Categories
Options
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Copeland and Stoke Central – the final push
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Copeland and Stoke Central – the final push
Latest LD communication delivered in Copeland looking like a freebie paper pic.twitter.com/kfgopx1T3s
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
I know of some older people in Aquitaine who say they will vote for either Le Pen or Mélenchon.
Le Pen would welcome the chance to fight either Hamon or Mélenchon in the second round. If it's Hamon, she will pick up these people's votes as well as some from those who voted for Fillon. If it's Mélenchon, she may not get their votes, but she will win even more from those who voted for Fillon.
Fillon seems to have improved in betting markets just from saying he won't pull out if indicted. He could still be indicted. Even if he isn't, he's going in with the label "trougher" around his neck which doesn't bode well, judging by previous polls. He is simply bouncing because of his "I'm not withdrawing" announcement. I doubt he will go through to the second round. Hopefully there will be some polls on le Pen vs Hamon soon, or Le Pen vs Mélenchon if Mélenchon gets the united left ticket.
On the first, it could possibly be for a long time, and it will be if the "king" chooses an informateur from Wilders's party, which by convention he kind of should, as I understand it, if they win a plurality. If Wilders gets the chance, he will obviously help Le Pen.
The talking points that will most help Le Pen are
* "reform the EU" (Le Pen, Wilders and Tony Blair have all said they want this)
* "despite the plurality party leading the other parties by a long way, there's still deadlock, so the system must be broken" (ideal for FN GOTV and winning over DKs)
Dutch events and Britain's filing of A50 will synergise.
If you read French the folllowing article is a good summary
http://www.liberation.fr/elections-presidentielle-legislatives-2017/2017/02/19/hamon-melenchon-c-est-mort_1549639
In short, both of them want to be the "unity" candidate and blame the other. Mélenchon said he would not tie himself to "the socialist hearse" and Hamon answered that he would not "run after Mélenchon" if he did not want to join him...
Jadot is a different case, as he does not have have the required numbers of sponsors (mayors, local councillors..) and has no chance to reach the 5% threshold needed to get his campaign budget reimbursed by the state.
Hamon and him will probably announce an agreement this week but some Jadot voters might nevertheless vote Melenchon.
i guess there must be kompromat on both these guys
Macron, however, lost several points last week and is now tied with Fillon. His great idea of going to Algeria to insult France in front of smiling foreign dignitaries did not work as expected...
Fillon's weaknesses are well-known. But he has one clear strength: he is the only representative of the centre/right and right in this election. These people are angry about him but they will vote.
Despite the fact that Copeland and Stoke should still be classed as safe Labour seats on the back of previous GE results, I was struck by the widening gap in GE turnout in both seats over recent years. GE turnout in Stoke has been significantly lower than in Copeland, and the far more negative and personal on the ground campaign between the two front line candidates in Stoke may well see an even more marked difference in by-election turnout between these two seats on Thursday?
Could we be about to see a tale of two very different by-election turnouts on Thursday night, and with both being very bad news for Labour?
I.d law so tough in South Carolina that Gov. couldn't vote.
A GOP Senator is voted out despite 62% Approval rating in Rohde Island!!!
https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/i41vkd4xdd/SundayTimesResults_150918_Website.pdf
https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/auuihsqsjz/TimesResults_170213_VI_Trackers_W.pdf
2015 ABC1 44-26-7-12-5-4 (C-Lab-LD-UKIP-Nat-Green)
2017 ABC1 41-24-14-9-6-5
2015 C2DE 32-37-4-22-3-1
2017 C2DE 38-23-7-22-7-3
So not much change in the middle classes, except for the LibDems stealing a few points from everyone. Labour are down from 26 to 24 in that group so margin of error stuff (to be fair other polls had them higher in 2015 so probably MoE is working the other way).
But in C2DE Corbyn has taken Labour from 37% to 23% - and you can't blame UKIP as they have been flat at 22%, it's gone to all the other parties. I know there's been some discussion of Labour losing the working class lately - but wow.
Pot luck I guess re what other news breaks in the next two days but there must be at least a chance that the headlines are going to be dominated by "Labour trying to block Brexit in the Lords".
I know Committee stage when amendments will be debated isn't until next week but the debate today and tomorrow could well still be pretty high up the news agenda.
And if it is, that could well help Con in Copeland and UKIP in Stoke.
Interesting a pundit I'd saying the House in '06 becomes more conservative despite blue wave as GOP lose liberal/moderate congressmen in north and hold southern seats while Dems run more conservative candidates to gain seats in places like Indiana.
Remember that ad where Dems complained about a racist ad apparently the ad played on peoples prejudice about black men dating white women...... the black Dem candidate loses in Tennessee. Would have been first black Senator since reconstruction. Not sure he lost cos he was black since Dems also lost out in house seats in Kentucky.
UKIP simple doesn't have the electoral power where it matters in either the HoCs or the HoLs to make the seismic impact needed to concentrate minds on this vote. UKIP have been comfortable positioning themselves as the alternative to Labour in their Northern heartlands for the last few years in the run up to the EU Referendum. But now the result is in, and it is a Conservative Government that is determined to deliver on that result... I suspect that losing a Labour heartland seat to a sitting Conservative Government would have far more impact than losing it to party with one MP who cannot even be bothered to turn up at the UKIP conference.
More importantly, I wonder when ordinary NHS patients will start joining the dots on another important issue. UK Health tourism has been in the news recently, and I was stuck by the fact that opponents of any changes to NHS delivery on this issue were so laid back about the fact there was still no proper nationwide functioning infrastructure to deal with claiming back money from those not entitled to free health care in the UK. It should not be far more easy to deny a UK patient who has worked hard and paid their national insurance the medical care they require on the back of their weight or smoking habits than it should be providing care for those that have not paid into the NHS at all.
One of the most interesting points in recent polls is the big difference in the certainty of the choice for different candidates
Le Pen has the most convinced supporters (nearly 80% saying they will definitely vote for her). Her first round vote thus appears rock solid.
Fillon has consolidated his base (around 70% certainty)
Macron is around 45% on this measure and is by far the weakest (except for Bayrou who is not yet a candidate).
The level of uncertainty is pretty high in general, especially as it is combined with very low turnout.
Most polls expect around 60% turnout, while it was 80% in 2012. That's around nine million voters disappearing in 5 years ... Left-wing voters disappointed by Hollande? Probably. Right-wing voters "on strike" because of Fillon? Maybe. The key of the election may be for one of the mainstream candidates to mobilize its former voters.
*edited to remove "campaign". forgot they were in govt for a moment
2010 ABC1 46-29-19-2-1-2 (C-Lab-LD-UKIP-Nat-Green)
2013 ABC1 35-38-11-9-2-3
2015 ABC1 44-26-7-12-5-4
2017 ABC1 41-24-14-9-6-5
2010 C2DE 37-41-14-3-2-0
2013 C2DE 28-39-9-17-3-2
2015 C2DE 32-37-4-22-3-1
2017 C2DE 38-23-7-22-7-3
http://cdn.yougov.com/today_uk_import/YG-Archives-Pol-Sun-budget-results-230610.pdf
http://cdn.yougov.com/cumulus_uploads/document/lkw77vr442/YG-Archive-Pol-Sun-results-190613.pdf
So yes, a Lib Dem recovery is underway - but its mainly among ABC1s, which suggests its Remainery......(while Brexit Tories are leaking ABC1s (-3 vs GE) as they pile on C2DEs (+6)...)
http://gotnews.com/breaking-reinces-gal-whitehouse-chief-staff-kmwalsh_gop-source-trump-leaks-nytimes-others/
I disagree as a former nurse and a very vocal anti UKIP voter! This "health tourism" stuff is about to become an even more major issue on the back of Brexit! If we leave the EU, then our health authorities are going to have to be well prepared and have the infrastructure in place to deal with it, just as any Brit travelling abroad to the EU will then need to make sure they have the relevant full health insurance in place to cover themselves.
SCOTTISH SUN SAYS One simple question for SNP Economy Secretary Keith Brown…do you think we’re thick?
https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/news/610589/one-simple-question-for-snp-economy-secretary-keith-brown-do-you-think-were-thick/
2014: The Economic Case for Independence
2017: F*ck it! - FLAGS!!
The linked story is actually quite interesting (and brief, for once).
I know this might be a novel idea, but how about reforming the NHS to make it that bit more efficient and bespoke for the current and future needs of the UK NHS!! And that includes dealing with health tourism, not even sure we have reliable data on this size of this issue due to the lack of infrastructure to deal with it.
Just a thought while we are at it, a major revamp of UK nurse training to bring it back into line with the staffing levels we used to enjoy here in the UK before the last major training reforms might also be the answer. Now that Nursing has become a University degree, that now means student nurses having to take out a loan during their training, instead of in the past when the NHS provided cheap accomadation and payed a small stipend for living costs when the students manned the wards on a far longer term basis as they learned!! Having taken away that very clear incentive to train as nurses, and then replaced it with a long term debt to be paid off when you qualify, is it any wonder that we are suffering from a shortage of trained staff....
I don't believe I was gratuitous tho, considering Plato's many previous posts about charming Milo
Without wishing to get all Ed Miliband here, a Royal commission or other cross-party effort on what the health service can realistically achieve and how it might look in the future would be welcome
Let's assume that the PVV tops the polls with 27 seats, against 24 for the VVD. If the VVD goes to Wilem-Alexander and says "I have a coalition of the ourselves, the CDU, GL and D66 that commands 81 seats of the 150 seat parliament" (just a random selection, there are clearly other possible coalitions), then Geert won't even be invited to the Royal Palace to discuss cabinet formation with His Majesty.
The problem the PVV has is that it seems unlikely to get more than about a third the number of seats it needs to get a coalition together. And there are a lot of parties that simply will not join a PVV led coalition. At the very least, it seems next to impossible they would get support from: D66 (18), the Greens (18), the Party of the Animals (5), the PvdA (12) or the Socialist Party (11). The Pirates are also flirting around the 0.66% required to get a seat. Between them, they will have 58-68 seats. I also can't see the VVD being junior coalition partners.
So who could they partner with? The Christian Democrats? They're EPP members and pretty pro-EU, so possible, but not likely. The Christian Union? OK, they're a bit more Eurosceptic; but their views on homesexuality (for example) are at complete odds with the PVV. They're a good bet, but they'll only have 5 or 6 seats. The Reformed Political Party? These are the true Calvinists, and they have refused to actually ever be in a coalition in their 100 years of existence. Will they break the habit and join the PVV? I don't buy it, but even if they did, it's only 3 or 4 seats. And then there's 50 Plus, the Party for the Oldies, and which might well get 10 seats. Now, they could join the PVV in coalition, but I'm also somewhat sceptical that they would
Palmer deserves nothing but contempt for his ludicrous post. And people wonder why Labour is struggling.
The latter seems to fit him better than the first.
Some might say that it was the day that represented the beginning of the end of David Cameron as PM, it was certainly the day when he lost the support of many people who had been positive about him for more than a decade.
Le Pen voters from 2012 are more likely than any others to say that they will vote again this time. And of course they will vote for her.
Her anti-EU position is probably one of her most popular. Apart from Macron, no candidate has a really pro-EU message.
Edit: beaten to it by @JosiasJessop. As a guess it's probably too expensive to do this for anything except a Parliamentary by-election, but I'm surprised it's allowed at all - and that the newspaper would want to be seen as so partisan with such a negative message on its front page.
The trends on admissions and attendances are there to see. My own Trust cancelled all admissions requiring a GA, other than cancer patients, because of bed and staffing pressures. Such things are now routine.
Nursing is entering a spiral of crisis. There are 24 000 nursing vacancies at present, applications for nurse training are down 30% since the abolition of bursaries and imposition of fees, and EU registrations are down by 90% since July. I am sure kippers will be happy with this, as now Nurse pay rates will no longer be suppressed by cheap foreign competition. That was surely what tbey campaigned for?
The situation for Medical staff is similar I think. For the first time in a decade one of my departments jobs attracted no EU or UK applicants, though there were some Syrian and Egyptians.
Meanwhile the new rotas take effect shortly, and see the discussion on this twitter stream for intensive care. A horrible rota for teaching or annual leave, but no additional staff at weekends either. One wonders what the point is?
https://twitter.com/doctor_oxford/status/831990469781549059
I've never heard any of his stuff. I have no intention of doing so - and from what people say i'd find it dull and irritating anyway.
But he has a right to say it and it is outrageous that opponents should use the fear of violence or commercial pressure to try and shut down his right to free speech
https://twitter.com/BrianSpanner1/status/833355646611382274
https://twitter.com/ReaganBattalion/status/833557005948354560
I cannot see what the Tory candidate offers the Copeland JAM's apart from cannon fodder for the Home Counties party.
It is true that applications are down, but still three times higher than places available.
Certainly an exciting week ahead, what with the F1 test next Monday
The by-elections are intriguing. My guess is a double Labour hold. I have (think it was Mr. Pulpstar who tipped it) 3.5 on them keeping Copeland, and 9 (tipped by Dr. Foxinsox) on UKIP getting below 20% in Stoke [one is grateful to Professor Nuttall for his endeavours in this regard].
They are running the Fracking Causes Cancer scare story, which was the one Friends of the Earth had to withdraw after being given a whole year to provide evidence by the ASA.
Sad.
I don't think the Labour leaning tendencies of the Whitehaven News have ever been questioned.
However, Hospitals in Cumbria have been a big problem since the days of Frank Dobson as health secretary. We only have 500,000 residents. Even in a modest sized city you could provide for all the health needs of such a community with one or two very large hospitals.
Here we have hospitals in Kendal, Furness, Carlisle, Whitehaven, I think Penrith and heaven knows how many cottage hospitals and health centres. If this wasn't expensive enough there are also major recruitment problems.
Farron has started every election campaign since he came in 1999 with claims that someone was going to close Westmorland General Hospital. Otherwise some service or other is to be removed to Manchester - the symbol of the evil south here in Cumbria. These claims are of course complete lies - Farron has specialised in fake news for twenty years.
That is why they did so well in Richmond - a total lie about closing a hospital just baffles opponents who naively think you wouldn't lie about things like that.
I think Labour are wise to concentrate on the Whitehaven Hospital - just about the only one in Cumbria that I haven't had relatives in. Their claims are unfair and I thought Theresa did well in the Border TV piece when she was up. But reorganisation is unavoidable. The choice is between an inadequate and unaffordable service close at hand or a much better and affordable service partly delivered from Carlisle. BTW I am NOT speaking for the Tory candidate when I say that. But that is a hell of a journey for patients and their relatives at a most vulnerable time.
The reasons you can't recruit to Cumbria's hospitals ? Well, the distances and small populations are important. But the worst for Westmorland General was Farron always accusing staff of some misdemeanor - this or that is a crap service. Oh, and the hospital is going to close. Any senior health official can expect to be denounced for any decision by Farron on Border TV. consequence ? Well if you can get the same job somewhere else without Farron, then you will - wouldn't you ?
http://www.liberation.fr/elections-presidentielle-legislatives-2017/2017/02/19/hamon-melenchon-c-est-mort_1549639
On fake election leaflets etc., all parties have a long and dishonourable tradition. We can all cite favourites The subtlest I've run into personally, though, was a full-page ad in a local paper from the LibDems in a Euro-election (back in the 1995 days when we had single member Euro wards). We were fighting in East Sussex and South Kent, a Tory seat which the LibDems could genuinely claim to be the main rivals. What they did was have the main story "Only the LibDems can beat the Conservatives" typeset to look like a regular newspaper article, and then a small section in different print headed "Advertiser's Announcement" with some overt LibDem material. The impression given was that the rest of the page was legit, and the newspaper let them get away with it because the words "Advertiser's Announcement" appeared on the page.
Since the main claim was in fact true, nobody got very excited (though I was pretty annoyed at the time), but it was unquestionably both naughty and clever.
*Other parties are available
Main view is that there will be a very low poll and in that scenario underestimate the Conseravtives and Liberal Democrats at your peril, their voters are more likely to turn out.
http://www.euractiv.com/section/all/news/that-bus-has-gone-eu-sees-no-brexit-u-turn-now/
http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/15102373.Revealed__picture_of_SNP_candidate_on_pro_IRA_march/
*) Prior examples: has fracking caused an increase in cancer in the many areas it has been used in the past?
*) Analogues: has laboratory replication of some part of the fracking process caused cancer in an analogue (e.g. mice).
*) Direct proof: discovery of a strong mechanism by which fracking can cause cancer.
If the FoE cannot do any of the above (or other mechanisms) to back up their 'story', then it's just a scare: "you must believe that something I don't like will have bad consequences. Because, well, belief."
As it happens, I have concerns that the companies doing the fracking can keep their formulas secret: if they're pumping it into the ground, they ought to disclose what the chemicals are. It is one of these areas where I would not be surprised if a strong link between fracking and cancer was found (especially due to the secrecy), but the protesters don't seem to have any firm evidence.
Yet.
It appears that I *might* be wrong on that:
http://www.ukoog.org.uk/onshore-extraction/industry-guidelines
"Most importantly, the UK guidelines set out that operators must publically disclose all chemical additives to fracturing fluids for each well. These disclosures meet or exceed all known standards in the shale gas industry."
In which case, that's a welcome change from a few years ago, where AFAICR the government were allowing potential operators not to disclose.
It also makes me more hopeful and happier about fracking. I'll need to dig a little deeper ...
(As ever with controversial topics such as fracking, it's difficult to work out the truth from the propaganda).
Schengen, Euro, rebate etc... as people have been saying here for some time.