Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » In late April the Tory data chief, Jim Messina, told senior To
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » In late April the Tory data chief, Jim Messina, told senior Tories that his modelling pointed to a CON majority of 290
I’m just back in the UK after my holiday on the West Coast of the US visiting my son, Robert, and his family who have moved to LA from London in July.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Laying overconfidence is how I make money on this political betting thingy.
http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2017/04/23/why-a-1997-style-landslide-or-even-a-1983-style-landslide-might-not-happen-but-maybe-a-2005-style-majority-of-66-will/
Now we are going to have 4 and a half years of phrophecies that Jeremy Corbyn will be PM. Do not be surprised if the self denying prophecy strikes again............
Crypto currency miners are chartering 747s to get graphics cards delivered more quickly....
https://qz.com/1039809/amd-shares-are-soaring-ethereum-miners-are-renting-boeing-747s-to-ship-graphics-cards-to-mines/
I know Blyth Valley was one mentioned...
And this is my ongoing defence to Jezbollah worshippers on the campaign targeting - "had we ignored the polls we could have won more seats". Perhaps. Had everyone ignored the polls the Tories wouldn't have come over so overconfident and smarmy putting those seats within reach. Swings and roundabouts.
http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/targets/conservative
Nothing much will happen in the world of politics, we can all put our feet up and focus on Christmas instead.
It wasn't targetting the likes of Bolsover and Don Valley where the Conservatives went wrong - they achieved big increases in vote and by far their best ever totals there.
It was that the Conservatives had no idea what was happening in London and studenty areas. Nor did Labour or for that matter, most PB anecdotes or JackW and his team of experts
Nice.
Insane to even contemplate.
They actually wonthe number 145 target in 2010 - Ealing Central and Acton - by coming up towards a 4,000 vote majority (nearly 8% majority).
https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/nationalaccounts/uksectoraccounts/bulletins/nationalbalancesheet/2017estimates
As I've pointed out previously people with defined contribution pensions have been doing very well (even if they didn't know it):
' The value of the households sector increased by £750 billion in 2016, making it the greatest contributor to the change in UK net worth. Insurance, pension and standardised guarantee schemes rose by £348 billion, with £319 billion of this coming from pension schemes. Much of this increase is due to revaluations of insurance and pensions, which has a significant effect because of the size of the asset in the households sector. '
Rather puts the 'fishfingers to go up by 5p' stories into perspective.
http://www.wired.co.uk/article/how-much-energy-does-bitcoin-mining-really-use
20:20 hindsight is a wondrous thing but I wonder how many politicians could have resisted calling an election if they were seeing those sorts of numbers.
But I said at the time that the canvassing in Don Valley was only squarable with the national polling if we were being slaughtered in London: yet both parties were acting as if that wasn't the case (see e.g. Ruth Cadbury in that documentary).
Running the worst campaign in living memory with policies to upset your key demographics, not such a good idea.
https://medium.com/@tuurdemeester/critique-of-buterins-a-proof-of-stake-design-philosophy-49fc9ebb36c6
The point of bitcoin is to provide security and it's not a given that proof of stake is as secure as proof of work, nor will it ever be.
Posters comparing the energy costs to the cost of Visa transactions, etc, are missing the point. Visa can, and do, cancel cards on a whim. Banks can, and do, freeze accounts and assets and allow governments to seize funds. None of this is possible with bitcoin. That is its value.
"I am conscious that I have only been elected by Conservative MPs. Although that is how our constitution works, I want to give the British people the chance to give their approval - both for my leadership and our plan to trigger Article 50."
Wrong to assume that it was in the bag and refuse to turn up to debates or engage with the public. And to forbid senior Cabinet Ministers from the airwaves. And to generally run a negative piss poor campaign.
http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2017/02/21/fifty-shades-of-grey-voters-corbyns-punishing-polling-with-older-voters/
One of the problems with the election result is that it makes these problems even more intractable.
Since Parliament was always going to be dominated by Brexit anyway, putting other stuff in was worse than pointless.
It would have given her enough wiggle room to implement those policies and not upset her voters weeks before they go to the ballot box.
I think they predicted 329 seats in 2015 (versus the 330 they actually got) so it might have been overconfidence from that.
With regards to Jihan Wu, he took his best shot at it last month on the weekend of the 12th, and failed. Chain death spiral ain't gonna happen.
It was a very difficult election to get that right - Take the East Midlands..
In Ashfield the Tories are now within 1,000 , whereas High Peak is over 2,300 votes away ! Not sure even Rogerdamus could have predicted that one.
Not entirely leave/remain broken either - again why did the Tories take Mansfield, come close in Ashfield but up in the NorthEast get walloped in Hartlepool which on any model (Even accounting for differential leave/remain swing) goes blue before Ashfield.
She got what she deserved.
Cluedo has come on in leaps and bounds since my childhood.
Labour are VERY on message about staying in the Single Market and Customs Union. First time I have seen unity on their Brexit position.
The Conservatives apart from the usual headbanger suspects and Anna Soubry don't wan't to talk about Brexit. It's an uncomfortable subject for them and the few middle roaders that turned up are concerned about it.
And, most interestingly, David Davis is going for Single Market and Customs Union - In All But Name. The UK will emphatically not join the SM+CU according to Mr Davis' hints. But it will replicate them.
So why were the polls, and particularly the internal party polls so wrong before the GE? Increasingly, because they are only asking their own supporters. Telephone and internet polls are tedious and boring, while street and door2door pollsters are easily ignored or abused, while the weighting of the results to increase the accuracy reminds me more of the acronym GIGO, garbage in, garbage out. Really, who is going to waste their time answering lots of questions, unless they feel they can influence the results?
And all that, before I even mention my suspicion that some of the parties are intentionally rigging the polls by making sure their own supporters flood them.
https://twitter.com/DannyShawBBC/status/938043935150223360
Theresa May's problem is that she's not calculating enough, or at least that she calculates wrongly. In particular, she seems often to assume that the situation will remain static whilst she decides what to do, failing to anticipate how others will move in the meantime. So she keeps getting caught out.
We are finally out of the excess deficit procedure as our deficit has fallen below the 3% Maastricht limit.
http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2017/12/05/uk-s-deficit-back-below-3percent-of-gdp-council-closes-procedure/
…
The former British ambassador to the US Sir Christopher Meyer says it’s an important distinction that can be summed up as ‘the difference between singing in unison and singing in harmony’
https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2017/12/david-davis-suggests-regulatory-alignment-will-apply-to-whole-of-the-uk/
Imperfect metaphore: singing in unison corresponds to "harmonisation", and singing in harmony corresponds to "alignment".
Mansfield, Broxtowe, Ashfield, High Peak look like the main battleground seats near me.
Nigel Dodds quoted in the Guardian liveblog:
He says the “regulatory alignment” proposals were introduced by the Irish government. They are not necessary. There are sensible approaches to the border issue, such as trusted trader schemes.