Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Suddenly this election becomes a lot more difficult to call
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Suddenly this election becomes a lot more difficult to call
Sun
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Just after the local elections they would have been at the peak, around 397-398.
YouGov - regional swings
Con lead (diff 18/19 vs 16/17 May)
Lon: -10 (-13)
Sou: +22 (+1)
Mid: +11 (+1)
Nth: -14 (-11)
Sc: +6 (-)
Colour me sceptical - but there are some huge internal swings, while other regions haven't budged.....
https://twitter.com/ScotTories/status/865923560807813120
Preventing a referendum on Scottish independence until after the Brexit process has been completed England (Scotland)
Good idea : 55 (47)
Wrong priority : 23 (37)
FPT:
There is a significant UKIP to Con swing in Labour-held constituencies in England and Wales north of the Wash-Severn line. This is likely to lead to massive Labour seat losses without necessarily any loss in GB % vote share, or even a net gain in Labour vote share if there is a swing to Labour in safe Labour seats in cosmopolitan metropolitan areas or safe Tory seats.
There will still be a significant Tory majority. Don't forget 10-15 potential Tory gains from LD and SNP as well.
Unless the Tory lead over Labour drops below 6% (that achieved in 2015), a Tory victory is nailed on.
Can't wait for that exit poll on the bong of 10pm!
10 reasons :
1. National Polls - Two party system returns. Look at the gap not the headline numbers.
2. Regional polling awful in Labour marginals in the midlands and north.
3. Differential turnout
4. Leadership ratings.
5. Jezza
6. Jezza
7. Jezza
8. Jezza
9. Jezza
10 Jezza
Rinse And Repeat
Changes have to come to social care funding, as it is consuming ever greater fractions of local authority budgets.
Then again, Tories may be best off just changing the subject on to something else!
Then as Southam has stated, there's the unions.
I didn't get on at the start, am waiting for the price to drop a little more before buying - for somewhat more modest stakes!
@TSE did mention one more possible black swan which is a charge in the Thanet expenses case next week - I'm not convinced it will be too much of a story but it's another possibility for a spike down in the spread.
http://players.brightcove.net/2540076170001/NykPWQNal_default/index.html?videoId=5178827459001
» show previous quotes
The reason for c) is that people have the expectation that the NHS should cover mental health issues like dementia and that they have already been paying for it all their lives.
For chronic illnesses of frailty (whether mental or physical) there has been a shift to care outside the hospital, but no recognition that this really means paying for it yourself.
That's right.
If we accept the principle of the NHS that the cost of ill health (which is mainly a lottery) is shared (with the option going private for higher quality), then we should also accept the principle that that the cost of frailty including dementia should be shared in the same way.
It is a form of insurance. The most effective insurer is the government (the US system is twice as expensive) with the premiums paid out of general taxation.
Since 1979, there has been a race to the bottom in rates of personal taxation. First it was funded out of North Sea oil, then privatisations. These were oneoffs - the family silver. We are rapidly running out of family silver.
The options are (a) an increase in personal taxation (b) an influx of hundreds of thousands of well educated young healthy immigrants who pay tax and consume less services, or (c) a growing number of very unhappy pensioners and their families.
Maybe Sturgeon hasn't been talking about independence enough?
While you may not mind May sacrificing a chunk of her majority, the reason this election was called was to get a massive Conservative majority.
Stake 6 units with Hills on Labour winning > 162.5 seats
Stake 6 units with Betfair Sportsbook on Labour winning < 176.5 seats
Maximum loss is therefore 1 unit (i.e 6 units lost - 5 units won). BUT should Labour win between 163 seats and 176 seats, a highly promising prospect covering a range of 13 seats, then both bets pay out, providing a combined profit of 10 units against a maximum combined loss, as above, of 1 unit i.e. effective odds therefore of 10/1 ..... hurry though this can't last!
DYOR.
McIRA up next.
It's like a mini-version of the 2012 budget where the pensioners' tax allowance was withdrawn. They drifted away but came back for the 2015 vote. Three years condensed into three weeks with these policies, the reaction and the imminent vote.
GE2017 has certainly become a little less dull, but the basics are little changed, the Tories are on course to increase their majority and Labour look set to save a few more of their MPs.
Betting on constituency outcomes just got very complicated, I think I'll stick to lost deposits.
Green: nope.
McDonnell now arguing that rich pensioners should pay less for social care, but still won't say where the money comes from.
As for why the election was called, actually I think one of the bigger reasons was so that we now don't have to have an election for five more years which will help with Brexit. Furthermore, if things go well in Scotland, it will put the SNP back in their box.
Could be worth looking on oddschecker where the Tories have been pushed out and backing them
The exchange has EVS under 177.5
Some Labour activists are concerned that the suspensions in Aberdeen will have repercussions in next month’s general election. Labour’s last surviving Scottish MP in the 2015 SNP landslide was the member for Edinburgh South, Ian Murray. Even he would concede that among those who returned him to Westminster two years ago were a number of those who might traditionally have voted Tory. Will those same voters feel so happy supporting a Labour candidate now they know that party views them with such contempt?
http://www.scotsman.com/news/opinion/euan-mccolm-dugdale-blunders-with-suspension-of-disbelief-1-4452123
I doubt Crosby's plan was to go to "landslide" via "twitchy underwear" any more than Dunkirk was part of the plan for Normandy.
Curbing pensioner benefits after all the shelter they've had is morally right "all in it together" etc. The long term care situation also needs looking at for all our sakes so we will benefit from it being now firmly on the agenda. The essentials of the route they have chosen is that hateful word "progressive" in that rich southerners are going to be the supply of money for poor northerners at its most blunt. Ok they have chosen to individualise the risk which is a further choice but someone in a two up two down in Salford benefits over a £5m pad owner in Chelsea.
But thrice but, as an act of salesmanship, it's dire. These are a "masterclass" in creating doubt and fear. Marr is roasting Damian Green right now as to what level the WFA cuts will kick in. Nail on head - is it pensioners on 30k, 20k, 10k? So McDonnell can't miss can he as 12m are now in doubt and he can say he's protecting poor old ladies on 6k from freezing to death rather than having to defend (say) handing out cash to folk on 30k who spend it on a winter break in Marbella.
Ditto long term care. As I said at it's heart "progressive" (though risk is not pooled which is v odd) but it's way way too complex to explain on the doorstep two and a half weeks before an election. All folk hear is "they're taking my house if I'm ill, sort of, aren't they?". People are very very very emotive about their homes. You can use all the logic you like they won't listen, they'll just go into defence mode.
Facts are largely irrelevant "it's perception stupid ". If you are explaining you're losing. The Tories are explaining a lot on this, even as Labour's own policies are collectively "moon on a stick".
And oh what fun Andrew Neil will have in the leaders interviews.
First up the PM. Tomorrow BBC1 7-7:30pm .... titter ....
POPCORN SHARES .... BUY BUY BUY
The Brexit factor may have been part of it, but that factor was there even when May was telling us she wasn't going to call an early election. I don't think May cares about the SNP, it fairly obvious as per the polling that Scottish independence is not popular right now. The SNP isn't likely to be put in their box for as long as they are Scotland's biggest party which they will be after this GE.
I was happy if there was a 50 majority when this was announced
Green: "exactly!"
A bad opposition leads to bad government, as is being proved now and in the past
This policy stank of polling disaster from the moment Theresa May stood up to launch the manifesto.
The perception is generally awful by sounds of it. Although bit of a mixed response in my own family. Several terrified by the sound of it all - "losing control of our homes", one or two saying "let's wait for the detail".
I think the latter are being highly naive.