Categories
Options
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Why UKIP standing aside in a particular seat might not be as b
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Why UKIP standing aside in a particular seat might not be as beneficial to the Tories as might appear
I am sure that I am not the only PBer who is spending a lot of time at the moment looking up Wikipedia pages on interesting constituencies to try to work out whether a particular bet is good value or not.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Couldn't this mean that the UKIP support has dropped so much it is basically like them not standing?
http://tinyurl.com/kx7p76u
The Durgin' Sturgeon retreated from her "D" row of trenches to the "E" row, instantly declaring another towering victory to keep the faithful in line.
Cool.
Voters are well and truly confused at the LDs " Change Britain" message and as such are not buying into it
SNP targets:
Dumfries Clydesdale & Tweedale (Con) - Likely Con
Orkney & Shetland (LibD) - Leaning Lib Dem
Edinburgh South: (Lab) - Likely Lab
Con targets (all SNP):
Berwickshire Roxburgh & Selkirk: - Likely Con
Dumfries & Galloway: - Leaning Con
Aberdeen W + K - Leaning Con
Perth & N Perthshire: - Likely SNP
Moray: - Too close to Call
Aberdeen South: - Too close to call
Stirling: - Leaning SNP
Edinburgh SW: - Too close to call
East Lothian: - Likely SNP
Renfrew E: - Too close to Call
Angus: - Likely SNP
Ochil & S Perth: Too close to call
- 1 'Likely Con', 2 'Leaning Con', 5 TCTC and 3 Likely SNP
Lib Dem
Dunbartonshire East: Too close to call
Edinburgh West: Too close to call
Fife North East: Too close to call
Caithness: Too close to call
Ross Skye: Too close to call
Gordon: Too close to call
Argyll & Bute: Too close to call
Aberdeen W : - Leaning Con
7 TCTC and 1 Leaning Con (see above)
Labour:
Renfrew E: Too close to call
Edinburgh N & Leith: Leaning Lab
East Lothian: Likely SNP
Paisley & Ren S: Likely SNP
Aberdeen S: Too close to call
Edinburgh SW: Too close to call
Dumfries & G: Leaning Con
Rutherglen: Likely SNP
Ochil & S Perth: Too close to call
1 Leaning Lab, 4 TCTC 3 Likely SNP and 1 Leaning Con (see above)
So, 3 Con 'likely/leaning', , 1 Leaning Lab and 13 Too close to call......
You mean like Tony Blair did? :-)
Whether the Tory strategy for dealing with the Farron and LDs is right or wrong it is based upon the assumption that Cowley Street are unable to call the shots under this leader. I will discuss properly after the election. From the Tory pov it makes sense to target W&L. Trollope has shown he is not inclined to lay down his life for his colleagues.
So saying that it doesn't make much of a difference whether they stand or not is simply a reflection of their current weakness. What is relevant, in seats like Don Valley, is that there are several thousand ex UKIP voters looking for a new home and that home is overwhelmingly the Tories. Whilst UKIP standing or not is of marginal importance the fact that there is that pool is likely to be very important. It may or may not be enough in Aaron's case but it gives him a much better chance.
In an ideal scenario for Aaron at least a couple of thousand of these ex Lib Dem supporters would now go back home. But there is very little evidence of that in the national polling. The risk for the Tories and of course the Lib Dems is that those voters may be gone for good.
This could be significant. Lib Dem weakness was the main reason that Ed Miliband outpolled Brown and gained seats in England. It does look as if Corbyn will have that advantage as well.
Morning all.
If Don Valley follows the national trend, then the UKIP vote from 2015 should split about 7,000/1,000 Con/Lab.
As Hodges was pointing out yesterday, Lab canvassers are finding mass DLJ (Don't know/borderline Labour but Corbyn is a factor). They don't have time to convert all these people back by focusing on the core skills of a local Labour MP. Nick P assures us that his canvassing has been going well and this is not the case.
I remain unconvinced and have bet accordingly. At the moment I'm not going to change that.
The problem is that 2015 was such an incredible tsunami for the SNP that most seats were washed well inland with massive majorities to overcome. In anything like a conventional year these would be safe seats. Even if the SNP tide has receded somewhat they will take some catching, at least in one go.
But is it working?
We're looking at Con 17,700, Lab 20,600, if national trends apply. Aaron has to win over 1,500 Labour voters.
The problem they have is that Farron is not managing any kind of national profile at all and is one of those bye elections (no doubt one of the reasons the Tories are muttering about having a go in his seat). Add in a lack of clarity of message (other than we don't like the result of the referendum very much) and their vote is unlikely to improve much. It may be slightly more efficient of course but this will be at the margins.
Have the Yellow Peril got a plan B?
At the moment SCon are getting very carried away. 13 seats seems unlikely, yet they are still on course for their best result in Scotland in decades. They ought in many ways to be downplaying their chances in some seats in the hope of depressing turnout among Nats disillusioned by Sturgeon's domestic record and constitutional posturing.
Now they've whipped up such a fervour if they're not in double figures there will be pressure on Davidson, while Sturgeon will almost certainly survive what looks set to be a significant drop in the vote and the loss of several seats.
I would like a decent showing from Scotland however to get Ms 'Scottish education is fine if you ignore numeracy & literacy' Sturgeon to raise her game.....
Edit: due to staffing shortages I was once asked if I would be happy to teach some maths. I proved that philosophically speaking 2+2 equals 5. Strangely I was not asked again!
This is where care is needed over being too precise with Ashcroft's work in my opinion. If it's a general swing toward Labour with students (And the interpolation thereafter) that takes North & Leith then I'd have thought this was probably not the case north of the border. No tuition fees in Scotland.
Adding ukip and Tory votes to try and forecast results risks making some big mistakes.
One of us lost a large amount of money on the 2015 election.
Con 89 10 25 69
Lab 4 80 13 7
LD 5 7 56 1
UKIP 0 0 0 23
Was the vote transfer in thew latest Yougov.
So the Tories are definitely gaining from the UKIP collapse. My ward (Which isn't a million miles off Don Valley demographically)
2013: Tories 800ish, Lab 2500
This time round Tories 2100 Lab 2300.
If Labour and the Lib Dems aren't moving much in the polls how else do we get Con up 10 pts or more ?
That said, that seems to be the almost certain outcome anyway.
I've said before, the timing of the election was terrible for the LibDems - they had no policies to wheel out other than Stop Brexit.
I'm almost afraid to ask how you got 2+2=5. You aren't an historian by any chance?
It's fantabulously something alright.
It'll also be interesting to see whether a significant number of ex-Lab, ex-UKIP voters just stay at home. Corbyn's not going to enthuse them, we've voted to leave the EU, and I wonder if the seemingly foregone conclusion of the election might depress turnout and perhaps lead to some odd results.
Utterly off-topic, but the first (of three, initially) part of my new serial's now available. It's a free, short episode so do give it a look. If you like the style (fast, action-packed and very much Robin Hood meets Ancient China) the next two episodes will be up for pre-order shortly, and, if not, it hasn't cost you a bean.
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Phoenix-Rising-Wandering-Roaming-Tiger-ebook/dp/B071LCLJYY/
I wonder whether that will happen in the GE as the campaign really gets under way.
Also I am rather concerned by the effectiveness of the Labour campaign so far. I think they are making an energetic and good fist of defending the indefensible in contrast to a very lacklustre CON effort. It feels lazy and complacent.
For one of my models, the "natural" vote split in the two constituencies I had to apply the following factors :
0.69 Don Valley
1.39 Richmond Park
Anything over 1 implies the seat was more remain for the GE2015 vote than expected, anything under 1 implies more leave.
Basically Don Valley had alot of Labour leavers above and beyond the 2015 UKIPers (Which makes sense).
My point is Richmond Park and Don Valley are quite different (At least on this analysis)
The question is what those voters who were still intending to vote UKIP in 2017 will do in constituencies where UKIP aren't standing. I don't think we have very much evidence what they will do.
https://twitter.com/colmuacuinn/status/863995202272321540
But no I don't find 30% surprising. It's not so far from what Ed M got not long ago, and is indicative of Old Labour support rather than a resurgence of the Dave Sparts and Wolfie Smiths of this world.
"What is scary is the shit I see going Facebook among youngsters that basically says yes corbyn is a bit crap but he is a super nice human not like those evil Tories.."
.Ed miliband was a bit of hapless plonker but he wasnt a f##king terrorist sympathizing, extremist supporting communist enabler.
I don't think they really know what they are supporting."
You asked me recently whether I was a Federalist and I typed you a longish reply. I didn't notice any response to it from you. I'm not worried if you (or anybody) don't read my posts but I would like to know whether you did comment and I just missed it.
Thanks.
I still predict a huge majority for May with 50% of the vote.
1) Ramping predicted huge gains in the local elections which turned out to be losing councillors in England, Wales and Scotland.
2) Ramping predicted prosecutions of dozens of Conservative MPs which never happened.
3) Ramping mystery private polls which apparently showed numerous gains from the Conservatives but which neither the local election results, the Conservative campaign nor the bookies have placed any credence.
a=b
therefore ab=b squared
ab-a squared =b squared - a squared
therefore a(b-a) = (b+a)(b-a)
cancelling thro and removing b-a from both sides of the equation
a=b +a
therefore 1=2
Mr. Punter, I did see and it replied
I can't recall the precise words, but it was essentially: "I disagree with you on federalism, but appreciate your honesty."
Edited extra bit: and don't forget to enjoy my rambling post-race nonsense following a rather good Spanish Grand Prix:
http://enormo-haddock.blogspot.co.uk/2017/05/spain-post-race-analysis-2017.html
And Labour voters in Carshalton are not the same as Labour voters in Richmond.
Mr Dancer, best of luck with the books - you are certainly prolific. I've managed a short story (published in an on-line magazine) and what seems to be a novella. If anyone has access to a kindle or a similar techy things, and more money than sense, the publishers (Wild Wolf) have set the price for my novella at an incredible £1.99. Too much!
As Tony Capstick once sang ... "Do you know when I were a lad you could get a Tram down into't town
Buy 3 new suits n an overcoat, 4 new pair of good boots
Goo n see George Formby at Palace Theatre ,
Get Blind Drunk,
Have some Steak n Chips, Bunch of bananas n 3 stone of monkey nuts
And still have change out on a farthing."
But be warned, it's not for the faint-hearted, but if you want to squander such an insane amount of money on his trash, don't say you weren't warned.
Amazon UK: https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B0727W8ZZ7
Amazon US: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0727W8ZZ7
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/may/15/jobs-market-will-suffer-a-brexit-slowdown-say-ey-item-club-experts
Now with TMay looking to implement Brexit and much of the political estabishment lukewarm to actively hostile i suspect large numbers of previous non voters will come out again having lost their voting virginity. They know how to do it and they know it can work. Much less likely to bother for the locals though.
Just a thought
1 <> 2
Divide both sides by zero.
It does now.
:-o
Hopefully short enough for Abbott, Long-Bailey and McMao if they remember one bit each.
Good luck to anyone who wants to try and model those people's reactions!
[Pricing's always a bugger. One of the serial advantages is that making the first part free will, hopefully, work quite well].
As I said, I do think you're entirely wrong about federalism but an honest disagreement is fine (indeed, the basis of democracy). What I dislike is the weaselly evasiveness and half-truths of some politicians on the subject.
At the risk of bragging, I told you Hamilton would win.
Looking a bit ominous for the rest of the season, as I was hoping for a couple of Ferrari wins this weekend and at Monaco. Have bet on the championship(s) accordingly.
Europhobes may not be noted for their honesty and integrity either but two wrongs will never make a right.
Also, Ferrari screwed up the strategy. Pitting Vettel a lap earlier would've added 6-8s to the gap, and he might've retained the lead. I still think you're over-egging the cake when it comes to Hamilton/Mercedes being faster than Vettel/Ferari.
I agree Monaco should be better for Ferrari, but if there's a safety car the timing could be critical.