politicalbetting
Home› General

Howdy, Stranger!

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

Sign In Register

Categories

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Applying huge governing party national poll leads has been a v

SystemSystem Posts: 11,695
edited February 2017 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Applying huge governing party national poll leads has been a very poor guide to Westminster by-elections

Almost ever since the Copeland by-election was declared the Conservatives have been a very strong odds on favourites. As has been pointed out repeatedly for them to take a seat off Labour while beinf the governing party would be an extraordinary achievement and something that really hasn’t happened in modern times.

Read the full story here


«13

Comments

  • Options
    bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 21,883
    edited February 2017
    First like Labour in Winklebury

    Winklebury (Basingstoke & Deane) result:

    LAB: 61.6% (+31.1)
    CON: 35.3% (-10.5)
    LDEM: 3.1% (-2.7)

    Lab GAIN from Con.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,898
    Precedents can presumably be found to back up most positions, but this, local candidates/main local opposition and Lab not really underperforming in some other by-elections despite Corbyn, I find more compelling than that seats in donkey country will switch even in such times as these (Copeland does seem closer, but apparently the candidate is good and babies will die if Lab lose, which will probably work to some degree)
    bigjohnowls said:

    First like Labour in Winklebury

    Winklebury (Basingstoke & Deane) result:

    LAB: 61.6% (+31.1)
    CON: 35.3% (-10.5)
    LDEM: 3.1% (-2.7)

    Lab GAIN from Con.

    Huh, didn't see that coming.
  • Options
    FregglesFreggles Posts: 3,486
    Macron FTW
  • Options
    chestnutchestnut Posts: 7,341
    29% turnout in Winklebury - it's only secondary school is set for closure.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,898
    MarkSenior said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    RobD said:

    MarkSenior said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    MarkSenior said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    Richard_Nabavi said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    I still think Theresa May visiting Stoke this week will ended up being bracketed in the same batshit craziness of Dick Cheney campaigning in Hawaii at the end of the 2004 election.

    Personally, I wouldn't read too much into that visit in itself, because I think she's the kind of leader who will feel duty-bound to visit in order to show support for the troops on the ground.
    May has spent years working with the constituency parties - unlike her predecessor - so I expect we'll see a lot more of her at bye-elections - even very long shots. The local parties won't forget.
    The Conservatives used to win council by elections when Cameron was leader , it will eventually sink in that their current leader is a vote loser .
    Apologies but I missed your predictions for how much Tory vote share will fall in tomorrow's bye-elections.
    I have posted my predictions for Copeland and Stoke both on here and the Vote2012 website . I don't recall seeing yours though .
    For everyone else:

    "Copeland Lab 39 Con 34 UKIP 11 Lib Dem 8 Green 4 Others 4
    "
    So for a Mid-term PM losing 2% in Copeland versus the GE is not much of a "vote loser" is it?
    It is when all the hype is that Corbyn is useless and the Conservatives are heading for a famous victory .
    Objectively it still won't be an awful result, but they have oversold how likely it is, such that it will be seen as a major disappointment. Corbyn could teach them a thing or two about expectations management!
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,097
    Plus Uxbridge 1997
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uxbridge_by-election,_1997

    Uxbridge and Beckenham 1997 and Eddisbury 1999 were the last by elections a governing party was trying to gain a seat though and of course the last time a governing party did win a by election, Mitcham and Morden in 1982, was when the governing Tories had a huge poll lead in the middle of the Falklands War. So while it is true to say that big poll leads by the governing party do not translate automatically into gaining seats in by elections without a big poll lead a governing party would have no chance at all of gaining a seat from the opposition in a by election
  • Options
    Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905
    Interesting historical perspective on the prospect of a Conservative victory in Copeland, arguing that the last comparable upset happened in the 19th century:


    "...government gains in by-elections aren’t just exceptionally rare, the examples that have occurred are mostly the product of freakish circumstances (to repeat – that means electorally, not merely politically), none of which apply to Copeland.

    "The last time a governing party gained a seat in by-election by overturning a principal opposition party majority of more than 3 per cent, without a defecting incumbent, a disqualified winner or a material change in the set of parties contesting the seat, was when John Derby Allcroft took Worcester for the Tories on 28th Mar 1878, overturning a 7.6 per cent Liberal majority.

    "So the Conservatives are trying to do something that hasn’t been done on a genuine like-for-like basis for 139 years, since a time when women couldn’t vote, secret ballots had only been in use for one general election and Keir Hardie wasn’t yet even a union organiser.

    "Which is not to say that they won’t succeed. But if they do, and Theresa May gains an MP mid term, she won’t have done something that hasn’t been done since Thatcher. She’ll have done something that hasn’t been done since Disraeli."


    More here: https://www.ncpolitics.uk/2017/02/copeland-turning-blue-would-be-more-historic-than-you-think.html/
  • Options
    chestnutchestnut Posts: 7,341
    edited February 2017
    The thing that is evident in Uxbridge 1997, much as it was in Oldham in Corbyn's first by-election, is that the governing party's voters are less enthused to turn out because they have already won 'the big one'- a general election majority.
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,536
    edited February 2017
    Who can forget the Sleaze Merchant.

    He's in UKIP these days isn't he?

    Is Piers Gaveston the only Piers that wasn't an idiot/knob?

    Piers Morgan, Merchant, and Corbyn haven't done much for Piers in recent times.
  • Options
    Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905
    https://twitter.com/JamesKanag/status/834432379385217025

    And this on Stoke: in a tight contest, the winning candidate could take the seat with 6,000 votes (and perhaps less if the Lib Dems can mount a significant challenge.)

    For comparison, Tristram Hunt's majority in 2015 was about 5,200.
  • Options
    MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 7,382
    I have updated the post to include reference to Uxbridge
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,898
    Black_Rook said:

    perhaps less if the Lib Dems can mount a significant challenge.

    They'd best not - In some quarters it has been said their putting in serious effort in some wards was 'disreputable'.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,985
    How long has this thread been here??
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,097
    MikeSmithson said:

    I have updated the post to include reference to Uxbridge

    Thanks
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,985
    Shouldn't the title say "Applying huge *labour* party national poll leads..."... innocent face...
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    edited February 2017
    FPT
    foxinsoxuk said:

    Off topic:

    Seville vs Leicester is nailed on for Seville. I am on the Seville -2 handicap. If Leicester get away with losing 2 nil then I would be happy. I would be ecstatic with a goal!

    Incidentally, I think Seville offer good value for winning the CL. They are nailed on to progress, are good at European knockout competitions, flying high in the Spanish League, rivals misfiring and currently 28 on Betfair. Worth a fiver at least.

  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,278
    Freggles said:

    Macron FTW

    Bayrou news? Excellent for me as he was one of the Black Swans I haven't covered in my book.
  • Options
    TheWhiteRabbitTheWhiteRabbit Posts: 12,388
    rottenborough said:

    Freggles said:

    Macron FTW

    Bayrou news? Excellent for me as he was one of the Black Swans I haven't covered in my book.
    It's all about the effect on Macron's poll numbers which were slowing.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,033
    TheWhiteRabbit said:

    rottenborough said:

    Freggles said:

    Macron FTW

    Bayrou news? Excellent for me as he was one of the Black Swans I haven't covered in my book.
    It's all about the effect on Macron's poll numbers which were slowing.
    Pau nailed on for Macron now :smile:
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,109
    TheWhiteRabbit said:

    rottenborough said:

    Freggles said:

    Macron FTW

    Bayrou news? Excellent for me as he was one of the Black Swans I haven't covered in my book.
    It's all about the effect on Macron's poll numbers which were slowing.
    Excellent news for Macron, and good timing as you say.

    Macron has something of Pierre Trudeau about him. A real political rockstar.
  • Options
    SimonStClareSimonStClare Posts: 7,976
    edited February 2017
    One thing I have learnt over years is that betting markets are not a reliable predictor of the outcome, in fact on occasions they’re as fallible as the most gormless punter*.

    (*Obviously PB punters are perfect in every way. H/T MP.)
  • Options
    TheWhiteRabbitTheWhiteRabbit Posts: 12,388
    williamglenn said:

    TheWhiteRabbit said:

    rottenborough said:

    Freggles said:

    Macron FTW

    Bayrou news? Excellent for me as he was one of the Black Swans I haven't covered in my book.
    It's all about the effect on Macron's poll numbers which were slowing.
    Excellent news for Macron, and good timing as you say.

    Macron has something of Pierre Trudeau about him. A real political rockstar.
    I think Macron will capture just enough to become the second placed candidate and strengthen slightly on BF. At the moment I just want to capture a few quid by laying and make my book less of a mess.
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    williamglenn said:

    TheWhiteRabbit said:

    rottenborough said:

    Freggles said:

    Macron FTW

    Bayrou news? Excellent for me as he was one of the Black Swans I haven't covered in my book.
    It's all about the effect on Macron's poll numbers which were slowing.
    Excellent news for Macron, and good timing as you say.

    Macron has something of Pierre Trudeau about him. A real political rockstar.
    He has to make the final two, I have topped up on Fillon and running a very green book on the top 3.
  • Options
    SirNorfolkPassmoreSirNorfolkPassmore Posts: 6,264
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Who can forget the Sleaze Merchant.

    He's in UKIP these days isn't he?

    Is Piers Gaveston the only Piers that wasn't an idiot/knob?

    Piers Morgan, Merchant, and Corbyn haven't done much for Piers in recent times.

    He's in the ground, sadly. The big C, I believe.

    A flawed character, certainly, but not all bad.

  • Options
    FregglesFreggles Posts: 3,486
    TheWhiteRabbit said:

    rottenborough said:

    Freggles said:

    Macron FTW

    Bayrou news? Excellent for me as he was one of the Black Swans I haven't covered in my book.
    It's all about the effect on Macron's poll numbers which were slowing.
    Yeah, it's good for the narrative.
  • Options
    DixieDixie Posts: 1,221
    SimonStClare said:

    One thing I have learnt over years is that betting markets are not a reliable predictor of the outcome, in fact on occasions they’re as fallible as the most gormless punter*.

    (*Obviously PB punters are perfect in every way. H/T MP.)

    group think, you see
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,278
    foxinsoxuk said:

    williamglenn said:

    TheWhiteRabbit said:

    rottenborough said:

    Freggles said:

    Macron FTW

    Bayrou news? Excellent for me as he was one of the Black Swans I haven't covered in my book.
    It's all about the effect on Macron's poll numbers which were slowing.
    Excellent news for Macron, and good timing as you say.

    Macron has something of Pierre Trudeau about him. A real political rockstar.
    He has to make the final two, I have topped up on Fillon and running a very green book on the top 3.
    Likewise. This is looking a good election!!
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,457
    edited February 2017
    I think Stoke could be a very tight race between Labour and another, or anothers, I don't think the betting markets reflect that.

    I'm not expecting that another to be UKIP.

    Of course, I could be wrong, and Labour romp home.
  • Options
    MortimerMortimer Posts: 13,951
    williamglenn said:

    TheWhiteRabbit said:

    rottenborough said:

    Freggles said:

    Macron FTW

    Bayrou news? Excellent for me as he was one of the Black Swans I haven't covered in my book.
    It's all about the effect on Macron's poll numbers which were slowing.
    Excellent news for Macron, and good timing as you say.

    Macron has something of Pierre Trudeau about him. A real political rockstar.
    Something of a retired PM about him?

    Unlikely to help his winning the French presidency....
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,109
    Mortimer said:

    williamglenn said:

    TheWhiteRabbit said:

    rottenborough said:

    Freggles said:

    Macron FTW

    Bayrou news? Excellent for me as he was one of the Black Swans I haven't covered in my book.
    It's all about the effect on Macron's poll numbers which were slowing.
    Excellent news for Macron, and good timing as you say.

    Macron has something of Pierre Trudeau about him. A real political rockstar.
    Something of a retired PM about him?

    Unlikely to help his winning the French presidency....
    Retired? Pierre Trudeau died nearly 20 years ago.
  • Options
    DixieDixie Posts: 1,221
    Casino_Royale said:

    I think Stoke could be a very tight race between Labour and another, or anothers, I don't think the betting markets reflect that.

    I'm not expecting that another to be UKIP.

    Of course, I could be wrong, and Labour romp home.

    Casino_Royale said:

    I think Stoke could be a very tight race between Labour and another, or anothers, I don't think the betting markets reflect that.

    I'm not expecting that another to be UKIP.

    Of course, I could be wrong, and Labour romp home.

    covering every base there...
  • Options
    AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited February 2017
    Casino_Royale said:

    I think Stoke could be a very tight race between Labour and another, or anothers, I don't think the betting markets reflect that.

    I'm not expecting that another to be UKIP.

    Of course, I could be wrong, and Labour romp home.

    The thing I'm most confident about predicting is that UKIP will probably get 25-30% in Stoke. That most likely won't be enough to win but if Lab and Con are more evenly divided than expected it could be, combined with a good LD showing.
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    Casino_Royale said:

    I think Stoke could be a very tight race between Labour and another, or anothers, I don't think the betting markets reflect that.

    I'm not expecting that another to be UKIP.

    Of course, I could be wrong, and Labour romp home.

    Lay Labour?

    I think a low turnout Labour win.

  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,033
    williamglenn said:

    TheWhiteRabbit said:

    rottenborough said:

    Freggles said:

    Macron FTW

    Bayrou news? Excellent for me as he was one of the Black Swans I haven't covered in my book.
    It's all about the effect on Macron's poll numbers which were slowing.
    Excellent news for Macron, and good timing as you say.

    Macron has something of Pierre Trudeau about him. A real political rockstar.
    Does he have a visible tattoo? I don't think I could ever vote for a candidate without a tattoo.
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,109
    rcs1000 said:

    williamglenn said:

    TheWhiteRabbit said:

    rottenborough said:

    Freggles said:

    Macron FTW

    Bayrou news? Excellent for me as he was one of the Black Swans I haven't covered in my book.
    It's all about the effect on Macron's poll numbers which were slowing.
    Excellent news for Macron, and good timing as you say.

    Macron has something of Pierre Trudeau about him. A real political rockstar.
    Does he have a visible tattoo? I don't think I could ever vote for a candidate without a tattoo.
    To be clear I'm talking about the father, not the son.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DeTsQQ22Uwc
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,033
    williamglenn said:

    Mortimer said:

    williamglenn said:

    TheWhiteRabbit said:

    rottenborough said:

    Freggles said:

    Macron FTW

    Bayrou news? Excellent for me as he was one of the Black Swans I haven't covered in my book.
    It's all about the effect on Macron's poll numbers which were slowing.
    Excellent news for Macron, and good timing as you say.

    Macron has something of Pierre Trudeau about him. A real political rockstar.
    Something of a retired PM about him?

    Unlikely to help his winning the French presidency....
    Retired? Pierre Trudeau died nearly 20 years ago.
    Well he is move of a grave digger than a cradle snatcher...
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    AndyJS said:

    Casino_Royale said:

    I think Stoke could be a very tight race between Labour and another, or anothers, I don't think the betting markets reflect that.

    I'm not expecting that another to be UKIP.

    Of course, I could be wrong, and Labour romp home.

    The thing I'm most confident about predicting is that UKIP will probably get 25-30% in Stoke. That most likely won't be enough to win but if Lab and Con are more evenly divided than expected it could be, combined with a good LD showing.
    Kippers under 20% was my top tip for this one with Shadsy at 8/1.
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,785
    edited February 2017
    SirNorfolkPassmore said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Who can forget the Sleaze Merchant.

    He's in UKIP these days isn't he?

    Is Piers Gaveston the only Piers that wasn't an idiot/knob?

    Piers Morgan, Merchant, and Corbyn haven't done much for Piers in recent times.

    He's in the ground, sadly. The big C, I believe.

    A flawed character, certainly, but not all bad.

    Certainly added to The Gaiety of The Nation;

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/obituaries/politics-obituaries/6224063/Piers-Merchant.html
  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,760
    williamglenn said:

    rcs1000 said:

    williamglenn said:

    TheWhiteRabbit said:

    rottenborough said:

    Freggles said:

    Macron FTW

    Bayrou news? Excellent for me as he was one of the Black Swans I haven't covered in my book.
    It's all about the effect on Macron's poll numbers which were slowing.
    Excellent news for Macron, and good timing as you say.

    Macron has something of Pierre Trudeau about him. A real political rockstar.
    Does he have a visible tattoo? I don't think I could ever vote for a candidate without a tattoo.
    To be clear I'm talking about the father, not the son.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DeTsQQ22Uwc
    Holy Ghost by the look of it
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,960
    Insightful analysis from Mike here.
  • Options
    stodgestodge Posts: 12,877
    Pulpstar said:

    Insightful analysis from Mike here.

    Indeed.

    I, on the other hand, continue to be wholly devoid of insight in relation to the by elections. I've not had a bet - I have no idea what is going to happen.

    All I can predict with confidence is that tomorrow is Thursday and the day after will probably be Friday but as Shadsy hasn't priced that one, I've not had a bet there either.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,927
    foxinsoxuk said:

    AndyJS said:

    Casino_Royale said:

    I think Stoke could be a very tight race between Labour and another, or anothers, I don't think the betting markets reflect that.

    I'm not expecting that another to be UKIP.

    Of course, I could be wrong, and Labour romp home.

    The thing I'm most confident about predicting is that UKIP will probably get 25-30% in Stoke. That most likely won't be enough to win but if Lab and Con are more evenly divided than expected it could be, combined with a good LD showing.
    Kippers under 20% was my top tip for this one with Shadsy at 8/1.
    That was a good bet. I can easily see four parties in the 20-25% range, it only needs something like a windy and rainy day for some soft UKIP support to stay home.
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,785
    Pulpstar said:

    Insightful analysis from Mike here.

    The fact that people are contemplating anything other than two Labour holds is telling in itself.
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,457
    Pulpstar said:

    Insightful analysis from Mike here.

    A bit, but tinged with an element of frustration that it's not the LDs strongly challenging for those seats rather than the Tories.
  • Options
    state_go_awaystate_go_away Posts: 5,422
    The Greens to be fourth place in Stoke seems big at 25/1 - just had a fiver on it
  • Options
    JasonJason Posts: 1,614
    The bar set by Labour is now so low (and seemingly getting lower and lower), winning (retaining) these two seats will be perceived as a triumph by Labour. When the dust has settled, if they win, it will be seen as what it is by objective observers - the absolute bare minimum an Opposition party should be achieving. There's no triumph in retaining safe seats, there really isn't, and all this 'expectation management' stuff is a pile of crap. A sitting government taking a seat off the Opposition IS a big deal, though.

    The Tories have nothing to lose from either of these by-elections and everything to gain. Labour have nothing to gain but a whole lot to lose.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,960
    Casino_Royale said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Insightful analysis from Mike here.

    A bit, but tinged with an element of frustration that it's not the LDs strongly challenging for those seats rather than the Tories.
    Where ?
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,960
    state_go_away said:

    The Greens to be fourth place in Stoke seems big at 25/1 - just had a fiver on it

    It really isn't.
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,871
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Who can forget the Sleaze Merchant.

    He's in UKIP these days isn't he?

    Is Piers Gaveston the only Piers that wasn't an idiot/knob?

    Piers Morgan, Merchant, and Corbyn haven't done much for Piers in recent times.

    Piers Gaveston was also a knob. He liked insulting the English barons so much that they cut his head off.
  • Options
    CD13CD13 Posts: 6,351
    Mr Senior,

    FPT, "The Lib Dem decline started in 2011 and we all know the reason for that."

    The decline started when you lost Charlie. At least, he had something about him, even if some of it was 70 degree proof.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,960
    foxinsoxuk said:

    AndyJS said:

    Casino_Royale said:

    I think Stoke could be a very tight race between Labour and another, or anothers, I don't think the betting markets reflect that.

    I'm not expecting that another to be UKIP.

    Of course, I could be wrong, and Labour romp home.

    The thing I'm most confident about predicting is that UKIP will probably get 25-30% in Stoke. That most likely won't be enough to win but if Lab and Con are more evenly divided than expected it could be, combined with a good LD showing.
    Kippers under 20% was my top tip for this one with Shadsy at 8/1.
    Not on this particular one myself, but that is a stonker.
  • Options
    state_go_awaystate_go_away Posts: 5,422
    For Copeland Labour must have a better chance than 9/4 ish
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,960
    state_go_away said:

    For Copeland Labour must have a better chance than 9/4 ish

    Definitely.
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,457
    AndyJS said:

    Casino_Royale said:

    I think Stoke could be a very tight race between Labour and another, or anothers, I don't think the betting markets reflect that.

    I'm not expecting that another to be UKIP.

    Of course, I could be wrong, and Labour romp home.

    The thing I'm most confident about predicting is that UKIP will probably get 25-30% in Stoke. That most likely won't be enough to win but if Lab and Con are more evenly divided than expected it could be, combined with a good LD showing.
    What makes you so sure UKIP will poll so highly?
  • Options
    KenKen Posts: 24
    edited February 2017
    I've got a fiver on Labour to win Copeland, so I hope you are right. Labour should hold Stoke as well, but I have my doubts about that contest so I am steering clear of it.
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,457
    Dixie said:

    Casino_Royale said:

    I think Stoke could be a very tight race between Labour and another, or anothers, I don't think the betting markets reflect that.

    I'm not expecting that another to be UKIP.

    Of course, I could be wrong, and Labour romp home.

    Casino_Royale said:

    I think Stoke could be a very tight race between Labour and another, or anothers, I don't think the betting markets reflect that.

    I'm not expecting that another to be UKIP.

    Of course, I could be wrong, and Labour romp home.

    covering every base there...
    Not really, I outlined on previous thread (and last night) I think the Tories are a value bet.

    But, I'm not a soothsayer.
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,871
    I've got £100 on Labour holding Copeland and £25 on their holding Stoke. If they do, I make a profit of £237.50.
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,871
    state_go_away said:

    For Copeland Labour must have a better chance than 9/4 ish

    They'd better.
  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    It's remarkable how the received wisdom on this site all along has been that Labour are definitely value if not favourites in Copeland yet the market has never agreed. Good luck to anyone seeking a profit tomorrow.
  • Options
    jayfdeejayfdee Posts: 618
    Jason said:

    The bar set by Labour is now so low (and seemingly getting lower and lower), winning (retaining) these two seats will be perceived as a triumph by Labour. When the dust has settled, if they win, it will be seen as what it is by objective observers - the absolute bare minimum an Opposition party should be achieving. There's no triumph in retaining safe seats, there really isn't, and all this 'expectation management' stuff is a pile of crap. A sitting government taking a seat off the Opposition IS a big deal, though.

    The Tories have nothing to lose from either of these by-elections and everything to gain. Labour have nothing to gain but a whole lot to lose.

    Nail hit fair and square on the head, my thoughts as well.
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,457
    foxinsoxuk said:

    Casino_Royale said:

    I think Stoke could be a very tight race between Labour and another, or anothers, I don't think the betting markets reflect that.

    I'm not expecting that another to be UKIP.

    Of course, I could be wrong, and Labour romp home.

    Lay Labour?

    I think a low turnout Labour win.

    Probably, but then Labour is led by an utter idiot and has a local candidate who's called Brexit a bucketful of shit, in one of the most heavily Leave areas in the whole country.

    If they still score a clear win, then donkeys is a label many of their voters will not unjustly be tagged with.
  • Options
    MortimerMortimer Posts: 13,951
    Today is a good day to be an antiquarian bookseller political nerd - I bought a good number of books from Robert Peel's library!
  • Options
    RoyalBlueRoyalBlue Posts: 3,223
    Sean_F said:

    I've got £100 on Labour holding Copeland and £25 on their holding Stoke. If they do, I make a profit of £237.50.

    Congratulations! I think you'll collect. I wish that weren't the case...

    When are you going to rejoin the Tories? We need more sound people in the Conservative and Unionist (Brexit) Party.
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,457
    Sean_F said:

    state_go_away said:

    For Copeland Labour must have a better chance than 9/4 ish

    They'd better.
    Oi.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,960
    Sean_F said:

    state_go_away said:

    For Copeland Labour must have a better chance than 9/4 ish

    They'd better.
    :D
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,871
    RoyalBlue said:

    Sean_F said:

    I've got £100 on Labour holding Copeland and £25 on their holding Stoke. If they do, I make a profit of £237.50.

    Congratulations! I think you'll collect. I wish that weren't the case...

    When are you going to rejoin the Tories? We need more sound people in the Conservative and Unionist (Brexit) Party.
    I won't renew my UKIP subscription when it runs out, as UKIP's job is done. I'll probably join Islington Conservatives, whose Chairman is a friend.
  • Options
    dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 27,992
    Jason said:

    The bar set by Labour is now so low (and seemingly getting lower and lower), winning (retaining) these two seats will be perceived as a triumph by Labour. When the dust has settled, if they win, it will be seen as what it is by objective observers - the absolute bare minimum an Opposition party should be achieving. There's no triumph in retaining safe seats, there really isn't, and all this 'expectation management' stuff is a pile of crap. A sitting government taking a seat off the Opposition IS a big deal, though.

    The Tories have nothing to lose from either of these by-elections and everything to gain. Labour have nothing to gain but a whole lot to lose.

    UKIP have much to lose too. If they don't win in Stoke with the leader standing against a less than stellar Labour candidate, then bang goes their plan of replacing Labour in the North and Midlands. If not here and now, then when and where?
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,871
    Casino_Royale said:

    Sean_F said:

    state_go_away said:

    For Copeland Labour must have a better chance than 9/4 ish

    They'd better.
    Oi.
    If the Conservatives win Copeland, I'll still be pleased, even if I lose £100. It's win win.
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,323
    Sean_F said:

    RoyalBlue said:

    Sean_F said:

    I've got £100 on Labour holding Copeland and £25 on their holding Stoke. If they do, I make a profit of £237.50.

    Congratulations! I think you'll collect. I wish that weren't the case...

    When are you going to rejoin the Tories? We need more sound people in the Conservative and Unionist (Brexit) Party.
    I won't renew my UKIP subscription when it runs out, as UKIP's job is done. I'll probably join Islington Conservatives, whose Chairman is a friend.
    ...and then there were three?
  • Options
    BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 7,997
    If UKIP win both then I'm stuffed. Otherwise I'm green including LD surprises and Con/Con.

    I could cover with a fiver on UKIP/UKIP on Betfair at 100 but why waste a fiver?
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,871
    IanB2 said:

    Sean_F said:

    RoyalBlue said:

    Sean_F said:

    I've got £100 on Labour holding Copeland and £25 on their holding Stoke. If they do, I make a profit of £237.50.

    Congratulations! I think you'll collect. I wish that weren't the case...

    When are you going to rejoin the Tories? We need more sound people in the Conservative and Unionist (Brexit) Party.
    I won't renew my UKIP subscription when it runs out, as UKIP's job is done. I'll probably join Islington Conservatives, whose Chairman is a friend.
    ...and then there were three?
    From a very low base, the Tories have markedly improved in Islington South. In a few wards, they've got into four figures (in the past, they frequently polled in double figures).
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,536
    Sean_F said:

    RoyalBlue said:

    Sean_F said:

    I've got £100 on Labour holding Copeland and £25 on their holding Stoke. If they do, I make a profit of £237.50.

    Congratulations! I think you'll collect. I wish that weren't the case...

    When are you going to rejoin the Tories? We need more sound people in the Conservative and Unionist (Brexit) Party.
    I won't renew my UKIP subscription when it runs out, as UKIP's job is done. I'll probably join Islington Conservatives, whose Chairman is a friend.
    Islington politics? Eesh, you'll have gone full Corbynista if you spend too long in Islington.
  • Options
    David_EvershedDavid_Evershed Posts: 6,506
    Casino_Royale said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Insightful analysis from Mike here.

    A bit, but tinged with an element of frustration that it's not the LDs strongly challenging for those seats rather than the Tories.
    Lib Dems taking votes off Labour in Copeland and Stoke could let Conservatives in at both.
  • Options
    DixieDixie Posts: 1,221
    dixiedean said:

    Jason said:

    The bar set by Labour is now so low (and seemingly getting lower and lower), winning (retaining) these two seats will be perceived as a triumph by Labour. When the dust has settled, if they win, it will be seen as what it is by objective observers - the absolute bare minimum an Opposition party should be achieving. There's no triumph in retaining safe seats, there really isn't, and all this 'expectation management' stuff is a pile of crap. A sitting government taking a seat off the Opposition IS a big deal, though.

    The Tories have nothing to lose from either of these by-elections and everything to gain. Labour have nothing to gain but a whole lot to lose.

    UKIP have much to lose too. If they don't win in Stoke with the leader standing against a less than stellar Labour candidate, then bang goes their plan of replacing Labour in the North and Midlands. If not here and now, then when and where?
    Of course Farage never won a constituency and tried 7 times. UKIP predicting Labour in Stoke and too close to call in Copeland. That's me paraphrasing their emails to me.
  • Options
    David_EvershedDavid_Evershed Posts: 6,506
    CD13 said:

    Mr Senior,

    FPT, "The Lib Dem decline started in 2011 and we all know the reason for that."

    The decline started when you lost Charlie. At least, he had something about him, even if some of it was 70 degree proof.

    There was no way Charles Kennedy could have carried on in his state. It was for his own good and to avoid bringing the party into disrepute.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,898
    David_Evershed said:

    Casino_Royale said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Insightful analysis from Mike here.

    A bit, but tinged with an element of frustration that it's not the LDs strongly challenging for those seats rather than the Tories.
    Lib Dems taking votes off Labour in Copeland and Stoke could let Conservatives in at both.
    An amusing result, to be sure, albeit one some LD voters might well regret, should it come to pass.
  • Options
    midwintermidwinter Posts: 1,112
    David_Evershed said:

    Casino_Royale said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Insightful analysis from Mike here.

    A bit, but tinged with an element of frustration that it's not the LDs strongly challenging for those seats rather than the Tories.
    Lib Dems taking votes off Labour in Copeland and Stoke could let Conservatives in at both.
    If the Leave vote is split evenly 3 ways in Stoke the Lib Dems have a better chance than the odds imply.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,097
    edited February 2017
    TheWhiteRabbit said:

    rottenborough said:

    Freggles said:

    Macron FTW

    Bayrou news? Excellent for me as he was one of the Black Swans I haven't covered in my book.
    It's all about the effect on Macron's poll numbers which were slowing.
    Bayrou's support (with conditions) might give Macron a minor boost but the latest Elabe had Fillon still reaching the runoff even without Bayrou, Bayrou failing to run boosted Macron by 1.5% and Fillon by 1% so not that much difference. Macron also needs to ensure Macron's conditions do not lead to him losing any support to Hamon given Bayrou used to be Education Minister in Balladur's and Juppe's centre right governments
    http://elabe.fr/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/21022017bfmtv_lexpress_intentions-de-vote-presidentielles-vague-2.pdf
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 40,960
    Dixie said:

    dixiedean said:

    Jason said:

    The bar set by Labour is now so low (and seemingly getting lower and lower), winning (retaining) these two seats will be perceived as a triumph by Labour. When the dust has settled, if they win, it will be seen as what it is by objective observers - the absolute bare minimum an Opposition party should be achieving. There's no triumph in retaining safe seats, there really isn't, and all this 'expectation management' stuff is a pile of crap. A sitting government taking a seat off the Opposition IS a big deal, though.

    The Tories have nothing to lose from either of these by-elections and everything to gain. Labour have nothing to gain but a whole lot to lose.

    UKIP have much to lose too. If they don't win in Stoke with the leader standing against a less than stellar Labour candidate, then bang goes their plan of replacing Labour in the North and Midlands. If not here and now, then when and where?
    Of course Farage never won a constituency and tried 7 times. UKIP predicting Labour in Stoke and too close to call in Copeland. That's me paraphrasing their emails to me.
    That Farage statistic, while true, is so misleading it may as well not be. On at least 5 of the occasions he stood UKIP would have been 100/1 to win the seat, the exceptions being Bucks in 2010 and Thanet South in 2015 (and that's a bit fishy)
  • Options
    David_EvershedDavid_Evershed Posts: 6,506
    Dixie said:

    dixiedean said:

    Jason said:

    The bar set by Labour is now so low (and seemingly getting lower and lower), winning (retaining) these two seats will be perceived as a triumph by Labour. When the dust has settled, if they win, it will be seen as what it is by objective observers - the absolute bare minimum an Opposition party should be achieving. There's no triumph in retaining safe seats, there really isn't, and all this 'expectation management' stuff is a pile of crap. A sitting government taking a seat off the Opposition IS a big deal, though.

    The Tories have nothing to lose from either of these by-elections and everything to gain. Labour have nothing to gain but a whole lot to lose.

    UKIP have much to lose too. If they don't win in Stoke with the leader standing against a less than stellar Labour candidate, then bang goes their plan of replacing Labour in the North and Midlands. If not here and now, then when and where?
    Of course Farage never won a constituency and tried 7 times. UKIP predicting Labour in Stoke and too close to call in Copeland. That's me paraphrasing their emails to me.
    It is the First Past the Post System.

    When did an insurgent party last make any substantive inroads in parliament. Was it the Labour party?
  • Options
    SimonStClareSimonStClare Posts: 7,976
    edited February 2017
    Mortimer said:

    Today is a good day to be an antiquarian bookseller political nerd - I bought a good number of books from Robert Peel's library!

    Excellent news Mr Mortimer. At a guess I’d say the Ex PM was not a great Mills & Boon fan.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,033
    Mortimer said:

    Today is a good day to be an antiquarian bookseller political nerd - I bought a good number of books from Robert Peel's library!

    Apparently he had as a first edition of Madonna's Sex!
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,097
    Interesting report on Copeland on ITV News tonight. It looks like a battle between Jeremy Corbyn's opposition to nuclear power and Gillian Troughton's support for it and Theresa May's refusal to outright oppose the downgrading of maternity services at the local hospital and Trudy Harrison's clear opposition to it
  • Options
    SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,941
    Casino_Royale said:

    foxinsoxuk said:

    Casino_Royale said:

    I think Stoke could be a very tight race between Labour and another, or anothers, I don't think the betting markets reflect that.

    I'm not expecting that another to be UKIP.

    Of course, I could be wrong, and Labour romp home.

    Lay Labour?

    I think a low turnout Labour win.

    Probably, but then Labour is led by an utter idiot and has a local candidate who's called Brexit a bucketful of shit, in one of the most heavily Leave areas in the whole country.

    If they still score a clear win, then donkeys is a label many of their voters will not unjustly be tagged with.

    Imagine the reaction if a metropolitan liberal leftie had posted that about white working class voters. Should Labour win in Stoke it's because the other options were not appealling enough.

  • Options
    TheWhiteRabbitTheWhiteRabbit Posts: 12,388
    HYUFD said:

    TheWhiteRabbit said:

    rottenborough said:

    Freggles said:

    Macron FTW

    Bayrou news? Excellent for me as he was one of the Black Swans I haven't covered in my book.
    It's all about the effect on Macron's poll numbers which were slowing.
    Bayrou's support (with conditions) might give Macron a minor boost but the latest Elabe had Fillon still reaching the runoff even without Bayrou, Bayrou failing to run boosted Macron by 1.5% and Fillon by 1% so not that much difference. Macron also needs to ensure Macron's conditions do not lead to him losing any support to Hamon given Bayrou used to be Education Minister in Balladur's and Juppe's centre right governments
    http://elabe.fr/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/21022017bfmtv_lexpress_intentions-de-vote-presidentielles-vague-2.pdf
    Polling without Bayrou is going to be different now he's (a) ruled himself out affirmatively and (b) endorsed Macron.
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,536
    https://twitter.com/MrHarryCole/status/834484751968919553
    https://twitter.com/MrHarryCole/status/834485457610227712
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,033
    HYUFD said:

    TheWhiteRabbit said:

    rottenborough said:

    Freggles said:

    Macron FTW

    Bayrou news? Excellent for me as he was one of the Black Swans I haven't covered in my book.
    It's all about the effect on Macron's poll numbers which were slowing.
    Bayrou's support (with conditions) might give Macron a minor boost but the latest Elabe had Fillon still reaching the runoff even without Bayrou, Bayrou failing to run boosted Macron by 1.5% and Fillon by 1% so not that much difference. Macron also needs to ensure Macron's conditions do not lead to him losing any support to Hamon given Bayrou used to be Education Minister in Balladur's and Juppe's centre right governments
    http://elabe.fr/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/21022017bfmtv_lexpress_intentions-de-vote-presidentielles-vague-2.pdf
    Albeit that didn't include Bayrou actually endorsing Macron.

    It will be interesting to see if this catalyses Melanchon and Hamon getting together.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,898
    Casino_Royale said:

    foxinsoxuk said:

    Casino_Royale said:

    I think Stoke could be a very tight race between Labour and another, or anothers, I don't think the betting markets reflect that.

    I'm not expecting that another to be UKIP.

    Of course, I could be wrong, and Labour romp home.

    Lay Labour?

    I think a low turnout Labour win.

    If they still score a clear win, then donkeys is a label many of their voters will not unjustly be tagged with.
    They are hardly alone in that.
  • Options
    CornishBlueCornishBlue Posts: 840
    Sean_F said:

    RoyalBlue said:

    Sean_F said:

    I've got £100 on Labour holding Copeland and £25 on their holding Stoke. If they do, I make a profit of £237.50.

    Congratulations! I think you'll collect. I wish that weren't the case...

    When are you going to rejoin the Tories? We need more sound people in the Conservative and Unionist (Brexit) Party.
    I won't renew my UKIP subscription when it runs out, as UKIP's job is done. I'll probably join Islington Conservatives, whose Chairman is a friend.
    Very sound. :)
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,033
    TheWhiteRabbit said:

    HYUFD said:

    TheWhiteRabbit said:

    rottenborough said:

    Freggles said:

    Macron FTW

    Bayrou news? Excellent for me as he was one of the Black Swans I haven't covered in my book.
    It's all about the effect on Macron's poll numbers which were slowing.
    Bayrou's support (with conditions) might give Macron a minor boost but the latest Elabe had Fillon still reaching the runoff even without Bayrou, Bayrou failing to run boosted Macron by 1.5% and Fillon by 1% so not that much difference. Macron also needs to ensure Macron's conditions do not lead to him losing any support to Hamon given Bayrou used to be Education Minister in Balladur's and Juppe's centre right governments
    http://elabe.fr/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/21022017bfmtv_lexpress_intentions-de-vote-presidentielles-vague-2.pdf
    Polling without Bayrou is going to be different now he's (a) ruled himself out affirmatively and (b) endorsed Macron.
    The French press are suggesting that Bayrou will be actively campaigning for Macron. Which will probably be useful in Pau, but I'm unconvinced it will have a major impact elsewhere in France.
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,457
    SouthamObserver said:

    Casino_Royale said:

    foxinsoxuk said:

    Casino_Royale said:

    I think Stoke could be a very tight race between Labour and another, or anothers, I don't think the betting markets reflect that.

    I'm not expecting that another to be UKIP.

    Of course, I could be wrong, and Labour romp home.

    Lay Labour?

    I think a low turnout Labour win.

    Probably, but then Labour is led by an utter idiot and has a local candidate who's called Brexit a bucketful of shit, in one of the most heavily Leave areas in the whole country.

    If they still score a clear win, then donkeys is a label many of their voters will not unjustly be tagged with.

    Imagine the reaction if a metropolitan liberal leftie had posted that about white working class voters. Should Labour win in Stoke it's because the other options were not appealling enough.

    My point is just how bad and unappealing do Labour have to be to put their own core voters off?

    We are told that the whole of the Northern core area is up for grabs now because it voted overwhelmingly for Brexit, Corbyn is viewed as an atrocious leader and the candidates are non-local and of poor calibre. This would lead to much of that being questioned.

    The language in my post was deliberately provocative.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,097
    Interesting table showing the rise of the European far right since the 1980s
    https://twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/834489104138133504
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @PaulBrandITV: Both Labour and Tories are very nervy, which suggests their canvassing reports that it's tight. UKIP say they're taking more from Labour.
  • Options
    MarkSeniorMarkSenior Posts: 4,699
    CD13 said:

    Mr Senior,

    FPT, "The Lib Dem decline started in 2011 and we all know the reason for that."

    The decline started when you lost Charlie. At least, he had something about him, even if some of it was 70 degree proof.

    That is simply false as the results for 2006 to 2009 show .
  • Options
    TheWhiteRabbitTheWhiteRabbit Posts: 12,388
    Scott_P said:

    @PaulBrandITV: Both Labour and Tories are very nervy, which suggests their canvassing reports that it's tight. UKIP say they're taking more from Labour.

    ... Copeland or Stoke?
  • Options
    Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905
    SouthamObserver said:

    Casino_Royale said:

    foxinsoxuk said:

    Casino_Royale said:

    I think Stoke could be a very tight race between Labour and another, or anothers, I don't think the betting markets reflect that.

    I'm not expecting that another to be UKIP.

    Of course, I could be wrong, and Labour romp home.

    Lay Labour?

    I think a low turnout Labour win.

    Probably, but then Labour is led by an utter idiot and has a local candidate who's called Brexit a bucketful of shit, in one of the most heavily Leave areas in the whole country.

    If they still score a clear win, then donkeys is a label many of their voters will not unjustly be tagged with.

    Imagine the reaction if a metropolitan liberal leftie had posted that about white working class voters. Should Labour win in Stoke it's because the other options were not appealling enough.

    The truth is somewhere in between. Some voters won't switch because they really like their preferred party, some because they view it as the best of a bad lot, but yet others are tribal loyalty voters and would back the candidate of their chosen party even if it selected Gary Glitter to stand. This phenomenon is not, of course, purely restricted to some Labour voters.
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,457
    Sean_F said:

    Casino_Royale said:

    Sean_F said:

    state_go_away said:

    For Copeland Labour must have a better chance than 9/4 ish

    They'd better.
    Oi.
    If the Conservatives win Copeland, I'll still be pleased, even if I lose £100. It's win win.
    Just teasing.
  • Options
    MortimerMortimer Posts: 13,951
    SimonStClare said:

    Mortimer said:

    Today is a good day to be an antiquarian bookseller political nerd - I bought a good number of books from Robert Peel's library!

    Excellent news Mr Mortimer. At a guess I’d say the Ex PM was not a great Mills & Boon fan.
    Indeed not. The best thing (both commercially and historically, I'd say), was his copy of the first edition (London, 1841) of Memoirs of Extraordinary Popular Delusions: the first major book on bubbles and the psychologies of crowds.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,097
    TheWhiteRabbit said:

    Scott_P said:

    @PaulBrandITV: Both Labour and Tories are very nervy, which suggests their canvassing reports that it's tight. UKIP say they're taking more from Labour.

    ... Copeland or Stoke?
    Copeland, in my view it could go to a recount but we shall see
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,871
    Casino_Royale said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    Casino_Royale said:

    foxinsoxuk said:

    Casino_Royale said:

    I think Stoke could be a very tight race between Labour and another, or anothers, I don't think the betting markets reflect that.

    I'm not expecting that another to be UKIP.

    Of course, I could be wrong, and Labour romp home.

    Lay Labour?

    I think a low turnout Labour win.

    Probably, but then Labour is led by an utter idiot and has a local candidate who's called Brexit a bucketful of shit, in one of the most heavily Leave areas in the whole country.

    If they still score a clear win, then donkeys is a label many of their voters will not unjustly be tagged with.

    Imagine the reaction if a metropolitan liberal leftie had posted that about white working class voters. Should Labour win in Stoke it's because the other options were not appealling enough.

    My point is just how bad and unappealing do Labour have to be to put their own core voters off?

    We are told that the whole of the Northern core area is up for grabs now because it voted overwhelmingly for Brexit, Corbyn is viewed as an atrocious leader and the candidates are non-local and of poor calibre. This would lead to much of that being questioned.

    The language in my post was deliberately provocative.
    In a general election, I think Labour would lose Copeland, and come close to losing Stoke, with Corbyn as leader.
This discussion has been closed.