Howdy, Stranger!

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

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Tonight’s local and Westminster by-election preview

135

Comments

  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 63,105
    Lovely interview with 96 year old Mike Sadler (last survivor of the founding of the SOS) on Newsnight.
  • Options
    nunu said:

    Prediction: Zac by 10%.

    Has Paddy eaten his hat yet??
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,229
    Speedy said:

    nunu said:

    Prediction: Zac by 10%.

    If he wins by 3K with turnout at 35% it would be around that area.
    I don't think turnout will be quite that low; wasn't the quote that turnout was "as low as 35% in some areas".
  • Options
    AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Richmond Park had one of the highest turnouts in the country in 2015. (Twickenham was the highest in England at 77.3%). I'd be surprised if turnout today is as low as 35%.
  • Options
    BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 8,010
    William Hill have now closed their book. Only Ladbrokes are open (plus Betfair) offering 1/2 for Zac, 6/4 for Sarah.
  • Options
    SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    kle4 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    kle4 said:

    Speedy said:

    35% turnout is actually low for a by-election of this importance.

    The Tories should be nervous, it might be low enough for the zombies to win.

    But it's certainly not an anti-tory wave.

    If the turnout is that low, is it really an important by election?
    A Tory loss on any turnout (ok, Ind loss, if we must) would be very important, as it would be a shock even on low turnout, and shocks are important because they force everyone to react differently.
    Would it be a shock if Zac loses to the Lib-Dems? I thought it was on the cards from the start - Voters HATE being forced to trudge to the polls for needless elections (especially three weeks before Christmas) and will usually punish those that bring it upon them.
    .
    But do they? OGH said on a thread 'In fact if you look at other by-elections where the incumbent seeks re-election then they usually do so', with very few failures apparently.

    Without a Tory opponent to split his vote, and with UKIP also explicitly backing him, even with the Greens doing likewise for the LDs Zac should be safe given his stonking great majority and that there doesn't seem to be much antipathy toward him for his decision.

    Realistically I'd have thought the LDs would hope to be within a few thousand, where they were in 2010 when they lost the seat, indicating the 20% drop in 2015 had been reversed, as there are other seats where recovering that would win a seat back.
    I would probably read it the other way if the LD lost.

    It would be the second by-election in a row where they put all their eggs in one basket and still lost.
  • Options
    AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Barnesian said:

    AndyJS said:

    Scott_P said:

    @STJamesl: LDs ahead in first boxes I'm told #tension #gnats

    Doesn't mean anything since the first boxes could be from one of the LDs better areas in the constituency.
    If they are from Kingston as reported, then all Kingston four wards were heavily Tory in the last local elections by a factor of two to one. But Sarah is from Kingston.
    Kingston used to be the best part of the constituency for the Tories. For example in 1997 they probably won the seat because of it. But I think things have changed a bit since then and Richmond is more Tory than it used to be.
  • Options
    AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Barnesian said:

    William Hill have now closed their book. Only Ladbrokes are open (plus Betfair) offering 1/2 for Zac, 6/4 for Sarah.

    Betfair Exchange is of course still available.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,028
    Can Sky News get back to Richmond :p
  • Options
    DixieDixie Posts: 1,221
    AndyJS said:

    Barnesian said:

    William Hill have now closed their book. Only Ladbrokes are open (plus Betfair) offering 1/2 for Zac, 6/4 for Sarah.

    Betfair Exchange is of course still available.
    few pennies on Libs is still the only bet in town. Should be evens. Tories are feeling a bit better currently.
  • Options
    AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Labour candidate in Richmond Park — "Time to ban toilet paper"

    http://www.christianwolmar.co.uk/2016/09/time-to-ban-toilet-paper/
  • Options
    BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 8,010
    Live blog from the count here with pictures and a running commentary:

    http://www.coombemonthly.co.uk/richmondpark-by-election-live-blog/
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,578
    Speedy said:

    kle4 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    kle4 said:

    Speedy said:

    35% turnout is actually low for a by-election of this importance.

    The Tories should be nervous, it might be low enough for the zombies to win.

    But it's certainly not an anti-tory wave.

    If the turnout is that low, is it really an important by election?
    A Tory loss on any turnout (ok, Ind loss, if we must) would be very important, as it would be a shock even on low turnout, and shocks are important because they force everyone to react differently.
    Would it be a shock if Zac loses to the Lib-Dems? I thought it was on the cards from the start - Voters HATE being forced to trudge to the polls for needless elections (especially three weeks before Christmas) and will usually punish those that bring it upon them.
    .
    But do they? OGH said on a thread 'In fact if you look at other by-elections where the incumbent seeks re-election then they usually do so', with very few failures apparently.

    Without a Tory opponent to split his vote, and with UKIP also explicitly backing him, even with the Greens doing likewise for the LDs Zac should be safe given his stonking great majority and that there doesn't seem to be much antipathy toward him for his decision.

    Realistically I'd have thought the LDs would hope to be within a few thousand, where they were in 2010 when they lost the seat, indicating the 20% drop in 2015 had been reversed, as there are other seats where recovering that would win a seat back.
    I would probably read it the other way if the LD lost.

    It would be the second by-election in a row where they put all their eggs in one basket and still lost.
    There is only one basket.
  • Options
    DixieDixie Posts: 1,221
    Independent gains Walbrook in City of London from...Independent. Ooh
  • Options
    PaganPagan Posts: 259
    FPT re the burqa

    While I believe the state shouldnt intervene unless necessary I have to reluctantly come down on the side of a ban here, the thing is with the burqa is it does not merely affect the woman wearing it

    - it is a proclamation that those men viewing it are slaves to their own lust, and its necessary to hide yourself for fear of inviting it

    - It labels in the minds of those men that think wearing a burqa a thing that woman should do any woman not wearing one as a women of loose morals and fair game

    - It prevents social interaction when in a culture where facial expression is the norm

    - It is a public statement of rejection of the host culture and therefore subconsciously stokes racial tensions

    The burqa is often compared to a nuns whimple...not sure any of these objections apply to that and I certainly wouldnt advocate a ban on the niquab
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,578
    Speedy said:
    But wherever it is that Labour is progressing toward is unlikely to be a sensible place to go.
  • Options
    I think Ruth Davidson is coming across really well on QT.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 92,087
    IanB2 said:

    Speedy said:

    kle4 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    kle4 said:

    Speedy said:

    35% turnout is actually low for a by-election of this importance.

    The Tories should be nervous, it might be low enough for the zombies to win.

    But it's certainly not an anti-tory wave.

    If the turnout is that low, is it really an important by election?
    A Tory loss on any turnout (ok, Ind loss, if we must) would be very important, as it would be a shock even on low turnout, and shocks are important because they force everyone to react differently.
    Would it be a shock if Zac loses to the Lib-Dems? I thought it was on the cards from the start - Voters HATE being forced to trudge to the polls for needless elections (especially three weeks before Christmas) and will usually punish those that bring it upon them.
    .
    But do they? OGH said on a thread 'In fact if you look at other by-elections where the incumbent seeks re-election then they usually do so', with very few failures apparently.

    Without a Tory opponent to split his vote, and with UKIP also explicitly backing him, even with the Greens doing likewise for the LDs Zac should be safe given his stonking great majority and that there doesn't seem to be much antipathy toward him for his decision.

    Realistically I'd have thought the LDs would hope to be within a few thousand, where they were in 2010 when they lost the seat, indicating the 20% drop in 2015 had been reversed, as there are other seats where recovering that would win a seat back.
    I would probably read it the other way if the LD lost.

    It would be the second by-election in a row where they put all their eggs in one basket and still lost.
    There is only one basket.
    They'd be happy just to get on the court to attempt to get near the basket. #mixedmetaphors.
  • Options
    Betfair moving to Zac..but .....
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,028
    edited December 2016
    http://labourlist.org/2016/12/richmond-park-by-election-liveblog/ ought to be reasonably neutral actually.

    Wolmar hasn't won, we know that much at least.
  • Options
    SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    IanB2 said:

    Speedy said:

    kle4 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    kle4 said:

    Speedy said:

    35% turnout is actually low for a by-election of this importance.

    The Tories should be nervous, it might be low enough for the zombies to win.

    But it's certainly not an anti-tory wave.

    If the turnout is that low, is it really an important by election?
    A Tory loss on any turnout (ok, Ind loss, if we must) would be very important, as it would be a shock even on low turnout, and shocks are important because they force everyone to react differently.
    Would it be a shock if Zac loses to the Lib-Dems? I thought it was on the cards from the start - Voters HATE being forced to trudge to the polls for needless elections (especially three weeks before Christmas) and will usually punish those that bring it upon them.
    .
    But do they? OGH said on a thread 'In fact if you look at other by-elections where the incumbent seeks re-election then they usually do so', with very few failures apparently.

    Without a Tory opponent to split his vote, and with UKIP also explicitly backing him, even with the Greens doing likewise for the LDs Zac should be safe given his stonking great majority and that there doesn't seem to be much antipathy toward him for his decision.

    Realistically I'd have thought the LDs would hope to be within a few thousand, where they were in 2010 when they lost the seat, indicating the 20% drop in 2015 had been reversed, as there are other seats where recovering that would win a seat back.
    I would probably read it the other way if the LD lost.

    It would be the second by-election in a row where they put all their eggs in one basket and still lost.
    There is only one basket.
    I could have mixed my metaphors and included Budapest kitchen sinks thrown into the by election by the LD.
  • Options
    brokenwheelbrokenwheel Posts: 3,352

    I think Ruth Davidson is coming across really well on QT.

    What has happened to QT? It was actually watchable today.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 92,087

    I think Ruth Davidson is coming across really well on QT.

    I hadn't seen much of her until the EU referendum, and I can see why the Tories are so fond o her. She's reasonably funny, for a politician, personable, and appears quick witted. In the EU debate I saw her in she picked up quickly on the irritating 'as a mother' refrain of Leadsom and co, and though it didn't work and provoked laughter, her boldness in attempting to make a positive EU case by claiming we make it work for us more than it makes us work for it, was interesting at least.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,028
    Live betting position:

    Lib Dem Zac < 2500 Zac 2500+
    +23.595 +156.38 +158.89
  • Options
    DixieDixie Posts: 1,221
    AndyJS said:

    Labour candidate in Richmond Park — "Time to ban toilet paper"

    http://www.christianwolmar.co.uk/2016/09/time-to-ban-toilet-paper/

    Ha!
  • Options

    Betfair moving to Zac..but .....

    And now big style to the Remainers
  • Options
    BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 8,010
    Pulpstar said:

    Live betting position:

    Lib Dem Zac < 2500 Zac 2500+
    +23.595 +156.38 +158.89

    I'm green on all results except LibDem > 2,500. I can live with that.
    I'm +£211 if Zac<2,500.
  • Options
    MarkSeniorMarkSenior Posts: 4,699
    Con hold Warwick
    LDem Gain Chichester
  • Options
    ParistondaParistonda Posts: 1,819
    nunu said:

    SeanT said:

    FF43 said:

    SeanT said:

    kle4 said:

    SeanT said:

    This is as exciting as Brexit night, isn't it?

    We shall never see its like again. Unless we get Brexit Round 3 at some point.
    It just occurred to me that politics will NEVER be as exciting as 2014-2016. From indyref to the GE to Corbyn to the incredible peak of Brexit and The Donald, that was it.

    We're done. We're finished. Within the realms of democratic politics, we have had the most excitement possible. We can't touch those heights again. From now on, all is gentle decline.

    *sigh*
    1989 was even more exciting surely? Internationally, anyway
    1989 was probably more exciting, and certainly much more important, but I specifically said "within the realm of democratic politics we have had the most excitement possible" - ie. within electoral politics here in the west.

    For politics nerds like us, I do not see how it can feasibly get any more exciting than what we have witnessed 2014-2016. Even a Marine Le Pen election wouldn't quite match Brexit or Trump. And Corbyn has provided incredible comedy.

    It's a golden age now ending, like the first tang of autumn in the Summer of Love, or French Art in the decades before the lilacs and roses of the Great War.

    2014-2016, we salute you.
    nah I actually think Le Pen would be bigger earthquake then trump because trump was standing on the Republican party platform who are not considered neo nazi/facist like FN. But trump is more important in terms of west's general direction.
    I think the implications of a Le Pen victory will be far more wide reaching - if frexit happens (which, if she wins, means a referendum victory is likely) I can't see the EU surviving much longer. Not to mention a complete pro-Russia pivot. the new axis of Trump-Le Pen-Putin would leave leaders like Merkel and May feeling very isolated.
  • Options
    Looks like I went all Green far too early.
  • Options
    AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
  • Options
    DixieDixie Posts: 1,221
    Pulpstar said:

    I know stuff is going on but can't Sky get back to the by-election..

    I do agree. WInding us up!
  • Options

    I think Ruth Davidson is coming across really well on QT.

    What has happened to QT? It was actually watchable today.
    Yeah, I'm enjoying it so far. I think Davidson, Stanley, and Johnson have all done really well. Even the Leave guy isn't so bad.
    kle4 said:

    I think Ruth Davidson is coming across really well on QT.

    I hadn't seen much of her until the EU referendum, and I can see why the Tories are so fond o her. She's reasonably funny, for a politician, personable, and appears quick witted. In the EU debate I saw her in she picked up quickly on the irritating 'as a mother' refrain of Leadsom and co, and though it didn't work and provoked laughter, her boldness in attempting to make a positive EU case by claiming we make it work for us more than it makes us work for it, was interesting at least.
    Agreed. She comes across as very down to earth, and reasonable. A lot of politicians could learn from her.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,028
    FFSake somethings happening at the count and no news org is there...
  • Options
    SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    Pulpstar said:

    FFSake somethings happening at the count and no news org is there...

    Are you at the count?
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548

    I think Ruth Davidson is coming across really well on QT.

    What has happened to QT? It was actually watchable today.
    Yeah, I'm enjoying it so far. I think Davidson, Stanley, and Johnson have all done really well. Even the Leave guy isn't so bad.
    kle4 said:

    I think Ruth Davidson is coming across really well on QT.

    I hadn't seen much of her until the EU referendum, and I can see why the Tories are so fond o her. She's reasonably funny, for a politician, personable, and appears quick witted. In the EU debate I saw her in she picked up quickly on the irritating 'as a mother' refrain of Leadsom and co, and though it didn't work and provoked laughter, her boldness in attempting to make a positive EU case by claiming we make it work for us more than it makes us work for it, was interesting at least.
    Agreed. She comes across as very down to earth, and reasonable. A lot of politicians could learn from her.
    Ruth is a star, but can anyone name any other Scottish Tory? It looks very much a one woman band.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,028
    Speedy said:

    Pulpstar said:

    FFSake somethings happening at the count and no news org is there...

    Are you at the count?
    Nope
  • Options
    MarkSeniorMarkSenior Posts: 4,699
    24% swing Con to LD in Chichester
  • Options
    DixieDixie Posts: 1,221
    So Lib Dems have the best data in Richmond because they have had lots of voters in the past and have historical data. Labour have never had enough voters. Zac doesn't have Tory data, that's has been confirmed to me. But Tories feeling more comfortable all of a sudden. Only Libs should know the outcome and certainly the ones I have spoken don't think they have done enough. Good, if true, but data is thin on the ground. One Tory canvasser said that Libs had every member in the country there today and it was pissing people off. It's the sense of entitlement from the Liberal Elite that annoys people.
  • Options
    timmotimmo Posts: 1,469
  • Options
    BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 8,010

    Con hold Warwick
    LDem Gain Chichester

    24% swing Tory to LibDem. That's big!
  • Options
    Crossover.
  • Options
    SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    Pulpstar said:

    Speedy said:

    Pulpstar said:

    FFSake somethings happening at the count and no news org is there...

    Are you at the count?
    Nope
    Then how do you know something is happening there?
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548

    Crossover.

    crossover indeed...
  • Options
    DixieDixie Posts: 1,221
    Southbourne is a Lib Dem gain. F*ck
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,578
    LDs 1.51 Zac 1.96
  • Options
    MarkSeniorMarkSenior Posts: 4,699

    24% swing Con to LD in Chichester

    LD 646
    Con 289
    UKIP 132
    Lab 53
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,028
    Speedy said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Speedy said:

    Pulpstar said:

    FFSake somethings happening at the count and no news org is there...

    Are you at the count?
    Nope
    Then how do you know something is happening there?
    Betfair going mad.
  • Options
    Totally agree with Ruth Davidson on Labour.
  • Options
    AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Pulpstar said:

    FFSake somethings happening at the count and no news org is there...

    Sky are there, aren't they
  • Options
    BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 8,010
    William Hill have pulled their book and Sarah is 1.52 - 2.00 on Betfair
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,578
    Faisal is on the wrong side of the law IMO
  • Options
    DixieDixie Posts: 1,221
    23% swing in Southbourne to yellows
  • Options
    AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395

    I think Ruth Davidson is coming across really well on QT.

    I don't like her much but I understand that she's the acceptable face of Toryism for lefties.
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,698
    edited December 2016
    Hah, I messaged some of PB's premier punters 10 mins ago telling them I was off to bed, and expecting to wake up to a Zac victory.

    Now there's crossover on Betfair.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,028
    AndyJS said:

    Pulpstar said:

    FFSake somethings happening at the count and no news org is there...

    Sky are there, aren't they
    Yes but they have Oakeshott and another lady wittering on.
  • Options
    BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 8,010
    "The Lib Dems are still being cautious, but someone from the Labour camp said it is looking like a Lib Dem win - “and not in recount territory, either”." Guardian blog
  • Options
    sladeslade Posts: 1,941
    Southbourne, Chichester
    LD 646, Con 289, Ukip 132, Lab 57.
  • Options
    AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Just put £20 on Zac at 2.1 which probably means he'll lose given my luck recently.
  • Options
    Barnesian said:

    Con hold Warwick
    LDem Gain Chichester

    24% swing Tory to LibDem. That's big!
    Oh that's Chichester, NOT Richmond!
  • Options
    MTimTMTimT Posts: 7,034
    If he loses, can't say that I have one ounce of sympathy for Zac.
  • Options
    MTimT said:

    If he loses, can't say that I have one ounce of sympathy for Zac.

    If Zac does lose, he will have more spare time to watch his Bollywood collection
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,578
    MTimT said:

    If he loses, can't say that I have one ounce of sympathy for Zac.

    There would be some sort of justice in the son of the leader of the Referendum Party losing his seat because the voters don't like his being against Europe.
  • Options
    DixieDixie Posts: 1,221
    IanB2 said:

    LDs 1.51 Zac 1.96

    early boxes are yellow but as we know it is random. Tories going in to their shells again I assume. They've certainly stopped answering my text messages!
  • Options
    MarkSeniorMarkSenior Posts: 4,699
    Dixie said:

    23% swing in Southbourne to yellows

    But the Conservatives are SIXTEEN POINTS AHEAD in the Polls and Lib Dems are at 7%
  • Options
    Next week QT is the pits of a panel.
  • Options
    4k version of this week's grand tour will be worth watching.
  • Options
    BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 8,010
    I think it is over. LibDem win.
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,578
    Dixie said:

    IanB2 said:

    LDs 1.51 Zac 1.96

    early boxes are yellow but as we know it is random. Tories going in to their shells again I assume. They've certainly stopped answering my text messages!
    Now LibDems almost nailed on acc Betfair at 1.12, Zac going out to 2.68 - someone at least thinks they know...
  • Options
    MarkSeniorMarkSenior Posts: 4,699
    Conservative Gain from UKIP in Dorset Ferndown
  • Options

    I think Ruth Davidson is coming across really well on QT.

    What has happened to QT? It was actually watchable today.
    Yeah, I'm enjoying it so far. I think Davidson, Stanley, and Johnson have all done really well. Even the Leave guy isn't so bad.
    kle4 said:

    I think Ruth Davidson is coming across really well on QT.

    I hadn't seen much of her until the EU referendum, and I can see why the Tories are so fond o her. She's reasonably funny, for a politician, personable, and appears quick witted. In the EU debate I saw her in she picked up quickly on the irritating 'as a mother' refrain of Leadsom and co, and though it didn't work and provoked laughter, her boldness in attempting to make a positive EU case by claiming we make it work for us more than it makes us work for it, was interesting at least.
    Agreed. She comes across as very down to earth, and reasonable. A lot of politicians could learn from her.
    Ruth is a star, but can anyone name any other Scottish Tory? It looks very much a one woman band.
    That's true. The Scottish Tories seem to be doing pretty well (by recent past standards anyway) under her, but I wonder if that'll continue when she's no longer leader. A quick google tells me that she's in her late thirties - so relatively young for a leader, and so she may be leader, for some time yet. Alternatively, the Tories may want her to come down to Westminster if she continues on this upwards trajectory.
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,698
    edited December 2016
    This chart does look eerily familiar

    https://twitter.com/MSmithsonPB/status/804471899887665152
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,229
    MTimT said:

    If he loses, can't say that I have one ounce of sympathy for Zac.

    Indeed; the man's an idiot.
  • Options
    AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Barnesian said:

    I think it is over. LibDem win.

    Based on...?
  • Options
    DixieDixie Posts: 1,221
    IanB2 said:

    Dixie said:

    IanB2 said:

    LDs 1.51 Zac 1.96

    early boxes are yellow but as we know it is random. Tories going in to their shells again I assume. They've certainly stopped answering my text messages!
    Now LibDems almost nailed on acc Betfair at 1.12, Zac going out to 2.68 - someone at least thinks they know...
    blimey
  • Options
    DixieDixie Posts: 1,221
    AndyJS said:

    Barnesian said:

    I think it is over. LibDem win.

    Based on...?
    that is what the Tories told me at 10 pm.
  • Options
    AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited December 2016
    They haven't actually started counting any votes yet, as opposed to verifying them.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2016/dec/01/richmond-park-byelection-results-counting-starts-live
  • Options
    AndyJS said:

    I think Ruth Davidson is coming across really well on QT.

    I don't like her much but I understand that she's the acceptable face of Toryism for lefties.
    There is no acceptable face of Toryism for the British left these days. Those who have taken over the Labour party deem every Tory - in fact anyone who doesn't buy into the cult of Jeremy Corbyn - to be evil and worthy of contempt.
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,578
    Zac now 3.85
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,229
    AndyJS said:

    They haven't actually started counting any votes yet, as opposed to verifying them.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2016/dec/01/richmond-park-byelection-results-counting-starts-live

    Shhhh. Will you stop bringing facts into this debate.
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548

    I think Ruth Davidson is coming across really well on QT.

    What has happened to QT? It was actually watchable today.
    Yeah, I'm enjoying it so far. I think Davidson, Stanley, and Johnson have all done really well. Even the Leave guy isn't so bad.
    kle4 said:

    I think Ruth Davidson is coming across really well on QT.

    I hadn't seen much of her until the EU referendum, and I can see why the Tories are so fond o her. She's reasonably funny, for a politician, personable, and appears quick witted. In the EU debate I saw her in she picked up quickly on the irritating 'as a mother' refrain of Leadsom and co, and though it didn't work and provoked laughter, her boldness in attempting to make a positive EU case by claiming we make it work for us more than it makes us work for it, was interesting at least.
    Agreed. She comes across as very down to earth, and reasonable. A lot of politicians could learn from her.
    Ruth is a star, but can anyone name any other Scottish Tory? It looks very much a one woman band.
    That's true. The Scottish Tories seem to be doing pretty well (by recent past standards anyway) under her, but I wonder if that'll continue when she's no longer leader. A quick google tells me that she's in her late thirties - so relatively young for a leader, and so she may be leader, for some time yet. Alternatively, the Tories may want her to come down to Westminster if she continues on this upwards trajectory.
    I think Ruth prefers Holyrood, she is no Mayfly.

  • Options
    JonathanDJonathanD Posts: 2,400
    edited December 2016
    MTimT said:

    If he loses, can't say that I have one ounce of sympathy for Zac.

    But is it a rejection of Zac or a rejection of the EU obsessed Tories?
  • Options
    DixieDixie Posts: 1,221
    rcs1000 said:

    MTimT said:

    If he loses, can't say that I have one ounce of sympathy for Zac.

    Indeed; the man's an idiot.
    indeed indeed. utterly self centred approach. He was sitting pretty a year ago. Now losy Mayoralty and lost his MP seat when he could have carried on for 30 years.
  • Options
    SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    AndyJS said:

    They haven't actually started counting any votes yet, as opposed to verifying them.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2016/dec/01/richmond-park-byelection-results-counting-starts-live

    Then what the heck is Faisal Islam talking about.
  • Options
    FF43FF43 Posts: 15,843
    Dixie said:

    Southbourne is a Lib Dem gain. F*ck

    UKIP didn't stand last time. The Conservatives have lost over half their vote share, with a big chunk going to the Lib Dems and another big chunk to UKIP. It must be an extreme example of the Brexitisation of politics that Mike referred to earlier today.
  • Options
    AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Speedy said:

    AndyJS said:

    They haven't actually started counting any votes yet, as opposed to verifying them.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2016/dec/01/richmond-park-byelection-results-counting-starts-live

    Then what the heck is Faisal Islam talking about.
    So-called "sampling", probably.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 92,087
    edited December 2016
    AndyJS said:

    Barnesian said:

    I think it is over. LibDem win.

    Based on...?
    Either people have been really good spotting signals, or one person moved and everyone followed assuming there was something in it.
  • Options
    DixieDixie Posts: 1,221

    Dixie said:

    23% swing in Southbourne to yellows

    But the Conservatives are SIXTEEN POINTS AHEAD in the Polls and Lib Dems are at 7%
    very good. only on paper
  • Options
    rcs1000 said:

    AndyJS said:

    They haven't actually started counting any votes yet, as opposed to verifying them.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2016/dec/01/richmond-park-byelection-results-counting-starts-live

    Shhhh. Will you stop bringing facts into this debate.
    But you can occasionally get a good indication from the verification stage
  • Options
    BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 8,010
    AndyJS said:

    Barnesian said:

    I think it is over. LibDem win.

    Based on...?
    Betfair. Someone knows something from the verification stage. There was a point just now when no one was laying the LibDem and someone else wanted 900/1 to bet on Zac. It's stabilised a bit now but there is information out there. There will be moles tweeting from inside the count. No wonder Ladbrokes and William Hill have closed their books.
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,578
    Ed Balls still seems pretty chubby despite his weeks of jumping about
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    edited December 2016
    Dixie said:

    rcs1000 said:

    MTimT said:

    If he loses, can't say that I have one ounce of sympathy for Zac.

    Indeed; the man's an idiot.
    indeed indeed. utterly self centred approach. He was sitting pretty a year ago. Now losy Mayoralty and lost his MP seat when he could have carried on for 30 years.
    He can retire to spend more time with his money.
  • Options
    AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Barnesian said:

    AndyJS said:

    Barnesian said:

    I think it is over. LibDem win.

    Based on...?
    Betfair. Someone knows something from the verification stage. There was a point just now when no one was laying the LibDem and someone else wanted 900/1 to bet on Zac. It's stabilised a bit now but there is information out there. There will be moles tweeting from inside the count. No wonder Ladbrokes and William Hill have closed their books.
    It looks more like ill-informed punters overreacting to the gossip and speculation on Twitter. That doesn't mean the LDs won't win of course.
  • Options
    tpfkartpfkar Posts: 1,548
    Speedy said:

    AndyJS said:

    They haven't actually started counting any votes yet, as opposed to verifying them.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2016/dec/01/richmond-park-byelection-results-counting-starts-live

    Then what the heck is Faisal Islam talking about.
    It's the verification stage when you do your sampling. Too late when they are counting them. Faisal's tweet makes good sense, albeit I think it's dangerous to be tweeting that live from a count.
  • Options
    SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    So based on this Tim Farron is going to be our PM.
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,578
    Barnesian said:

    AndyJS said:

    Barnesian said:

    I think it is over. LibDem win.

    Based on...?
    Betfair. Someone knows something from the verification stage. There was a point just now when no one was laying the LibDem and someone else wanted 900/1 to bet on Zac. It's stabilised a bit now but there is information out there. There will be moles tweeting from inside the count. No wonder Ladbrokes and William Hill have closed their books.
    If you know an area and its boxes, it is usually possible to know how things are going early in a verification - and the LibDems will have a lot of local experience to draw on (as will any Tories that Zac has been good enough to invite, their not being entitled to any counting agents of their own).

    But it is strictly illegal to communicate the information outside the hall..in pre-mobile phone days you'd end up in jail; some counts try to prevent people taking phones in, or insist that they are turned off, but controlling it is pretty much impossible nowadays
  • Options
    tim80tim80 Posts: 99
    The reported comment from Faisal below has him saying all sample tallies he's seen show Olney slightly ahead.

    Anyone who's been to a count will know that doesn't ring true, or he's not looked at many sample sheets.

    Different tally sheets are done for each ward, and sometimes in practice they are attached to votes from a specific ballot box. It is implausible that across the constituency they'd all be showing Olney slightly ahead, even though she may be slightly ahead overall.
  • Options
    DixieDixie Posts: 1,221

    Dixie said:

    rcs1000 said:

    MTimT said:

    If he loses, can't say that I have one ounce of sympathy for Zac.

    Indeed; the man's an idiot.
    indeed indeed. utterly self centred approach. He was sitting pretty a year ago. Now losy Mayoralty and lost his MP seat when he could have carried on for 30 years.
    He can retire to spend more time with his money.

    rcs1000 said:

    AndyJS said:

    They haven't actually started counting any votes yet, as opposed to verifying them.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2016/dec/01/richmond-park-byelection-results-counting-starts-live

    Shhhh. Will you stop bringing facts into this debate.
    But you can occasionally get a good indication from the verification stage
    No Tories responding to my texts now. I believe same at Brexit. The side who thinks they are losing goes quiet. At last a way to forecast results!
This discussion has been closed.