already won before June 23rd and the Conservatives had already won the GE before May 7th 2015 because they had won decisively among the early or postal voters who were insulated against the late breaking events as they had already cast their ballots. It may be even though Trump wins on the day in many states (and even nationally), HRC has sewn up enough early ballots to prevail.

    We don't know but it's further encouragement to treat the plethora of polls with a bucket load of salt.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    another_richard said:

    JackW said:

    National Panel Tracker - LA Times - Sample 2,938 - 3 Nov

    Clinton 42.5 .. Trump 47.5

    Note - Trump winning the 18-34 demographic, the gender divide by 10.3 points and one third more Hispanics than Romney ..... Chortle .... :sunglasses:

    http://graphics.latimes.com/usc-presidential-poll-dashboard/

    Maybe so but its often a bad sign when people start mocking subsamples.
    I'm not mocking it .... I'm saying it's a pile of crap !! .. :smiley:
  • SandraMSandraM Posts: 206
    George Osborne was genuinely funny in that clip. I remember James Corden on The Marr Show saying that Osborne has "funnybones" and is naturally funny. (Not so sure Corden is though)
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,654
    Chris said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    JackW said:

    National - IPSOS/Reuters - Sample 1,772 - 28 Oct - 1 Nov

    Clinton 44.7 .. Trump 37.4

    http://polling.reuters.com/#poll/TM651Y15_26/filters/LIKELY:1

    Every pollster seems to be having an outlier....
    Probably the outlier of the day is this one just added to 538 (though concluded nearly two weeks ago):
    Louisiana OCT. 15-21 The Times-Picayune/Lucid (614) C: 40% T: 43% J: 6% Trump +3

    Obviously we have to use averages, not individual polls.
    I can't see any Louisiana poll with Trump as narrowly as 3% ahead.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,075
    Mr. kle4, what rule did Parliament pass enabling the judiciary to determine the limits of the royal prerogative? [Not being sarcastic, incidentally].
  • MonikerDiCanioMonikerDiCanio Posts: 5,792
    another_richard said:

    JackW said:

    National Panel Tracker - LA Times - Sample 2,938 - 3 Nov

    Clinton 42.5 .. Trump 47.5

    Note - Trump winning the 18-34 demographic, the gender divide by 10.3 points and one third more Hispanics than Romney ..... Chortle .... :sunglasses:

    http://graphics.latimes.com/usc-presidential-poll-dashboard/

    Maybe so but its often a bad sign when people start mocking subsamples.
    I'd guess that the LA Times has a better handle on the voting intentions of US Hispanics than Jack W.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,920
    Sean_F said:

    AlastairMeeks said:

    1.41 looks a very good price for Hillary on current polling, never mind 1.45. The other side of the bet is effectively a bet that the polls are systematically wrong and the interpretation placed on early voting data is misplaced. They might be but I wouldn't be rushing to that assumption.

    Broadly I agree, but I don't think much weight should be placed on early voting numbers, for the reasons given by Sean Trende. We should assume that she's about 2-3% ahead.
    Anyone who didn't read the Sean Tende piece would be well advised to do so. His view - that early voting patterns have next to no use as prediction - is compelling.
  • MrsBMrsB Posts: 574
    rottenborough said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Greens not standing in Richmond Park, cancels UKIP tbh.

    I was wondering when this would happen. Zac is a green conservative, an endangered breed which needs protection.
    The Greens aren't doing it to help Goldsmith, they're doing it to help the Lib Dems!
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,301
    Bath MP in some local difficulty.

    http://www.bathchronicle.co.uk/bath-mp-ben-howlett-quizzed-by-police-over-sex-assault-claims/story-29864900-detail/story.html
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,654
    edited November 2016
    stodge said:


    To move on, in an election where so many can vote before the day, do late polls have any relevance ? If 20-25% of people have already voted, are they included in the late polls or, if you've already voted, are you excluded or do you choose not to respond ?

    In theory the polls should pick up early voters, and since they've already voted - those people should state the way they've ACTUALLY voted.
  • mattmatt Posts: 3,789
    AlastairMeeks said:

    From previous threads: those that haven't been to Northern Ireland should give it a visit. Don't spend too long in Belfast, the real interest is in the countryside.

    Although the Titanic Museum is one of the best museums in Britain (and the Sunday afternoon tea is remarkable). The current Scott and Amundsen exhibition there is first rate.
  • ChrisChris Posts: 11,783
    Pulpstar said:

    Chris said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    JackW said:

    National - IPSOS/Reuters - Sample 1,772 - 28 Oct - 1 Nov

    Clinton 44.7 .. Trump 37.4

    http://polling.reuters.com/#poll/TM651Y15_26/filters/LIKELY:1

    Every pollster seems to be having an outlier....
    Probably the outlier of the day is this one just added to 538 (though concluded nearly two weeks ago):
    Louisiana OCT. 15-21 The Times-Picayune/Lucid (614) C: 40% T: 43% J: 6% Trump +3

    Obviously we have to use averages, not individual polls.
    I can't see any Louisiana poll with Trump as narrowly as 3% ahead.
    Apart from copying and pasting all the details and telling you where they came from, what more can I do to convince you I'm not making it up?
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    MonikerDiCanio said:

    another_richard said:

    JackW said:

    National Panel Tracker - LA Times - Sample 2,938 - 3 Nov

    Clinton 42.5 .. Trump 47.5

    Note - Trump winning the 18-34 demographic, the gender divide by 10.3 points and one third more Hispanics than Romney ..... Chortle .... :sunglasses:

    http://graphics.latimes.com/usc-presidential-poll-dashboard/

    Maybe so but its often a bad sign when people start mocking subsamples.
    I'd guess that the LA Times has a better handle on the voting intentions of US Hispanics than Jack W.
    I'd guess that the LA Times also has a better handle on Hispanic voting intentions than all the specialist polls of that demographic showing Donald tanking with him barely getting half of Romney's vote.
  • 619619 Posts: 1,784
    HYUFD said:

    Pulpstar said:

    HYUFD said:

    vik said:

    New University of Denver poll shows a Tie in Colorado

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/co/colorado_trump_vs_clinton_vs_johnson_vs_stein-5974.html

    Colorado is increasingly looking like the pivotal state for both campaigns, win there and you win the Electoral College
    Mike Pence visited yesterday.
    Yes Trump campaign still there but Hillary campaign seem to have scaled down activity, they may need to scale it back up
    they did a few months ago. Tbf, the average lead for clinton is high there, that poll has a too low sample of hispanics, and they are massively up in early voting.

    If Trump does scrape a win, it will be through a win here, but i can understand why allocating resources to other places is more important
  • RogerRoger Posts: 20,062
    foxinsoxuk said:

    AlastairMeeks said:

    From previous threads: those that haven't been to Northern Ireland should give it a visit. Don't spend too long in Belfast, the real interest is in the countryside.

    There must be some interesting political history for those of us brought up in the Seventies too.
    ...and it's thrown up some very watchable British films. My two favourites being '71 and Cal.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,654
    edited November 2016
    Chris said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Chris said:

    MarqueeMark said:

    JackW said:

    National - IPSOS/Reuters - Sample 1,772 - 28 Oct - 1 Nov

    Clinton 44.7 .. Trump 37.4

    http://polling.reuters.com/#poll/TM651Y15_26/filters/LIKELY:1

    Every pollster seems to be having an outlier....
    Probably the outlier of the day is this one just added to 538 (though concluded nearly two weeks ago):
    Louisiana OCT. 15-21 The Times-Picayune/Lucid (614) C: 40% T: 43% J: 6% Trump +3

    Obviously we have to use averages, not individual polls.
    I can't see any Louisiana poll with Trump as narrowly as 3% ahead.
    Apart from copying and pasting all the details and telling you where they came from, what more can I do to convince you I'm not making it up?
    Found it, 538 "adjusted" it to T +8...
  • mattmatt Posts: 3,789
    Morris_Dancer said:

    Miss Plato, I'd keep your name, but it's up to you, of course.

    Mr. Bromptonaut, it's been delayed ages and we've discussed it a lot. Besides, this is like the starter before the main course of the judgement. And the judgement itself is likely only the first leg ahead of appeal.

    It's ridiculous the judiciary may meddle in politics in this way.

    You're correct, who needs the rule of law.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,836
    Morris_Dancer said:

    Mr. kle4, what rule did Parliament pass enabling the judiciary to determine the limits of the royal prerogative? [Not being sarcastic, incidentally].

    Granted I am not a lawyer, but the general principle is surely that parliament passes laws, and they can make ones saying what the judiciary can and cannot do. For all I know the court will rule it cannot decide as it is beyond their power, but the question can only be asked of the court in order to reveal that for sure. The alternative is the government gets to decide what the legal position is without legal challenge, and they never get the law wrong do they?

    It essentially seems a process issue more than anything else, and that is why it is a good thing the courts will indicate. We will all be clear, in the end, of the process, and then Brexit will occur. What harm? May woukd probably like the high court to rule against the government, it will stir up people and she can count on them for months more at least no matter what else she does. Then if the Supreme Court, in the end, rules in the government favour great. If not, she has the votes to do it in parliament.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,836
    Roger said:

    foxinsoxuk said:

    AlastairMeeks said:

    From previous threads: those that haven't been to Northern Ireland should give it a visit. Don't spend too long in Belfast, the real interest is in the countryside.

    There must be some interesting political history for those of us brought up in the Seventies too.
    ...and it's thrown up some very watchable British films. My two favourites being '71 and Cal.
    Found 71 pretty meh, to be honest, a shame as it was talked up to me quite about.
This discussion has been closed.